zotz

<p>Respecting those who have done this work for many years, I must now agree: flash brackets are often an unnecessary burden for modern wedding photography. The same can be said for huge Fong-like flash accessories and other excessive hardware.</p>

<p>The big Custom Brackets QRS-H2 I've had for three years is certainly better than the clumsy Stroboframe Camera Flip I owned previously, but it's now used only for formals. I mount the camera and CB bracket to my tripod Arca clamp, mount a flash head on top for fill, and rotate the camera as needed for the right composition.</p>

<p>These days I always shoot with two cameras, each with a flash head during the reception, so having one with a heavy bracket and one without makes little sense and produces no better results. I mostly bounce anyway, and sometimes use a Lumiquest Mini Softbox, Omnibounce, or card on each flash, depending on the venue.</p>

<p>You <em>can</em> have too much hardware for your own good. I'm reminded of a scene in <em>Jaws</em> , when Quint remarks to Hooper, "What are you? Some kind of half-a$$ed astronaut?<em>"</em></p>

 

<p>Have you considered a dual-camera harness?</p>

<p>Since July, I've been using the $35 Op/Tech Dual Harness:</p>

<p>http://optechusa.com/product/detail/?PRODUCT_ID=87#</p>

<p>I highly recommend it, especially if you're already a fan of Op/Tech straps and connectors. My cameras already have Classic Straps, so I bought some #9 Uni Adapter Loops ($7 per camera set) to allow more connection options and length adjustment.</p>

<p>When I need to use the harness, I simply disconnect the neoprene shoulder pad from each strap and snap the straps to the harness. When I need to use a tripod or flash bracket (mine's a CB QRS-H2), I disconnect the strap near the camera, and let the pigtails dangle. Clicking in and out is a breeze, and the tripod plates stay on the cameras. It's comfortable for hours, even with heavy bodies and lenses. It also works well for girls (the web page and YouTube video show this).</p>

<p>The BlackRapid and CameraSlinger straps were tempting, and some here may like them, but hanging the cameras upside-down by a single screw in the tripod socket is less adaptable for me and lacks redundancy. For about $50, the Op/Tech harness with your choice of connectors is a bargain.</p>

<p>I second the recommendation of American Digital. I use these:<br>

http://www.american-digital.com/prodsite/product.asp?p=2107&c=2054&name=TinCDCase,Square,WithWindow</p>

<p>That sounds like a fun one. For comparison, I could describe a recent wedding formal session where the first grouping was the B&G with about 60 other people at the steps of the altar. Equipment was a tripod extended high, Canon 40D, 17-55/2.8, 580EX in the shoe, and two 580EX-II's into umbrellas on stands to the left and right. Settings were ISO 400, f/5.6, 1/30s, and E-TTL flash. I think my lens was around 25-30mm. This setup worked very for the large group and the many smaller ones which followed.</p>

<p>Nadine, I certainly understand your reasoning. However, I should clarify my statements. I'm not recommending the production of trails as a standard effect. I shoot second-curtain during low-light events not to produce trails purposely, but to control where they are seen when they do occur. Where no rapid motion exists, as in shots of people at banquet tables, the diference is not seen. I simply leave second-curtain enabled for the entire event. Your experience may vary, of course.</p>

<p>Connie, your 5D/430EX should work well with a combination of high ISO, dragged shutter, second-curtain sync, and bounce card. The idea is to capture as much ambient light along with freezing motion.<br>

With my 40D and 20D, each with a 580EX-II in E-TTL, I set at least ISO800, f/2.8-5.6, 1/30-1/60, and second-curtain on the flash heads. The bounce cards are either the slide-out cards in each flash, or larger ones I have made from thick flexible plastic (from and old donor three-ring binder), and velcro strips, attached to speed straps around each flash head.<br>

Second-curtain sync keeps any trails behind the subjects, and the bounce cards work regardless of the ceiling. I can also easily remove or reposition them if I swivel the flash heads.<br>

Good luck!</p>

<p>I bring all of my lenses, which amounts to only five:</p>

<ul>

<li>Canon 17-55/2.8 IS </li>

<li>Canon 70-200/2.8 IS L</li>

<li>Canon 24-104/4.0 IS L</li>

<li>Canon 50/1.4</li>

<li>Canon 85/1.8</li>

</ul>

<p>I'm still shooting APS-C, my bodies being a humble 40D and 20D. Regardless of flash use, these are my usual combos:</p>

<ul>

<li>Engagement: 40D/70-200, 20D/17-55</li>

<li>Preparation: 40D/17-55, 20D/85</li>

<li>Ceremony: 40D/70-200, 20D/17-55</li>

<li>Reception : 40D/17-55, 20D/85 (or 24-105 if outdoors) </li>

<li> Formals: 40D/24-105, tripod, CB QRS-H2 rotator bracket</li>

</ul>

<p>The 50? It's rarely used, as the 17-55 covers its range, and 2.8 is as bright as I'll normally go. I bring it along as a backup prime.<br>

<br /> The rest of my kit? That's another thread...</p>

<p>You may be right about that regarding some girls, Nadine. Like the other 'harness' worn by women, the Op/Tech harness may have to be tried to determine fit. Some women who might have issues with it could loosen or completely remove the sternum strap, allowing the support straps to splay farther apart. Op/Tech shows this in a good <a href="

video</a> on YouTube. The standard product photo shows the sternum strap riding lower than it does on me.</p>

<p>Regarding the look of a dual camera strap, I believe it suggests a level of professionalism. Customers at an event will see you equipped differently than the usual gunslinger, never struggling with the straps.</p>

<p>If dual cameras are your thing, it's worth a try.</p>

<p>Thinking about a dual-camera sholder strap? If you have been considering the $130BlackRapid DR-1 or the $140 CameraSlinger $35 Op/Tech Dual Harness .Mine came in last month, and I've used it in two weddings since. I highly recommend it, especially if you're already a fan of Op/Tech straps and connectors. My cameras already have Classic Straps, so I bought some #9 Uni Adapter Loops $7 per camera set) to allow more connection options and length adjustment.</p>

<p>When I need to use the harness, I simply disconnect the neoprene shoulder pad from each strap and snap the straps to the harness. When I need to use a tripod or flash bracket (a CB QRS-H2), I disconnect the strap near the camera, and let the pigtails dangle. Clicking in and out is a breeze, and the tripod plates stay on the cameras. It's comfortable for hours.</p>

<p>The BlackRapid and CameraSlinger straps were tempting, and some here may like them, but hanging the cameras upside-down by the tripod socket is less adaptable and a bit risky, IMO (especially with the BR connector). For about $50, the Op/Tech harness is a bargain.</p>

<p> </p>

<blockquote>

<p><em>With so many shooters doing weddings for 500 bucks or less...</em></p>

</blockquote>

<p>I resemble that remark. ;-)<br /> <br /> Expanding on Pete's reply, perhaps the seasoned wedding photographers here could comment on what could be perceived as a widening chasm in the market between the sub-$1000 shooters and those who charge much more to deliver fuller services and products. In marketing, how do you differentiate yourselves from competent part-timers? How do you convince customers of the need for your superior skills and experience? It must certainly be more than pretty portfolios and saccharine statements.<br /> <br /> Also, I think the career wedding photographer may not be threatened by the part-timer as much as believed. In my experience so far with budget-minded couples, I have secured work from those who otherwise would not have hired a professional. Couples like these are simply adding to the market at the low end. Couples with higher expectations and deeper pockets will continue to seek well-experienced photographers and their premium offerings.<br /> <br /> Thoughts?</p>

<p>Nadine - from your first succinct response to your last exposition, you have encapsulated the debate and poured some needed water on the firery posts (and my own sarcasm).<br>

Funny you mention Jeff Ascough, because I thought to go back and re-read his interview with MaryBall. His perspective on RAW-vs-JPG is an intelligent one, and would fit well into the discussion here. Jeff had to become satisfied enough with the speed and results from RAW workflow - and conversion software in particular - before he could move away from JPEG. I'm curious to know what his ratio is today. The great results he gets from minimal flash and noisy high ISO speak volumes for what he can do with either workflow. I'm not worthy!<br /> <br /> While I remain a committed RAW shooter for my own practical and technical reasons, I will try an experiment during my next wedding: I'll shoot RAW+JPEG. My new batch of Flash cards arrived today. :-)</p>

<p>Darcy,<br /> <br /> True - I can understand your choice. My situation is a compromise, but a manageable one. The 20D isn't really that far behind the 40D in apparent noise, and I find the results are acceptable. The 40D rig usually gets more work during most events because I prefer its agility and resolution (it's also too much trouble to move the battery grip and redo straps to use the 20D on the bracket). During the ceremony, the 40D has a long lens and the 20D has a wide-angle zoom, again giving the 40D more of the work.<br /> <br /> The situation would be simpler if we both had a pair of 5D-II's. :-D</p>

<p>Sigh... I apologize for some of my earlier commentary which may have been construed as rude. My attempt to encapsulate typical anti-RAW attitudes into a few sarcasm-laced bullet points may have appeared clever, but appears to have been peceived by some members as a personal attack. That was not my intention, I assure you. With vocal inflection, much of it could have been taken as tongue-in-cheek, but the nature of text filters out such nuances.<br /> <br /> In the meantime, I continue to enjoy the information and opinion this thread has generated. RAW rulez. ;-D</p>

<p>I typically set my cameras on Manual when shooting with flash indoors, because allowing the camera to choose the aperture or shutter speed takes away too much control. My chosen settings vary by the motion expected, and the need to incorporate available light.<br /> <br /> This is the gear I use at indoor or dimly-lit events:</p>

<ul>

<li>Cam1: 40D, battery grip, 17-55/2.8 IS, 580EX(or II), battery pack, CB rotator,<br /> sometimes an OmniBounce or Lumiquest Mini Softbox </li>

<li>Cam2: 20D, 85/1.8, 580EX(or II) sometimes </li>

</ul>

<p>Cam1, depending on available light, is usually set to ISO 400 or 800, Manual, f/5.6, and 1/60-125. The flash is sometimes set for second-curtain sync - when motion blur is unavoidable, I want it behind, not in front. I also bounce the flash off available surfaces or use a diffuser, depending on the situation or creative opportunity.<br /> <br /> Cam2 is set for ISO 800 or 1600 (gulp), f/1.8-2.8, at least 1/60. I often use it without flash to catch closeups and other moments from a bit father across the room. Sometimes I wish for a 100/2.0, as my 70-200/2.8 IS is too beastly in tight quarters, and the 24-105/4.0 IS is not bright enough.<br /> <br /> That said, I'm with Nadine on the topic of wide-open shooting. We should do our best to take advantage of natural light, but I find the present fad of wide-open lenses at the expense proper exposure, definition, and usable DOF to be - dare I say - snobbish in some cases. Can we expect within several years the progress of technology to deliver truly clean images at very high ISO? Certainly, but the 'strobist movement' is clear evidence of the continuing desire to control the delivery and quality of light, wherever it may be originated.</p>

<p>Most readers should be able discern the mostly-JPEG team from the mostly-RAW team in this discussion. Learning a shooter's RAW/JPEG ratio, however, answers only a simple question. The OP asked for <em>what</em> , and most of us have also responded with <em>why</em> , providing a far greater and more useful amount of fact and opinion.<br /> <br /> Answering the OP's questions <em>only</em> , with no exposition, I submit the following:</p>

<ul>

<li><em>What percentage of Raw vs. JPEGS do you shoot?</em> <br /> <br /> <strong>100% / 0%</strong> </li>

</ul>

<ul>

<li><em>Have we reached a stage where JPEGS are "good enough"?</em> <br /> <br /> <strong>No</strong> (or, if you prefer a gracious response, "No, in my opinion")</li>

</ul>

<p>Without a healthy debate, all we have is a poll. ;-)</p>

 

<p>The topic of of RAW-vs-JPG is certainly not dead, as made evident by the recent responses in this thread. Well-thought contributions continue to make my visits here worthwhile.</p>

<p>In the meantime, technology marches on. As noted before, RAW work flow was a more a time-consuming and storage-consuming process just a few years ago, but the process has become remarkably streamlined by faster computers and better software. My output may ultimately be an 8-bit JPEG destined the photo lab, but it <em>all goes through Lightroom</em> whether it began as a Canon CR2 or an in-camera JPEG. <em>My effort is the same.</em> The difference is knowing I have more headroom and latitude <em>when I need it or want it</em> . If I don't want to bother with any special effort, having CR2's instead of JPEGs on my NAS causes no pain. I export to a web gallery or disc and the job is done.</p>

<p>One would think this topic has been beaten to death, but plenty of photographers still appear to need convincing of the obvious benefits of RAW IMO. Unless you need to dump photos from your card to a device or customer after a shoot for hasty printing or publication, JPEG is inferior IMO.<br>

 

 

<p>When I got a Canon G2 in early 2002, I shot JPEG for two months. I went on a vacation, and had a revelation. I was banging into walls during processing. White balance issues, inability to recover some highlight and shadow detail, and annoying artifacts in bigger prints convinced me to switch to RAW. RAW images also write to the card faster.<br>

Today, with software like Lightroom, excuses are invalid. I process and upload directly to Smugmug without ever exporting to disk, except to work something further in Photoshop or burn discs for a customer. RAW workflow is fast, efficient, and delivers a superior product. End of argument. ;-)</p>

<p>In 2002, I began my rechargable life with a Lenmar 8-cell 7-hour charger and a few Lenmar and Maha cells. Those batteries were... OK. Time moves on...</p>

<p>Today, I use a pool of Energizer NiMH cells of various ages and capacities up to 2500 mAH, and these chargers: Maha MH-C801D (8-cell intelligent), Maha MH-C204W (4-cell intelligent), and two Sanyo 4-cell chargers which came with discounted Eneloop packs from Costco. The Eneloops go into remotes for our Wii, GameCube, and other devices. I charge up all the Energizers I need before every event, along with my Canon SLR batteries. I bought the big Maha recently, and must say it's EXCELLENT.</p>

<p>Rick -Z-</p>

<p>Interesting - I didn't know Stroboframe had come out with something similar to the Custom Brackets QRS-H2:<br>

http://www.custombrackets.com/scripts/prodView.asp?idproduct=144<br>

I bought mine two years ago with the adjustable camera plate and Arca foot for mounting to my tripod. The Stroboframe looks to be a good lower-priced alternative.</p>

Shaun, you're right about tin cases being cool. In late summer I bought the ones with the transparent window:

 

http://www.american-digital.com/prodsite/product.asp?p=2107

 

I print disc labels from a wedding template with the usual event information, type of images, and contact info.

The top disc shows through the window, so I leave the case plain.

For Canon, I use Breeze Downloader to transfer images from the card reader and rename them in the following manner:

 

lastname_model_yyyy-mm-dd_hh-mm-ss_iiii

 

...or, for example:

 

Zotz_20D_2007-10-10_20-23-45_9999

 

Why the image serial number? Continuous shooting will result in several frames within the same second, especially with an incredible weapon like the 1DIII. The meter rolls over at 9999.

Interesting trend. Thanks for the post.

That was an excellent read, Matt. Thanks for posting the link.

 

Rick -Z-

That was a short and funny read. As a network engineer with about $5000 of gear, I'm anxious about my own first solo wedding shoot a month from now. I already have a few Canon L's in my bag, but playing with the Canon 70-200/2.8L IS at the pro shop today convinced me that $30 to rent one will be dollars well spent. :-)

A search of the Web and photo forums will turn up a wealth of information and mis-information on this subject. FWIW, however, I have determined THIS to be an excellent kit:

 

https://www.micro-tools.com/store/item_detail.aspx?ItemCode=DIGI-KIT4A-F

 

My Canon had a nasty organic smear across the sensor caused by trying to clean it with a Copper Hill brush. The wet method with a Sensor Wand worked easily.

 

Good luck!

 

Rick -Z-