Disappointed

ShepsMom · July 15, 2011

I was so disappointed in myself i wanted to cry:cry

Let me tell you that i don't do a lot of bright day light beach photos, i'm not comfortable with them. Sunset is different, and i like sunsets.

I shot this 2 hour event for another photographer, and i'm kind of feeling guilty with how it turned out. The couple wanted me there at 6:30 for beach family shots... 6:30? Yikes, it's blazing sun and sunset is not till at least 7:45. No matter what i did couldn't overpower the sun with my flash, majority of them looked all washed out, so i don't know if i didn't use my lights properly or what. Anyway, i would love you to tell me what was wrong.
I shot with 1 AB at 1/8 (but that might have been a problem, and i should have blasted with 1/2 power) + small softbox. I eventually removed the softbox and went with straight light.

I felt rushed because this couple had a reservation at the restaurant and wanted everything quickly, hence starting earlier, so i just couldn't think quickly enough or be more creative. I know, excuses excuses....Eeek! :rolleyes

I spent couple of days fixing this trying to save some of the images.
Anyway, here are few i posted on my blog that were somewhat presentable, any advise would be appreciated. They just don't look right to me.
http://intruecolors.com/blog/wedding-photography/sandpiper-inn-longboat-key-fl-wedding-of-jodi-and-josh/

I will be going to the beach in the middle of the day for some practice. :huh

zoomer · July 15, 2011

They look right to me. Maybe clean up some shiny spots on faces.
The clients will love them.

Lots of blown whites, clients probably won't care. Might be able to save some of them in Lightroom with the recovery tool.....having said that they look like they may be beyond recovery, if that is the case they will look worse if you try to recover them. Better to leave them as they are.
The smart thing you did was to keep the exposures very bright....which kind of camouflages the blown out whites.

Next time try high speed sync so you can shoot at F4 so the background will blur more for subject separation.

What is is that you don't like about them?

ShepsMom · July 15, 2011

Well, these are the better ones, i tried to face the bride towards the water on the opposite direction from the sun, but the issue with that she was squinting a lot. I didn't post photos where i placed her against the sun and was shooting in a different direction, those were terrible and not a blog or any kind of material at all. Ugh
Yes, blown white are just driveing me crazy, i already ran these through LR and photoshop and this is the best i could do without totally compromising the photo. The ceremony was done with the on camera flash, so skies are blown and I'm not happy at all.

marikris · July 15, 2011

Hi, marina. Looking at these on my iPad, the ones on your blog looks fine to me. I would have kept the soft box on and cranked up your AB since you still had plenty of power to go. My quadra overpowers the noon sun pretty well, so I know your AB can handle 6pm fine. If anything, you can move the light source closer to the subject and that will help if full power is not doing enough. The specular high lights on her and their faces are noticeable to us, but not to the clients I'm sure.

Why don't you post some shots of the ones that didn't make it to your blog so we can help you better?

Kinkajou · July 15, 2011

I've had a 'we want beach photos in the middle of the day!' session before... and I think you just have to go with it. The most I had going on in terms of lighting was a reflector. I think that as long as you include the environment, folks will know it's supposed to be 'beachy' and therefore really sunny and you can make it work, even if you do get some shadows. A couple of (somewhat decent, not spectacular) examples:

ShepsMom · July 15, 2011

sample.jpg

Here is one sample (sooc) of the bride when she was back to the sun, yes, i see that light source might have been too far, my camera setting possibly was wrong at ISO100, F7.1, 1/200

ShepsMom · July 15, 2011

I always keep WB on auto as i can always correct it in post production, should i've changed that i don't know.

marikris · July 15, 2011

I think with something like that, I would make the bride the most important factor in the shot. Zoom in and get the exposure spot on for her, crop tight. Specially when the environment is not ideal due to something or other, you don't need to show so much of it.

I use a passport color checker for wb and color, and get it done in post. I figure it doesn't take that much time to batch, specially when the shoot is hurried. I know others have differing opinions, though, and honestly, whatever works for you is the one you should do

However, when I don't have the passport with me, I try to use Kelvin as much as possible, or one of the settings (daylight, tungsten, etc) just so I can be at one steady wb if the lighting doesn't change.

Matthew Saville · July 15, 2011

6:30 blazing sun? Where do you live? Around here, the sun sets at 8 PM and by 6:30 the late afternoon sunlight rocks.

I will admit, 100% open sunlight with zero chance of shade is indeed a difficult task. But I'd take bright sun ANY day, over completely overcast (flat) lighting...

Just watch your blinking highlight warnings and histograms... There should be no excuse for bad exposures or white balance in an environment with such constant lighting! Just face your subjects in the right direction based on the type of image you're going for, and shoot in manual.

Lastly, when you say that you've got an Alien Bee at your disposal, I'm even less sure about why bright sunlight is daunting. A single AB should be more than enough to counter-balance sunlight.

As usual, please understand that I'm not just ragging on you because I enjoy being an ass. I genuinely want to see you raise your own standards and achieve a higher level of quality, and of course confidence in yourself and your abilities.

Here's an image from a bridal "day-after" session I did last week. The image was taken at 11:40 AM because the couple ONLY had time mid-day. I lit it with a single hotshoe flash, and shot it on a crop-sensor Nikon D300. 1/350 sec, f/4, ISO 100, circular polarizer.

Here's an image from 4:40 PM in June, when the light is starting to get really awesome, if there's a bit of shade to work with.

Again, I'm encouraging you to get out there and conquer the situation! As professionals we owe it to our business to be ready to handle anything.

=Matt=

tenoverthenose · July 15, 2011

Matthew Saville wrote: »

I'd take bright sun ANY day, over completely overcast (flat) lighting...

I couldn't agree more. But then again, I'm a drama whore.

bobcool · July 16, 2011

Matthew Saville wrote: »

Here's an image from a bridal "day-after" session I did last week. The image was taken at 11:40 AM because the couple ONLY had time mid-day. I lit it with a single hotshoe flash, and shot it on a crop-sensor Nikon D300. 1/350 sec, f/4, ISO 100, circular polarizer.

=Matt=

Matt, if you used your hotshoe flash, did you use FP mode? I believe the D300 flash sync speed only goes up to 1/200 or 1/250, so I'm scratching my head about that setting... If so, that's great, and goes to show that even a hotshoe flash can provide some fill on FP mode in full sun...

ShepsMom · July 16, 2011

Matt, i don't have any excuses it was my mistake and i screwed up, heh, i'm in Florida btw. Our sunset is nice at around 8pm so pre-set light is a lot nicer around 7:30
Yep, i'll be out and about shooting in the mid day, especially on the beach to nail this down. Thanks for replying, nice photos.

marikris · July 16, 2011

Also, Marina, have you tried gelling your flash? Nearing sunset, the light is starting to warm.

Mark Dickinson · July 16, 2011

BOB: My nikons will sync up to 1/8000th of a second on fp mode. you have to change the setting in the flash though. It really looks like there was a reflector used at 72mm that seems a very wide shot for that photo as if it were stitched

Matt; Your shot looks very good. How did you get that flash in there at 72mm thats a wide shot for 72mm was it stitched? because my sb900/d700 combo can't pop flash in that well that far away.

Sheps mom...

Here's a few things that I think.

Scenery A beautiful location makes a beautiful photo
You seem to be shooting into the sun a bit more than Matts
Post production does help Matt exported his from LR and looks like a blue gradient may have blued the sky up a little (Just guessing No offense there pls)
Then composure. Florida does not have pretty beaches unless you are featuring some of the jeddys that are here or the dunes (Her dress should have been composed not the scenery (IMOP)
I shoot raw and I am sure Matt does too. That is a big benefit for post production work.
ISO 100 is good, but F 7.1 will be hard to get light to fill in there. Use the light and don't put up a fight (turn her a little and shoot with a little bit into the sun (Shes already squinting) even in this shot so it wouldn't hurt. The shot below was done in a zero direct sun, 400, 2.8 @4.5, fill flash remotely triggered. 1/4 power on sb900 flash with no post processing (girl on right has too much makeup on)

Mark Dickinson · July 16, 2011

Just fyi, I looked at the blog. The pics look great! there's nothing wrong with them. White beach, White sand, and direct blast you in the face sunlight is difficult. Good job on the pics!

ShepsMom · July 16, 2011

Thank you everyone for your comments and suggestions. As i said, I'll put all that into practice and see how things will turn out, heading to the beach for some play time next week.

Matthew Saville · July 17, 2011

bobcool wrote: »

Matt, if you used your hotshoe flash, did you use FP mode? I believe the D300 flash sync speed only goes up to 1/200 or 1/250, so I'm scratching my head about that setting... If so, that's great, and goes to show that even a hotshoe flash can provide some fill on FP mode in full sun...

No, I just cheated. At 1/350 sec, the "black shutter banding' will only show up at the very bottom ~20% of my frame, which in this image is just fine. :-) I used a new radio trigger from a company called Aputure, I've been testing them for a few months now and I really like their advanced functions. I can trigger a camera AND wireless flash remotely, if I need to.

=Matt=

Matthew Saville · July 17, 2011

Mark Dickinson wrote: »

BOB: My nikons will sync up to 1/8000th of a second on fp mode. you have to change the setting in the flash though.

I do like FP sync mode for certain uses, however each stop you go above the native sync speed, you do lose flash power. So for example, I would get MUCH more power out of my flash at f/5.6 and 1/250 sec. than at 1/1000 sec. and f/2.8, even though they are technically the same exposure... I only use higher shutter speeds and FP sync mode when shallow depth is very important, and when the flash can be close enough to handle the light loss.

Mark Dickinson wrote: »

It really looks like there was a reflector used at 72mm that seems a very wide shot for that photo as if it were stitched.

Matt; Your shot looks very good. How did you get that flash in there at 72mm thats a wide shot for 72mm was it stitched? because my sb900/d700 combo can't pop flash in that well that far away.

I used a radio trigger instead of the built-in infra-red system, and I went above the normal sync speed just by "cheating" and letting the black band fall where it wouldn't matter.

The shot was 72mm on a crop sensor, so about 105mm equivalent. The flash was radio-triggered, juuuuust out of sight. It was probably at 1/4 power or within 1 stop of that... There was some faint buring and dodging, but nothing else major. And yes I always shoot RAW on bright, harsh days like that. However I do actually shoot compressed 12-bit RAW, to save space.

Mark Dickinson wrote: »

Use the light and don't put up a fight (turn her a little and shoot with a little bit into the sun (Shes already squinting) even in this shot so it wouldn't hurt.

I almost ALWAYS have my subjects face directly AWAY from the sun, if I'm going for a shot of their smiling faces. Using the sun as a light source is okay if the photos is about the environment more than their smiling faces. I'm not sure if this is what your recommending or not though, based on your word choice about "turn her a little and shoot with a little bit into the sun..."

Of course rules are meant to be broken, but I've found that unless it is high-noon during the summer solstice at the equator, (IE, the sun is DIRECTLY overhead) ...then there is at least SOME shadow, somewhere. Before I start "breaking the rules" and doing other stuff, I always just begin by having my subjects face directly away from the sun, shooting telephoto towards anything that remotely resembles shade if possible, and/or using a reflector to help out a little bit... That is my default, sure-fire, easy-to-expose shot that I start with before getting any more complicated with things...

=Matt=

Glort · July 17, 2011

You say you are dissapointed but I doubt the couple will be and who are these pics for.??

It's all well and good to take pride in your work but don't get carried away with it. the couple aren't going to crap on about blown highlights and other techinacal crap. They have 2 parameters, they like them or they don't. You are shooting a real life event for clients. If you wanted to shoot for a photo competition you would hire models and wait for precisely the right lighting and make technicaly perfect pictures. Seems to me any twit can do well under perfectly organised conditions and if it were that easy, even MORE weekend warriors would be clagging up the market with unsustainably cheap packages.

Luckily what counts is how you handle the less than perfect situations.

To be brutaly honest, I'm not sure if you are just being overly pedantic here or your looking for people to blow sunshine up your nether regions but in any event the pictures are fine and will more than satisfy the people you shot them for and PAID for them. If your dissapointed, so what? Got set up shoot all nice and perfect and make pretty pictures. The couple will be delighted with them and if you were shooting for me and came back with this stuff, even if these were the best of the bunch, I'd be damn happy too.
There is a BIG difference between pictures that may not be perfect when you made excuses for doing a half arsed job and pictures that have made the best of what you had to deal with at the time and conditions that were beyond your control. One is an excuse, one is a fact.

It's not up to us as shooters to control the wedding to suit what we want, it's up to us to make the best pictures of what the bride and groom have decided best pleases them.

Mark Dickinson · July 18, 2011

Thank's Matt! Awsome pics, and as well Sheps.. same for you. Yes have confidence. You will always be self critical of your own work just as clients their own images!

bobcool · July 18, 2011

Glort makes a good point.

We must always try to remember that when we share our photos to fellow photographers, they will never see the photos on the emotional level of the client. Why is that, you ask? It's because when we look at them, we have no memories that tie us to the photos. These photos reflect the memories of the client's most special day, and all but the most out-of-focus, extremely blown out, crappy photos will still be a source of great memories for the client.

Marina, don't beat yourself up over it - our clients don't have the same technical perspective as we do, and will overlook/not notice small technical "flaws" that we all make at some point. For all we know, the bride could associate all of her squinting in the photos to a memory such as, "My wedding was a glorious ceremony at the beach, full of warm sunshine and a fresh breeze off of the water. No wonder I was squinting!"

Foques · July 18, 2011

Matt, can you explain how you achieve the blue sky in that picture?
this is one of the things i struggle with - my sky is always blown out..

Matthew Saville · July 20, 2011

Foques wrote: »

Matt, can you explain how you achieve the blue sky in that picture?
this is one of the things i struggle with - my sky is always blown out..

All I cay say is, simply find ways to bring both the sky and your subject into the same exposure range. That's it! If the sky is blowing out, that means you don't have enough light on your subject. Put it in the sunlight, or light it with a flash, whatever you gotta do.

I use a polarizer a lot too; that helps to darken sky by 2-3+ stops while only darkening the rest of the image by ~1 stop. You gotta be careful though, at the wrong angles a polarizer may not work at all, or at wider angles you'll get un-even brightness. The image I posted previously was barely affected by the polarizer, mostly the sky was blue simply because I used flash to keep the sky within exposure range, then I darkened it no more than 1/3 or 1/2 a stop in Lightroom. Here's an example of a TRULY darkened sky, using flash to counter-balance the sun:

...Or, at sunset, a single flash can EASILY help darken the sky in an even more dramatic way, helping to bring out color in clouds. (The sun was actually setting behind me, if you look carefully you'll see that the direction the flash is coming from mimmics the direction the sunlight is hitting the clouds from)

But, sunset is the easy part, because you've got plenty of darkness to enable easy use of flash. Noon-day sun is the real challenge, especially when shade is scarce. But again, a single flash or reflector is all it takes to open up many options, and at least give the photographer plenty of confidence in getting the job done.

Matthew Saville · July 20, 2011

bobcool wrote: »

Glort makes a good point.

We must always try to remember that when we share our photos to fellow photographers, they will never see the photos on the emotional level of the client. Why is that, you ask? It's because when we look at them, we have no memories that tie us to the photos. These photos reflect the memories of the client's most special day, and all but the most out-of-focus, extremely blown out, crappy photos will still be a source of great memories for the client.

Marina, don't beat yourself up over it - our clients don't have the same technical perspective as we do, and will overlook/not notice small technical "flaws" that we all make at some point. For all we know, the bride could associate all of her squinting in the photos to a memory such as, "My wedding was a glorious ceremony at the beach, full of warm sunshine and a fresh breeze off of the water. No wonder I was squinting!"

I agree with this, and I think it is very important to remember that a client's NUMBER ONE priority when looking at an image of them is, "does this make me look good?" I mean you can preserve highlights till kingdom come, but I guarantee you the first thing the client is going to look at is their chin / arm fat, etc. Their problem areas... I've made plenty of beautiful images with dramatic exposures, that still fail to flatter the subject because I knew nothing about posing. So, client satisfaction is the #1 gauge of your qualification, and indeed that is usually not based on one's skill with exposure.

HOWEVER, that's not an excuse to say "It's great, for your first try!" I say, raise the bar! In this digital age, we have no excuse for going into a once-in-a-lifetime situation without the skill to properly expose images of someone's wedding vows. Unless you book the wedding just a day or two in advance, there ought to be plenty of time for sufficient practice in any lighting condition.

That's part of the reason why, probably to Glort's dismay, I believe that many new weekend warriros ARE clogging up the market with un-sustainably low prices. Because the barriers for for exposure and focus are lower than ever before. Sure, long-term success is based on client satisfaction as we already discussed, but that doesn't stop people from trying...

So, while I do agree that the images turned out fine and I'm sure the client is thrilled with them, I still feel a little uneasy when I read the part of your website that talks about how you guarantee the client's "peace of mind"... This was a close call to put it nicely, and or to put it as scarily as possible, you made a promise to the client that you almost didn't keep.

But at this point I'm not ragging on you or anything, I know you have already determined yourself to get out there and "own" this type of harsh lighting. So, keep up the hard work!

=Matt=

ShepsMom · July 20, 2011

All points taken Matt, while i agree that customer see with different eyes, i do have a higher standards for my photography, yes, it's a constant learning curve no matter what the situation is. I do want to give my clients a "peace of mind', it is not only about quality of photos it is also about customer support and treating clients with respect, so while you're feeling uneasy about the statement on my site, i believe in overall experience that client gets, not just one part of the job (photos) it's all of it together, and that's what I'm striving to do.

Thanks again for your thoughts.

Foques · July 20, 2011

thank you Matt.
will practice...

Glort · July 20, 2011

ShepsMom wrote: »

, so while you're feeling uneasy about the statement on my site, i believe in overall experience that client gets, not just one part of the job (photos) it's all of it together, and that's what I'm striving to do.

You are definitely on the right track.

I could not begin to cont the number of clients that have come to me over the years that spent the first 10 minutes of our interview raving about the pics the photographer at their sisters/ cousins/ friends wedding did.
When I have asked basicaly, " If they were so great, why are you here? " they spend the next 2o minutes telling me what an annoying, stuck up, demanding, rude , egotistical..... Pain in the arse he was and that they don't want anyone like him again for their wedding.

You can guarantee in most circumstances that if the people don't enjoy the experience, they will never recommend you and even if the pics are great, they will still be unhappy from a business POV.

Over my years of doing weddings i have stuffed every part of it at different times. Never blown a whole wedding but had problems where the ceremony didn't come out or the cake cutting or the whatever.
Despite ME thinking the world chad come to an end, the clients were pretty much unfazed because they got good pics at other parts of the wedding and they enjoyed the having the pics taken. Despite me offering to pay for suit hire , hairdressing etc and re shoot the pics, no one ever took me up on this let alone made much fuss of it.
Clearly something you want to avoid at all cost but the bottom line is if they didn't enjoy working with you, they would take you to the cleaners and back.

It is the same with my glam work. What a lot of shooters don't get is that the pics are a rather secondary importance. It's how the people feel when they hare having them done and the experience of being a model for a day that counts about 100 times more than technically perfect pics. While I say that the pics should be as good as you can make them at all times, Given a choice of technically perfect pics or pics that reflect the good time the people had doing them that may have technical flaws, i can guarantee which one will have the clients happier at the end of the day, get you recommendations and give you a more successful business.

By all means do the best possible quality but don't forget to make the experience of the clients great as well.

whysoserious · July 25, 2011

i think they look pretty good, i wouldn't be ashamed of them at all.... they only thing that i could see was cleaning up some glare on the faces like a few others said: great stuff

sphynge · August 2, 2011

Nice outline

ShepsMom wrote: »

sample.jpg

Here is one sample (sooc) of the bride when she was back to the sun, yes, i see that light source might have been too far, my camera setting possibly was wrong at ISO100, F7.1, 1/200

Well on the plus side you've got some nice side light outlining her beautiful shape. So, you're great on that. I think most of that here you can recover in Lightroom. I'd be more conscious of composition (line of horizon across the bride's head) than the lighting, because you've got that down pretty good

Disappointed

Comments