More info for choosing film

<p>Okay, I asked awhile back on different types of film for a hindu ceremony for my wife's cousin's wedding that I am shooting. I finally heard back from the groom about specifics of the ceremony as well as location.<br />The ceremony will be held under a tent outdoors and if needed lighting will be setup, though I won't know the particulars of the lighting until a day or two before as they aren't setting up the tent till next Wednesday with the ceremony on Friday and will determine extra lighting at that point. I'll be doing 'getting ready' pictures which will be indoors of both bride and groom. During the ceremony I will be doing various pictures of the bride, groom, officiant, attendants and speakers as well as some pictures before/after of some of the decorations and setup. Some family/group/table shots afterward during the meal. Dressing is to begin around 4:30-5 with the ceremony around 6 I believe (reconfirming that since he didn't mention it in his reply). With the length of the ceremony and with sunset at 7:24 that day and unsure of exactly the lighting level in the tent after sunset I am thinking some 800 speed film is in order as well as 400 speed film as I am loath to use flash during the ceremony. I am deffinitely bringing my flash (Vivitar 285hv) with lots of extra batteries for before/after if needed (especially after).<br />My plans are (2) om-1, Sigma 28/1.8, Zuiko 50/1.4, Zuiko 85/2, Sigma 70-210/2.8, Monopod, Vivitar 285hv, a couple of rolls of Fuji 160s (for early on), 5 rolls 400h, 3 rolls 800z and I'll throw in a few rolls of superia 400 (since I have about 20 rolls on ice) in case I actually run out of the other film.<br />Does the balance, especially of film, sound right? Or should I do more 800z and less 400h? Thanks.</p>

<p>Oh and no I am not getting paid for this, it is solely as a favor to the bride and groom. They aren't looking for a professional photographer, but I plan on delivering the best results I am possibly capable of providing. They aren't looking for a whole wedding album just from this, but I do want to be able to give them at least a couple of hundred nice pictures to remind them of their day.</p>

<p>One thought, as a substitute for the 160s, I have a whole bunch of Reala on ice (around 30 rolls), should I/could I get away with that instead? Or am I really better off with 160s for skin/color reproduction? I haven't shot 160s before, so I have no way of comparing it to Reala at the moment. Thanks.</p>

<p>"They aren't looking for a professional photographer, but I plan on delivering the best results I am possibly capable of providing. They aren't looking for a whole wedding album just from this, but I do want to be able to give them at least a couple of hundred nice pictures to remind them of their day."</p>

<p>Matthew,</p>

<p>Your heart is in the right place. I wish you the best with this wedding. Please don't get mad at me but I would suggest to your relatives to please consider hiring an experienced pro photographer, at least for the group photos, if they are going to have any, through the ceremony. If they would consider doing that then follow the photographer and see what s(he) does and make some photos on your own. That would take some pressure off of you to get those photographs for them to remember their wedding day.</p>

<p>There is a lot more in capturing a once in a lifetime event than the equipment. <br /> Please check my web site out. Look at the slide show. The only photo where a flash was used is the one where Dad is giving his daughter away at the beginning of the ceremony. All the others were made with available controlled light and I used a reflector for fill for some of them. <br /> Most weddings I do the B&G invest in having an associate photographer. What she does is find the light and composition that will make good photographs. She can do it very quickly as she has over 30 years with making wedding photographs. <br /> At any rate, I thought I would offer these thoughts to help you. Wedding photography is quite a responsibility and I admire your desire but what if they aren't happy looking at the photos after the event has faded into the sunset? Then what?<br /> Just something to think about.<br /> Good luck.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>I'd bring more 800 ISO rolls, just in case. I'd guess it would be handier than 400 ISO. Otherwise, looks fine. Reala would be really helpful under fluorescent lighting, but it is slow, so I'd actually leave it at home.</p>

<p>I am certainly nervous about the responsibilty, but for them with their budget its either me or snap shots from friends and family. They are having two ceremonies, one on Friday which is Hindu with dinner to follow and one on Sunday which is the main ceremony and is christian with a large reception to follow. They have a wedding photographer for the ceremony on Sunday, but they can't afford her for both events.<br>

I have previously shot my brother's wedding with fairly good results, same situation (affordability), though his wedding consisted of 10 people, though it was a beautiful church.<br>

The B&G are fairly comfortable with my photography and like it. At least at the moment they aren't expecting the world and my wife is actually reigning them in a bit to the effect of "Yeah, Matt can shoot it, but he is a guest to, so he is going to be enjoying himself. He's also helping out with our son, so he'll shot what he can when he can."</p>

<p>I would only use the slide film as a total desperation or "just for fun" if you have extra time and an extra camera. It's just too slow and it's very fussy. You're going to be dealing with an unknown lighting situation and negative film gives you some room (2-3 stops even) for imperfect exposure. Slide film is not tolerant enough for unknown lighting and little time to get the shot. I love Reala, but I think it's not going to be useful for anything except at the beginning of the afternoon outdoors.</p>

<p>If the dressing is indoors, away from bright windows, which seems likely, that 160s might be discarded for the 400 speed instead. If you can get to the venue and scope it out beforehand, preferably at the same time of day, plan some shots and see what the exposures would need to be. I'd buy more 800 speed film, myself. And as much as it feels intrusive, a flash is sometimes necessary. If you are the official photographer, people will forgive you some flash (you can take the same shot with flash and without it, too, if it's a shot you really want to be sure of). If you bounce it off the tent interior instead of aiming it directly at the subjects, that may be less irritating and give you a nice diffused softbox effect. I got some good advice from Nadine to work on my flash technique, and I am glad I did because today I have a job with an event at 6 pm. Even though the sun sets at 7:30, we'd lost enough light next to the large windows by six (yesterday, scoping it out) that we have to use the flash. My camera was at ISOs 400 and 800, to get 1/125, f4 in some places. We had more light outdoors, but some fill flash was still necessary to get rid of the eye socket shadows and to compensate for some of the split lighting of long shadows. Note, a lot of wedding don't start on time, so you may lose even more light (arg!).</p>

<p>If you have a little time to practice a roll of 400 speed at 6-7 pm outdoors, I would. Try it with your flash to see what it gives you.</p>

<p>I would carry at least 10 rolls each of 400 and 800 and wouldn't bother with anything slower. Anything that's left over can go in your fridge for future work. Stick to Kodak Portra NC or the Fuji equivalent in order to get the best skin tones. If this is an evening wedding just accept the fact that you're going to be shooting a lot of it by flash and don't get caught up in trying to shoot available light -- enough light is not the same as good light. Get at least an StoFen Omnibounce or a Lumiquest SoftBox (the kind that velcros to the flash) and a Stroboframe bracket so it doesn't look like direct flash. Also drag the shutter to open up the backgrounds.</p>

<p>I do have a mini loftbox. I was considering an omnibounce...but I was thinking I might stick to what I know (the minisoft box or using a bounce card). I'll up how much 400 and 800 speed I get and discard getting the 160s due to the time of day. I'll slip a few rolls of reala in just in case for early on stuff if the light is willing (to use in my 2nd body early on).<br>

I do have to handle flash bracket, not a great one though (think 30 years old).</p>

<p>Personally when I shoot weddings it's with one or two fast lenses and one film speed. There are too many ways to make mistakes changing between films. I'd forget flash all together unless you are very experienced with how it looks with your camera, lens and the films you're using. Everytime I use flash at a wedding I end up regretting it. <br>

You can shoot ISO 400 at F1.4 until it's pretty much too dark to see.<br>

I'd take the 28,50 and 85 mm lenses and then I'd only use the 50mm 1.4 95% of the time. Throw in a few images with the 90 for flavour, can be good for details during the service too. 28mm only for groups if you can't fit everyone in with the 50mm.</p>

<p>I guess I should explain the film choice abit more. For a wedding it's important the images have the same 'look' - using the same film stock helps with this alot. 400 to 800 - the film has a really different look interms of grain and also the colour. It's really hard to get skin to look as nice with 800. The difference between 160 and 400 is much less, though with a film like Portra 400NC, there really isn't a big advantage using 160 at all, unless it's an outdoor wedding the whole way.</p>

<p>My hope is to basically shoot with the 400, but if the lighting is going to be poor under the tent and flash is limited during the ceremony then I may have to use the 800. My plan for the 70-210/2.8 is for the ceremony itself if I am limited to the back (also where the monopod comes in). I still have to work out some of the details and unfortunately some of them are not going to be able to worked out till the day of, so I'd rather take to much gear and leave it in a pack then not have what I need at the time.<br>

My plans were pretty much that for lens usage (excluding the ceremony if I am limited to the back), 50/1.4 90+% of the time with the 85/2 in there a bit and the 28/1.8 for group photos.<br>

For the films I plan on marking all the 800 canisters with silver metallic tape so that they stand out a bit more (and hopefully reminding me to reset the camera meter ISO dial). I am hoping that the lighting under the tent is going to allow me at least f/2, 1/125s and iso400...but I am planning for the worst (IE needing flash and/or iso800).</p>

<p>I agree with James that sticking to one film with one ISO is the ideal situation. But I disagree about flash. In my opinion, you simply can't shoot a wedding without flash. 1.4 at 1/30th just doesn't cut it for cutting the cake, tossing the garter, dancing, etc., especially at night or inside a "romatically lit" catering hall. There are so many shots that you only get one chance at that you can't risk the focus being off or motion blur. And just because there's enough light to get an image on the film doesn't mean it's going to be flattering light. Flash doesn't have to look like something shot with a point and shoot. If you learn to use it properly, you can get to the point where the average viewer doesn't even know it's flash. But even if it's clear that it's flash, I personally would rather have a shot that's tack sharp where you can see everyone than something where it's a little soft because the wide-open aperture didn't give enough depth of field or the shutter speed resulted in blur, or the available light left deep eye socket shadows, etc. Some people can shoot very well without flash, but I prefer to use it myself.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>I agree with James that sticking to one film with one ISO is the ideal situation. But I disagree about flash.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Yeah. Me too. I could really see myself messing up and not changing the ISO, and as James said, skin tones just aren't as nice at ISO 800. But honestly I really could not shoot an entire event at f1.4. For me, two issues would come into play:<br /> 1. At f1.4, I have no room for error should that plane of focus be in the wrong spot. I really don't want to take one of those photos where the bride's dress beads are in perfect focus across her bust, but her eyes, nose and lips are all fuzzy. This is one place where experience probably counts for a lot. James is braver than I am.<br /> 2. What about situations where I simply cannot have super-shallow depth of field? Those shots with the bride, groom and 1-2 other people? Or just the bride & the groom both in focus somewhere? If they are not standing exactly parallel to each other, only one's face will be in focus. How would the family feel about that?</p>

<p>Thinking back, I did attend a night wedding as a guest w/ a film camera. It was in an aquarium at night by candlelight against a 15-foot-high glass tank - talk about darkness and reflection issues! I shot 3200 speed b&w film at f1.4 and f1.8 without flash, and it came out - mostly because I didn't have to shoot more than two people at a time. All the photos definitely had a certain grainy, film-noir, shallow DOF look. Moody & cool, yes, but not a way to get a group portrait, that's for sure. I didn't envy the paid photographer on that job. She must have had one super power pack because she was lighting up the place every other second with a full strobe that got to be seriously annoying during the reception.</p>

<p>If the wedding is starting at 6 pm, the B+G's and the family's formal shots will likely be afterwards (bad luck for the groom to see the bride before hand while it's sunny!). If you have a family of 6-10 people you have to get in focus, you have to go with at least f5.6 or preferably f8, I think. Definitely use your monopod.</p>

<p>That reminds me, once you exceed 6-10 people in a group shot, you could run into issues lighting a group that large with one flash. Also, you might consider doing some shots of different family members earlier in the day, before the wedding, perhaps as they arrive, in better light. That way, you would have a few more images that you could count on.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>I agree with James that sticking to one film with one ISO is the ideal situation. But I disagree about flash. In my opinion, you simply can't shoot a wedding without flash. </p>

</blockquote>

<p>Craig, not wishing to argue with your opinion particularly, but I think quite the exact opposite on both counts.</p>

<p>I rarely if ever use a flash - in fact, while I own a few strobes, I think they're fairly unnecessary in most wedding situations. I'm aware of conventional wisdom regarding flash, and I agree it has its place in certain circumstances, such as outside fill etc. But I've seen so many photographers ruin what would otherwise be beautiful images simply from an insensitivity to ambient light. There are people who fire on camera flash at everything regardless, and as a result their images are lifeless, flat and uninteresting.</p>

<p>There are also photographers who feel everything has to be in focus and on the same plane. I don't share that opinion either. There's not much room for creative vision if everything is shot at f11 at 1/500 with flash. You could just get a kodak instamatic and accomplish the exact same thing :-) Of course, its possible to go to far in the other extreme as well, and shooting everything at 1.4 is also a good way to ruin an album. The key is being versatile and staying sensitive to the light and the subject and making appropriate choices.</p>

<p>So - I shoot plenty of film, usually 20 rolls or more in a wedding. I use a mixture of Ektar, ProH, NPH and TMZ. I overexpose everything by at least 2/3 stop. I shoot wide open a lot of the time, and stopped down when I need to. I very rarely use flash. And the net result is attractive - creamy colours, nice contrast, beautiful tones in b+w, and pleasantly different from digital.</p>

<p>I also don't agree with just using one film stock or speed. That's an unnecessary and undesirable limitation. Light is always changing and it's important to be able to respond with an appropriate film for the situation. So my film stock covers everything from ISO 50 to 3200, and I shoot with multiple cameras so I don't need to change mid-roll.</p>

<p>My portfolio is linked from my profile. I'm fairly sure there's not a single flash image in there, and a large part of it was shot on film.</p>

<p>Just my thoughts.</p>

<p>Thanks for the thoughts everyone. For me the flash is simply there if the light level drops too low, low meaning blur or not enough in focus with those light levels. I am an available light guy most of the time and I figure I'll go with what I prefer and do the best. Flash will be there, because I can't fight the nature of bad or failing light. I like to mix it up with dof, sometimes shallow, sometimes a lot, it depends on what I am trying to convey and record in the image. I'll keep that thought in mind with the slight over exposure. I am planning on, at least earlier in the wedding, loading one camera with Reala and one with 400h and later on if the light levels drop to much 400h and 800z or 100 and 800 possibly (the 100 for shallower dof with flash, the 800z when trying to light really big groups or ambient light shots).<br>

Monopod, film and omnibounce in the mail. I'll have about a week to burn some film and practice with it all (well, mostly burning reala, but its the monopod and omnibounce that I feel I really need to get used to).</p>