Practising for a wedding - question and C&C.

[C&C]

Sorry for the long post...

I know this is a fairly common theme, but I've been asked to cover a friend's wedding in April. I've read probably every thread on here with "wedding" in it, and despite the sensible advice to not do it, I've agreed to photograph it as the bride does not like her photo taking, and would never have a pro. She would only feel even slightly comfortable with someone she already knows well. The couple only want a very few formal shots - the rest to be more reportage style. I've explained in no uncertain terms I'm not a pro, and they are OK with this.

My usual kit is an EOS 40D with EF-S 17-85 IS, 50mm f1.8, and Sigma 120-300 f2.8. 580EXII flash and Gary Fong Whaletail diffuser.
I am in the very fortunate position to have recently spotted a complete bargain and now have an EOS 5D and 24-105 f4L IS (< 3000 actuations, as new with 12 month guarantee for under £1020 including the lens!).

So, I have 2 questions:

1. In terms of kit, apart from a backup flashgun, what are your opinions on the lenses being up to the job - my real concern is that most people appear to use a 70-200 f2.8 especially for unobtrusive candids. Would the 120-300 f2.8 do the job (in terms of flexibility) I'm obviously happy with the IQ. I'd probably use the 24-105 on the 5D and the 120-300 and nifty fifty on the 40D?

2. Having just got the 5D, and not had much experience with the 580 flash, I have been practising and took some photos of our cricket club dinner at the weekend. I was following advice from here on bouncing/diffusing the flash on ETTL mode, with the camera on manual set to roughly a stop underexposed. I would welcome any comments, tips, or advice.

Many thanks,

Conrad.

Some examples below, and Flickr set is here:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/conradsphotos/sets/72...


Larger one:
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3243/3034801683_7ca...


Larger one:
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3037/3035606216_262...


Larger one:
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3004/3034749335_d27...


Larger one:
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3020/3034752869_5be...

[CivicMan]

I'd suggest you show the bride the pictures you've taken at the cricket dinner and make sure she understands exactly the level of photography you're offering so she is under no illusion.

In 20 years of photographing weddings, I've had several brides who have professed to not wanting an "obvious" photographer, but by golly, when it's all over they sure as hell want professional looking pictures.

[Simpo Two]

CC said:

the bride does not like her photo taking, and would never have a pro.

Those two facts are not actually linked!

This is from an enquiry I got last January: 'I warn you now that whilst I try not to be difficult, I can be exasperating as as soon as a camera comes near me I tense, freeze and do an awful fake smile. My husband to be, will agree with this wholeheartedly.'

I photographed their wedding last Saturday, it went extremely well, and the bride was in fact brilliant.

At a guess, and I may be wrong, one reason your friend may not like having her photograph taken is because she doesn't like the results - and I will leave you decide why that might be!


NB: Liken it to going to the dentist. You hate dentists. Would you rather go to a professional dentist or an amateur dentist?

Edited by Simpo Two on Tuesday 18th November 20:34

[bramley]

The bride of the last wedding I did told me as soon as I met her "I hate having my picture taken". Good start I thought! All went well in the end though.

To the OP, does the bride to be have a specific hang up with herself? If you can find out in a subtle way it may mean you can shoot with that in mind. For instance, if she hates her (big) nose, don't shoot her side profile, if she has big ears don't shoot her head on etc.

[crmcatee]

Everyone can take photographs of a wedding. It's how they come out that makes the difference.

I've done (under pressure) a friends wedding (we're still friends so they weren't that bad). One thing I found really hard to do was to switch off. Being there as a guest, but also have a role of photographer meant that I didn't really have time to enjoy the wedding as I was too busy concentrating on what shots to get, where to stand etc and because your a friend even though they've said that they don't want any pictures after the first dance, they will as their guest turn up for the evening so you'll be getting the camera out just when you thought you can get down to some serious drinking celebrating.


The second wedding of more friends I said I would wander about taking reportage shots - nothing formal, and I'ld pick the shots. I made it clear that they'd get the wedding as I saw it which also meant there was quite a few at the bar both before and during the wedding . A win win position - I enjoyed myself, they got a different perspective on the wedding day and it seems all their guests enjoyed the pictures as well since it reminded them of the day they had been through (although most of them didn't see the blind drunk judge )


Don't over commit yourself.

[VxDuncan]

Those are good pics, better than a lot of reception photos I've seen by pros! If you mastered the lighting inside, thats part of the battle. Make sure you're upto speed with fill-flash outside and don't shoot in direct sunlight if you can get away with it. And don't overexpose the dress! (dial in a bit of underexposure and shoot RAW to be safe). For some reason this is the worst sin to the female guests!

I've done a few as a friend, but not as the main tog. Not sure I'd want to be the big cheese TBH. What I would say is plan (and agree) the formal shots before hand with the couple. Keep the list close to hand. Plan how you are going to pose the guests for these formal shots and stick to it - if they think you know what you are doing they are more likely to relax and give better shots.

There's a load of points a pro tog HAS to hit - bride truning up at church, walking in with father, rings, kiss, walking down the isle, leaving the church, speaches, cutting the cake, first dance etc etc. Any pro will get agro if one of these is fluffed. I think I'd be up front and say you'll do your best to get everyone, but you might miss one or to. They have to understand this. A pro will usually move around a church almost without being noticed in an alsmot set routine to be in the right place for every shot. But they've done the same routine every weekend it's like dance moves! HHope can't possibly hope to be in the right place every time first time.

Personally as the main tog I'd stay off the alcomahol until off-duty, but that's your call. There's a few decent books on the subject that are very informative if that's your thing.

[C&C]

Firstly, many thanks to everyone for taking the time to respond. It is very much appreciated.

Civicman
"I'd suggest you show the bride the pictures and make sure she understands exactly the level of photography you're offering so she is under no illusion."
I have done exactly that, and sent her and the groom the link to the photos so they can decide for themselves how they wish to proceed.

Simpo Two
Thanks for pointing this out - it is a very fair point that she may not like her photo taking because she has previously been unhappy with the results. All I can say is that in initial discussions, it was made very clear to me that they would like me to take photos at their wedding, and that regardless of whether I agreed or not, they would not be getting another photographer. I am having a bit of difficulty getting the gist of the conversation over in this post, as it didn't come across as putting any pressure on me, it was simply that if I would take some photos then that would be great, but if not, they wouldn't be getting a pro to do the job. This position they maintained even after my strong suggestions that they do get a pro to do the job, and I'd be happy to take more candid type shots.... So, rightly or wrongly, I do not feel to have been put under undue pressure, and so have made it clear to them that I will obviously do my best, but I am in no way a pro, and they should not expect results that they would have every right to expect from a pro. I'll see what they come back with after having a look at some of my other photos as suggested by Civicman.

Bramley
Another very good point - I will certainly follow up on that - it may make a massive difference in how she views the photos, and wasn't something I would have thought about (although it seems obvious when you think about it). That's the difference/value you get with going with a professional.

Crmcatee
The wedding will be quite a small affair and does not include a church service - it will be a civil ceremony at the same place (in the country) as the reception. All the guests that are invited will attend both the ceremony and the reception immediately afterward, so there should hopefully be ample opportunity to get some decent photos of everyone there without there being a whole bunch more guests turning up just for the reception. I fully understand that I will not be doing a lot of enjoying proceedings until I've definitely got the photos sorted. Having said that, the wedding is at 12:30 and the reception kicks off around 2pm and will go on until probably 11pm. There is no car for the couple to leave, as they are staying in the bridal suite at the venue.

VxDuncan
Thanks for the positive comments on the indoor shots - I intend doing a lot more practice between now and April, and will ensure I'm up to speed on fill flash etc.

I've sent a list of possible shots (again from a post either on here or on talkphotography) to the couple and asked them to use it as a starting point to give me a list of shots they definitely want. They are working on this, and we will be discussing it shortly, although they have said that they want very few specific shots, so for me to expect a short list... I'll certainly be shooting raw, and will make sure not to blow the highlights in the dress.

Also, good advice about the alcohol - I'll definitely not be drinking until after I'm happy I've got all the shots sorted (and backed up to both a separate hard drive, and laptop).


Many thanks for all your comments - I really do appreciate it.

Finally, does anyone have any comment on my original question about the kit to use? Especially regarding the suitability of the 120-300 f2.8? Reason I ask is that I'd be quite prepared to hire a 70-200 f2.8, but am trying to balance the pros and cons - specifically that the 70-200 may be more suitable, but this may be counteracted by the fact that it will be an unfamiliar lens, and I'm very comfortable with the 120-300?

Cheers,

Conrad.

[Simpo Two]

CC said:

All I can say is that in initial discussions, it was made very clear to me that they would like me to take photos at their wedding, and that regardless of whether I agreed or not, they would not be getting another photographer.

Well it may be that they don't feel it's worth spending any money on - a fair objection. However if it's because she thinks she's going to be intimidated by a stranger, then that's another matter. Or maybe she was at another wedding and the tog was horrible? There is of course a real reason in there, it's just interesting to find out what it really is.

One thing I've got used to on forums is looking hard at a statement or answer and seeing if it adds up. In this case it's still 2+2=10!

Anyway, I wish you the best of luck, and well done for being brave enough to tackle it

CC said:

Finally, does anyone have any comment on my original question about the kit to use? Especially regarding the suitability of the 120-300 f2.8? Reason I ask is that I'd be quite prepared to hire a 70-200 f2.8, but am trying to balance the pros and cons - specifically that the 70-200 may be more suitable, but this may be counteracted by the fact that it will be an unfamiliar lens, and I'm very comfortable with the 120-300?

I think you may hit problems with minimum focus distance/field of view with the 120-300 (but I don't know this lens). I find 70-200 on a DX sensor pretty much perfect, but still occasionally hit the focus distance/FOV thing, and that's at 70mm. I haven't felt the need to go longer than 200mm, but your mileage may vary. I guess it's better to go with kit you feel most comfortable with.

Edited by Simpo Two on Wednesday 19th November 19:30

[Colin RedGriff]

Just a thought - the 5D is a full frame dslr whereas the 40d is a 1.6 crop, but you probably know that.

Worth checking if your other lenses are built for the smaller sensor or whether they will work on the full frame OK. That said then the 5d will give you a wider field than the 40d which might work well with the 120-300 (70mm on a 1.6 crop is about 110mm equivalent on a full frame).

Worth checking that you are comfortable using each of your lenses in conjunction with your flash.

If you are thinking of hiring a lens then it may be worth going for a fast lens that covers the 50-150 range so you've got all options covered. If it's a small venue then the 120-300 will probably not be any help anyway.

[Road2Ruin]

Might be worth considering getting a slave flash for indoor work and a reflector for outdoor. The worst thing about amateur photos are the shadows as the kit is not up to the job. All weddings I have been to have always had two people to do the shooting. One with the camera and another holding a reflector.