Julie and Andrew - a stack of photos

tenoverthenose

It's been a long time since their engagement session, but it was great to see them again. Fairly small wedding, under 40 guests, and super personal. Just really good people

1.


2.


3.


4.


5.


6.


7.


8.


9.


10.

Matthew Saville

GORGEOUS! Hey Patrick, when do those magnolia-like flowers bloom? I REALLY want to shoot a couple portrait sessions in Sequoia and Yosemite this spring / summer / fall, but I know those flowers are going fast... :-(

=Matt=

ssimmonsphoto

Your work always blows me away. I love #5 the most from this set. Can you tell us more about how you shot it in terms of the equipment and EXIF?

Foques

awesome work!!
Are the 5 and 7 shots taken with a flash?

I am still struggling with getting the exposures right to get the sky and the subject lit well

tenoverthenose

Matthew Saville wrote: »

GORGEOUS! Hey Patrick, when do those magnolia-like flowers bloom? I REALLY want to shoot a couple portrait sessions in Sequoia and Yosemite this spring / summer / fall, but I know those flowers are going fast... :-(

=Matt=

Thanks Matt! Those are dogwoods and beautiful trees to see. There are plenty of them in the park, but their flowers only last so long. The started to flower about two weeks ago and will be dead within another two weeks. They look great now when they are vibrant and white, but they will get yellow, dirty and shrivel as they go...

Come on up and lets go shoot!

tenoverthenose

ssimmonsphoto wrote: »

Your work always blows me away. I love #5 the most from this set. Can you tell us more about how you shot it in terms of the equipment and EXIF?

Sure thing - 5dII, 16-35II, Four 550ex's blasting them straight from camera right (you can see the shadow of her arm on her dress). ISO 100, 18mm f5.6, 1/640. Then in LR just a little dodging and burning to complete the look. When I as taking the picture in camera, my #1 goal (technically) was to keep the dynamic range under control. It's a tough scene (direct sun light, many foreground in direct sunlight, background in open shade) and requires a darn near perfect balance.

Thanks for sharing the love!

tenoverthenose

Foques wrote: »

awesome work!!
Are the 5 and 7 shots taken with a flash?

I am still struggling with getting the exposures right to get the sky and the subject lit well

Lots of flash on #5, no flash on #7 - it was shot pure Ansel Adam's style with just dodging and burning as necessary. In #7 I basically (again, technically) just treated the couple as part of the scenery. I really didn't care about getting a perfect exposure across them; all that matters is that they pop out of the background. So I kept them separated through tonality with her white dress. As you can see, his black jacket does blend into the background here so it's the bride that anchors the photo - without her, he'd be lost.

Thanks again!

Foques

thank you!
One day, i'll learn how

ssimmonsphoto

tenoverthenose wrote: »

Sure thing - 5dII, 16-35II, Four 550ex's blasting them straight from camera right (you can see the shadow of her arm on her dress). ISO 100, 18mm f5.6, 1/640. Then in LR just a little dodging and burning to complete the look. When I as taking the picture in camera, my #1 goal (technically) was to keep the dynamic range under control. It's a tough scene (direct sun light, many foreground in direct sunlight, background in open shade) and requires a darn near perfect balance.

Thanks for sharing the love!

Note to self: Stock up on flashes. ! My two measly 580exiis aren't enough.

tenoverthenose

ssimmonsphoto wrote: »

Note to self: Stock up on flashes. ! My two measly 580exiis aren't enough.

To be fair, you could do this with two. I really have no idea how much power they are putting out, I shot this in ETTL with the PW Flex's - HSS is robbing some of the power away here. You could also just use a bigger light like an Alien Bee - but I work by myself, so I can't carry that much weight and work at the same time. I use four lights because it fits my workflow and I am often shooting outside in full sunlight like this.

I have to add: when I started out I obviously couldn't afford 4x Canon speedlights, so I purchased 3x SunPak 383's, a wireless trigger and wiring to hook them all up. Less than $200 spent and you can easily do the same thing as I did here.

ian408

#8 is a lovely photo. Maybe a bit more light on the happy couple? Anyway, I think shots like #3, #7 and #8 are awesome because of the juxtaposition between nature and your subjects.

mmmatt

Dude that is NOT Julie Andrews! Great pictures though!!


Matt



Oh AND,

tenoverthenose wrote: »

I shot this in ETTL

Gasp!

tenoverthenose

mmmatt wrote: »

Dude that is NOT Julie Andrews! Great pictures though!!

Ha! I never thought of it that way...

And yes, I do use ETTL all the time. Once you get a feeling for how it works, it's fairly consistent. Not perfectly consistent, but acceptable for me. Of course with the new Pocket Wizards I can put my remote flashes in manual mode too if I need to -- all from camera position

ian408

I always used to wonder about the whole ETTL vs. Manual debate. After seeing the whole thing demo'ed, most recently by Hobby & McNally, I'm of the opinion either works just fine as long as you know how to use it. As they say, it's not the arrow, it's the Indian.

tenoverthenose

Both are tools to get the job done. I'm really more concerned with the finished product that how you got there. Better yet, I'm more concerned with why you took the shot than how you took the shot. Of course I think it's incredibly important to understand manual flash too (I do use it all the time) so that you can understand what is happening and the inherent limitations of ETTL.

Shima

I really love 3, 5, & 7

Great stuff! I always enjoy stalking your blog and posts on here

theprincereturns

Great outdoor shots. I like how you did some of the indoor ones as well. You didn't try to fill the room with too much flash, but just tried to capture the emotion of the moment. Does #9 have a remote flash above the table in the background or did you just use available light for that picture?

tenoverthenose

Thanks again everyone!

Lucas #2, #7, #9 are the only photos here not using flash.

theprincereturns

tenoverthenose wrote: »

Thanks again everyone!

Lucas #2, #7, #9 are the only photos here not using flash.

Thanks for the info. I do really like how #9 turned out :-)

mjordanphoto

Awesome work! I agree with pretty much everything said here --- and just to add, I absolutely love #8 (even if I think the couple could have used just slightly more light, as someone else said). I haven't seen anything quite like it, and I really love what you did with all of the shots! Keep up the great work (and thanks for sharing some of your trade-secrets with the rest of us!)