No-flash ceremony?

<p>Hi William W has the answer here. Meet the celebrant and become their friend. Find out exactly what they want and explain in a nice way the difficulties of not using flash could create for you. If its a really dark church it could be difficult however in talking to the celebrant you could ask for all the lights in the church to be turned on. I would also explain to the B&G that you will be doing your best despite not being allowed to use flash. With modern digital offerings of high ISO, VR etc and judicious use of PS, you should be able to nail this. Maybe its an opportunity for you to grow and learn to produce a different perspective of the ceremony than the standard view. If you are going to be a wedding photographer then this situation will not be uncommon.<br>

There is a minister in my city who strictly forbids flash at weddings. The first time I encountered this, I was using film and was absolutely aghast at how I was going to get through the ceremony. It worked out fine. Many weddings later, I relish the thought of a wedding with him as it gets my juices flowing and presents a challenge which I am well and truly up for ! It also gives your images a very different and natural look compared to flash.</p>

<p>I don't know but I find it weird that some photographers react so much when they are confronted with such "crazy" rules. Rules are rules, they may seem absurd to us but they are there for a reason. Instead of crying foul, why not do our homework and be creative.</p>

<p>We can use fast primes, we can use tripods, we can use remote triggers, we can piggy back on guests P&S flash fires and so on. If we don't have the gear we can always rent.</p>

<p>The point is, we were paid to cover the wedding, it is our responsibility to make sure that we fulfill that obligation and at the same time adhere to the location's rules. Unless of course the rule states NO PHOTOGRAPHY then that's a different story.</p>

<p>And lastly, just because everyone is shooting with their flash on doesn't mean you should to. If you were instructed not to use flash then be professional enough to abide by the rules.</p>

<p>Marius--there are churches that say no photography at all during the ceremony. I've been to a couple. I sit at the back of the church during the ceremony, shooting nothing, and observe so that I can re-create the highlights. Now if a church says no photography at all and no re-creations, that is REALLY another story.</p>

<p>Almost all the Churches here in the UK won't allow flash, bump up the iso and you will be fine.<br>

Heres one i did hand held no flash.</p>

<p><img src="http://d6d2h4gfvy8t8.cloudfront.net/8602531-md.jpg" alt="" width="679" height="452" /></p>

<p>No kissing in Church, at a wedding - wow! </p>

<p>You might also consider a mono-pod for one of your cameras. This will give you quite a bit more mobility.</p>

<p>Done weddings where there were NO photo's could be taken. Had to put everyone (wedding party) back in their orginal positions. If there is some crazy rule at that church where you can not do that either, ( I will get a complaint on this one) remember this & ask future brides where they are getting married. If they say at this particular location, turn it down. I have a local church that the wedding director/church secretary is a $%&%#, she & I almost got into a fight over some of HER silly rules & I will not do weddings there. sorry,,, </p>

<p>It's not just weddings, I've been asked to do the same for corporate events, etc. and I'm the in-house guy. I just let them know not to expect much for those whom wander outside of the stage lights, or are very quick paced, and to expect some very high ISO shots. I would emagine reaching the same understanding with the B and G for weddings.<br>

If you do accept the job, you should attend the rehearsal, make sure the lights are set to what is expected for the ceremony, and take a few test shots, then show them what you mean. It really drives a point home.</p>

<p>An excellent article has been written about this by WPJA:<br>

http://www.wedpix.com/articles/005/church-photography-restrictions/</p>

<p>Carey - You should properly set the expectations of the bride and groom. </p>

<p>From a technical point of view, rent a 70-200 f/2.8 VR and call it a day.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Setting the expectations of the couple is a good idea, of course, but we photographers have to remember that the wedding is not all about us or the photography. In my experience, it is rare that the couple are so bent out of shape by their own church's rules that they are totally devastated by them.</p>

<p>Sure, it is nice to get that melting glance between the bride and groom as they stand and recite their vows, but as I have said many times that emotion is still there to be mined right after the ceremony in re-creations. If you can't get it 'for real', for whatever reason, you can still get it right after. I am puzzled by photographers who refuse to do re-creations on the grounds that it isn't the same. In my experience, it is really, really close, and given a choice between having the image and not having the image, I'd go with the former.</p>

<p>Kay, on top of my list for that situation is to be sure to have a camera that performs well at high iso settings like the Canon EOS system or Nikon D700 or D3.</p>

<p> I thought it was strange that there was no kissing in the church, as well. I talked to them myself to verify and the secretary said that when they were doing confirmations the parents were not even allowed to kiss their children. The pastor does not allow recreations due to a religious rule that a man and woman are to marry once and he thinks it would be odd to do the ceremony twice. I tried to explain that it would only be parts of it and they don't even have to say any words if necessary. The answer was still no. Also no external lighting other than the church lighting at the front and light that falls from the windows. The B&G are pretty okay with it all but the Bride's mother is not handling it too well. It is her only daughter and she is in her late 30's. This is her first marriage so her mother wants it documented to the fullest extent.</p>

<p>I feel for you, Carey. More reason why you might consider renting a 300mm f2.8. If shooting from a balcony, and access and movement restricted otherwise, I find that 200mm is not enough, sometimes. Plus your lenses are slow, I think. This is for full frame--don't know what you have.</p>

<p>I've shot hundreds of weddings over a 30 year career in photography and yes, they do come up with some really ridiculous demands and restrictions. I retired in 2000, but a few years before that I was contracted to photograph a wedding at a church here in Vegas and the officiant told me I could not use any lights whatsoever.<br>

<br />I met with him alone and asked, "Do you think God loves this couple and the marriage they are about to commit to?" He answered, "Of course! God is love and the marriage ceremony is the embodiment of that love." I asked, "I am not as religious as I should be and I am not familiar with all of the teachings of God, but from what you and other ministers have told me from the teachings, the very word of God, it's just so hard for me to believe for even a second, that God, the loving God, compassionate God that everyone tells me about, would not want the finest wedding possible for this couple.</p>

<p>It's just hard for me to comprehend that a loving God would not want this couple, joined in one of the most loving ceremonies, if not the most loving ceremony, to have the finest memories of this event to carry forward into their lives so that when doubt and struggle and all of those things that fight so hard to destroy loving marriages and separate loving couples who became one in the eyes of God, they can sit down, look back upon this most special, this most sacred of days in their lives and remember why it was they got married in the first place. Quality photography makes that possible and quality photography requires light. The higher the quality of the light, the higher quality of the photos.</p>

<p>Would God really not want that for this loving couple? Would God really demand they have lesser quality memories of this, what may be the most important event in their lives.... not want them to have the finest photos possible to remember this day? It's hard for me to believe God would deny them this small gift, but you're the expert..."</p>

<p>I then told the Priest, "I can't profess to be as religious as I should be, but I understand the MAGIC and the POWER of REVERENCE! (The entire church and most churches are designed so they give an accoustic ECHO to help create REVERNCE. Most churches are designed to be lit, so that the Pries or officiant is spotlighted in a GOLDEN GLOW to create REVERENCE...) I understand all of that and I don't want to take away from that and don't want to interfere with the REVERENCE of the ceremony, which is why I go out of my way, take extra care in mounting the lights where they are hidden from view, behind columns, blocked from the congregation by bouquets of flowers, pedestals etc."</p>

<p>The Priest with nobody around to impress or express his REVERENCE, became very down to earth and told me I could bring the lights by, show him what I would do with them, where I would put them and demonstrate how often and how intense the disturbance would be.<br>

<br />I did and he, AFTER TELLING ME HOW GRATEFUL I SHOULD BE, allowed me to use the lights. Three White Lightning 1800s hidden behind columns throughout the chapel, snooted so the light was concentrated on the key locations, the alter, the candle etc... and the lights did not spill out into the congregation, nor did they fire directly into anyone's eyes other than the Priest, who was looking down in most of the shots or looking into the eyes of the B&G.<br>

<br />Sometimes you have to explain technology to the untrained and place the burden of GUILT of bad photos on their shoulders. MOST could not care less, they suffer from THE GOD COMPLEX! They imagine they are not a servant of God, but instead God's right hand man.<br>

<br />In hundreds of weddings I have shot, I have seen some odd things. I saw two Priests almost go to fisticuffs fighting over the fact that one of them did not secure a cash GIFT from the Bride and Groom in advance of booking the wedding. I mean they were pushing, shoving, SOB this, F that... I was in the dressing room packing up my cameras when I heard the arguing and looked out the half-opened door to see what was going on.<br />They were a heartbeat from knocking each other out... SO MUCH FOR REVERENCE!!!</p>

<p> </p>

<p>I think you will find it's the exception rather than the rule of no flashes in churches during the ceremony. Other religions, other venues can be different.<br>

Also positions and ability to move can be very different in each church. You need to know where you can go. Keep in mind officiants have put up with some real id***ts trying to photograph weddings.<br>

I tell couples, are goal regardless of the church rules is not to interfere with the view of guests attending the ceremony and not to do anything that would draw their attention to us rather than the couple and ceremony. Isn't that a little bit of common sense?<br>

You need to learn how to shoot in low-light to almost no light situations and capture romantic images. This may mean high-ISO which the newer professional cameras can do well, tripods, fast glass, long lenses and simply knowing your craft.<br>

I think you will also find their is seldom time to "recreate" after a ceremony and for PJ shooters that's just yech!<br>

Formals are a totally different situation and can range from natural light to several studio strobes. It all depends.</p>

<p>No flash at all or no flash during the ceremony? As long as you have a tripod you can do everything but the processional without much of a problem. Never had to do the processional without a flash.</p>

<p>A related question:</p>

<p>In the UK, it is not allowed to photograph the signing of the register (at least, at registry office ceromonies) as the register page will contain personal details of previous couples. A re-creation is done after the ceromony, turning the register book to a new page.</p>

<p>Is this practice the same in the US?</p>

<p>I'm no professional, just shot three weddings for my colleagues and friends. In USA rules may be different, but in Scandinavia it seems 'no flash' is quite commonplace because it's first the wedding and then photography. Those weddings I shot were at film days so I've used ISO 800 b/w film and 85mm f/1.8 lens. There was sufficient light and in fact that light was quite awesome - soft, but far from flat so the resulting images had nice "volume" in them.<br>

If you could try to get to the church ahead of ceremony to assert the cituation and make couple tests, you may be will find that 'no flash' isn't such a big deal. Of course, the couple may have different expectations, but talk to them and explain what is and what is not possible in given condition. Explain that the limitations are due to the specific environment and they did right choice by contracting you as their photographer because you know how to get best out of it. Bringing sample photos to demonstrate your point would be also good idea. And if the couple wants to have those 'magazine like' wedding photos perhaps you could arrange (as extra service) another session and 'stage' the desired look.</p>

<p>1. Have tripod.<br>

2. Use fast lens( f1.4)<br>

3. You can increase ISO<br>

4. Use VR lens<br>

5. Take few shots with focusing on black outfit of groom, next take few shots focusing on white dress of bride.</p>

 

<p>To add to Grigoriy's list:</p>

<p>6. Practice panning<br /> 7. Ask if you can get in to see the church a few days before at the same time the ceremony will be happening. I can't recall if someone else mentioned this also. If not, at least drive by at the same time to see where the light is, where the windows are, etc.</p>

<p>Carey: to <em>"do the best I can and I can't do anything more than that"</em>, <br>

<br>

IMO means securing the best available equipment to document the ceremony under the conditions you will have.<br>

<br>

I concur with Nadine. <br>

<br>

Specifically: limited, to the Balcony shots and Available Light only, you need to secure the best vantage point and, if need be, rent a suitable body (High ISO Capacity) and Fast Lens(es) to suit the Distance and Filed of View you need to cover and at shutter speeds suitable to freeze Subject Motion. <br>

<br>

WW</p>

<p > </p>

 

<p>I think it is quite difficult to offer advice, especially about rental equipment, without knowing what gear Kay actually has other than a 50/1.4. If Kay has a Canon 5D-II or D3, that's one thing, if it's an older Digital Rebel that's another. Does Kay only have a 50/1.4? What other lenses?</p>

<p>The question wasn't about whether it is right or wrong concerning use of flash, or whether certain geographical areas differ, ... it was "when the church forbids flash what do you do?"</p>

<p>Kay ... as to "looking foolish bringing a Sunpak" ... that's a flash right? ... and if flash is forbidden ... well ...</p>

<p>My philosophy is be prepared for the worst, and hope for the best. If you are equipped for shooting a black cat in a coal mine at midnight, then you can do anything, at any time, anywhere. Short of that, a tripod is the least expensive tool available ... and just requires a sharp eye for timing when the movement is minimal ... which isn't that difficult since they're not exactly playing Soccer up there. </p>

<p> </p>

<p>Just curious - Has anyone here ever set up a remote camera triggered by a PocketWizard when there is restricted access?</p>

<blockquote>

<p>3. no kissing is allowed in the church</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I'll try to contain myself, but sometimes it's difficult ;-)</p>

<p>This is common where I'm at (the no flash thing), so I'm used to it. I have a whole clause in the contract regarding 'house rules' which not only lays out my respect for the rules forced upon me, but, the likely effect those rules can have (such as high-ISO aka 'noisier' shots, limited composition, limited shot selection, etc. etc.). I don't like to do recreations (personally) simply because of the additional time/ work constraints it puts on the B&G, but of course I do due diligence in suggesting it in certain circumstances.</p>

<p>Your lens choice should be based on a first hand evaluation of where you'll be (specifically), when you'll be there, and what focal length you're likely to need (and ape.). If you do a once over, you'll be mentally vastly more prepared to shoot properly, and with maximum effect. You can usually stash specific gear at specific locations which might make it easier to plan out your movement/ work. The bottom line though is that this is a normal thing in this industry, and I have to agree that proper gear is a big part of why we get paid what we get paid.</p>

<p>My worst instance was 5 min prior to the bride walking down the aisle, when I was moving from one position to another the officiant yells to me "hey! you! photographer! Don't move, stay right there until we're done!" (keep in mind this was a beach wedding, and completely of a non-traditional sort) Then he proceeded to lecture the guests for the next few minutes about how he'd better NOT hear any cell phones, to turn them off, cause this is a reverant ceremony, and the 'devil devices' (his words not mine) were disrespectful to God (oh and flash photography is disrespectful to god too... what? you didn't see that in the bible? *L* j/k).... It was weird...<br>

Of course that <em>was</em> the easiest ceremony I've ever shot...</p>

<p>Sorry I didn't post my equipment earlier. I have a 5D, a 40d, a 24-70mm 2.8, 50mm 1.4, 100mm 2.8, renting a 70-200 IS 2.8, and have a 10-22mm Ef-S.</p>