jonj

<p>Seth,<br>

Ansel Adams said "I don't get caught up in the gear, buy a camera and learn how to use it" I think that camera companies want us to buy the latest and greatest, but do we really need to? I use 2 D80's with SB 800s I do believe in buying the best glass you can, but it must meet your style of photography. Look at it this way Tiger Woods could beat almost any golfer with a set of clubs from Wal-mart.</p>

<p>Nadine,</p>

<p>I guess it's based on how you get to your end result. I find the best results with the D80 and D200 is to meter the face of the individual then recompose and add fill flash. I do agree with one of the other posters who stated the camera is an extension of yourself. I have nerver been obsessed by theroy of photography rather I believe in picking a camera and learning how to use it.<br>

I would say I am product of Photo.net and prior to becoming a wedding photographer I used to post some really bad photos here. Now I do 20+ weddings a year and have learned a great deal from this forum.<br>

So if you are new to Photo.net stay with it becasue it's a great place to learn.</p>

 

<p>Nadine,<br>

I didn't just devise this way of determining my exposure on my own I wanted to reference an article by (David Parris) which does a better job explaining how to determine exposure when photographing a bride. Basically if I followed your direction and opened up one additional stop after metering her face I would be close to overexposure. If you note what David says you can meter the dress then add 1.5 - 2 stops. This would work, but I prefer to meter the brides face then re-compose the shot and yes I do go for a higher key image, but this is more the norm in today's wedding photography.<br>

David's Article<br>

Example #1. Imagine taking a portrait photo of someone with the sun shining behind them. Automatic metering is going to take an average reading, take the brighter background into account, and underexpose your subject.<br />Instead of relying on auto, take a manual reading from your subject. Move in closer, or use the spot meter setting if you have one, so there is no bright background in the frame, and take your exposure reading. Set the aperture and shutter speed manually, then move back, re-compose and take your shot. Now your subject will be correctly exposed, while the background may be overexposed and lose some detail.<br />Using the same scene you might want to change the look of this image and expose for the background instead of the subject. Take your reading from the background, excluding the subject, and reset the aperture and shutter speed. This time the background will be correctly exposed and, depending on the range of brightness, your original subject may be underexposed or be silhouetted against the light.<br />In either case you have decided on the look that you want, instead of waiting to see what the automatic settings gave you.<br /><br />Example #2. Ever tried taking a close up photo of a bride in a white dress? If you did this with your camera on automatic you would probably find that the whole picture came out much darker than the original scene. This is because your camera was assuming that the white dress was an 18% grey. It underexposed the shot and made the whites look grey.<br />If you set the camera manually you can compensate for the white dress or any other large area of white or light tone in the picture. You could do this in a couple of ways; either take a reading from another area, near the subject, with the same lighting conditions but a more average range of tones, or, if that's not possible, take a reading from the dress and make an adjustment to allow for the lighter tones. In this case I would probably open up another 1.5 to 2 stops to get a good result.</p>

<p>Nadine,</p>

<p>In the past I have used gray cards with similar results I found that the results were better when I used the " center weighted" mertering on a subject up-close. What I mean is when I do Bridal portraits I walk up to the bride and see what the camera thinks the proper exposure should be. I back off and recompose the shot and of-course the camera has now jumped up several stops from the original suggestion it gave when I was up close with the bride. I set the camera to the original set points based on the up-close metering and tend to get great results.<br>

With this photo I metered her face at 1/200 f3.2 iso 100 with an 85mm f1.8 up close I recomposed the shot and added fill flash.</p><div></div>

<p>Pete,<br />During Weddings and portrait sessions I meter off of the face of the B&G or someone who is in the similar light. I would not meter off of a gray subject and then shoot the B&G. I often shoot someone sitting in the front pew and fire off a test shot. If all is well with that setting then I lock it in and shoot that portion of the wedding using those settings. Here is where it gets a little hectic during the Ceremony I'm often at 1/60th f2.8 iso 800 and the processional is under way as you follow the B&G out the door it's almost impossible to shoot manual from the Sanctuary, to the Lobby, and outside to the Limo, and then inside the limo! That's when I have to switch to Aperture Priority and that's why the second camera is ready for the Processional.</p>

<p>Nadine,</p>

<p>I use the spot metering with my Nikon D80 when shooting in Aperture priority not the full pattern metering. When shooting manual I use the same spot metering but meter the light off of a similar object. Like in this photo of a highrise building. I Used the Nikon's spot meter aimed right at the building and the digital meter inside the viewfinder showed 1/800th at f11 was the proper exposure, but that was to bright . So I metered off of a similar wall not in the full sun light I bracketed my images and 1/1000 at f11 was the correct exposure.<br>

So I guess even though you have the metering on "spot" the camera is still going to be off because it just doesn't know what you are trying to accomplish.</p><div></div>

<p>I decided to put my camera's aperture priority mode against metering and then shooting in Manual mode.<br>

Most of the images where buildings that had the daytime sky in the background.<br>

While in Aperture Priority I had the camera metering on the center rather than the entire frame. I found the camera still over/under exposed images in full sun light by 2 stops. </p>

<p>Richard,</p>

<p>I think my question is I have to constantly change settings while shooting in manual slowing down my flow or is this normal for most manual shooters. I feel I get a little obsessed with settings while I'm shooting manual, but that may be the nature of the beast.</p>

<p>Over the past 2 years I have moved to more manual settings rather than using the aperture priority during my weddings. I would say I am about 50% Aperture Priority and 50% Manual, and my question is do I slowing things down by going with manual settings? I do spend a little bit of time metering and getting the right settings, but I find I get better results when I shoot in manual mode VS Aperture prioity.<br>

How often do you use manual setings vs aperture priority/shutter priority?</p>

<p>Thanks Marc I was thinking Bokeh or shallow DOF Sorry for the screw-up.</p>

<p>Kennedy,<br>

The DOF is increased as the focal length of the lens goes up. What length of lens are you using is a big factor. I would focus on the womans eyes to answer your question. </p>

<p>You really need to meet with them as soon as possible. I set up a meeting after the first contact beacuse there is so much that can get lost in translation via email that you need to say in person. Also when you are sitting down with the client they are more apt to tell you what they like from other photographers and what they like about you.</p>

<p>Insurance is your best bet because it's not always theft you have to worry about. I did a wedding last year and had my D80 with an 80-200 on it and flash sitting on the floor while doing formals I was using my second camera, and the bride walked by and her heel caught the strap and she slung the whole thing across the floor. Also there is the chance you'll be in the rain (twice this year) or at the beach, or the ring bearer goes after you second camera during the formals that you left sitting on the pew ...should I go on.<br>

Thanks god everything still works and there was no need to cash in on the insurance which is an Inland marine policy through my homeowners insurance $250 deduct.</p>

<p>Otto,<br>

I was thinking about this some more and everyone here who is saying it's just film or lenses or proper exposure is way off course. I want all of those people to look at some of the best photojournalist and every White House photographer and you will see that their images don't have this kind of color and vibrance. <br>

The reason is Photojournalist as a whole do not post process thier images beyond cropping. I have freelanced for 6 years and all the news papers require that you are not allowed to manipulate your images. Go to world press photo and look over those photos they are the best in the world and don't even come close to looking like the wedding photos in question.</p>

<p>Otto I know what you are saying there is a wedding photographer Stacy Cross look at her work the same deal with the color. I did ask her and she told me that all of her procesing was sub-contracted out.<br>

I think it is her post processing that does achieve this look and it on average cost $2-$3 per photo to have a professional do this for you I know I have done the same searching you have.<br>

You can tell they are processed by the pinks in the one girls dress they start to bleed out of the bounderies of her clothing. Also I think she is over exposing a stop or more and uses a high end wide angle.<br>

Good Luck</p>

<p>Julie,<br>

I would not put my money into the off camera strobes/flashes as you can see in the photos the room is to bright and there is no imtimate atmosphere when the room is lit up to that degree. I use 2 D80s and both are getting close to the end of their life so I am faced with the same issue. I think a D700 or D300 and keep the D80 is what I would do when you can afford it.<br>

Buy a lightshpere as well.</p>

<p>Good luck</p>

<p>I tell them "Some people need all the help they can get". Or I remind them that Ansel Adams said "I don't get wrapped up in the gear, Pick a camera and learn to use it"</p>

<p>I carry two cameras all the time one wide angle and one with either and 85mm or 80-200 on it. I use a Lowe Pro lens case on my belt it's a long case and will hold just about any lens I need to toss in there. With two cameras and 3 lenses and flashes on both bodies you can tackle just about any situation.</p>

<p>I agree with Orlando Pentax does not produce a fast telephoto zoom lens that most pros would feel comfortable carrying around in the field. Also Nikon equipment holds it's value better than Pentax equipment I should know I sold a lot of my Pentax gear and took a big hit.</p>

<p>If you can work with what Pentax has to offer then go for it, but look at it this way in terms of holding their value Pentax is the Volkswagen and Nikon is the BMW .</p>

<p>As a owner of both Pentax and Nikon I would suggest staying with Nikon. My main issue with Pentax and the reason I use Nikon for all of my wedding photography is lens selection and availablity. Pentax produces some nice bodies but their lenses have only just begun to come up to speed and they still lack a 80-200 f2.8. The other factor regarding lenses is that Nikon has a long history with each of their available focal lengths while Pentax is still playing catch-up. </p>

<p>IMO the 85mm can contribute the wonderful image quality due to it's rear focusing element that puts the glass closer to the sensor than most lenses. If you own this lens then you know when taking it off of the camera body you have to be careful not to touch the rear lens element because it sticks out of the lens housing almost like a reversed fisheye.</p>

<p>I use the 85 f1.8 it's with me 80% of the time. It's great for tight getting ready shots, first dance, toast, cake ( not cake cutting) etc. Here is a first dance at f 2.2 I keep the camera on auto focus and follow the B&G the lens is a bit slow at focusing but the image quality makes up for the slow focusing.</p><div></div>

<p>I think B&W is the way to go with this one it's a nice image you just need to crop in a bit tighter. Here is my attempt.</p><div></div>

<p>Place cards iso 800 105 mm f2.8</p><div></div>

<p>I've seen dogs as the ring bearer, but this was the first cat as a wedding guest. Anyone else had animals show up during your wedding?</p><div></div>