Wedding Critique of the Week 8/22/11

[picturesque]

 

<p>This week's image was taken by Marc Williams.<br /><br />This is Part 2 of Wedding Photo of the Week. You can see all submissions in the thread with that title. In your critiques - include what you would do to improve the shot or why the shot is perfect as it is.<br /><br />Remember that this is not a contest. Sometimes an image will be a winning image and sometimes an image that needs some help. Try not to just say "great shot" but explain why it works. Or - "Doesn't do it for me" without explaining why.<br /><br />The photographer up for critique for this week should remember that the comments expressed each week are simply "opinions" and the effort and focus of these threads are to learn and to take images to another level. There will be times where the critique is simply members pointing out why the shot works which is also a way for others to learn about what aspects contribute to a good wedding photo. In reading all critiques -- you may agree or disagree with some points of view - but remember that there are varying approaches and often no right or wrong answer.</p>

<p><strong>Marc's Notes:</strong> Gothic Revival Catholic Church. Five shot panoramic using PTGui Pro stitching software. Final print is 45" tall.<br>

Hand-held Sony A900 @ 1/40th shutter, ZA24/2 lens @ f/3.2, ISO 640, spot metering/manual exposure.</p>

<div></div>

[cliff_nj]

<p>I would only slightly crop it to complete the symmetry. Beautiful venue and way to show it in all its' glory!<br>

<img src="http://cliffevans.files.wordpress.com/2011/08/my-try1.jpg" alt="" width="290" height="649" /></p>

[fotografz]

<p>Wow! That works Cliff.</p>

[picturesque]

<p>Marc--I know this is a critique thread, but I am asking you to talk a bit about shooting panos and stitching, particularly at weddings, where one is normally under the gun. Thanks.</p>

[fotografz]

<p>Be happy to Nadine. First I'll discuss where panoramic stitched images can be used ... where they can be applied successfully and why. Then I'll discuss how to do them at a wedding.</p>

<p><strong>Panoramic images can be fun and can help capture some images that otherwise would be close to impossible.</strong> For example, I could not have used a lens wide enough, or been able to get back far enough to capture the Gothic Revival Church interior in the manner shown in this thread, (the top part of the scene was literally right over my head) ... and even if I could, it would not have been symmetrical nor have a correct perspective ... <em>as further demonstrated by Cliff's insightful crop.</em></p>

<p><strong>The other aspect of doing a pano stitch</strong> is that, if you want, you can end up with a very high resolution final image even from a lower res camera. Landscape photographers often use pano stitches to capture sweeping vistas while maintaining very high resolution for wall sized prints. </p>

<p><strong>The final wedding application</strong> can be in an album for an image that dramatically spans the entire width of a spread layout, or obviously as larger print.</p>

<p><strong>Attached below are 3 examples</strong> of using a pano to capture something hard to do with a single image:</p>

<p><strong>Top pic shows</strong> an outdoor wedding in a backyard. It captures the entire setting, the Ceremony in progress, and every person that was there. From my vantage point there isn't a lens on the planet wide enough to have captured this scene. I sold three 30" prints of this one. People love these.</p>

<p><strong>Middle pic</strong> was at a reception that was very crowded and cramped ... this is a 8 shot pano using a 14mm lens with the camera held in portrait orientation (which accounts for some distortion of the floor edges). I was literally standing right behind the empty chair in the foreground with my back against an obstruction. 14mm alone barely covered the front of the table because I was so close. Note that the edges of the image are not sloping inwards like a super-wide lens usually produces.</p>

<p><strong>The bottom pano </strong>was done as a 5 shot pano during the Ceremony because right next to me out of frame were the guests. There just wasn't enough room to use a wide lens without including the heads of those guests up front. We all have been in that situation where there isn't enough clearance between the pews and the altar. Note again the lack of distortion and back sloping perspective ... the verticals are all fairly straight, and the bridal party members at the edges aren't horizontally stretched anywhere near as much as they would be with a super-wide lens. </p>

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

[fotografz]

<p><strong>How to do Panos when under the time stress of a wedding shoot.</strong></p>

<p>My first wedding panos were done with a Hasselblad XPan panoramic format film camera. Snap! Done. <em>(See the Abby Road "rip off" shot the Beatle's loving client insisted I do below).</em></p>

<p>Today, there are some digital cameras that have a panoramic setting that automatically makes panos ... I've used a Sony A55 and Sony NEX camera to do panos. On the pano setting you just sweep the camera side-to-side while the camera rapidly fires 12 shots and then stitches them in-camera as a jpeg. Very simple. If the shot isn't successuful it automatically stops and asks you to do it over.</p>

<p><strong>To do panos with a conventional camera</strong> like most of us use at weddings, there are a few principles that need to be employed.</p>

<p><strong>Manually meter the scene</strong> so the exposures don't jump all over the place as you sweep across from dark areas to lighter ones (like areas that may include more sky). If exposures aren't even, you have to correct the individual shots to make them more even shot-to-shot before stitching them.</p>

<p><strong>Use manual focusing and set the aperture so there's enough depth-of-field front to back</strong> to keep the subject sharp ... including at the edges of the scene. AF can be tricked into changing the focus point shot-to-shot, resulting in odd OOF areas butted up against ones that are sharper.</p>

<p><strong>Use as long of a lens as you can get away with</strong>. The wider the lens used, the more that distortion comes into play to make the stitching match-ups harder to connect. A 50mm or 35mm lens is better than a 24mm lens IF you can get in enough of the scene as you sweep.</p>

<p><strong>Take more shots than you think you need.</strong> The more that the shots overlap, one to the another, the better/easier the pano stitch will be when blended together in the software.</p>

<p><strong>Here's the hard one to explain:</strong> Most panos are done using a tri-pod and a panoramic slider attachment to get the lens' Nodal point directly over the center of the tripod. The Nodal point is usually the center of the lens, which conventionally is not over the center of the tripod. This is done to keep close and far objects relative to one another to avoid stitching alignment errors. <em>(Google "Nodal Point/Panoramics" for an in-depth understanding).</em></p>

<p><strong>However, at a wedding this may not be possible due to the time crunch.</strong> So, most, if not all, of my wedding panos are done hand-held. This requires a bit of practice. You have to twist your hands at the wrist in a panning manner as opposed to swinging left to right with your torso or body. Plus, as mentioned, shoot as many over-lapping shots as possible to capture more image data for the stitching software to use in lining up the individual shots. .</p>

<p>Photoshop has a panoramic stitching option that is pretty decent. However, anyone that does these on a regular basis uses stand alone software ... I use PTGui Pro which was recommended to me by a well known landscape photographer. It is far more flexible, faster, and more accurate than Photoshop.</p>

<p><strong>In terms of time,</strong> shooting the Pano takes as long as shooting 5 to 12 shots in a row. The low end of the motor-drive like 3FPS can be used as you sweep left to right. I just shoot single shot. Shooting panos is fast, processing is what takes more time than a conventional image.</p>

<p><strong>Below</strong>: B&W wedding shot done with the XPan. Center and bottom pics show other applications of pano shots. Both done with medium format digital cameras on a tripod using the Nodal point to keep things more correct. The commercial shot of the massive automotive Dynamometers was printed 8' wide for the client's lobby.</p>

<p><strong>Experiment</strong> ... it's fun. Once you get it down, you can choose to employ it at times when a normal lens can't hack the challenge at a wedding.</p>

<p> </p>

[fotografz]

<p>Oops, here's the attachment for above:</p>

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

[blairhall]

<p>I shoot a lot of panoramic and 360 stuff for my day job, and have shot weddings (granted only a handful per year) for about 5 years... and I must admit I've never really seen the two worlds collide.</p>

<p>The image up for critique is absolutely fantastic in my opinion. The only things I'd do differently would cropping for symmetry, as mentioned above... and to bring up the exposure a bit towards the top of the image... just a subtle boost to bring out some more of the details. That's more of a personal taste thing though.</p>

<p>Excellent image, and inspiring in that I realize I have an extra trick in my wedding bag. Thanks for sharing!</p>

<p> </p>

[picturesque]

<p>Thank you very much, Marc. As said, this is a critique thread, so I encourage all of you to critique. However, it is also a golden opportunity to ask questions...</p>

[dave_wilson1]

<p>I like the original even though the side ornaments are geometrically bent in, the convregance is part of the whole thing, none of the verticals are true. While I appreciate the crop, I don't care for it. Overall, it's very nice and your pano explaination is great! Thanks for sharing. My only little critique is I think I would have shot my flash straight up to open up the area above my head more, of course I don't know the circumstances and I've been lucky to even have 30 seconds to just grab a shot at times, so it's more of a passing thought than a criticism. Excellent as always Marc.</p>

[fotografz]

<p>Thanks Dave. That pano was shot during a full Catholic wedding mass. No flash allowed. No time afterwards to try it either as we had 20 minutes for the formals.</p>

[dave_wilson1]

<p>Yep, I know only too well, that's why only lightly mentioned it ;-)) I had an interesting scenareo around 1998, still shooting film, I had to get a fast shot of the last light coming through the big stained windows at St Patrick's in NYC, I literally ran in threw the camera on tripod and made a few overalls. Within no time there was NO more light coming from anywhere at in those days with film, yikes, you had to be creative. Anyway beautiful work, and your post work is really envious for a post proc. hacker like me, lol.</p>

[maira_sharron]

<p>What an excellent shot - breathtaking. Thank you for sharing your expertise. I honestly never thought of doing a pano at a wedding. Makes me realize that there is so much more that I could be doing -- I am going to try this at my next wedding and am very excited for the possibilities. Thanks again for all of your examples -- you do beautiful beautiful work.</p>