I Would Like to Thank Nadine O.

[anthony_bridges]

<p>I have a wedding coming up this weekend. I've been lurking in the wedding forum for any new suggestions or advise out of habit. Her advise on photographing the bride and father of the bride walking down the aisle was spot on. I usually prefer to prefocus and then machine gun exposures as the subject walk thru the focus point. Her advise is better. Experimented with Nadine's method this weekend and it worked quite well. Thank you for this advise and many other contributions.</p>

<p>- Anthony</p>

[William Michael]

<p>If I hadn't read your very enjoyable post about the now uselessness of 5DMkII, I would not have been directed to this thread.<br>

If you think Nadine knows something about "walking down the aisle photography" – that is Kiddy’s Stuff.<br>

You should ask her some tricky question about EOS Flash Fill outdoors on the fly, just before sunset and shooting into the sun . . .<br>

Those tricky questions, she eats for Brunch, with one hand tied behind her back whilst changing lenses and herding the Bridal Party . . .</p>

<p>Just saying - in respect of what is being presently discussed on this Forum – it is nice that you thanked her, (not specifically her, but any credentialed one here) for her (their) advice: and that the advice was recognised as being "spot on".</p>

<p>WW</p>

<p> </p>

[sravan]

<p>Can you provide a link to the advice also? So we can also learn.</p>

[picturesque]

<p>Thank you Anthony. I am glad it worked for you. I also want to point out that much valuable information was given by Marc Williams, John Deerfield and Peter Zack in that thread.</p>

<p>Sravan, the thread is still on the active list.</p>

<p><a href="00a1lU">http://www.photo.net/wedding-photography-forum/00a1lU</a></p>

<p>I should stress that 'my way' is not the only way. My way happens to work with the semi-pro cameras and lenses I use. If you buy the new D800 or D4 or 5DMkIII or D1X, you probably can shoot many processionals without flash by taking advantage of high ISO (given the ambient light isn't ugly to begin with), and perhaps using wider apertures and AI Servo. The latter remains to be verified.</p>

[frolickingbits]

<p>I would second this great sentiment, Nadine makes excellent contributions to this forum. And I would like to bold that quote <strong>(given the ambient light isn't ugly to begin with).</strong> All the high ISO capability in the world isn't any good if the quality of light is lousy. It is so important to look not just at the quantity of light, but also the quality. Then again, I'm pretty old school and only ever push my useless 5D MarkII to ISO 800, because Ken Rockwell tells me it's lousy beyond that point.</p>

[karl_knographer]

Nadine helped me out awhile back with a B&G session, during the fall, in a deep pocket of hills and trees with approaching dusk, in her neck of the woods. The environment ranged from wooden bridge to faux greek pavilion, with shots inside and out. Her technique included available, varying mixed fill, and full lighting with shutter drag. She was working alone and knocked out a few hundred nice shots in a couple of hours. Her eye, management of technique and technical ability are absolutely top drawer.

[booray]

<p>I stopped answering buestions a while back on the forum because Nadine always answers every question and she's never wrong. :)</p>

[picturesque]

<p>Thanks everyone. I am just happy that I can help. I was kinda hoping that this thread would quietly sink down the active list if I didn't feed it, but Booray's comment needs to be dealt with! :^)</p>

<p>Booray, I hope you are kidding and I hope you don't feel pre-empted. I purposefully do <strong>not</strong> answer every question (there is no such thing as just one answer anyway) just so everyone can participate...</p>

[booray]

<p>Well, I didn't mean to type "buestions" so I was kidding about that. :)</p>

<p>I'm not kidding but I don't mean it in a negative way. You're just very good at giving detailed answers that are typically exactly what I would write so there's no need for me to repeat it. It's to the point now that I will read a question and I have something to add, I first look for your name. If I see it, I move on. I don't remember the last time I felt I had something to add after reading one of your replies. Good Job. :)</p>

[William Michael]

<p>I think that is unfortunate.</p>

<p>There are very few “questions”, posted here on a creative forum which require a black a definitive answer – “<em>What one stop more open than f/4?</em>”, is not often asked here.<br>

Almost all original posts here are complex to some degree and allow for nuance of response, that if added might even wander, slightly off the topic - but usefully so - (like this comment).<br>

I find the above statement interesting, mainly in these regards.</p>

<p>I would have been more happy if the reason for lack of contribution were because one were too busy out shooting - or up to their armpits attending family matters.<br>

But the forum is not here to make me happy.<br>

But, I cannot conceive that any two people could ever think so perfectly alike such that neither a mainstream addition, nor a nuance could be <strong><em>never</em></strong> be added, by such a talented and experienced person.</p>

<p>WW</p>

[booray]

<p>Most of the time I have nothing to add to what Nadine says. She's very thorough and does a great job of explaining technique. There have been times when I have looked at a post by her and thought, "That's what I would have said except it would have taken me an hour to write it so clearly.." :)</p>