Sparklers Again......

[kari douma]

Well, I had another wedding with Sparklers. This will be a continuation off

my last post here:

 

http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00JAOs

 

I tried to do it different this time. Again, my assistant went out and did a

few tests while the recieving line was going on... but one sparkler compared

to over a hundred is a lot different.

 

The problem with this type of shot is that everyone lights the sparklers, and

within 60 seconds the bride and groom are coming, so there is no time to take

some test shots or meter and get the right settings. So, I was counting on

there being a lot of light, and shooting ambient light only as was discussed

in the last thread. I told the bride and groom to GO SLOW... but of course

they were enjoing themselves and ran through faster than what I'd like.

 

I set my camera to 1600 ISO, F4 (I wanted a little DOF with them moving tward

me...) and 1/60 ss (I was afraid to hand hold under this speed). Well, after

I took the first two shots, I knew it was underexosed, so I quick turned on my

flash and poped flash on the last one (which was the best.) But, They are

still now where near what the samples were in the last post.

 

I tried to lift and correct the ambinet light image in PS, but with 1600

underexposed, it was not forgiving at all. I tried to adjust the white

balance so it wasn't so yellow, but I got a lot of blue "grain" in the image

which was unexceptable.

 

So, my question still is what can I do to improve on this... and how SHOULD

have I handled this situation?<div></div>

[picturesque]

Hi Kari--don't have any good tips for handling what you already have, but as far as how it should have been handled, I would have done exactly what I recommended last time. I personally wouldn't have put the ISO that high. Maybe 800 or even 400, underexposed the ambient by a couple of stops or more while putting correct flash exposure on subject, keeping other people from getting in front of the couple enough to affect the flash calculation. The exterior lighting could have been sodium vapor, which is sickly yellow-green. I would have set the white balance for flash and with the background underexposed, the background should not be so dominant. Last one doesn't look so bad.

[w.smith]

You could have straightened them, for starters! Jeeeez . . .

 

Have you tried a denoising app yet?

[meredith_barringer_sutton]

Hi, Kari!

I thought the first photo really captured the moment! I liked the yellow image. Photojournalic and beautiful. What does the couple think?

 

Sorry those others were so harsh. Bet their pictures look like something from Olan Mills...

 

Meredith

[david_banks2]

"You could have straightened them, for starters! Jeeeez . . ."

 

That's easy to say, but the steps are perfectly straight already.

[pete_s.]

Kari,

I would gel the flash with a CTO to bring flash and ambient closer in temperature. That would make any color adjustments much easier in post.

 

Hope you don't mind but I've made a attempt to adjust your first image by color correcting shadows, midtones and highlights separately while still maintaining the mood. Instead of lifting the shadows I made them darker to make the bride and groom stad out and to minimize the effect of noise. May not be to everybodies taste though. I also cloned out the hot spots on the brides face.<div></div>

[pete_s.]

On the other one I adjusted the color temp and put a black vignette to lift the bride and groom. In addition the image needs some noise removal treatment and the couple still loks a little bit underexposed to me. I would probably darken the yellow steps too because I find them distracting. Oh well...

 

In retrospect I think a little bit of gelled flash on both images would have been better.

 

Happy New Year, Peter<div></div>

[kiva]

This still doesn't answer your question but it's an alternative.

Black and white adjust the black, white, and neutrals in selective colors adjustment to taste.<div></div>

[bruce_rubenstein___nyc]

My personal preference for sparklers is to use a very low shutter speed combined with flash. With a low shutter speed you get the movement of the sparklers, and they burn in and appear bigger. The flash, set to second curtain, will freeze the couple and render them sharp. You also don?t need a very high ISO, or very large aperture. The combination of the low shutter speed blur and flash will give a more dynamic image with detail.

[kari douma]

Thanks Nadine, my assistant did a setting like that, we thought we'd try to cover both bases. He used ISO 800, F4 at 1/25 ss, and he had too much motion blur. I'll post his (Thanks Matt, I hope you don't mind...) Maybe ISO 400 would have been better? Was he too close to the ambient???? I can't believe he was being that mine was so under exposed... but maybe his images were in an area where people were closer together with sparklers causing more light.

 

Thanks Merideth!

 

Thanks for the tips peter. These aren't edited too much, jsut a quick RAW conversion, and that is it. I'll have to work on them a little more to get the best results. I appreciate your tips.

 

Bruce, I did just what you are saying the last time (see the last post), but the slow shutter caused a double exposure when other flashes were going off. Plus, I think my shutter was too slow, letting in too much light, because the sparklers were brighter than I thought. I got too much motion blur.

 

I just want to be confident in a shot like this... I think this is becoming a more popular thing to do. I want to be able to do this with out guessing and hoping I come out with something good. (Plus, I really want it to be a WOW shot like some of the ones posted in the last thread!)<div></div>

[annealmasy]

I hate sparklers. They create so much smoke, it's almost unbearable.

[jmichaelc]

I like the natural light shot by far the best; regardless of the ISO used. I do almost the first thing you did......i use a large aperature, sometimes set the shutter at 1/60 and anywhere between 800-3200 iso depending on the light and i will pull the exposure if i have too in post....just for this paticular kind of shots; which are minimal in the overall presentation. How should you handle the situation? IMO, For this application,do get a lens with a larger aperture than F4....i recommend the sigma 20 F1.8 or the Canon 16-30 F2.8 and in MUST situation, use a small amount of diffused or direct flash.

[kari douma]

Thanks Jamie, I do have lenses wider than F4, but I was worried about DOF with the bride and groom moving tward me. Kind of like the processional and postcessional shotes.... I have to be careful that they wont move out of the focus range too quickly. So, that is why I didn't shoot lower than F4.

[picturesque]

Kari--I think you have your answer--the ambient generated by all the sparklers must have been closer to your assistant's settings than he thought. When they are running, you've got to widen the difference between ambient and camera settings if you don't want any hint of motion blur. Also if the flash was underexposing if he was using either TTL-BL or an automated setting. Looks like the former though.

 

These events are very hard to predict, as you know. Sometimes the ambient is brighter, sometimes near pitch black. Sometimes the people stand close to the couple, other times farther away. There may be a bright building in the background, or not. Even if you try to control people, you may end up with people in front of you, blocking your view. I guess you should decide which way you want to err--is it better to end up with "flashy", no-motion-blur pictures but darker backgrounds or motion blur pictures but brigher backgrounds, with or without noise, etc., etc.

 

You might want to experiment the next time using aperture priority, with the ambient compensation dialed down at least two stops. Add flash as normal (flash compensate as normal) and see what the camera comes up with. If you find that seems to work, you can use it in fast changing situations.

[kari douma]

Thanks Nadine, that is a great idea again. So, let me get this straigt... If I set my camera to aperture priority at about F4, (I would have to take an educated guess on the ISO to not get my shutter too slow for the sake of a double exposure image with other flashes) and set my CAMERA comp to -2 to under expose the picture by two stops. Then set my flash on TTL at 0 comp to bring the exposure to where it should be (and hopefully the TTL will be where it should be.) So, am I understanding this correctly? I think I want to test this method. It sounds good.

 

Now... if only I could get 100 people to hold some sparklers while my husband runs through for me! :) I guess my 5 family members will have to do.... or, maybe at the next family party I can round up about 15-20 poeple... oh, wont they think I am crazy...

[picturesque]

Kari--you have it right. I'd stick to ISO 400 or 800. You'd have to test how much the camera/flash is fooled by the bright points of sparkler light, though.

[kiva]

a thought: once you have done all your figures and come up with the settings you want then use auto exposure bracketing?

 

dunno, just a passing thought. could set camera and flash to fire continuous and bracket at same time? ups the chances when you've only got a matter of seconds in a fast moving situation.

 

might at least try it if you get a group of people together in a grand experiment?

[rob_s___san_francisco_bay_]

Lots of good suggestions already... <p>

I would add that I would definatey try to stick to a manual camera exposure, dialed in

ahead of time, then use the flash in TTL mode. I really think the sparklers could make it

difficult on the camera's metering system with all those bright spots waving around...

unless you were good at using a "spot" metering mode with your camera and the

exposure-lock button for recomposing.<p>

I'd definately use flash as the main exposure for the couple. For the ambient all you need

is to just get enough so the guests' faces don't go completely dark. I would maybe try to

meter off of a single sparkler before the b & g come out... get up close and try to fill a

good part of the frame with the sparkler... open up a stop, maybe two, from that reading...

use that for your camera's ambient exposure, manual mode. That would eliminate the

variable of metering 1 person with a sparkler versus 50. If the camera is set to expose for

the sparklers (plus a stop or two) then the people holding them will probably be properly

exposed or just a stop or so under, which would be fine I think....

<p>

Just my couple cents worth anyway. I'm sure you'll keep us posted the next time. Good

Luck!

[kari douma]

Thanks William and Rob, some more good tips. I'll let you all know how it goes next time!

[conraderb]

Kari - seems to me that the sparklers weren't particularly close to the couple, and your high ISO images dont' have a lot of color, which is pretty normal for high ISO images IMHO. I think that a better exposure from stronger ambient light (ie. sparklers closer to the couple) would do the trick.

 

of course, you could always just do f8, drag the shutter for maybe 1/5 or 1/4 of a second, and pop the flash. shoot a few of these to get a nice expression on both faces. avoid dragging too long otherwise ghost faces might show up...

 

also try rotating the camera as you shoot - a fun effect.

[larry schaefer - chicago,]

A little sparkle.

[larry schaefer - chicago,]

A little more contrast. You can yank out more with the original I am sure.<div></div>