Judy and Gail's wedding
I am a member of the Unitarian church here in Newton, MA.
Yesterday, the church held it's first same sex wedding. The minister has married 2 couples already, but not in church ceremonies. I went to this event as a photojournalist and as a Unitarian, but (should have seen it coming) was instantly cast as a wedding photographer. This is something I haven't done before and haven't really thought about and let me tell you, I found it hard. Gives you a new respect for people who do it for living (and I suppose it is a skill that can bring in some cash.)
Lesson #1: Go to the rehearsal. Probably a great photo-op all by itself. Also you won't be clueless (as I was) about the script for the actual event. I missed some sort of procession with the spouses, parents, minister outside before the ceremony. I think this would have been a good place to be with a fill flash on such a sunny afternoon.
So I started off in the space just outside the sanctuary. It has a relatively low white ceiling and some sunlight from open doors. Perfect for bounce flash with the Stofen thing (thanks, Pathfinder.)
The flower girl.
Judy. Here is the first foretate of trouble to come. Even with bounce flash, the reflection from Judy's face is unflattering. I know this can be improved in post (see below for an example), but still. I don't know anything about makeup, but maybe it would have been better if she used more. Sometimes it's hard to be a Unitarian. Still, I think she will like this image with the blurred afternoon in the background if I can do something about the facial glare.
Gail. Wish she had contact lenses. Can something be done in post about the reflection in her glasses? Wish she would lose her ironic distance more easily. But you have to play the hand you are dealt.
The parents. Lesson #2: Posed groups should really be posed. Candid is good. Posed can work. Semicandid doesn't work. Now I know, find a nice background. Take some test shots to make sure of the lighting and that the background really will work with aperature, bokah, etc. Then boss everybody around and make them stand where you want them to and engage them to make them relax and pose the way you want them to. Take lots so you aren't stuck with one person with eyes closed or an ugly expression or something.
The couple. Well, it has all the aforementioned problems with shooting Judy and Gail. And if I had already learned lesson #2, I could have done better. But with a little post to make the colors pop and cosmetic work on the faces, I'll bet it can be turned into something nice for their album.
Miniser James Ford.
I love shallow DOF and selective focus. I like how it works in these shots. (Especially the first; the second need a crop, I think.) But probably the couple will would prefer to be both in focus.
Then this really really bad thing happened. The minister walked down the aisle and stood at the alter at the far end of the sanctuarly and Judy said to me, "Oh, please, do you think you think you get get one of that; it's so beautiful."
Oh my God. It's dark in there. And a long way off. But I'm nothing if not game. So I changed lenses from portait to 100-400 as fast as possible and cranked the camera up to 1600 ISO. The results didn't survive my first cull. Lesson #3: Don't be afraid to go where you have to in order to get the shot you want. I should have just run up the aisle instead of changing lenses. More about darkness below.
Once the are on the alter, it would be good to get some shots of the ceremony, right? But this turns out to be really hard. I couldn't find the angle that showed the just the couple and not the ministers partly hidden. Or the couple and the ministers all looking unobscured. And did I tell you, it's dark in there.
Direct on camera flash. Ugh.
Just can't find the angle. Lesson #3: Foresight and planning is what separates us from the beasts. Use it. If I'd been at the rehearsal, I could have figured this out and set it up so there would have been an angle and I would have known where it was.
Lesson #4: Use remote flashes for the ceremony. It's dark in their and there is a limit to what on camera flash can do for a large scene in a dark place like this. I know how to light this! It's just like the elementary school play I shot a couple of weeks back. There I used two remotes + on camera. I don't know if the couple would have accepted this, but I could have asked if I had already learned lesson #3.
By the power vested in me by the great state of Massachusetts, I now pronounce you spouses for life. That got a standing ovation from the Unitarians and guests! Wish I could have got a good shot of this scene. I actually can't figure out even now, what that angle would be. How to show the hug and both faces? Maybe if I'd had a boom or a ladder or something?
Then a miracle occured. I got this:
OK, it's dark. OK, Judy's face has flash reflection. OK, Gail is wearing glasses. But Gail is just happy, no ironic distance for one. The composition works and shows movement. They are holding hands and obviously happy with each other. Sharpness good enough (would look better if Gail and James weren't wearing glasses.) The flash The minister is there and unobscured. I can work with this.
This time PS/CS shadow/highlight worked like a charm. I didn't even have to monkey with the curves in strange colorspaces afterward. Then there was the issue of the ugly background. I think that once you get really good with flashes, this might stop happening, but I'm not there. No matter, I have learned to use the make good selections (thanks to dgrinners) and the black black background just shuts this problem down. Dabbed at the flash reflections on Judy's face with a soft brush and low opacity. Ready for the cover of the New York Times Sunday Magazine. Well maybe not, but I bet that Judy and Gail would like an 8x10.
Anyone still with me? Probably not, so I' guess I'm done. The wedding cake cutting had all the same issues as the ceremony. If I'd learned lessons 1-4, I might have got something worth showing then.
Oh, and Lesson #5: take lots of pictures of the children at weddings. There is absolutely nothing to lose by doing this. Almost all children are much better looking than most adults. People love pictures of children. Children at weddings are dolled up and have nothing better to do than to run around and pose for you. And it isn't as hard as the rest of wedding photography, so it counts as R&R.
Yesterday, the church held it's first same sex wedding. The minister has married 2 couples already, but not in church ceremonies. I went to this event as a photojournalist and as a Unitarian, but (should have seen it coming) was instantly cast as a wedding photographer. This is something I haven't done before and haven't really thought about and let me tell you, I found it hard. Gives you a new respect for people who do it for living (and I suppose it is a skill that can bring in some cash.)
Lesson #1: Go to the rehearsal. Probably a great photo-op all by itself. Also you won't be clueless (as I was) about the script for the actual event. I missed some sort of procession with the spouses, parents, minister outside before the ceremony. I think this would have been a good place to be with a fill flash on such a sunny afternoon.
So I started off in the space just outside the sanctuary. It has a relatively low white ceiling and some sunlight from open doors. Perfect for bounce flash with the Stofen thing (thanks, Pathfinder.)
The flower girl.
Judy. Here is the first foretate of trouble to come. Even with bounce flash, the reflection from Judy's face is unflattering. I know this can be improved in post (see below for an example), but still. I don't know anything about makeup, but maybe it would have been better if she used more. Sometimes it's hard to be a Unitarian. Still, I think she will like this image with the blurred afternoon in the background if I can do something about the facial glare.
Gail. Wish she had contact lenses. Can something be done in post about the reflection in her glasses? Wish she would lose her ironic distance more easily. But you have to play the hand you are dealt.
The parents. Lesson #2: Posed groups should really be posed. Candid is good. Posed can work. Semicandid doesn't work. Now I know, find a nice background. Take some test shots to make sure of the lighting and that the background really will work with aperature, bokah, etc. Then boss everybody around and make them stand where you want them to and engage them to make them relax and pose the way you want them to. Take lots so you aren't stuck with one person with eyes closed or an ugly expression or something.
The couple. Well, it has all the aforementioned problems with shooting Judy and Gail. And if I had already learned lesson #2, I could have done better. But with a little post to make the colors pop and cosmetic work on the faces, I'll bet it can be turned into something nice for their album.
Miniser James Ford.
I love shallow DOF and selective focus. I like how it works in these shots. (Especially the first; the second need a crop, I think.) But probably the couple will would prefer to be both in focus.
Then this really really bad thing happened. The minister walked down the aisle and stood at the alter at the far end of the sanctuarly and Judy said to me, "Oh, please, do you think you think you get get one of that; it's so beautiful."
Oh my God. It's dark in there. And a long way off. But I'm nothing if not game. So I changed lenses from portait to 100-400 as fast as possible and cranked the camera up to 1600 ISO. The results didn't survive my first cull. Lesson #3: Don't be afraid to go where you have to in order to get the shot you want. I should have just run up the aisle instead of changing lenses. More about darkness below.
Once the are on the alter, it would be good to get some shots of the ceremony, right? But this turns out to be really hard. I couldn't find the angle that showed the just the couple and not the ministers partly hidden. Or the couple and the ministers all looking unobscured. And did I tell you, it's dark in there.
Direct on camera flash. Ugh.
Just can't find the angle. Lesson #3: Foresight and planning is what separates us from the beasts. Use it. If I'd been at the rehearsal, I could have figured this out and set it up so there would have been an angle and I would have known where it was.
Lesson #4: Use remote flashes for the ceremony. It's dark in their and there is a limit to what on camera flash can do for a large scene in a dark place like this. I know how to light this! It's just like the elementary school play I shot a couple of weeks back. There I used two remotes + on camera. I don't know if the couple would have accepted this, but I could have asked if I had already learned lesson #3.
By the power vested in me by the great state of Massachusetts, I now pronounce you spouses for life. That got a standing ovation from the Unitarians and guests! Wish I could have got a good shot of this scene. I actually can't figure out even now, what that angle would be. How to show the hug and both faces? Maybe if I'd had a boom or a ladder or something?
Then a miracle occured. I got this:
OK, it's dark. OK, Judy's face has flash reflection. OK, Gail is wearing glasses. But Gail is just happy, no ironic distance for one. The composition works and shows movement. They are holding hands and obviously happy with each other. Sharpness good enough (would look better if Gail and James weren't wearing glasses.) The flash The minister is there and unobscured. I can work with this.
This time PS/CS shadow/highlight worked like a charm. I didn't even have to monkey with the curves in strange colorspaces afterward. Then there was the issue of the ugly background. I think that once you get really good with flashes, this might stop happening, but I'm not there. No matter, I have learned to use the make good selections (thanks to dgrinners) and the black black background just shuts this problem down. Dabbed at the flash reflections on Judy's face with a soft brush and low opacity. Ready for the cover of the New York Times Sunday Magazine. Well maybe not, but I bet that Judy and Gail would like an 8x10.
Anyone still with me? Probably not, so I' guess I'm done. The wedding cake cutting had all the same issues as the ceremony. If I'd learned lessons 1-4, I might have got something worth showing then.
Oh, and Lesson #5: take lots of pictures of the children at weddings. There is absolutely nothing to lose by doing this. Almost all children are much better looking than most adults. People love pictures of children. Children at weddings are dolled up and have nothing better to do than to run around and pose for you. And it isn't as hard as the rest of wedding photography, so it counts as R&R.
If not now, when?
0
Comments
ps cs shadow highlight works wonders. i tried it on one of your shots. 25%, 35% and 100px radius... looked pretty darn good!
thanks for sharing
Portfolio • Workshops • Facebook • Twitter
I have shot half a dozen or so weddings in my lifetime. I know this isn't a lot, but the few lessons I've learned that can be added to Rutt's are:
1. Find out the church's policies on photography. Some are very strict. Some allow some photography, but no flash photography. Some allow pretty much unlimited photography, but limit the photographer's movement during the ceremony. Find out where and when you may move about the church.
2. Visit the church about the same time of day that you will be photographing to see what kind of light you might have.
3. Get a diffuser for your flash. Bounce flash often isn't an option due to very high ceilings or very dark ceilings.
4. Take a picture of the organist/musician. (Just a shameless plug for us church organists
Again, Rutt, great post.
www.digismile.ca
Similar situation with the trumpeter:
But I the organ did sit still for me, so I shot it:
Judy. Here is the first foretate of trouble to come. Even with bounce flash, the reflection from Judy's face is unflattering. I know this can be improved in post (see below for an example), but still. I don't know anything about makeup, but maybe it would have been better if she used more. Sometimes it's hard to be a Unitarian. Still, I think she will like this image with the blurred afternoon in the background if I can do something about the facial glare.
Rutt thanks for giving me permission to "play" with this shot of Judy. Here is my result.
I have to chew on the flower girl in B&W. As you know I have a prejudice in favor of color if it can be made to work, and this one was working, I think. But your crop is nice. Loses the wisp of hair, though.
Talk to you when I hop back.
Lynn
Operating System Design, Drivers, Software
Villa Del Rio II, Talamban, Pit-os, Cebu, Ph
Operating System Design, Drivers, Software
Villa Del Rio II, Talamban, Pit-os, Cebu, Ph
Rutt, CLASSIC comment about being a Unitarian. Made me giggle.
Lynn, that's beautiful what you did with Judy's portrait. It actually gave her an extra twinkle in her eye, perfect for a wedding day.
Are No Match For
Age and Treachery
Lynn:D
http://www.providencecliffseniors.com/judy/judy.html
What do you think? Am I on my way to being a beutician?
Operating System Design, Drivers, Software
Villa Del Rio II, Talamban, Pit-os, Cebu, Ph
- it was too much work to move her, and
- I could use the "law of thirds" to justify my laziness
Meanwhile, I beautified the happy couple in a couple of other shots. It's like eating peanuts, can't stop once you start.(Thanks, Andy for the shadow/highlights parameters and courage to see this as a good enough shot to be worth some work.)
Perhaps you can't see the difference between this and the first retouched version I posted, but I took most of Lynn's hints and was much more careful about the selection. I think this one will stand up to 12x18.