Okay, WHAT do you want to know about wedding lighting?

[picturesque]

Marc--thought of something. How did your tests with the Habor Light diffuser system go?

[cjogo]

I thought many more would jump in with questions or samples of their struggles or achievements ?? Seems there are quite of few shooting above ISO 400 and relying on a fast lens. I like the dual strobe on your altar image ~ MARC. Some times wish I had my assistant back.

[fotografz]

Nadine, it has gone well. I like the quality of light much better than with a LS ... the large

angled bounce card that can be inserted produces better coverage of groups, and loses less

light. For closer work the clip on cap is great.

 

What don't like is how much room it takes in the bag. I just place the LS over a lens, where

this is bigger and rigid. We also found that the modular concept needs improving as the clips

holding the diffusion part don't hold firm enough. And when using the large bounce panel,

there's no way to do a portrait oriented shot. My partner made his own secondary bounce

panel which solved it for him.

[seandepuydt]

Marc, maybe people don't know what to ask? I haven't a clue when it comes to flash photography, and little when it comes to natural light and people images. Here is an image of my daughter that I took handheld at around f/4 with 100 speed B&W. I had to keep the shutter as fast as I could so DOF was out the window. Does this meet the criteria you were looking for with this post? I'm always trying to learn more about light and lighting.<div></div>

[fotografz]

Appreciate the post Sean. I think the notion here is for more novice wedding photographers

to be able to ask direct questions about lighting problems specific to weddings ... without

being told they shouldn't be shooting weddings if the don't already know the answer.

[seandepuydt]

Understood Marc. It woudl be appropriate to delete my post then. Thanks for the clarification.

[cjogo]

The most challenging lighting for me ::

 

 

Bright sunlight ---white dress/black tux---12 feet distance. Without executing POST CS > how does one place enough strobe, into the subjects eyes, and maintain detail in the brides dress, draped in front of her ?? Again without POST CS >

Years ago ~ I used a snoot on a Metz strobe and channeled the strobe in a narrow pattern..

[picturesque]

C jo--so why aren't you still using a snoot, if it worked? Seems to me it would be easier with digital, since you can see the results immmediately. Personally, I use fill flash and let some small highlights blow on the histogram. I then recover them in post, but I shoot everything RAW. I also avoid using bright sun frontally on my subjects, or if I do, I make sure the eyes are not raccoon eyes--so no high noon, frontal sunlight. When using the sun as rim or back light, you can let some highlights blow and it won't matter to the image--in fact, I like to let some of the veil blow.

[cjogo]

NADINE :: The snoot was a awkward unit ( think more cumbersome that the Fong )& I no longer use anything but, a shoe mount flash. I shoot 70% film but, always RAW with digital. Guess I will just have to let some of those unmanageable highlights go. Yes, if I process the RAW and spend the time with recovery, etc. I can retain a much better product. Just don't always have the time/opportunity for my clients.

[cjogo]

NADINE :: "Seems to me it would be easier with digital, since you can see the results immediately "

 

Do you mean reading the histogram? I certainly don't have the eyes ( I wear trifocals ) to view that little screen, on a 20d, especially in the sun. Just got a Canon G9 for a backup > now there's a screen ~!

[picturesque]

C Jo--Lumiquest makes a foldable snoot for shoe mounts, or you can just make one. Also, I have and like the Hoodman LCD loupe, which allows me to check out an LCD in bright sun. It magnifies as well. No problem on my 20D screen.

[pete_s.]

Regarding snoots I think http://zootsnoot.com might be the king for shoe mount strobes. Haven't bought one yet though...

[picturesque]

Hey thanks, Peter. I just ordered one. I have the Lumiquest snoot but this one sounds great.

[cjogo]

Thanks NADINE --- SO use to film -- I rarely chimp > I get into the flow and never stop for a breather , especially to view that little screen and have to take off my glasses ~ to distinguish smiles/eye closed. Will look into the snoot attachment > I do like the Hoodman product, to. Like those old days : with that bright Sinar hood for my 4X5 ~!

[astrid_garcia]

I have a few questions about light! I have a degree in photography and feel comfortable controlling light in the studio. But what threw me off was working as an assistant, then a second shooter, to a pro wedding photographer who never metered (he can meter by just looking at the scene and 9 times out of 10, was correct).

 

I was always about metering in the studio and using ratios. I did a semester of location lighting, where we metered considerably to figure out what we needed to set the flash to so that it balanced with the ambient light or did what we needed it to do. But all that went out the window when I worked with this pro.

 

My questions:

 

1. You don't really have time to meter in most situations during a wedding, so how do you gauge accurately how much or how little flash to use? Often times I find myself setting a ballpark and then adjusting from there by looking at the screen and in the process I miss shots as I adjust. Granted, in most cases, you have time to test, but is that what seasoned pros do? The pro I work with didn't test all that much. What do you do to decide what settings to begin with? Is it distance from you to the subject and ambient light reading?

 

2. I find myself having problems with either not using enough flash or using too much, and not being able to make the technical decisions fast enough to balance both ambient light with artificial light. Does learning this balance come with experience? What are some pointers to look out for in terms of balancing artificial light with the ambient light?

 

3. I always shoot manual and have gotten better at adjusting either aperture or shutter speed on the fly to compensate for my botched estimations...but it's still too hit or miss for my comfort. I want to be able to enter a room and have a solid understanding of what I see and what to set my camera/flash to in order to record it as closely as possible. How do you begin the process of doing this?

 

 

Thanks! I have so many more questions....I am still shooting with this professional, and am embarking on my own as well. My goal right now is to get better at judging the light that I walk into so that I know what to use and how much of it to use.

 

I also want to move to the next level and add a second light to my set ups although my preference is to shoot with natural light as much as possible....thanks again to all the contributors on this forum.

 

Astrid

[pete_s.]

Hi Astrid,

 

Are talking about formal portraiture on location or candid/documentary type of photos? Flash on the camera, off the camera or studio strobes?

[pete_s.]

And..film or digital? 35mm or medium format?

[picturesque]

1. I have time to meter. I have a handheld incident meter that I use, but not for flash metering. When I don't have time to meter, I use one of the automated modes on the camera, which I have previously tested and know how to control and how to compensate. When it comes to flash, one basically does a lot of testing to learn how the camera/flash "thinks" and then applies what one learned in the field. I use a manual, off camera flash somtimes but most of the time I am using the automated flash metering (ETTL). I use it either as main source of light or as fill. The application itself is one that requires experience and some theory. One starts to get a handle on this by doing, so go out and shoot a lot, meter a lot and keep notes. Then formulate a method.

 

2. See above. Pointers are as follows. Fill flash is generally used a one to two stops less than "normal". Adjust to taste.

 

3. If you are talking about flash indoors, do searches on dragging the shutter and read the article at planetneil.com, under techniques.

 

If you are using a Canon camera and flash, study photonotes.org/eosflash. I did a previous tutorial on fill flash--you can look that up in the archives.

 

I would assume you are talking about weddings, and using a 35mm DSLR, but what camera and flash?

[picturesque]

Here's the link.

 

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

[astrid_garcia]

Hello,<p>

 

 

Thanks Nadine for the insightful advice!<p>

 

Let me ask you, when you meter using your incident meter, you take a reading of the ambient light (falling on the subject I assume) and then what do you do with that reading? <p>

 

Do you use it as starting point for setting your flash? Would that flash setting be set using a manual setting or do you set your aperture in the camera and let the flash pick the settings and then power down or up according to how you envision the scene?<p>

 

Peter, I read one of your last posts "Guestimating ambient exposure" and found it to be very helpful. I can't say that I have my head wrapped around it 100%, but it's the direction I want to head in. I've bookmarked it and will come back to it frequently as I practice. Hopefully in time all this will be second nature!<p>

 

To answer questions: <p>

 

Peter: <i>Are talking about formal portraiture on location or candid/documentary type of photos? Flash on the camera, off the camera or studio strobes?</i><p>

 

For formal portraiture, it's easier for me because it mimics more of a studio set up. I can meter, decide what lighting I need and what shutter speed to use and I am in full control of the light and the distance to the subject(s) does not fluctuate nearly as much. <p>

 

 

So I am referring more so to candid/documentary type photography. My flash is usually always on camera. I've never shot with the flash off camera (weddings, that is) other than when I used to shoot medium format using a bracket. <p>

 

 

My current set up is a 35mm DSLR Fuji S5 with a Nikon SB800. I USED to shoot with Mamiyas and Lumedynes.<p>

 

 

Another 'what do I want to know about wedding lighting' question is, how do you begin to recognize the quality of light? In Jeff Ascough's interview he says:<p>

 

 

<blockquote>"One of the differences that separates the talented pros from the rest in photography, is the photographer's ability to see light direction and quality."</blockquote><p>

 

 

How do you recognize good lighting? I mean, what IS good lighting? Is it lighting that gives you the ability to record what you see without using artificial lighting? Or perhaps lighting that lets you use settings that produce less noisy images? To me, good lighting is lighting that lets me record a scene emotionally without artificial lighting. But seeing images from professionals that know how to handle flash, 9 times out of 10 it didn't look like they used flash. So I feel that my preference comes from a lack of understanding of artificial lighting.

 

 

Also, if you are shooting in a documentary-style...do you move around the subject until you are able to use that light? In other words, if the subject isn't in the best light, do you move them into it?<p>

 

 

Ascough said he only used flash twice this year! I find that incredible! I bought two fast primes, but my problem lies in soft or out of focus images when I open up all the way (which I love to do) in order to avoid using flash.<p>

 

I have read Marc's posts on the distance to the subject in order to gauge what is in focus, but if anyone else has any tips, I'd love to hear them! I guess I'm trying to find out how to shoot using only that light and straying from artificial light...with so many things to consider, it seems almost impossible to do it. But obviously it's not when I see so many great photographers out there doing all of this and more!

 

Thanks so much to all of you for inspiring us...

 

Astrid

[picturesque]

When I use an incident meter I take a reading, as you say, and then use it to set my camera. I'm not being flippant--sometimes I use the reading as is, sometimes I use it to calculate some other setting. For instance, if in even shade, I might meter and use the settings as is. If I metered the brighter light in a situation where there was mixed lighting, or the darker light, I might calculate a couple of stops one way or the other, to place that light in a range predetermined in my head. This is all for ambient light.

 

I never meter for flash. When I use on-camera flash, I use the camera's flash metering, having "figured it out"--as I said above, how it "thinks". When I use off camera flash (always in manual), with or without the on-camera, I use my distance/f stop cheat sheets that I paste to my flash.

 

As far as recognizing good light, I would say that you should add to the term--"good light for people", since that is what we wedding photographers photograph. I would suggest studying basic portrait lighting--the patterns (those patterns look good on the human face and body), not the technical--and then try to understand how those patterns can be created "in nature". For instance, if you do any amount of outdoor portraiture, you begin to recognize that overhangs and light coming in on one side of a person while blocked on the other side, are great for creating the classic short lighting pattern on faces. The overhangs and gobos can be found in a stand of trees, for instance, or a convenient porch, or a window. You recognize that you can use sunlight bouncing off a wall as the "key light". Good light for weddings is light that makes humans look good. It has nothing to do with whether flash is used. Flash can look good on humans too.

 

When shooting in documentary style, you make the best use of the light that is there since you often have no time to do otherwise. If the subject isn't in the best light, and you have the time, you can move them if it doesn't interfere with the storytelling element of the image.

 

Re wide aperture primes. Research Marc's posts on using the 50mm f1.2 and 85mm 1.2 L lenses for techniques on using wide aperture primes.

 

And if you don't already know about the planetneil article, go there and look for the article on using on-camera flash, under Techniques. Also start following the strobist for incredible tips on using flash to best advantage.

[pete_s.]

Astrid,

 

I have given up on exposure automation in it's current form so I always shoot everything in manual including flash power. That way I can work the same regardless if the flash is on camera, or off camera, or I have multiple flashes/strobes or if they are combined with ambient light or any combination of the above.

 

To do it fast in a fluid situation like shooting weddings documentary style where you pick new subjects all the time requires some practise. It's not as difficult at it may seem at first though.

 

You could for instance set flash power by distance if you use direct flash and adjust when you bounce. I always bounce the flash off something when possible because it gives direction and size to the light.

 

Shooting digital you could also set the flash power to whatever you guess it should be and then fire of a shot, check the histogram and adjust the flash power if needed. You need to know your histogram very well though so you can adjust the flash power exactly without having to repeat the process over and over.

 

The key to this technique is to do this once and then increase or decrease flash power as the distances changes. Of course keep an eye on the histogram from time to time to check that you still have it where it should be.

 

The nicest thing about shooting manual flash though is that it will never be fooled by the brightness of your subject, brightness of the background or anything else. And if the exposure wasn't what you wanted you know who to blame :-)

 

Peter

[pete_s.]

PS. And set your zoom on the flash to manual. You are usually better off having it at 24mm for everything close (regardless of your focal length) and then making the spread smaller as you need to bounce or cover longer distances.

[markonestudios]

Peter, Nadine, this is some great info being disseminated here. Marc, kudos for starting this thread. I shot a wedding last weekend where I put some of the things here into practice, to good effect (e.g bouncing off walls instead of only looking for ceilings!) I also revisited planetneil after a leave of absence and was happy that I did that 'refresher.' Astrid, for the longest time I've shot film at weddings and not had the benefit of histograms. I still get clients who are elated with the results. Secret? Practice, practice, practice! Use your S5 as your teahcer. Shoot many frames, change settings, etc. It'll cost you nothing but time and battery recharge cycles, but the payback is well worth it :)

[fotografz]

Astrid has made a couple of comments that probably could use a bit more discussion as

they are the key to lighting for weddings IMHO.

 

1) "One of the differences that separates the talented pros from the rest in photography, is

the photographer's ability to see light direction and quality" -- Jeff Ascough

 

Some have an intuitive talent for doing this ... but it CAN be learned. Astrid asked "how?"

 

So rather than just offering technical solutions, perhaps we all can elaborate on how we

assess a scene before jumping to artificial solutions. Can't technically solve a problem if

you don't know what the problem is to start with. One tendency I've noticed is a use of

artificial lighting solutions as the dominate answer to many lighting scenarios. IMO, it's

putting the cart before the horse.

 

My grasp of available light came from having never used a flash for years of shooting B&W

with a Leica M camera. During my formative years few, if any, of my "Photographic Heros"

ever used flash, so it never occurred to me to do so.

 

 

YOU DO LEARN TO SEE AVAILABLE LIGHT WHEN IT'S THE ONLY LIGHT AVAILABLE.

 

 

So, to correct this tendency to solve everything with flash, one has to teach themselves to

see and use the available light first. Repeat: FIRST!

 

A fast and easy way to do this is to practice in various situations and locations without the

"crutch" of having a flash at all. Leave the flash at home!

 

Go out on your own and shoot, all the while paying attention to where the light is, and

what the quality of that light might be. When the quality is bad (like very harsh and/or the

wrong direction), look for where it isn't bad. Sounds remedial, but it's amazing how many

photographers simply don't do that. 90% of the time you can move the subject to take

advantage of better available light OR you can change your vantage point. So, don't let the

other 10% drive how you shoot everything.

 

BTW, another way to heighten that learning experience is to shoot B&W ... it strips away

the crutch of color and the only thing left to define an image is the lighting. Use B&W film,

or if your digital camera allows it, set the LCD review to B&W. If not, batch process all your

shots to B&W in post, then review.

 

 

2) "But seeing images from professionals that know how to handle flash, 9 times out of 10

it didn't look like they used flash."

 

Astute observation actually. It is the goal, or should be IMO, for every wedding

photographer. It most certainly is mine personally. However, if you do not master #1

above, then flash will become the dominate answer to most lighting situations at a

wedding and all to often spoil what was a beautiful opportunity provided by the ambient

light. IMO, a lot of flash work takes on a correct, but homogenized feel ... mostly because

even when technically "correct", it's still to much of it.

 

This stuff is basic, and it is certain that each of us will face what seems like an impossible

lighting situation that we are forced to deal with. But in reality, those are fewer in number

than opportunities to use what is already there if we teach ourselves to look for the light ...

and only AFTER that decide if you need to add a little bit of help from your flash.

 

Put the horse back where it belongs ... in front of the cart : -)<div></div>