ideas on how to do a forest wedding . . .

[kitsu_2000]

<p>Okay, first post as a new member to the website. I have a wedding coming up that will be held in the forest. Ceremony will be approx 3pm with afternoon sun in and out of the trees. I am looking for a few words of advice/input. While I have done about 5 weddings now, none like this. I have done some outdoor receptions/group shots, but not a whole event. I plan not to be using flash diffuser at all. <br>

I found at the last wedding I did I ran into issue with using aperture priority outside as light got lower and lower with late afternoon/evening time (no direct sun prior to going down). I ended up with a few blurred small group (3-6 people) shots (around 1/40th or so) because the camera would meter ambient too slow and the flash wasn't enough to freeze action. Even when standing within 5-10 feet. I have seen on the forums here a few threads recommending/talking about Tv mode to maintain a fast enough shutter to keep people in sharp focus outdoors. It must be that using 1/40 or so indoors works better because the flash has more effect in terms of getting more shots in focus by freezing action with being able to bounce it and have more light 'available' so to speak vs outdoors? In other words, confining the flash indoors gives it more power (either with diffuser/bouncing/straight on/ etc)?<br>

The reception after the ceremony will be as light lowers and dusk will settle. I figure I will need to be upping my iso and lowering my f/stop and let go of worrying about controlling depth of field as the light becomes night. I am hoping to use fill flash to help with shadow prior to it becoming dark, but don't want it to keep from maintaing non-blury shots. It's in the Redwoods and the canopy will keep it fairly dark and consistent, i.e. fewer hot spots, or shafts of light. Maybe, I'm just over-thinking the whole thing! I will have Canon 7d, 30d and 40d available with 550 and 580II flash. primary lens' will be 70-200 2.8 IS, 17-55 2.8 IS and the 50 1.4 prime. Thanks for any thoughts/words of wisdom.<br>

-Matt</p>

[the_mongrel_cat]

<p>i've never used the 7d, but i've heard good things. it will probably produce excellent pics up to 3200ISO anyway. Hopefully somebody can verify this.<br /> your 501.4 will drink light in too.<br /> best thing to do, go to the forest at before the date, same time of day, take a couple of pals and practice a few different things. bribe them with a photo or some beer.<br /> good luck</p>

<p>ps, fwiw, i would use manual and keep an eye on the meter and the shutter speed</p>

[tom_mann1]

<p>In your 1st paragraph, you said that the sun will be in and out of the trees, whereas in your last paragraph you said that the redwoods will keep the light consistent, ie, fewer hot spots or shafts of light. My suggestion is to wish for the second situation, but be prepared for the 1st. ;-) </p>

<p>In the first part of this event, I would be much more worried about dappled light, maybe with a green color cast illuminating your subjects than I would be about low overall light levels. With a modern DSLR you'll be able to go to astonishingly high ISOs, so I wouldn't be too worried about low light, at least if the event will be in the next few weeks, when 3 pm will be several hours before sunset.</p>

<p>IMHO, dappled light on people's faces doesn't look good and its a real PITA to remove in post processing. As suggested, I would shoot some test shots so that you can pre-select your shooting angles and locations, determine if you need fill flash, how to gel it (if needed), etc.</p>

<p>OTOH, as the afternoon progresses and you lose light, my guess is you will eventually want to supplement the ambient light with flash. At minimum, get your flash off of your camera. You want your lighting to be soft. One of the easiest techniques that I've used to achieve this is to bounce your on-bracket flash off of a big reflector held by an assistant who stays glued to your side. Again, this is made feasible by the advent of decent high-ISO cameras.</p>

<p>Tom M</p>

<p> </p>

[picturesque]

<p>I recommend you read the entire previous thread below, as well as look at the link I provide toward the bottom of the thread. Redwood forests can be problematic because of the high contrast between the shadows (deep, since the trees are very tall) and bright shafts of sunlight.</p>

<p><a href="00Y8N8">http://www.photo.net/wedding-photography-forum/00Y8N8</a></p>

<p>What is the timing of the event? When is the ceremony and when is the reception? At a certain point, the shafts of sun will be gone, and you will be dealing with more manageable shade.</p>

<p>As for the flash used inside and outside re shutter speed, research "dragging the shutter" on these forums and on Neil van Niekerk's site/blog.</p>

[kitsu_2000]

<p>So I was a little back and forth, oops! I have been to the site and there will be dappled light but it should be manageable due to the amount of canopy coverage provided by the redwoods. I.E. a lot of canopy and not a lot of shafts of light to have to worry about. I won't have chance to walk around and practice, but should be able to be there for the rehearsal to practice with that.<br>

I will not be using gels, haven't learned that process yet. The fill flash is the big question due to some of the blurry shots I got at the last venue where I had some outdoor photos to do. I tried to 'drag the shutter' at that event by using fill flash and 1/40 to 1/50 or so shutter speed but got some blurry shots, even when the group was standing still. Maybe operator error, although the indoor dragging the shutter shots were much sharper. I think I'm trying to figure out how to fill flash outside while using a high enough shutter speed to freeze the action combined with avoiding the 'black cave' look as the light fades. <br>

The ceremony is about 3pm so fill flash at that time should be fine. It's the reception toward 5pm as the light fades that has me the most nervous. It will get darker quicker under the trees because it is such a thick forest setting.<br>

I will have an assistant, but not for the whole event. I'm reluctant to start using reflectors outdoors because a flash loses so much power trying to bounce like that? Something I may need to work on. Thanks for the helpful words/links!<br>

-Matt</p>

[picturesque]

<p>Perhaps you are missing one key factor in dragging the shutter. That is that you must have the ambient or background light underexposed in relation to the flash EV--by approximately 2 stops, although that is not rigid. It depends on the kind of subject motion we are talking about. Normally, outside, in brighter light, one does not actually drag the shutter, because one is normally exposing for the ambient, and using flash as fill (at light levels not powerful enough to illuminate the subject just by itself). Just using flash does not mean it will freeze motion. This is why your indoor flash shots were less blurry. The ambient light indoors was probably 2 or more stops underexposed in relation to the flash EV.</p>

<p>If the focal length of your group shots was at about 35mm (full frame), 1/40th or even 1/50th may still be too slow to consistently stop handholding blur or subject blur. You may also be dealing with missed focus. Be sure of the reason(s) for the blurriness.</p>

<p>When outdoors in brighter light--even shade--and you want to use fill flash, meaning flash at levels not high enough to illuminate the subject by itself--you are basically still following two other 'rules'. Rule one is the one for handholding shake. Rule two is the one for stopping subject motion. Dragging the shutter does not come into play.</p>

<p>The above will be what you use for daytime (bright sun/shade) shots in the forest where brightly lit parts of the subject are important, and perhaps even in the shade, where you want to fill eye sockets or something. This can go on in the dimming light for as long as you are comfortable with using higher and higher ISO. Once you get to the point that you are no longer comfortable using a higher ISO--this is when you start dragging the shutter for subject motion shots. Remember--this means your ambient is about 2 stops underexposed to the flash EV, and perhaps the gap should be larger if the subject motion is pretty active.</p>

<p>This is when I would break out my off camera lights as well.</p>

[fotografz]

<p>My advice is to use the forest as much as possible (see attached photo), especially in the Redwood forest.</p>

<p>For more candid work, dappled light is okay as long as it isn't falling on the main subject's face or arms ... which is hard to fix. Otherwise, it looks natural and is part of the charm of a forest wedding. </p>

<p>In this specific situation, I wouldn't use automated exposure at all, day or night. There are too many contrast extremes in forest venues that can trick the meter ... so by the time you keep compensating the exposure levels, you might as well just use manual metering. If you aren't adept at selecting what to meter in a natural setting, take a grey card ... you can also use it to set manual white balance which will help eliminate to some degree the green cast when shooting available light in a forest setting. </p>

<p>As the sunlight wains into evening, break out the 50/1.4 and don't be afraid to shoot wide open ... just keep some distance from the subject to keep the DOF deeper. BTW, in many of these kinds of situations, a monopod can be a great friend and helps eliminate camera movement from the blur equation. Often, a bit of subject movement is acceptable IF the rest of the image is sharp. This is especially effective when dragging the shutter in conjunction with the use of an on-camera speed-light. </p>

<p> </p><div></div>

[kitsu_2000]

<p>Wedding done . . . much to edit but cursory look shows I ended up with 800 ISO as essentially my base ISO. A lot of flash needed and what I didn't realize . . . dang red eye!!!! Doh. I can edit no problem and it isn't persuasive but it makes sense. Dark night, pupils open up, hit with any kind of flash . . . red eye. I even used diffuser for some stuff. Will have to look closer and see if I notice/find any patterns in terms of how it happened. Next step . . . get the flash off the camera. I've used flash bracket before but found it really awkward with trying to get vertical shots. Might be time to upgrade to a better bracket than what I have.</p>

[picturesque]

<p>Red eye isn't affected by whether the flash is diffused or not. Basically, it happens when the angle of the flash to the subject and back to the camera is narrow enough, which is why it happens more with telephoto shots. Subjects tend to be farther away, and the angle narrows.</p>

<p>A flash bracket will help with the non tele shots but even with the bracket, you can still get red eye if the angle is narrow enough. Getting the flash off the camera--way off--helps a great deal.</p>

[savagesax]

Some many people worryabout fast lenses. They of course have their needs. But if you dont have a really fast 1.4 or even a1.2, leica makes an f1! Thats the fstist lensI know of. Hsasblabs make a 50mm lens at F8. You have to e care with peaking the right exposure and a pod is needed. The point is don't run out and buy all sorts of gear until you practice with it.

 

I'm nor sure if this will load but here is a shot at F8 with the blad.