First wedding - lessons learned

antaine wrote in post #571394
Tim, what did you use for your group shots? Surely the Tamron 28-75 was not wide enough. I have a similar wedding to you in Sept - the bride didn't even want a photographer and initially wanted me to take 6 photos! Her last comments to me were that she wasn't fussy.

But she does want a family photo that will involve approx 15-20 people, and space will be confined if its raining outside as we will have to use a church porch.

Therefore I feel that I need something wider than 28 (x1.6) for these formal shots

thanks, Antaine.

I have used my Tamron with a 20D for most of the weddings I have done and it was plenty wide. The only time it wasn't wide enough was when I had to take pictures on a yacht, but I ahd the 16-35 for that so all was good.

-Tim

EOS mE wrote in post #2107371
i just tried it the way Tim described it. The only thing i couldn't do right is the step 9. by top layer, i assume you are talking about the original photo (labeled background) right? because when i held down ALT, i wasn't able to get it to merge. instead i just went with the layer and hit Ctrl + E and merged.

here's a quick sample i did from a random photo off the web. is this the effect you are teaching Tim?

Yes that's more or less the effect i'm after, though I don't have quite so strong a vignette. When I say top layer I mean the layer closest to the top of your screen, the background layer you refer to is what i'd call the bottom.

minatophase3 wrote in post #2107480
I have used my Tamron with a 20D for most of the weddings I have done and it was plenty wide. The only time it wasn't wide enough was when I had to take pictures on a yacht, but I ahd the 16-35 for that so all was good.

I found that the 17-55 and 70-200 are a great pair. Before when I had the 28-75 I had to keep swapping the 12-24 lens in when I was indoors.

I don't shoot weddings and never will. Prefer to have things more controlled. I would like to say though that almost everyone knows a couple that have recently gotten married and as we all know there's not much chance for the bride to wear her wedding gown again. So why not approach her and see if you can take portraits of her in her wedding gown. Get the husband involved (if they are still married ) and do some couple shots etc. This is good practise and can add to your portfolio for showing to potential clients.

Tim thanks for the great tip.

I do something close to this, however what I use is Layer Fill, and then choose my color (allows me to choose a lighter color for that misty effect), and adjust the out put.

I will have to try your instructions on some of the ones I did and see if I like you affect better. thanks.

tim wrote in post #2107687
Yes that's more or less the effect i'm after, though I don't have quite so strong a vignette. When I say top layer I mean the layer closest to the top of your screen, the background layer you refer to is what i'd call the bottom.


I found that the 17-55 and 70-200 are a great pair. Before when I had the 28-75 I had to keep swapping the 12-24 lens in when I was indoors.

cool. thanks for teaching Tim! yup, i love my 17-55... and soon, i'll have a 70-200 & a nifty fifty f1.4. can't wait~~

"Nifty fifty" is the term used for the 50mm F1.8, the F1.4 is a very different beast.

tim wrote in post #2109260
"Nifty fifty" is the term used for the 50mm F1.8, the F1.4 is a very different beast.

doh!... guess we'll need a new term for this beast then~ how's light sucker sound? haha

i found this thread very helpfull, thank you.
ps: i dont do weddings

tim wrote in post #2109260
"Nifty fifty" is the term used for the 50mm F1.8, the F1.4 is a very different beast.

I always thought the 50mm f/1.8 was the "Thrifty Fifty".

aacmckay wrote in post #2230206
I always thought the 50mm f/1.8 was the "Thrifty Fifty".

Has many names, I can think of a few for it...

tim wrote in post #2231337
Has many names, I can think of a few for it...

I guess I assumed because the 50mm f/1.8 was the "Thrifty Fifty" that the 50mm f/1.4 was the "Nifty Fifty". I digress....

tim wrote in post #2231337
Has many names, I can think of a few for it...

Would the acronym POS suffice?

mizuno wrote in post #2231495
Would the acronym POS suffice?

Nope! For it's price it's an excellent lens. Considering the price to add it to your kit I really don't think POS is good acronym for it. Maybe POS should be the acronym for the 50mm f/1.2. It's not gonna be that much better than the 50mm f/1.4, and way overpriced.

Let's not this thread on that track, there's plenty of other threads to argue on about that.

Just thought I would bring this back up to the top.
Love this thread.
so this is the situation.

I'm new to all this. I'm getting pretty good pics of nature and sport. But now I have to shoot a wedding.

I really would rather be 2nd photographer then 1st but don't have a choice. Sisters wed. So what would be the most fool proof way of doing this. I shoot mainly on m. But too nerves to do that on her wedding day. My photoshop skills are very good, but my photography not so hot. Should I use my 28 to 300. Or try and lend a 24 70. Shoot on full auto, av tv. What is going to give me the most useble photo's?

Please help.
I'm sweating bullets.