Who has shot weddings with film?

cdifoto wrote in post #5844228
http://en.wikipedia.or​g/wiki/Sinclair_ZX81

http://www.butkus.org …af/yashica_230-splash.htm

The photographer at my wedding, in 2004, used a Hasselblad with medium format film. Her pictures were astonishingly good -- the exposure and the luminosity were jaw-dropping..

I never shot a wedding with film yet, but if I were to shoot one it would be my choice of medium.

I am a firm believer in traditional wedding photography and not the photojournalistic approach. Couples don't need a thousand shots to go through. The need 120 good ones, and then medium format was dominant this is what you would get.

A wedding was shot on 10 rolls of 120 film and while the poses were pretty much the same, the album IMO was better.

Film is also more forgiving and tolerates highlights much better. Few digital people experienced it and it's beautiful.

DrPablo wrote in post #5845743
The photographer at my wedding, in 2004, used a Hasselblad with medium format film. Her pictures were astonishingly good -- the exposure and the luminosity were jaw-dropping..

If the wedding is an expensive one, the photographer usually is armed with a hassy. I have seen all kinds of weddings working part time in a banquet hall, but the really expensive ones are shot in film or at the very least film is used for the posed album shots.

Nobody really wants the boring posed shots anymore. They want to see and cherish the emotion from their day (be it tears or smiles). That means lots of photos, some of which will be crap since you're trying to grab small moments on the fly and it's very likely you'll miss a couple timing-wise.

Anyone who says they can do an awesome job with just a few rolls of film in such a style is full of it.

DrPablo wrote in post #5845743
The photographer at my wedding, in 2004, used a Hasselblad with medium format film. Her pictures were astonishingly good -- the exposure and the luminosity were jaw-dropping..

I would LOVE to see those images (and I don't mean that condescendingly). I just want to see 'em!

cdifoto wrote in post #5845791
Nobody really wants the boring posed shots anymore.

I don't agree.

It's the photographers that have been brainwashed by marketing. The magazines can't print the boring traditional stuff, so they're full of crazy mixes of brides and journalism... brides and fashion, gothic weddings, trash the dress and other styles nobody looks at other than the photographers themselves.

Those styles will look funny in two generations, worse than theold camera commercial.

Wedding photography is about making an album in a style that transcends time. It's about the two families coming together and their friends... and not about the photographic fad of the decade.

cdifoto wrote in post #5845795
I would LOVE to see those images (and I don't mean that condescendingly). I just want to see 'em!

Here is one from our wedding.

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif'

Nice. She has tilt issues just like me! I feel slightly less retarded now.

Got anymore?

I don't think I have any others online. On my other computer I may have a few others scanned in.

The thing about shooting in these conditions is that you only really have to meter once. Then you just set your exposure and flash and shoot away. And since she shot with negative film you can be off by quite a bit and never know it in print.

Yeah that's pretty much the way I do it once I get inside. I don't do manual flash but I do set my aperture, shutter, and ISO and pretty much forget it. FEC as needed but even then it's usually the same setting. Receptions are cake. Pun intended.

DocFrankenstein wrote in post #5845729
http://www.butkus.org …af/yashica_230-splash.htm

Funny thing for me was... at the last wedding i shot... 14-06-08 one of the guests was using the same camera... i was amazed it was still working!

I've got to admit it did have one of the largest view finders ever... allot larger that the old EOS100 i had.

breal101 wrote in post #5845034
I'll bet you can load a film back pretty damn quick too. I remember having charts taped all over my strobe unit. I was lucky to have a "semi auto" system, 1/4 1/2 3/4 and full buttons on the strobe. Nothing more fun than the processional starting, 8 bridesmaids and the bride and having only enough film in the camera to have one chance for each one.

I used 2- 220 magazines & 1- 120 one. That gave me 60 shots before I absolutely had to reload. I usually found a moment along the way to load the empty mag. Magazine switches were a cool 6 sec. (actually timed). After a few hundred weddings with a manual strobe (Norman 200B) I actually could tell what f:stop to use by just looking at how far the subject was from me. I would not be off more than 1/4 f:stop. I don't think I could do that now though. Auto everything made me lazy & my brain is not as quick anymore so, thank goodness for my 5D.

cdifoto wrote in post #5845791
Nobody really wants the boring posed shots anymore. They want to see and cherish the emotion from their day (be it tears or smiles). That means lots of photos, some of which will be crap since you're trying to grab small moments on the fly and it's very likely you'll miss a couple timing-wise.

Anyone who says they can do an awesome job with just a few rolls of film in such a style is full of it.

I think you're being a bit unfair here. Some people do want the 'boring posed shots' for a start. And, as for somebody not being able to do a good job with a few rolls of film, that's nonsense. In the days of film, you just had to be more selective and use the rifle approach as opposed to the shotgun approach that many digital photographers use today.

I photographed a wedding a week for about thirty years and used a Hassleblad, so the OP was a little mistaken in saying that you couldn't change ISO (ASA, as it was then) or to black and white. A few seconds loading a new film back, and voila! And with an assistant (in my case, my wife) loading the next magazine, I didn't even have to stop to re-load.

It's often said that teenagers, of every generation, always think that they invented sex, and their parents and grandparents know nothing about it. The same thing applies, I believe, to young digital photographers. Photography wasn't invented with the onset of digital cameras - an awful lot of people did manage to turn out decent work before digital cameras you know!

Roy Mathers wrote in post #5849197
I think you're being a bit unfair here. Some people do want the 'boring posed shots' for a start. And, as for somebody not being able to do a good job with a few rolls of film, that's nonsense. In the days of film, you just had to be more selective and use the rifle approach as opposed to the shotgun approach that many digital photographers use today.

I photographed a wedding a week for about thirty years and used a Hassleblad, so the OP was a little mistaken in saying that you couldn't change ISO (ASA, as it was then) or to black and white. A few seconds loading a new film back, and voila! And with an assistant (in my case, my wife) loading the next magazine, I didn't even have to stop to re-load.

It's often said that teenagers, of every generation, always think that they invented sex, and their parents and grandparents know nothing about it. The same thing applies, I believe, to young digital photographers. Photography wasn't invented with the onset of digital cameras - an awful lot of people did manage to turn out decent work before digital cameras you know!

Roy, you and Tixeon have my utmost respect. To do as many weddings as you gents did is amazing to me. The few I shot made me nervous as hell. Most of my work in those days was industrial along with some conventions and stockholders meetings. I could work with major corporate execs and even CEOs and be cool as a cucumber. Mothers of the bride intimidated me beyond reason. I haven't a clue about current trends in wedding photography but there were some pretty creative guys doing weddings in those days.

One comment on the new generation of photographers. My favorite topic of discussion is FF for sports photography. Duhhhh, what were sports photographers in the film days using? Motordrives were available by the time I came along but before that they were manual film advance. Long ago they were using Speed Graphics for sport, measured in frames per minute instead of seconds.