fotografz

As an advertising art director I had the good fortune to work with many different photographers and cinematographers. The element you cannot divorce from the discussion is skill and experience. Most masters of lighting can do almost anything with the right tools. I worked with one still shooter that always used continuous lighting and employed the subtractive method of controlling the light. He had all sorts of flags and scrims of all sizes. Very hard (not impossible) to do that technique with strobes. This goes to the "Logistics" of capturing an image Michael mentioned. Aesthetic differences? I doubt it all things being equal. Which is easier to say, than do.

I just ordered the VC15/4.5-III in M mount. This is improved for use on digital cameras. I got it to use on a Sony A7R-II with adapter and on a Leica M-Monochrome. Oddly, reviews state that the Sony E mount version of the same lens is not as good in the corners. 15mm is certainly wide, but no more so than the fairly common 16-35 zoom on DSLRs. I have a M21/1.4 ASPH which I use on both cameras and it is often not wide enough for interior work. f/4.5 max aperture doesn't bother me that much as both the Sony and Leica MM are excellent high ISO cameras … and for interior pro work, I'm using lighting at f/5.6 or f/8 with most lenses anyway. f/4.5 doesn't matter for focusing because both cameras are mirror-less.

What do you mean by ... " ...but now I'm starting to do larger weddings" ? How do you envision use of off-camera lighting to help with larger weddings? In what way do the Canon RT Speed-lights fall short? If you get the highly reliable standard Pocket Wizard units, you will lose TTL ... therefore have to adjust the off-camera speed-lights manually. - marc

Assuming you know most of the tips offered, and you are just looking for ideas ... That is tough to do without specifics. What society? What do they do, or what do they stand for? The though would be to customize the shoot more exclusively to them. I agree with the tip to discuss any idea with the client before committing to it. They very well may simply want a record of who's who at the gathering.

Times have changed. This business is substantially more difficult to enter and/or make a viable profit from than when I started. Probably the same for many established photographers here. There are many reasons for the changes in wedding photography as a business, but few would debate that it hasn't become more difficult in the past ten or even five years. Old methods and approaches that once worked have been far less successful these days. This may require a "rethink" on how to gain experience and build a portfolio. One suggestion would be to pay a successful Wedding/Event/Portrait photographer to teach and advise you ... both on the job, and with some one-on-one consultations. Think about it ... you pump thousands into gear, pay for a web-site, but expect a free education from a busy professional. Once upon a time, I could afford to take on clueless assistants to play it forward for the industry ... but trust me, their contribution in the beginning was less than zero because of "Hit the ball and drag Billy" efforts while in the middle of a hectic shoot : -) They got an intense education that translated into a viable career in photography ... and I paid them ... ???? That's like going to a college where the professors pay you for attending their classes. Your thoughts? - Marc

frolickingbits is right on ... in open sun shooting a group of people that are backlit or side lit, no modifier is really necessary and just wastes precious light. The size of a medium softbox at a distance produces almost the same specular quality as no modifier. For best effect, place the lights opposite the angle that the sun is striking the subjects ... which is exactly what frolickingbits did in his example. It is even easier to pull off when at the beach because you get all sorts of fill light help from the beach itself. Like this shot using on-camera speed-light and a profoto B2 with a 9" Magnum reflector for a little fill. I used a 85mm lens to get some distance from the subjects which allowed the light spread to cover the whole group. It was windy and no modifier would have worked other than a simple reflector.

The OP is curious about becoming more creative. Anyone can become more creative because "more" is relative to the current state of their creative mindset, not the aggregate of all creative people. Rather than defining creativity, which is a slippery slope, perhaps we can identify ways to become more personally creative? I think it all starts with a desire to create something different. To see something differently, to explore a different notion of something, someone, someplace, or some idea that already exists. The platitude that "there is nothing new under the sun" is mistakenly applied to creativity. The role of creativity is to forward some new way of intellectually, intuitively, and/or emotionally interacting with what is immutable. This suggests "purpose" is an underlying tenet of creativity. Fine artist do produce and publish their "Intent". As the early Cubist painters intuitively explored the concept, they formulated an intent to visualize "Time and Space" in a new way. Plus, they intended on it being seen ... as Picasso once said "A painting kept in the closet, might as well be kept in the head". The trouble dealing with personal photographic creativity today is that there are billions of images everyone can access almost instantly. How can one hear themselves think with such a visual cacophony? I think it is a matter of introspection to bolster belief in your own uniqueness, and then taking an outward view of that which is part of your world see as only through your eyes.

Like many here, I learned exposure on manual everything cameras ... mostly in the prehistoric days of film : -) My early Leica M cameras didn't even have a built-in meter. However, negative film had the advantage of great exposure latitude (especially in the highlights) that digital is only now beginning to approach. Many photographers who thought they were good at setting exposure were unknowingly saved by their lab (I have friends who run labs that told me this many times). I use any means and any settings to get the best exposure possible as often as possible. Sometimes it is aperture preferred when the lighting averages out to medium tones. But, I WILL use Program when in a stress situation ... I teach my students/assistants that "P" stands for Panic ... when flummoxed set the camera to P! The problem with most exposure guidelines is that too many photographers do not know the basis of exposure metering. if you use "A", "P", 'S" or "M" to meter a black wall, it'll show settings to make it medium grey ... meter a white wall and it'll show different settings to make that wall medium grey also. Modern meters are pretty smart, but when faced with a strongly back-lit subject, you'll get an underexposed subject. Or if the background is very dark, you'll get an overexposed subject. This happens a lot with ambient light wedding work. It is also the reason why so many wedding shooters use on-camera flash to even out the light between the background and the subject. A sort of revolution in using manual exposure has come about with the mirror-less digital cameras. If shooting ambient light, you set the camera to show exactly what you will get in the viewfinder. WYSIWYG ... What You See Is What You Get. I now use a Sony A7R-II for weddings and always set the exposure manually because I can immediately see the effect of any adjustment right in the viewfinder.

Leica M Rangefinder film cameras and a Canon film camera of some sort, plus, like a lot of wedding shooters back then, I also did some formal work with a Hasselblad V camera ... eventually the Canon became a Contax film camera and I didn't return to Canon until digital cameras became usable for weddings. I think my first Canon digital was 3 meg crop frame ... LOL! (The photo below was shot with that first Canon digital).

The best piece of gear I can employ to create something special is my brain. Given the specifics of the coming wedding, where it will be held and when, I pre-plan some special shots for the client ... then go to the wedding prepared for it. This one was shot at a museum which was dark ... so I had powerful OC lighting with me.

<p><blockquote>Ellis, some people just want the experience. Maybe OP has another job - or her spouse/parents cover the expenses. It's not always about the money.</blockquote></p> <p> I hear that all the time ... <em >"I'm working super cheap for the experience, it's not about the money"</em></p> <p>So, in this case, that logic is flawed. If, as you suppose, the OP is working for less than slinging hamburgers to gain experience, and the second shooter is working for even less (or nothing) to gain experience ... who has the experience to gain from?</p> <p>Shoot cheap, shoot profitably .... doesn't change that clients expect results, and as evidence of this client calling insisting on more photos, they do not adjust their expectations just because you charged a pittance.</p> <p>Now the OP is charged with tracking down her second shooter to get more photos that may or may not exist or be useable.</p>

<p>It isn't THAT hard. Just study other sites and then have the existing person you are contracted to use for your site make some adjustments.<br> Here's an example of a grabber site that spurs you on further.</p> <p><a href="http://www.adamalex.com/">http://www.adamalex.com/</a></p> <p>Also check out his "about" part ... it's all about why he has a passion for wedding work without ever using the word passion. He also personifies what I said about the wedding being about the client, not us.</p> <p><a href="http://www.adamalex.com/about/">http://www.adamalex.com/about/</a></p> <p>- Marc</p> <p> </p>

<p>Hi Michael. Hopefully you will see success as you start your new venture in 2017!</p> <p>I reviewed your site and have a few comments and hopefully constructive suggestions based on many years of doing weddings ... plus my main career was in advertising and marketing as a Creative Director.</p> <p>Over-all it is a bit amateurish and doesn't really showcase your better work ... work which is good for a start up wedding company!</p> <p>Consider having a graphic designer help you out. </p> <p>IMO, stating that you will shoot in any style the client wants sounds wishy-washy and places the creative direction in the hands of the client, or can be confusing at a time when a bride may be looking at a number of sites to define what they want ... they tend to respond to what they see as opposed to what you say.</p> <p>Your current work is pretty consistent, which is a good thing because the client can count on you to deliver. When offering to do any style, in a few cases expect tear sheets of magazine ads etc. with a style that you may be hard pressed to duplicate.</p> <p>Perhaps think about what YOU emotionally stand for visually, without direct references to "style". </p> <p>Your landing page should demonstrate that visual "WoW! factor, and have just enough words to entice them to continue. </p> <p>Everyone says they are passionate about photography, feel privileged to be a part of the client's special day, etc. What is it that is different and special about you? </p> <p>All those photos in the Image Gallery are packed in together which makes it difficult to for anything to stand out ... especially if the client is using a cell phone. </p> <p>Highlight the best, suppress the rest.</p> <p>While I am now semi-retired and have removed my wedding site, it was successful for many years because: 1) I took a position which was not common back <em>then</em> ... "Romantic Photojournalism" and supported it with images, and 2) Tailored my approach to reflect the clients personality rather than fit it to a "style". It is about them not us.</p> <p>You mention a relaxed unobtrusive and candid style as opposed to the more traditional posed approach ... yet a vast majority of your samples are posed (?). Generally, the candid approach has run it course as a main draw anyway, and trends are running in different directions ... so what you are doing with further enhancements may prove more successful </p> <p> </p>

<p>Which camera? And is it with the same lens? (exif info for the shots will tell you).</p> <p>I had a similar intermittent situation ... which turned out to be a sticking lens aperture. Rather than stopping down upon release, it stayed wide open and grossly over-exposed the shot with the B1. </p> <p>- Marc</p>

<p>Ditto Rodeo Joe.</p> <p>What you need is a responsive camera. Less lag between pressing the shutter button, acquiring AF lock, and capturing the shot. Generally a three shot burst is more than enough to catch squirmy kids, hyper pets and fleeting expressions. You also need a camera that can track subject focus in continuous AF mode ... not all cameras are great at this, especially in low interior light. </p> <p>Modern flash (speed-lights) may be able to recycle this 3 shot burst IF set at a lower power level. They also may STILL shut down due to built-in thermal limiters after a few bursts. Plus, at lower levels, it is doubtful that the speed-light can overwhelm the apartment ambient color temp ... which can produce ugly skin tones really fast.</p> <p>Technology cannot always replace skill and intuitive timing. With a little practice, anticipation goes a long way toward capturing the decisive moment that even 12 FPS may miss if you aren't tuned in to your subject.</p> <p>- Marc</p> <p> </p> <p> </p>

<p>Hi Ed, long time no hear!</p> <p>Seems that a lot of dedicated wedding sites have faded from neglect ... even this one compared to its heyday with Mary, and then Nadine (God bless her soul). However, I think that is mostly because wedding photography has fallen on harder times compared to then.</p> <p>As interest and understanding of journalistic work faded I had to take a hard look at my approach also. While I kept my "of the moment" style, I expanded the more traditional type work and brought to bear more sophisticated lighting solutions as a key element of change.</p> <p>This allowed a clear difference from the myriad guests with cameras and cell phones who post stuff on social media before the wedding is even over.</p> <p>Come back here and post what you learn as you began your new journey.</p> <p>- Marc</p> <p> </p>

<p>I don't mind the look. Something a bit different which is showing up in a lot of fashion stuff lately.</p> <p>It is simply high key, high contrast post work. On my monitor, the whites of the dress are there and not blown. It is bright and cheery ... even uplifting ... so I could easily see a lot of brides liking this approach.</p> <p>- Marc</p> <p> </p>

<p>I use a Leica MM Rangefinder and Leica S(006) for a lot of work. I also use a Sony A7R-II with A and FE mount lenses.</p> <p>I had an opportunity to use a SL for awhile (a very accomplished photographer friend was provided one from Leica along with the two zoom lenses). He was not particularly impressed with the short zoom nor was I, but found the longer one to be quite excellent.</p> <p>IMO, the SL is a hyper-built, almost DSLR sized camera. In fact, the size and weight surprised me. Also, after all the hype, my expectations of the EVF were not met ... but in all fairness, I'm used to a S camera with a big, bright OVF. </p> <p>I think the notion of the M being a versatile platform comes from acessories now available due to use of a CMOS sensor allowing live view and an EVF. So, M lenses can be used for traditional rangefinder photography, while R lenses can be used for wider and longer lenses. I do not happen to agree with that adaptation, preferring to keep the M a rangefinder system, while using technology to shrink the M size.</p> <p>What has been an interesting development for me is the Techart AF adapter for use of M lenses on a Sony camera. I use one on my A7R-II with select M lenses and couldn't be more pleased (so far). It is quick, accurate, and provides more diverse use of my M lens investment. The whole system is quite small, with much smaller sized, fast aperture optics than the native FE lenses that continue to increase in size and weight.</p> <p>- Marc</p>

<blockquote> <p>"Im tyring to take some indoor 'in-use' product shots."<br> </p> </blockquote> <p>Alissa, not many people use speed lights for this type of professional photography, except perhaps those trying to sell speed-lights. : -)<br> <br> Andrew Gillis' post above tells you why.<br> <br> So, it depends on how serious you are about doing such work, how often, and if you will continue with it and/or expand such assignments.<br> <br> Also, sometimes it helps if you reference the type of images you make, or provide a link to some shots that show what you would like to do. Is is much easier to recommend solutions with such provided information.<br> <br> - Marc<br> <br> </p>

<p>Logos are an interesting subject. Their intent is to promote swift recognition in communications. The origins come from imprints, seals, or hallmarks representing individuals, organizations, and later, companies.</p> <p>Logos are part of branding (which itself, harkens back to things like branding cattle).</p> <p>Logos generally take one of two forms: A graphic icon that represents the company (like Apple or the Nike swoosh), or Logotype or Wordmark of the individual's name or company name (like Ford or FedEx).</p> <p>Generally, an individual photographer will not get enough exposure of a graphic logo to make it instantly recognizable when seen on it's own.</p> <p>When it comes to photography, people are buying the person behind the camera, therefore, I would advise promoting your name with a logotype treatment ... Kristo is a memorable name if you can make the logotype itself memorable.</p> <p>Hire a good designer to accomplish that.</p> <p> </p>

<p>There are 3 things I stress when teaching assistants, second shooters, or new wedding/event photographers.</p> <p>1) pre-plan.</p> <p>2) pre-practice.</p> <p>3) Prepare.</p> <p>Obviously, you had talked with the client about expectations. The "missed" shot you mentioned was part of that discussion. At that point, you should preplan exactly how you intend getting that shot, even to the point of adjusting how it happens if necessary to assure you are part of it, and in a key position to accomplish it. Same with any other important image the client expects. The more you preplan, do a time-line/itinerary, and go over everything in your head repeatedly ... the more free you will be to creatively concentrate on the shots during the actual shoot day.</p> <p>To avoid becoming flummoxed while shooting ... practice, practice, practice. The more familiar you are with "fluid" scenarios and what is coming next on the itinerary, and the more familiar you are with your camera and settings, the better you can adjust on the fly and respond to unforeseen situations.</p> <p>Before setting off for the shoot, prepare any gear for easy access, make sure all batteries are fully charged, the memory card is cleared and ready for new images ... and do this the day before, not on the day of the shoot. </p> <p>Preplan, pre-practice, prepare ... these are the hallmarks of all successful "Commercial Shoots". In fact more time and energy is spent prior to a commercial shoot then on the actual shoot day itself.</p> <p>- Marc<br> </p>

<p>Oh, I forgot ... consider adding a 50mm to your two V lenses. Those three are all you'll ever need. You do not want to go wider than 50mm for group shots because of the distortion on either end of of the group. </p> <p>50mm is also spectacular for environmental portraits in square format IMHO!</p> <p>- Marc</p><div></div>

<p>Here is 1/500 high-speed sync used outdoors to tame a bright background. The trick is "balanced lighting" so use of flash isn't readily apparent.<br> -Marc</p> <div></div>

<blockquote > <p > </p> <p >I've been shooting digital for some time now, and I'm at the point where I'm ready to invest in some serious lighting gear. The answers you guys have provided above are helping me narrow down my potential shopping list; I want a kit that I can use with both my digital setup and my (more modest) film setup. I'm still on the fence about shooting weddings, but I posted in this forum (as opposed to, say, studio) because I really like on-location portraiture, and the creativity that demands (while retaining a bit of control and structure). I'm not a huge fan of the run-and-gun style that the reception seems to require.</p> <p >For what it's worth, my MF kit at the moment consists of one Hassy 501c with a couple backs, a 2.8/80, and 4/150. I added a 45-degree prism finder, and my speed and hit rate has increased remarkably over the waist-level finder. I'd like to add a microprism/split-ring viewfinder to increase my speed further still. For OCF with my MF, I'm using Cowboy Studios radio transmitters and Lomopro manual speedlites. It's cheap, simple, and gets the job done. I will definitely do some homework on the Bronica setup. I'm leaning Contax 645nii at the moment. I think I want the AF option.</p> <p >My digital rig is all Canon with relatively fast glass (2.8 zooms). I'm considering adding an EOS-1v since the lens mounts are the same. A 1v with the 1.2/50 and/or the 1.2/80 I think would serve me well for shooting film at the reception.</p> </blockquote> <p > </p> <p >I've used everything you mention above.</p> <p > </p> <p >For decades I was an all film wedding shooter, then a hybrid shooter up until only 5 years ago. </p> <p > </p> <p >Most of the early hybrid shooting was 35mm digital and MF film. Later on I shot both film and digital MF using a Hasselblad 503CW and 203FE with a digital back and film backs.</p> <p > </p> <p >I'll address the MF film part of your questions including how it relates to lighting. </p> <p > </p> <p >IMO, stick with the Hasselblad V and lenses you already have. If anything, just upgrade your body to the 503CW which adds TTL control of one-camera flash for fill ... in such a case, the available light is the key light and the on-camera flash just acts as fill. (one great TTL bare-bulb flash is the Hasselblad version made for the TTL V cameras).</p> <p > </p> <p >This provides up to 1/500 sync to control background exposure for outdoor portraiture. <em>Often we do not have total control of where or when outdoor portraits are taken at a wedding ... so controlling backgrounds can be a great asset rather than blown skies and overexposed locations behind back-lit subjects. </em></p> <p ><em> </em></p> <p >The Contax 645 is a great camera, but doesn't offer Leaf-shutter lenses and the 645 format is less versatile than the 6X6 of the V.<em> </em>In addition, working with on-camera fill flash on the Contax in portrait orientation is difficult and awkward. With the V you never turn the camera. BTW, the AF of the Contax is not what you may think it is.</p> <p > </p> <blockquote> <p >I've been shooting digital for some time now, and I'm at the point where I'm ready to invest in some serious lighting gear.</p> </blockquote> <p > </p> <p ><strong>RE: Off-Camera Flash;</strong> Off-camera Flash can be used at weddings both outdoors as directional fill, or outdoors as a key light with on-camera flash as fill using higher sync speeds to adjust the background exposure as desired. Indoors the off-camera strobe can act as key light and on-camera as fill, effectively diminishing the effects of mixed color temperature, or undesirable directly overhead ambient lighting. </p> <p > </p> <p >Eventually, IMO, and experience, what you want is something small, mobile and portable (i.e., battery driven). Flash systems such as the Elinchrom Quadra Lithium is one example that is about as small as it gets, but punches well beyond its size/weight. There are many others to select from, but try to keep the size smaller for ease of transport. Battery pack units are great because you can hang the battery lower on the stand to help stabilize it. </p> <p > </p> <p >- Marc</p> <p > </p> <p >P.S., Background control isn't limited to outdoors with back lit subjects. Here is a MF shot at a crowded reception where I used a higher sync speed to kill the cluttered ambient background ... Off-camera Elinchrome Quadra @ 320 W/s with a shoot through translucent umbrella high up camera right ... on-camera TTL flash for fill. </p> <p > </p> <p > </p> <p > </p> <p > </p> <div></div>

<p>Leica will have a traveling show where anyone with the $5,000 admission can take images of quaint Leica cameras using their OrganicCom® infinity meg sensor, Smarty-Pants® cell phones ... images that are Adobe AutoPro® edited and processed then instantly transmitted to the entire world via SkittleShuttle® where they appear for no more 5 seconds ... (Andy Warhol's "15 minutes of fame" reduced to a more modern 5 seconds).</p> <p>Leica will also sell $10,000 T-Shirts.</p> <p>: -)<br> </p>