Anyone here shoot weddings with three bodies?

[Marcus Ian]

<p>Ya know, I only ever met one wedding shooter who used 3 bodies (not just had 3 - <em>used</em> 3, all day long). He focused on available light, and used the bodies pretty much as listed. His work was incredible, and it bordered on inspirational.<br>

He shot w/ Canons, and carried the following:</p>

<p>1) 5D (with a 28/1.8USM)<br>

2) Rebel (w/ a 50/1.4 USM)<br>

3) Rebel (w/ a 100/2 USM)</p>

<p>The most fascinating thing to me was his carrying method. At the time I was struggling with camera management shooting actively with 2 cameras, but he inspired me. He wore suspenders, and had clips (I have no idea what brand, but very similar in function to my spider holsters) for each camera. The 5D was on his front left hip, One rebel on his suspender strap (right side), the second rebel was on his back right hip. He wore a small lens (a smallish prime, not sure which) on his belt (rear left side), next to a 580.</p>

<p>He had no straps except for handstraps, and could juggle cameras by feel and weight and balance, (though I think he mentally assigned locations). Watching him work was pretty impressive. One camera clipped on, then another came up. - literally took 1-2 seconds to switch from one to another. I think the lightweight rebels and primes helped alot (For example he said he'd done away w/ the 50/1.2 for the 50/1.4 because of the weight reduction) - and certainly improved his speed.</p>

<p>But... he moved away, so I can't ask him - either way, I was investigating how to effectively manage two cameras at the time, and shortly after that the spider holsters became available. They allowed me to revolutionize my shooting process (though I stuck with two, not three)</p>

<p> </p>

[studio460]

<p>Marcus said:</p>

<blockquote>

<p><em>. . . I only ever met one wedding shooter who used 3 bodies (not just had 3 - used 3, all day long). He focused on available light . . . His work was incredible, and it bordered on inspirational.</em></p>

</blockquote>

<p>Three fast primes, on three compact bodies--cool (well, two compact bodies, at least). Yes, absolutely . . . I believe having a variety of very fast focal lengths for available-light capture, each ready at a moment's notice, can really make a difference. I think with newer compact bodies, this is totally do-able. If I could eliminate the on-camera flash "insurance" body, I would, and instead, I would much prefer to shoot all off-camera strobe and available light.<br /> <br /> But, as you can see from my above outline, I'm only carrying three bodies during the procession/ceremony (but, not really--I'll just set the D800E flash-fired rig on the floor during the actual ceremony). At all other times, I'll either be slinging only a single D800E for formals, or using just the two available-light bodies (and, again, I think threading my factory Nikon straps through my bodies' left strap-lug is a really simple and functional solution). When required, I'll grab the flash-fired D800E for the must-gets (cake, bouquet, etc.).</p>

[Marcus Ian]

<p>Well, overcomplicating your set up, especially without a lot of wedding experience is not an uncommon mistake. In your shoes, I'd probably stick with two for the time being, As I said, at the time, I was mostly just shooting with one camera and juggling lenses, but had started shooting with two (a 5D w/ 24-70 and a 50D w/ 70-200), but straps, and cameras kept getting tangled. The only way I made my process work well was by incorporating the spider holsters as a method of eliminating straps. I still frequently think about adding a third body, but haven't done so yet. </p>

[pete_s.]

<p>IMHO the key to working with two cameras and regular straps is to have one short and one long. <br>

It also makes a big difference how you hang them. I prefer having them so the lens faces inwards and attached to both lugs. In addition to the two cameras I would sling a medium size camera bag with other stuff like lenses, spare batteries, speedlights etc.</p>

[michaelmowery]

<p>Tell me how do you shoot with two cameras with that system? It appears you need your second hand free to release the locking mechanism in order to free the camera from the holster. How do you walk in narrow places while cameras are attached to your hip? How can you sit down? The weight of two pro cameras are better distributed across your shoulders with a double harness after hours of use. </p>

[studio460]

<p>Marcus said:</p>

<blockquote>

<p><em>Well, overcomplicating your set up, especially without a lot of wedding experience is not an uncommon mistake . . .</em></p>

</blockquote>

<p>I'll be working from a cart, and a van, both in close proximity. Whatever I don't need, or can't use, stays in the cart or the van. It's actually pretty straightforward--two fast bodies for available-light; one flash rig for must-gets. I just hate to count on "available-light" being, well, available. So, if time and space permits, I plan to use an off-camera flash (either stand- or pole-mounted) for the slow-moving parts of the event. If it all goes to cr*p--I go to plan B, C, or D.</p>

<p>About the straps--I shoot my two Nikon D3s bodies hung this way all the time (factory strap on left lug only; one body off of each shoulder). I find it a very fast and easy way to work--I'm able to switch bodies almost instantly. If I'm out hiking on vacation, I'll maybe wear a ThinkTank Skin50 lens pouch, but when I'm working, the only thing I'll wear is a Quantum Turbo on my hip (I'm often in too small a space to wear any extra gear) Plus, I don't ever wear a camera bag anymore--it's just too cumbersome. While a bag may be needed when shooting with only one body, shooting multiple bodies largely eliminates the need for a carry-with-you-all-the-time bag.</p>

[fotografz]

<blockquote>

<p>"However, I've been seriously re-thinking my body/lens strategy as I continue to prepare for my first wedding client."<br>

<br>

"I'll be working from a cart, and a van, both in close proximity. Whatever I don't need, or can't use, stays in the cart or the van. It's actually pretty straightforward--two fast bodies for available-light; one flash rig for must-gets."<br>

<br>

"While a bag may be needed when shooting with only one body, shooting multiple bodies largely eliminates the need for a carry-with-you-all-the-time bag."</p>

 

<p>Ralph, got to give you credit for really thinking through your whole strategy well ahead of your first real wedding shoot. So many photographers go at it without thinking it through first, and end up in a panic at some point.</p>

</blockquote>

<p> <br>

The real test of all the theory and conjecture will come when you have a few weddings under your belt and you have a chance to evaluate the results against your creative expectations. <br>

<br>

The flow of a wedding is dictated to a large degree by the time-line you should have before hand, and what prevailing conditions you may face at any given wedding shoot: (weather, locations available, client expectations/requests, the personality of the clients, degree of mobility required). Rarely are any two weddings the same … and I think you may find that what works for other types of event, portrait, or commercial photography may not be optimal for shooting a wedding. <br>

<br>

So, you will sort out what works and what hampers your creative intentions … and what may work for others may not work for you, and visa-versa. <br>

<br>

Personally, after doing this for a very long time, I came to use a Think-Tank Airport "carry-on" type roller … and if it doesn't fit in that, it doesn't go. I may supplement that with a tiny rangefinder bag that slips over the handle of the roller. IF the wedding dictates strobe lighting, I ALWAYS use an assistant … preferably one that understands the lighting gear.<br>

</p>

<p>All of this forces me to make gear decisions based on creatively pre-thinking the wedding shoot using all the info about a specific wedding. The idea of this is to be less gear centric, and shift the emphasis to creative expectations. Creative expectations involves pre-visualization, and what I like to call "emotional anticipation" … then taking what is needed to do that rather than everything I own. <br>

<br>

Also being a commercial photographer, I have all those carts and such including lighting gear to solve most any shoot requirement. For weddings, the word "over-kill" come to mind. I do not care who you are, how much experience you may have, complex systems require time to get it all set up and working right … or trouble-shooting a glitch when under pressure … and trust me, Murphy's Law is effect almost 100% of the time no matter how much you prep the gear before hand.<br>

<br>

You will discover many things as you move forward, and refine how you work and what you use over time. The only caution I'd add is to be cautious about being overly ambitious when beginning … <br>

<br>

Good luck,<br>

<br>

- Marc<br>

</p>

<p> </p>

[studio460]

<p>Marc said:</p>

<blockquote>

<p><em>Ralph, got to give you credit for really thinking through your whole strategy well ahead of your first real wedding shoot . . . The real test of all the theory and conjecture will come when you have a few weddings under your belt and you have a chance to evaluate the results against your creative expectations. </em></p>

</blockquote>

<p>Thanks, Marc! Yes, at this point, it's <em>all</em> theory. Though my plan has all the appearances of <em>overkill</em>, this is a rare opportunity for me, so I don't mind pulling out all the stops. While I'll be careful not to put my agenda above the clients' (I use that word symbolically, since I'm not charging the couple), at this point I really need to produce portfolio material. I am <em>absolutely</em> sure this will all change once I have several weddings under my belt.</p>

<blockquote>

<p><em>Creative expectations involves pre-visualization, and what I like to call "emotional anticipation" . . . then taking what is needed to do that rather than everything I own.</em></p>

</blockquote>

<p>Yes, I've been concentrating on pre-visualizing what I hope to capture as specifically as possible (especially the bridal prep and family candids), and after seeing a really blurry cell phone photo of the church interior, I now have a rough lighting plan: Nikon SB-800 at the rear, on the floor, pointing upward toward the back wall with a Stofen diffuser to create a soft-white glow, a 7' shoot-through umbrella spraying the room from the side for baselight, and a 7' silver umbrella to key the couple. If there's no time for all of that, they get one 7' umbrella. If there's no time for <em>that</em>, they get an on-camera Speedlight, bounced into an assistant-held FlexFill (I just bought 30" and 42" Westcott silver/white foldable reflectors just for this purpose--I like the Westcotts in particular because they're <em>square</em>, rather than round).<br /> <br /> Ideally, I'll pre-stage all lighting gear in a nearby area, which only requires that I arrive earlier to the location (which of course, I'm happy to do). When it's time to go, assistants will walk the gear into position, I'll grab a quick flash meter reading, and go!</p>

<blockquote>

<p><em>You will discover many things as you move forward, and refine how you work and what you use over time. The only caution I'd add is to be cautious about being overly ambitious when beginning . . .</em></p>

</blockquote>

<p>Certainly, as I gain more experience, I imagine I'll take less and less gear, while I pare the package down to the bare minimum necessary to meet the job's creative goals, until finally, I'm shooting with a single lens on a Nikon FM! Thanks for all your comments, Marc!</p>

[studio460]

<p>And, let me just say this for no particular reason, other than the fact that it's saved me a lot of time on-set in the past. For every job I've done which required lighting, I brought nearly everything "pre-built," so that set-up was near instantaneous (if I were all-Rotalux or PCB, this would be less of a problem!). Except for the largest modifiers (which have to be sprung on-set), I have separate pole-mounted, softbox rigs for different sources.</p>

<p>To me, there's nothing more tedious than sticking super-stiff softbox pins into finicky speedrings under the pressure of a client's glare (yes, I have all Chimera QR speedrings, but my octas still have be done the old-fashioned way). Notice, I'm <em>not</em> bringing any octas! Well, except for a pole-mounted, three-foot octa, which will stay in the van, unless needed.</p>

<p>About the camera bag . . . since I don't carry one, I have nowhere to momentarily "dump gear." I'm thinking, during the ceremony, between the procession and the recession, I'm going to use a Mole-Richardson half milk crate, and pad it with some foam. This will be my "dump box." I'll decorate the top rim of the box with "hazard tape" to prevent inadvertent "foot traffic" over it. When I'm temporarily not using my flash-fired body, I'll just dump it in the box. If I'm not using it again right away, I'll have an assistant scurry it back to "the cart."</p>

[DickArnold]

<p>What happens if the officiant says no shooting during the ceremony? Have you talked to the officiant? What happens if the wedding party does not make it to your marks for pictures? What happens, as it has happened for me, that the whole ceremony starts late and it is raining? A lot of times I let my brides call the shots ad hoc on shots they want in an uplanned way in different locations. What happens then? Do you drag your lights around? What happens when uncle Bob steps right in front of you to take a picture of his niece? A good example. I did weddings in a beach town and my customers came from afar. There were plans for a big wedding on the beach. In spite of mine and the JOPs urging there was no plan B. It rained. The two of us, the JOP and I, at the last minute, made arrangements at a local hotel and set up a room for the ceremony, and another for the reception and the wedding went off. I was capable of moving and setting up without props. They were very happy with the two of us. There are just any number of things that can happen that are unplanned for. I think one has to be quite portable. That was not the only beach wedding we had to move from the cliffs because of summer storms. I never fixed a location for my equipment knowing that I may have to move it quickly. I have rudimentary studio lights that I tried for just one wedding. They slowed me down. I never used them after that. I liked to establish good relations with my brides, uncle Bobs, and mothers particularly. My greatest test of rapport came as one bride yelled at me "Hey Dick get your A** over here and take my picture". I think she liked me. That made for some great impromptu bridal pictures somewhat because the dialogue never stopped while I was taking her pictures. I worked hard to obtain that kind of spontaneous relationship with clients. I worked for a paper when I was doing weddings and I much prefer staying in the background shooting un-posed pictures. A wedding is, IMO, a celebration and I was there the record it not tell people where to stand and pose nor have my shooting agenda alter the flow. Mark, I think, was spot on. I have tried to do formals before the ceremony but invariably in my experience some key player shows up late. Sometime when 30 minutes for formals were programmed between the ceremony and reception, I got fifteen. Sometimes I got fed and others I didn't. One large wedding I photographed on a beautiful day the bride dragged me and the guests out in the middle of a large grassy field and we shot lots of pictures there. It was not in the plan. I shoot sports, having done a swim meet at Harvard this past weekend. To me shooting a wedding is more like shooting sports sometimes than a preplanned affair with ethereal lighting effects. People also drink at wedding which sometimes modifies behavior and interferes with the photographers agenda. I have a few anecdotes about that, that I won't bore you with. Remember what Bobby Burns said, "The best laid plans of mice and men oft gang aglee (sic)". </p>

[michaelmowery]

<p>Ralph While a milk crate may be the choice in a studio setting or commercial shoot it is not the best choice for a wedding. Adding yellow hazard tape is not helping the situation. You want to be sharp looking and neat not only in your appearance but also the look of your equipment and how you store it during the event. Don't think you are going to be able to work out of your cart during a wedding as the hall or hotel will want that cart in a storage room or hidden back in another room. </p>

<p>As you may have heard there is usually no time to do what you want and you are always under the gun as far as the timeline goes. Who do you think gets cut on time when things are running late? The photographer. Keep things simple but you won't know what that is exactly until you do a few jobs as Marc has pointed out. You will develop your own workflow as you gain the experience.</p>

<p>Get a nice camera bag the tools of the trade. I don't know of one photographer I have worked with over the past 20 years that actually shot while shouldering a camera bag. Thats what your assistant is for. You can also put your bag down near you or next to a musician, the band or anywhere in the sight of everyone, never in a lonely corner of another room.</p>

<p> Softboxes are great but not in a Wedding as speed of setup and breakdown make the umbrella the best choice. Space is not always a premium so large soft boxes or 7ft umbrellas are not always practical. You should always have a pair of 46inch umbrellas.</p>

<p>The flex and mini pocket wizards are also something that is not consistent on events. The plus and multimax are the most consistent. One thing you haven't really talked about is your use and placement of room lights during ceremony and reception.</p>

[Marcus Ian]

Michael said:

"Tell me how you shoot with two cameras with that system..."

 

The setup is pretty simple. The spider holsters do not have to be used with the available belt/gear. I

simply attach the holsters to my belt ( and can attach securely to any belt), and hang them off that

way. I added suspenders to ease the wear on my hips, but the holsters are simple to operate. They

have a pin which mounts to the bottom of the camera, and slides into the holster, which has a flip

lock which can be flipped off or on with a finger. I shoot with a pair of 5d2s, a 24-70 on one, a 70-

200 on the other. My belt is admittedly pretty beefy, but the suspenders distribute the weight, and

black is black. Before I added the suspenders, ill admit it was alittle rough, especially with grips and

flashed cameras. But its pretty comfortable now.

 

 

The cameras ride on opposite hips (front and back) which makes navigating a crowd or narrow

doorways simple.

 

Like I said, its uber fast once you get used to it, switching cameras securely takes less than 2

seconds. I often do it one handed. In combination with anticipation, it means I rarely miss shots,

candid or posed. I do not have straps on either camera, just hand straps on both.

 

Im sure its not right for every shooter, but I can barely tolerate a camera bag, much less a cart! For

me simplicity makes for better work. For me the system works very very well. My cameras are

secure, and always ready, no straps to muck with, easy to navigate with... im not going to lie, I got

my inspiration from another shooter, but ive made it my own, and it has yet to fail me.

[studio460]

<p>Dick said:</p>

<blockquote>

<p><em>What happens if . . .</em></p>

</blockquote>

<p>I <em>expect</em> things to go wrong. If I only get 10% of what I'm planning, I'll be happy.</p>

[studio460]

<p>Michael said:</p>

<blockquote>

<p><em>Softboxes are great but not in a Wedding as speed of setup and breakdown make the umbrella the best choice. Space is not always a premium so large soft boxes or 7ft umbrellas are not always practical. You should always have a pair of 46inch umbrellas.</em></p>

</blockquote>

<p>I'm primarily using umbrellas for just for that reason--speed (I have a number of different sizes). I only plan to use a softbox for the exteriors, which I'll pre-build, and pre-stage.</p>

<blockquote>

<p><em>One thing you haven't really talked about is your use and placement of room lights during ceremony . . .</em></p>

</blockquote>

<p>Interestingly, the church is surprisingly well-lit, with large, ceiling-hung fixtures every few feet. This must've been done in consideration of past video and/or photography requirements.</p>

<blockquote>

<p><em>. . . and reception.</em></p>

</blockquote>

<p>That could be any number of things depending on the location (I haven't seen the reception location yet). If time is short, two assistant-carried, pole-mounted strobes (one to light the room, one to light the subjects). If time is <em>really</em> short, again, I'll use my on-camera flash bounced into an assistant-held FlexFill. I also have an "available-light," continuous-tungsten rig, which would also be pole-mounted.</p>

[DickArnold]

<p>I have a BlackRapid dual set up. I like where the cameras ride on my hips and the weight is borne by my shoulders. It is quite secure. I don't think I would like to do a whole wedding in that configuration but I have used it to effect in other situations. It can be split into single straps where the camera rides on the hip. The cameras are held by a tripod mount screw-in fitting on which a Caribiner with a locking mechanism is attached. It takes the strain off my neck and particularly my back. Some people object to using the tripod mount but once tight I think it is very secure. I check tightness every so often. </p>

[studio460]

<p>Well, it looks like it'll be easier than I thought. I probably couldn't have lucked into an easier entry into my first wedding shoot--the bride only wants candids and documentary-style coverage from me (perfect!). The reception is in a banquet room <em>at</em> the church. She's guaranteeing me priority parking within a few feet from the church (my only request).</p>

<p>She's working on the timeline now, and will e-mail it this weekend. Bride prep is scheduled for 12PM--ceremony at 4:00PM--drinks and hors d'oeuvres served immediately after, in the adjacent outdoor courtyard. Reception held thereafter in a banquet room at the church. My GF's niece is one of the bridesmaids (who also crewed for me on a short film), and has already been a huge help to me, helping to coordinate everything.</p>

<p>I've picked out my Rubbermaid-style, Harbor Freight utility cart--it'll be staged out of sight, with my aluminum equipment cases cable-locked to some fixture in the building. Most likely, I'll be parked so close, most of the gear can stay in the van (where it's both insured and within sight). Even though the bride said she didn't want formals, I'll still preset an exterior strobe set-up for some pretty bridal portraits if she wants to spare an extra 15 minutes after the ceremony. I'm pretty excited!</p>

[fotografz]

<blockquote>

<p>Well, it looks like it'll be easier than I thought. I probably couldn't have lucked into an easier entry into my first wedding shoot--the bride only wants candids and documentary-style coverage from me (perfect!). The reception is in a banquet room <em >at</em> the church. She's guaranteeing me priority parking within a few feet from the church (my only request).<br>

</p>

</blockquote>

<p>LOL! There is the voice of inexperience speaking. <br>

<br>

Don't be too sure about that Ralph. If there is a MOB or MOG in there somewhere, that plan may well get vetoed … even vetoed right at the wedding.<br>

<br>

YOU, as the photographer should strongly advise your client to do some portrait and family group shots, and plan on it. Family members will want it … weddings are one of the few times families gather and extended families photographed together. Weddings are part of any family's history, and the wedding photographer is the archivist.<br>

<br>

Often, clients do not want "formals" because they conjure up an image of wooden mannequins with deer in the headlights expressions … so, it is our job to show them otherwise. To convince them otherwise. <br>

<br>

I am primarily a candid type wedding photographer. My clients hire me for that. Many have insisted that was all they wanted. <strong>Absolutely insisted.</strong> Were sure of it. Enter Mom. Plan B goes into immediate effect. <br>

<br>

Even if the Bride/Client still refuses, and just wants candid work, what do you do when the MOG says differently right at the wedding, or a Grandmother, or an Aunt? <em>"Hey Mr. Photographer, can you shoot a nice picture of all us Aunts and Uncles? </em>Trust me, the Bride is NOT going to go against the wishes of her family when that subject comes up … and it WILL. <br>

<br>

People WANT to be photographed with their family, and especially with the newlywed couple. If you don't do it, they will with their cell phones … so it might as well be done right in the first place so your clients will look good rather than distorted and ill lit.<br>

</p>

<p>Besides, just from a self-interest POV, how are you going to build a portfolio without what most other clients will expect? <br>

<br>

Just saying' Be prepared.<br>

<br>

- Marc<br>

<br>

<br>

<br>

<br>

</p>

[studio460]

<p>Marc said:</p>

<blockquote>

<p><em>I am primarily a candid type wedding photographer. My clients hire me for that. Many have insisted that was all they wanted. <strong>Absolutely insisted.</strong></em><em> Were sure of it. Enter Mom. Plan B goes into immediate effect.</em></p>

</blockquote>

<p>Gotcha! I'm still bringing all the same gear (plus, pre-staging the exterior lighting set-up, etc.), and fully intend to try to do some persuading on-site (and you're right, I <em>do</em> need the portfolio material).</p>

[fotografz]

<p>Ralph, the point I was trying to make is to discuss it with your client now, not on site. She has expectations, and if you suddenly have to do a passel of formals with family, her expectations may be hard to meet out of sheer lack of time. It's best to reach a decision and fit it into the time-line.</p>

<p><em>(side note: read her time-line carefully … clients are notoriously ambitious with these … I even had a client that failed to account for travel time between locations … which instead was allocated to photography … wtf!) </em></p>

<p>Clients aren't always rational, nor are they knowledgable regarding what it takes to make good wedding images. They do not have any reference point. Unless they've been married a couple times already or are a wedding planner, this is all new to them … they lack experience, and that is part of what we are suppose to bring to the party.</p>

<p>Gentle persuasion with the whole family angle can work wonders. Peace and harmony goes a long way in making the wedding as much for her family and guests as for her and her groom. Otherwise, why have a full blown wedding if not for sharing with family and friends? It really doesn't take much time from the whole day … but can result in the most popular and most often requested images.</p>

<p>I can tell you one thing, if she doesn't agree, if you fail in gently persuading her, it is highly likely that both of you will regret it. If, after the wedding, parents and relatives start complaining about the lack of family photos, all the rational agreements made before hand will go out the window, and it'll be your fault. Not hers, yours.</p>

<p>Just sayin'</p>

<p>- Marc</p>

<p> </p>

[studio460]

<p>Marc said:</p>

<blockquote>

<p><em>Ralph, the point I was trying to make is to discuss it with your client now, not on site.</em></p>

</blockquote>

<p>Oh. Well, she was pretty adamant about it. She doesn't have a wedding planner, so she's spread pretty thin right now, but I'll urge her to re-consider the next time we talk (plus, I'll mention some of the arguments you brought up). I didn't think too much about it, since I shot a reception-only wedding several years ago where the couple was also adamantly opposed to any "posing," and refused to shoot any formals.</p>

[Marcus Ian]

<p>IME, the insistence upon zero posed/formal shots lasts up until the day of. Then it vanishes - sucked into the black hole of MOB and family pressure. Almost as if it was never there to begin with. Despite the insistence on numerous occasions, only <em>once</em> have I ever seen it not actually get vetoed ... and that, I think, was only because there was <em>no</em> family present (and I still got a disgruntled great aunt Ruby email about it). </p>

<p>The downside then is that, since there was no plan for it, doing it comes at the expense of other things packed into the day. The way I handle this, even with insistent clients is simply ask, "Are you sure Mom and Grandma, and Great Aunt Ruby will understand? Because you may want to consider the effect it'll have on them if there is no group shots of everyone coming to the wedding will have, and 'old people' don't always think the way us young whipper-snappers do..." </p>

<p>It's still low key enough to not pressure them, but rarely does ten minutes in a decent well lit area not yield adequate group/formal shots (for me at least - though I don't typically get crazy with the lighting ;) )</p>

<p>In the end, even though the insistent client insisted (up till the day of) on no formals/groups - they still buy prints of the group/formal shots, and so do their extended family.</p>

[studio460]

<p>Marcus said:</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p><em>IME, the insistence upon zero posed/formal shots lasts up until the day of. Then it vanishes . . . but rarely does ten minutes in a decent well lit area not yield adequate group/formal shots . . .<br /></em></p>

</blockquote>

<p>Well, if this is the standard operating procedure for "no formals" brides, at least I'm prepared for it now. I won't see a timeline until this weekend, but the likely time for formals is after the ceremony. At least I'll be all set-up anyway.</p>

[fotografz]

<p>Ralph, all we are trying to do is provide advice gained by having "been there, done that."</p>

<p>Frankly, I never liked doing formals myself, until I came to grasp their importance to the family(s). Then I decided to really learn how to do them well, rather than as a tack-on to the candid photography I preferred doing. </p>

<p>Despite indications to the contrary, they aren't always easy, and are even harder if time isn't allocated for them. So, it's important that you work with the couple to keep to that time line.</p>

<p>One thing you can count on more often than not with a wedding shoot, is that timelines can go out the window, and things can start running late so everything starts piling up on top of one another. Then there is the specter of plans to shoot outdoors going south due to weather … and suddenly you are faced with shooting an extended family photo the MOB or MOG insists on in a confined space with the world's worst ambient lighting infecting the image.</p>

<p>Just sayin'</p>

<p>- Marc</p>

<p> </p>

[studio460]

<p>Marc said:</p>

<blockquote>

<p><em>Ralph, all we are trying to do is provide advice gained by having "been there, done that."</em></p>

</blockquote>

<p>Yeah, I know you guys are trying to help. I honestly had no idea about this potential "problem" until you and Marcus brought it up.</p>

<blockquote>

<p><em>One thing you can count on more often than not with a wedding shoot, is that timelines can go out the window . . . Then there is the specter of plans to shoot outdoors going south due to weather . . . and suddenly you are faced with shooting an extended family photo the MOB or MOG insists on in a confined space with the world's worst ambient lighting infecting the image . . .</em></p>

</blockquote>

<p>Right. The light will be changing by the minute after the ceremony. My plan 'B' is to go back into the church and use that as an interior set. Also, I suspect this is another common problem--clearance from the altar to the pews, restricting my subject-to-camera distance, and therefore my frame. I suspect the pews are potentially blocking a full-frame group shot (i.e., obscuring subjects' feet), but, I definitely don't want to use too wide of a lens either. Also, the 5:4 framing makes my lenses 20% "longer." Hard to judge from the poor quality photos I could find of the venue. Will try to scout the location soon (though, not terribly convenient, since it's two hours outside of L.A.).</p>

[fotografz]

<p>Good that you are thinking of that because distance from front pew to alter is often an issue. While I try to shoot group shots outdoors, some older family members insist on using the church as a backdrop because it is more traditional. </p>

<p>Solution is … a short step ladder. I carry one in my SUV just for this reason. One with a larger flat top so you aren't teetering on it. Rarely use it anywhere other than the church. </p>

<p>It is good for groups anyway because getting up higher makes it easier if the groups are stacked 2 or 3 rows deep. </p>

<p>Try to shoot at least 3 shots without changing your position so you can swap heads in Photoshop (someone always has their eyes closed, or has a sour look on their face, or is looking somewhere else). Tell the group to please NOT move after the shots until you say so, or they will start dispersing after the first shot. Also, ask other's to not shoot until you are done are because the subjects won't know where to look … at you or the other family snap-shot shooter.</p>

<p>Another tip regarding upfront planning with the bride … ask them to assign a family "wrangler" for family shots. You do not know the players, and the MOB or MOG do … and they have "pull" with family members where you do not. This relieves the bride of the burden, speeds up the process, and allows you to arrange them once assembled … placing the parents and grandparents closest to the B&G. </p>

<p>Check with the church regarding how much time after the ceremony you can have … some limit it to 15 or 20 minutes because there is either a Saturday service following, or they want their people to be able to clean up and leave to go home. Plan accordingly and prioritize the shots if time is limited.</p>

<p>Personally, I wouldn't scout a location that's two hours away. I just have what's needed for most any situation in the truck. You'll know right away what you'll need.</p>

<p>Again, it is very common for clients to say "We love candid photography. <em>We don't want all those stiff, old fashioned wedding shots, so don't worry about doing them"</em>. I agree with them about loving candid photography but implore them to sacrifice 20 minutes or half an hour of their time to do family archive shots and get them out of the way in a swift and organized manner.</p>

<p>Also, it still amazes me that at a reception when a family member comes up and insists you shoot their family group at the most inopportune time, in the worst place possible. It is like the wedding was set up for them rather than the Bride and Groom. So, as soon as I enter a reception venue, I look for an out of the way area where I can do these if they come up.</p>

<p>Now, it may be that your client will brush all this off and insist on her plan. Just be prepared for when it doesn't go as planned. I've NEVER seen a bride go against her Mom or her new Mother-in-law's wishes for family photos when they get sprung on you on the day of. Not once in 15 years. </p>

<p>- Marc</p>

<p> </p>

<p> </p>