Advice for dim venue

[michaelbonner]

Hey, everyone,

<p>

I was the photographer for a retirement ceremony in a dimly lit chapel earlier today. I was shooting with

my Canon 350D at ISO 800, switching between a Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 and a Canon 70-200mm f/4 IS.

I also had a 430EX Speedlite, but as I've only had a few days' experience with it, I used it sparingly

(futhermore, my diffuser is still in the mail and the ceiling was far too high to bounce the flash). I shot in

M when I was facing the stage to get the best exposure for the participants and Av when I was turned

around, photographing the attendees. That formula seemed to work for most of the shots, but there were

some nice moments that didn't come out. The biggest issue I had was capturing any action that took place

in the space between the altar and the pews, due to the lack of lighting in the gap. Another one of the

difficulties was that all the participants were wearing white, which definitely did nothing to simplify my

exposure problems. A selection of the photos can be found <a href="http://www.photo.net/photodb/folder?

folder_id=777862" >here</a>, including many of the hits and a couple of the misses for illustrative

purposes (I had roughly 100 'keepers'). Critiques are quite welcome.

<p>

The issue at hand is I'm scheduled to be photographing a wedding for a good friend in the same chapel in

a little over two weeks. He is well aware of my skill level/equipment and his expectations are in

proportion. That said, I would like to provide the best photography I can. Do you have any suggestions for

solutions between now and then? In a perfect world, I would have a second body, the 70-200 would be a

2.8, I'd have a bag of fast primes, and the ceiling would be lower. In reality, though, I'm on a budget. So

far, I've considered renting an 85mm f/1.8 or a 50mm f/1.4. If anyone has any other ideas, I would be

very happy to hear them. I've attached a photo I took a week ago of the interior to give an idea of what I

was dealing with.

<p>

Thanks a lot,

<p>

Michael Bonner<div></div>

[michaelbonner]

Note: Chapel interior shot was taken at 1/25, f/2.8, ISO 400.

[Matt Laur]

Would your budget provide for the purchase of a 50/1.8? At only around $100, that seems like a worthy consideration, and worth owning regardless. Also: do you have any ability to use a tripod in this scenario?

[michaelbonner]

Funny thing- I already have the 50/1.8, but I haven't seen it in about a month and a half. :)

When I buy another 50, it's going to be the 1.4, but I'm looking for a short-term solution. As

for the tripod, wouldn't that just allow me to counteract hand-shake with slower shutters? I'm

not sure how it would help me capture moving people.

 

Thanks,

 

Michael

[scottl1]

You could try bumping the ISO up. It's better to have a slightly grainy shot than no shot at all. Did you use a tripod? It would be hard to capture any anything moving in that light even with a tripod but for example the picture of the hat, could have been taken at a much slower shutter speed. For your flash, did you have it pointing up or straight ahead? Was it dialed down any? I'm not a pro but it looks like if you pointed the flash up, with a bounce card or something to move the light forward, your subjects should have at least been lighter.

 

The 1.8 or 1.4 lenses would help too but I'm not sure how much with a place that dark. Did you post process them? Here is one where I used PS Curves to lighten it.<div></div>

[buffdr_raz1]

Hi Michael. Since your on a budget, I would rent the 50mm 1.4 AND make sure you have a good tripod and learn how to drag the shutter. This is provided that flash can be used during the event. Since you might be renting the lens, I would also look into renting another flash, like a 580EXII and you can control your 430EX remotely with your rented 580 EX. Finely I would go over there and keep practicing till the event with the newly rented lens (50mm 1.4)as the lens does have thin DOF and it takes some time to master it. I hoped I helped and good luck to you...v/r Buffdr

[kari douma]

You can only do what your light and equipment will allow. If I was shooting here, I would have bumped my ISO to at least 800, if not 1600. If you don't feel comfortable with those ISO's with your camera, you would have to use your flash. Higer ISO's, wider apertures, and a tripod help in these types of situations. But, when there is no light, you have no option but to use a flash. Or, if your equipment is limiting you, there is nothing you can do. You either need to get the equipment to do the job, or pass on the job. (I am not downing your equipment or trying to sound harsh, I am just trying to be realistic.) I think the 50 1.8 is a good option here, and try to bump up the ISO if you can. I don't know how the grain is on the Rebel.

[michaelbonner]

Thank you for the suggestions,

 

I'm usually very critical of noise in my images, but in this case I might have to suck it up

and see what I can wrangle out of ISO 1600 and Noise Ninja.

 

As I said above, I'm pretty green when it comes to flash and the ceiling was quite high, so I

had it pointed dead ahead, on E-TTL with no compensation, and I only used it in maybe a

dozen or so shots the whole time. I'm not sure I'd be able to become confident in the use

of a two flashes at once in the time I have.

 

Also, I don't know if it's a personal thing, but when I'm looking through my photos in a

given place, I find that processing them to where they match what I saw with my eye is

what comes out most pleasing to me, even if it doesn't always result in a centered

histogram. I try to go through my photos, correcting poor exposure and obvious color

casts, but I've found that pushing these further towards neutral tends to take away from

what I felt to be the ambient mood at the time of capture. That said, I looked again at the

photo Scott edited and found it to be underexposed. :) Are my sentiments in this regard

valid, or am I just not able to step away from my work enough to see that I'm making

underexposed, discolored photographs?

 

In regards to being able to do the wedding, I completely understand your sentiments

about equipment, Kari. In this case, though, I wouldn't have a problem with 90 percent of

the situations- even in the chapel, there's enough light on the altar, and even on most of

the pews- it's just that little section between that tests the limits of what I've got.

 

Thanks a lot for the help,

 

Michael

[bob_osullivan]

I would say you need to either use that flash or bump ISO to 1600. Either would due for certain pictures but not both at the same time. That 430ex has decent range, like 30 feet at 50mm. If you're diffusor is (in the mail) make one up out of an emplty clear milk jug or something. You should be able to walk into a local shop and pick up a diffusor for $15. FIND that 50 1.8. I don't see why any of these shot's couldn't have been done with flash. Yes it may be a bit harsh, you may get some shiny noses and forheads and deep shadows, but that's better than not getting the picture at all. If they wanted perfect shots with 3 to 1 shadows, they'd have paid a pro. If flash is not allowed, definatley use ISO 1600 and you can use noise ninja or something in post to clear it up.

[peterlyons]

Just a quick note:

 

"Noisy" images can sometimes look better when converted to black and white. This may be

worth considering for some of your shots taken inside the church at high ISO settings. It

tends to mimic the appearance of grainy, high ISO film.

[picturesque]

You have some very good advice above. Let me just add the following. Years ago, when we didn't have such wonderful high ISO opportunities, we wedding photographers used a tripod and waited for the pauses between movements to shoot. During wedding ceremonies, not a lot of fast action happens. About the only thing in between the processional and recession that involves movement you probably can't get a respectable shot of using the "pauses" method is when and if there are people presenting the communion items, and even then, that moment when the items get into the hands of the priest is sometimes possible, or just before the people start down the aisle. Also if the couple walks over to their parents during the ceremony. Otherwise, while there might be some small blur in some of the shots, very respectable shots can be gotten with a tripod and slower shutter speeds.

 

Here's another thing to consider. If it is impossible to get during, restage it, if it is important. Many photographers hate restaging and hate tripods. I personally think restaged images aren't ideal but they will serve very well in their capacity as reminders for the couple, of their big day. You can spend big money to solve the problem or you can try the above. Spending big money if you are going to keep shooting weddings isn't a bad thing--I have several fast primes myself and go without a tripod when I can. But I remember that I can still do things the old way too...

[kiva]

If you can use flash: bounce the flash at an angle from your camera so that the beam of light bounces more towards the subjects as opposed to shooting the flash straight up at a severely angled ceiling. It's all a matter of math: look at the angle of the church ceiling and bounce the flash as "square" to the closest ceiling as possible ... in that dark of a location every bit of light will be useful.

 

If you can't use flash then ignore this message.

 

Note: you've got a couple of weeks and I bet you could make two or more visits to this church and ask to practice during the day ... usually the people working during the day are very accommodating. (visit as close to the time of day that the event will take place.)

[michaelbonner]

Thank you to everyone who responded. I appreciate all the help. I have a while to practice,

as well as a rehearsal the day before the wedding (at the same time of day), so I'll be

working on making the best of the situation until the day of. Also, I decided to make this

wedding an excuse to buy myself the Sigma 30mm f/1.4, so between all the advice on this

post and a faster lens, I feel pretty confident going into this. I will have to post the results

here once everything is said and done. Thanks a lot for the advice.

 

Best regards,

 

Michael Bonner