Shooting a wedding at sunset - flash is enough??

[lana_k]

<p>I'm shooting a small wedding in a couple of weeks that starts at 6pm. The ceremony is 20 mins long and then I will have about an hour to take photos of the bride and groom. They dont want to see each other before the ceremony so thats why I can only take the photos of them after the ceremony and before reception. It will be at some chapel in Palos Verdes overlooking the ocean. I figured by the time ceremony is over the sun will be gone so what else should I bring with me besides the flash?? Should I rent a second flash and operate it wirelessly somehow? And also, I've seen these flash attachments that look kind of funky not sure if they will help in this situation. Any advice?</p>

[drjoder]

I don't shoot weddings, but I read all the advice that gets posted...What would happen if the wedding were to be delayed? What are your pitch black options? Just thinking worst case... However, if you have the barely post-sunset light to work with you could do some nice work with that additional flash or two and the ambient light behind...More experienced folks will chime in soon, I'm sure.

[william-porter]

<p>Lana,</p>

<p>Daniel has already raised one important question: what happens if the wedding gets delayed? The answer of course has to be, you may miss the sunset. However, you will need to explain this beforehand to the bride. Things change, that's normal. I did an outdoor wedding a year ago where the bride seemed very eager for a sunset shot and I was all prepared for it; but when the day came, it was surprisingly cold outside and she changed her mind at the last minute. Oh, well.</p>

<p>Now, if you DO have the time, be aware that sunset comes and goes MUCH faster than you might think. You will have a very brief window of opportunity to get your best shot — like a minute or two. (Of course you'll have a longer window for some kind of shot.)</p>

<p>As for the lighting, you can do it with one flash or two. A single flash will be less complicated and will probably be fine. This is mainly fill flash so that the faces of the couple aren't lost in shadow. The flash can be very important, though. If you tried to shoot this scene without flash and you added, oh, a stop or two of exposure compensation to brighten up the bride and groom, you'd risk blowing out the sunset. Flash will help keep the dynamic range manageable.</p>

<p>On the other hand, you might also consider doing a silhouette, too, without flash. This can be a nice shot. Take your flash shots, then turn the flash off, reconsider your exposure, and take some quick shots without flash. </p>

<p>My friend Booray Perry has a number of beautiful sunset shots on his web site.</p>

<p>I would strongly suggest that you enlist a friend to help you do a little practice shooting at sunset beforehand. You might not be able to practice at the actual wedding site, but find ANY spot where you can place your subject at sunset. You'll discover it's harder than you might think to get it just right.</p>

<p>Good luck,</p>

<p>Will</p>

[bruce_rubenstein]

<p>Tripod. If there's any color at all in the sky, a long exposure ( >1/2 sec.) can really bring up the color, but the camera needs to be on a tripod to do this. The exposure for the couple will be from the flash, so there isn't much issue with them not being absolutely, perfectly still.</p>

<p>Since the couple's exposure will be all flash, the quality of the light from the flash is critical: on camera flash will look like ... uh, bad, real bad. Go for the basic "One Light" set up: off camera flash, fired into an umbrella, triggered by a radio.</p>

[susan_winn]

<p>I am also shooting a wedding at dusk in the city, and have been thinking the same questions. I don't mean to steal your post and I was just curious about the flash. <br>

When using the flash as a fill flash where is the flash bounced or should the flash just be pointed at the B&G? Would reflectors be beneficial to bounce the light either off the flash or the sunlight?</p>

[william-porter]

<p>I have no doubt that Bruce R. is right that getting the flash off the camera is a better way to go. For this sort of thing I would very possibly have a person HOLD my flash because setting up stands outside is a pain. But it sounds like the OP is not very familiar with off-camera lighting at all, and I am reluctant to encourage anybody to try to become David Hobby in two weeks. Having the flash on the camera will work and I don't think the results have to be as bad as Bruce suggests. Usual caveats: watch out for reflections off glasses, don't have the couple look right at the camera. Some photographers would use a filter or gel on the flash; I don't bother personally but they're not hard to use and it might not be a bad idea. I might dial in -1 flash compensation or something like that, to make the effect of the flash less obvious. The tripod will indeed be a useful tool here although I'm not sure I'd want to shoot slower than 1/60th sec....</p>

<p>Certainly there's more than one way to skin this cat. Some ways might be better, if you can do them. But for beginners who aren't just practicing but are actually shooting a client's event, it's important to take an approach that doesn't complicate things too much.</p>

<p>In response to Susan's question (bounce? point directly at bride & groom? use reflectors?), I'd say, first, I wouldn't personally be using reflectors. It's not that a big reflector (with perhaps a gold cover) wouldn't work — it might do something. I just don't think it's going to do enough to make it worth the trouble. I could be wrong.</p>

<p>As for bouncing, you usually can't bounce outdoors. I say "usually". I've shot inside colonnades or covered walkways where there was indeed a wall and/or ceiling for me to bounce off. Place subjects with their back to the outdoors, put me with my back to the wall of the building (if there is one), and shoot. But if you're standing on a beach or a promontory overlooking the ocean, well, you probably won't have anything to bounce off, so you won't bounce. Some people seem to think that using a Gary Fong Lightsphere or a Demb Flip-It works outdoors. It'll do SOMETHING — I mean some of the light will get thrown forward. (Flip-It will be better.) But most of the light will simply be wasted, which means you're wasting batteries and possibly increasing your flash unit's recycle time.</p>

<p>So normally I just point the flash right at the subjects. Remember, I said I might dial the flash down a bit; that would be in TTL mode, and if I'm shooting in M, I'd control the flash output manually. Or I might use a Lumiquest Softbox III on the flash (whether it's on or off the camera). That's easy to use and the Softbox III does make a difference.</p>

<p>But let me say again, if you get a chance, as soon as possible, practice this. There are lots of variables here. Flash on or off camera? Tripod or no tripod? Exposure settings. Flash settings. Placement of flash, including angle, distance from subjects, height. I have a pretty good idea what works for me but I could be forgetting something critically important. So it will be valuable to have done this for yourself ahead of time, and really valuable to have done it more than once. The first try might not be satisfactory but you can learn from it and if you have a chance to make a second trial run, you can test your adjustments. Once again: ON the day of the wedding, you aren't going to have time to experiment, make a lot of test shots, etc.</p>

<p>Will</p>

[john_deerfield]

<blockquote>

<p>I've seen these flash attachments that look kind of funky not sure if they will help in this situation. Any advice?</p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>My advice: learn lighting. And you won't do that in two weeks, nor via a forum thread. Different flash modifiers serve different purposes. Most of them only serve to separate you from you money. As to what works all depends on the look you are trying to achieve. For the most part, I would stick with just the dome diffuser if anything. Put the flash on the camera and practice. It helps to know your equipment. As an example, if you dial in negative exposure compensation on a Canon camera, this has no bearing on the flash. If you dial in negative compensation with a Nikon camera, this is cumulative with the flash (and exposure compensation is different than <em>flash exposure </em>compensation). Flash off camera is great. But depending on your triggering method, potentially unreliable (<em>radio</em> triggers are best). And off-camera flash takes <em>knowledge</em> too.</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>Tripod. If there's any color at all in the sky, a long exposure ( >1/2 sec.) can really bring up the color, but the camera needs to be on a tripod to do this. The exposure for the couple will be from the flash, so there isn't much issue with them not being absolutely, perfectly still.</p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>To achieve this, the exposure must also be <em>underexposed</em> to have the flash effectively freeze the couple.</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>Would reflectors be beneficial to bounce the light either off the flash or the sunlight?</p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>OK, repeat after me: the larger the relative light source in relationship to your subject, the <em>softer </em>the light. Reflectors, umbrellas, softboxes, etc are all used to <em>increase</em> the size of your light source. Thus, soften the light. Reflectors can also bounce light back onto a subject (or in the case of a black reflector, take light away for modeling). At sunset, there isn't a whole lot of light sunlight to bounce back onto a subject (unless you have several and a crew to handle them). You could have an assistant hold a reflector behind you to give your flash something to bounce off off... provided the exposure is such that the flash has enough power to bounce and provide proper exposure.</p>

[picturesque]

<p>I would look up exactly when the sun will set in Palos Verdes on that day. If you are truly overlooking the ocean, and you are facing westward over the ocean (I assume so), the sun will dip below the horizon pretty much when it says it will. The (usable, photographable) afterglow, if any, can last for 20-30 minutes after that point.</p>

<p>I agree with the others, that if you aren't already using off camera flash, you should not start with something like a sunset, which goes by very quickly. Just use your diffused, on camera flash, and if you are going to shoot verticals, you may want to get a flash bracket to ensure that you don't have horrible side shadows, if shadows can be seen in the photo (usually not, unless there is some near background in the frame).</p>

<p>By diffused, I mean diffused as opposed to softened. As John Deerfield points out, softening only happens when you make the light source very large in relation to the subject, something you cannot do easily outside unless you have an available bounce surface, as William Porter points out. If you have an assistant, you can turn your on camera flash head around to bounce it off a white reflector held by the assistant. Realize you will need to be fairly close to your subjects, for two reasons. Photographing against a sunset is still asking a lot of your flash power, and to be softer, the reflector should be held closer to the subjects.</p>

<p>Otherwise, just use the flash direct. An OmniBounce will diffuse and so will a Demb Diffuser in the forward position. Or a small on camera softbox. Even pulling the wide angle diffuser down over the flash reflector will help diffuse, plus the wide spray of light will bounce off anything--including yourself, the ground, etc., and every little bit helps. Again, photographing against the actual setting sun still requires flash power, so you can't be too far away from your subjects.</p>

<p>There are two kinds of sunset shots, IMHO. The first is with the actual sun in the frame, and the second is with only the afterglow. You have very little time with the first kind, and more time with the second kind. In fact, it may take 10-15 minutes after the sun has actually set for the afterglow to be at it's most saturated (color).</p>

<p>With the sun in the frame, it is much like photographing a direct, bright sun photo. It is better to not use an automated mode on the camera since the bright sun will fool the meter. The last photos I shot like this, the settings were ISO 100, f5.6, 1/200th. You may want to start out at f8, and adjust from there. You may even need to close down more (on the aperture) if the sun is still fairly high above the horizon. You want to underexpose the color in the sky and see a clear orb within that color. Your flash will have to work hard with those settings, so again--not too far away, and you may have to take off the diffusing gear just to have enough power.</p>

<p>For the second kind of shot, you may have success by using an automated mode and playing with comp. You have more time, too. For manual mode and a reference point, spot meter a middle valued part of the colored sky, and transfer those settings to your camera. Let the flash expose the subjects--use comp if necessary. Remember--underexpose to deepen the color.</p>

<p>Sometimes the afterglow hangs around for a long time, and you can even use the dusky sky (deep blue, almost black) to get some nice shots, but you are talking much dimmer light overall, meaning upping the ISO considerably while still balancing flash on the subjects.</p>

<p>If the wedding starts late (most do) and take longer than everyone thinks (many do), and you find that you are past even the afterglow, you may opt to get some nice indoor pictures. Sunset waits for no one. </p>

[savagesax]

I've shot many times in Palos Verdes. A very rich area. There is only one area in which you can pull off the sunset, because the right side of this pointed section of california most of the places point to the north. You can still get some really nice color, but no sun. I was out there and the marine layer - clouds came in before the sun set, so there were no pics to take at all.

 

However on the looking north side you can get really great award winning shots of the Santa Monica city. Use a flash and tell the couple to stay real still. The flash will stop most of the motion. I shoot this at 1 second at F4. You can try 1.5 seconds as well. Just take a mess of shots, maybe 10, use different poses. The lights of the city really pop out so well.

 

Where exactly is the ceremony? At the La Venta Inn there is a fireplace you can use and there is a gazebo there, facing Santa Monica and you can back light the B&G during and after the service.

 

Kodak liked this one shot so much it made it into the pro section called "Promise of Excellence." This was during the film days.

 

Not bragging here, just letting you know that its a fantastic place to shoot a wedding regardless if there is a sunset.

 

Warning here. I heard last year that the La Venta Inn now requires insurance. Don't take my word for it, but call, any of the places in which you will be shooting. This friend said he needed a million dollar insurance policy to shoot there.

 

Have fun, don't expect a sunset, and use more than 1 light. Show us some of the final pics!

[alex_fedorov2]

<p>Hi Lana, <br>

First of congratulations on what sounds like your first wedding :) <br>

You should definitely be using flash in your situation - ideally off camera. As long as you are using Nikon or Canon I would highly recommend buying or renting pocket wizard TT1/TT5 system. Radiopopers are your other option. Both systems are fairly pricey but they allow you wireless TTL which can be a life saver in the situations where the light and the distance to subject changes quickly. Make sure that you get either one a few days prior and practice... wedding day is not the time to practice new things unless you are already pretty experienced. <br>

If off camera flash is not an option, use on camera and bounce. Keep in mind that attachments like omni bounce do not actually function as most people think they do - they do not soften the light they just make it a little less directional and provide bare bulb effect - basically you have light go in every direction instead of just forward - which could be good or bad - depending on intention. <br>

If you are not familiar with using on/off camera light at all you might also look into using a video light - they in general work well for the portraits - the problem is it will not help you at the reception time all that much. </p>

[fotografz]

<p>If this is your first time shooting in these type of ambient conditions ... <strong>keep it simple.</strong> </p>

<p><em>First, do what Nadine said ... Google the sunset info for your area. It will tell you when the sun sets and the twilight timings. Then get there, in position, at least 15 minutes before if possible.</em></p>

<p><em><strong>How you compose the photos will determine the use of the camera and flash ... </strong></em></p>

<p><strong>Top sample shown below</strong>: If you are new to this I suggest the camera be in landscape orientation (horizontal) using a wider angle lens (with the lens shade on). Then position the sunset at one side of the frame and the couple at the other. This will side rim-light them, and some of the sunlight will wrap around them. Then once you have the composition, swivel the flash head directly toward the couple to provide shadow fill. Do NOT use a bounce diffuser, it just wastes flash power.</p>

<p><strong>Mechanics:</strong> set the camera to manual exposure mode and expose for a dramatic background. When using a wide angle lens at a distance, you do NOT need to set a small aperture like f/8 or 11 to get everything in focus. f/4 or f/5.6 is usually enough, Stopping down a lot only makes the flash work harder than it has to. Set the on-camera flash to TTL and manually zoom the flash to the maximum setting (usually 105mm), then increase the output if needed by pressing the compensation button to the plus side. <em>(Read the flash's user manual on how to do both of these simple settings.) </em></p>

<p><strong>Bottom Tryptic Sample shown below:</strong> This shows getting closer to the subject and using the ambient sunlight just before it starts to set ... but NOT having the sun in the shot ... which can provide a gorgeous pastel glow needing less fill if you manually expose for the ambient. This type shot can use straight on-camera flash with a bounce diffuser like a Lumiquest or any other of that type. As you get closer to the subject (like the middle bridal portrait), the flash will provide catch lights in the eyes.</p>

<p><strong>Mechanics:</strong> set the camera on Manual exposure, and the flash to TTL. In most cases you will not have to compensate the flash at all, or if any to the minus side. The only objective of flash is to provide some fill to even out the light balance between the background and the foreground subject. Just look at your LCD to see how it is working, and adjust accordingly.</p>

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

[fotografz]

<p>BTW, here is a tip:</p>

<p>When you trek out to these wonderful locations shoot some quick ambient-light frames without the subjects in them. They make terrific backgrounds for albums or slide-shows that are meaningful to the clients ... as opposed to stock shots or cheesy backgrounds found in some of the post processing programs like Photo Tools and the like.</p>

<p>For example, here are a few of mine I've used : </p><div></div>

[ianivey]

Great examples, Marc. One more thing: taking a few shots of the background in which you get exactly the sky you

want, such as the last two from Marc, tell you what the exposure needs to be, without the distracting pressure of

having your subject(s) present. Then, keeping exactly that exposure, add subjects, and add flash; adjust only the flash

until you get the subjects' exposure where you want it as well. This helps you separate the two exposures (ambient

background plus flash on subjects) in your mind and your process until you're comfortable handling both togeer on the

fly.