Brutal Wedding

Sam

First time I shot second for this primary. Left my house at 8:00 AM got home at 12:00 PM. I be very tired.

Two photographers, two video guys, cell phones and iPads. Hard to shot around all these competing elements. Wasn't able to get some shots I wanted. DJ who didn't understand keep the lighting plain for the first dance and parents dance. No damn 50,000 watt spotlights flashing all over.

I spoke to the primary about the formals and lighting. He said don't worry about it he would use one speed light. When it came time for the formals he asked me to shoot them. I would not have expected the primary to have a second he never worked with shoot the formals, and if I knew I would have really argued for additional lighting. On top of that the family consisted of about 40 people 4 and 5 deep.

Overall a great bunch of people and a really nice bride and groom.

At any rate here are four images.

mercphoto

Really love the white vignette on the shoe shot, that was a great touch, and the black and white of the table is killer.

NagoC50

Sam,

Nice shots. A Filipino wedding, by chance? #4 looks like they have a veil and cord placed.

Sam

NagoC50 wrote: »

Sam,

Nice shots. A Filipino wedding, by chance? #4 looks like they have a veil and cord placed.

Yep Filipino wedding. This made for the largest family formal I have shot.

Again wonderful wedding and nice folks.

Sam

Matthew Saville

You can't win 'em all, eh? Every now and then I think it's good to realize why we charge so much for wedding photos. If all we ever had were easy-breezy wedding days, we might wind up lowering our prices by accident! :-P

I love the images aside from the reverse vignette on the first one. I don't mind brightening to increase the "high-key" feel of a photo, but that IMO is just a stop or so too far. Maybe pull it back and see how it looks, from what I can tell there shouldn't be too much clutter exposed...

Great job on the formal, BTW, and I don't even have to caveat "considering it caught you off guard"... Great job on it, period!

I love Filipino weddings, they're elegant and crazy all at once. ;-)

Sam

Matthew Saville wrote: »

You can't win 'em all, eh? Every now and then I think it's good to realize why we charge so much for wedding photos. If all we ever had were easy-breezy wedding days, we might wind up lowering our prices by accident! :-P

I love the images aside from the reverse vignette on the first one. I don't mind brightening to increase the "high-key" feel of a photo, but that IMO is just a stop or so too far. Maybe pull it back and see how it looks, from what I can tell there shouldn't be too much clutter exposed...

Great job on the formal, BTW, and I don't even have to caveat "considering it caught you off guard"... Great job on it, period!

I love Filipino weddings, they're elegant and crazy all at once. ;-)

Thanks Matt!!

I took an other look at the shoe shot and reworked it a bit. Would like this to be really nice for the bride who seemed to have some special attachment to the shoes.

Is this any better?

divamum

MUCH better!! I've been trying to think of how to voice an opinion about the first vignette, but this fixes what I didn't like about it

Sam

divamum wrote: »

MUCH better!! I've been trying to think of how to voice an opinion about the first vignette, but this fixes what I didn't like about it

That's why I post this stuff!!

When processing it's really easy to have your eyes adjust to the screen. Having others look and also waiting a week or so and revisiting your images will help as well.

Sam

Darter02

Sam wrote: »

When it came time for the formals he asked me to shoot them. I would not have expected the primary to have a second he never worked with shoot the formals, and if I knew I would have really argued for additional lighting.

Holy smokes! That's nuts. I can't believe someone would do that. I can't even fathom how the "primary" photographer even begins to thing they're a pro. Sounds like a real "$#^hat" to me...

Matthew Saville

Sam wrote: »

Thanks Matt!!

I took an other look at the shoe shot and reworked it a bit. Would like this to be really nice for the bride who seemed to have some special attachment to the shoes.

Is this any better?

I guess the main thing that was / is bothering me is the fact that the tip of the shoe at the bottom is still whited out. Maybe instead of doing a universal vignette, I would have just burned and dodged so I wouldn't have to affect the red of the shoe at all. I guess I just like my "high-key" and "low-key" vignetting to look, well, not like true "vignetting"... When the subject itself or a noticeable part of the image is darkened or brightened too much, it just makes me think of those oval frames of yesteryear... ;-)

=Matt=

Sam

Matthew Saville wrote: »

I guess the main thing that was / is bothering me is the fact that the tip of the shoe at the bottom is still whited out. Maybe instead of doing a universal vignette, I would have just burned and dodged so I wouldn't have to affect the red of the shoe at all. I guess I just like my "high-key" and "low-key" vignetting to look, well, not like true "vignetting"... When the subject itself or a noticeable part of the image is darkened or brightened too much, it just makes me think of those oval frames of yesteryear... ;-)

=Matt=

Thanks Matt,

I see where your going with this and I will take 3rd look at this.

Sam

Dooginfif20

I like the shots, but sorry the white vingette is not working for me in any version. I just dont see what value the white is adding to the shot when the shot itself is kind of plain to begin with.

Qarik

the white vignette = No (never ever ever). need to see more shots sam!

Sam

OK Quark,

Here are a few more:

Qarik

sam, are you holding back on us? the 2nd set I enjoyed much more than the 1st set

divamum

qarik wrote: »

sam, are you holding back on us? The 2nd set i enjoyed much more than the 1st set

+1!!!!

Glort

Dooginfif20 wrote: »

I like the shots, but sorry the white vingette is not working for me in any version. I just dont see what value the white is adding to the shot when the shot itself is kind of plain to begin with.

Reminds me of what I did in the 80's and it seemed pretty kitch back then!
I think that sort of thing was trendy in the 70's but old hat before the decade was over.
I wouldn't have a clue how many years it is since I have used an effect like that because here at least people would relate it to what was in their parents album and that's not what they want to see.


I don't think the bride would be overly impressed with the dancing shot with her mouth open. I take it there is plenty of others from that sequence with her mouth closed and hopefully a better expression that would be more worthy of highlighting.

Sam

Thanks Divamum and Quark!

Glort,

There seems to be a split on the vignette, but I do understand those that don't like it and appreciate their, and your honesty.

I really don't have a great dance shot. I have some other mediocre ones. I failed :cry

Remember the title is 'Brutal Wedding". I didn't go into all the details but I was and am frustrated.

While I had spoke to the DJ about the lighting for the first dances he ether didn't understand or ignored the conversation.

So here I am trying to run around the edge of the dance floor dodging two video guys, the primary photographer, trying to time the dance position, bride, groom spins relative to me, and avoid the spot lights that completely blow out any images.

While to a much lesser degree some aspects of this are normal, but I have been able to get some nice first dance images. Not this time.

Also I am the second photographer not the primary or the only photographer.

I have only processes a few of the images and will be handing over the RAW files for him to do with as he pleases.

Sam

Matthew Saville

Sam wrote: »

Thanks Divamum and Quark!

Glort,

There seems to be a split on the vignette, but I do understand those that don't like it and appreciate their, and your honesty.

I really don't have a great dance shot. I have some other mediocre ones. I failed :cry

Remember the title is 'Brutal Wedding". I didn't go into all the details but I was and am frustrated.

While I had spoke to the DJ about the lighting for the first dances he ether didn't understand or ignored the conversation.

So here I am trying to run around the edge of the dance floor dodging two video guys, the primary photographer, trying to time the dance position, bride, groom spins relative to me, and avoid the spot lights that completely blow out any images.

While to a much lesser degree some aspects of this are normal, but I have been able to get some nice first dance images. Not this time.

Also I am the second photographer not the primary or the only photographer.

I have only processes a few of the images and will be handing over the RAW files for him to do with as he pleases.

Sam

Ugh yeah covering the first dance can be a nightmare and uber frustrating. I had a rough day today too and I felt like smashing my camera on the dance floor. Nothing was going well. I hope I pulled off some decent shots...

=Matt=

Sam

Matthew Saville wrote: »

Ugh yeah covering the first dance can be a nightmare and uber frustrating. I had a rough day today too and I felt like smashing my camera on the dance floor. Nothing was going well. I hope I pulled off some decent shots...

=Matt=

Some how I know that while you may not have got the shots you envisioned, the couple will be happy with what you did get.

Sam

Sam

Just a quick update.

27 days into the effort to wrap this up without any conclusion.

After many attempts I was able to speak with the primary yesterday and was told he will only meet with me on his schedule, maybe next week.

I have never dealt with anyone like this. I have key images of his wedding. He really does need these for his clients.

Even after a 16 hour day I couldn't go to bed before I downloaded the images to my computer, and this is as a second shooter. If I were the primary I would want the second's images in my control and backed up it a timely manner.

Such is life in the big city.

Sam

Darter02

That's just so crazy!

lifeinfocus

I don't expect to shoot weddings, but I do sometimes shoot a large group for church photos.

So, if you would explain a little how you did the formals? Just some basics, nothing elaborate.

Excellent work.

Phil

Matthew Saville

lifeinfocus wrote: »

I don't expect to shoot weddings, but I do sometimes shoot a large group for church photos.

So, if you would explain a little how you did the formals? Just some basics, nothing elaborate.

Excellent work.

Phil

Phil, usually the handful ways to do it go like this:

1.) One on-camera flash, if there is enough ambient light in there and all you need is a little sparkle in people's eyes.

2.) One or two bare off-camera flashes on light stands positioned just to your left and right, "criss-crossed" to evenly light all the subjects. (It helps if you use the types of hotshoe flashes such as the Nikon SB80 that have a flash zoom built in)

3.) One or two umbrellas, with hotshoe flashes again but you could also start involving more powerful strobes, either shoot-through or bounce. (or the best is the "softbox-style" umbrella, if you know what that is) If you have two, you can put them to the left and right again, or if you want (and if you have a powerful enough flash / strobe) you can put a single diffused light up high on a light stand, relatively centered.

4.) If you love to have a lot of light but you also want to keep it simple, you could also just use a single high-powered strobe head, pointed straight up a few pews behind you, to illuminate the whole church. But this really depends on the ceiling / size of the church, haha...

=Matt=

lifeinfocus

Matthew Saville wrote: »

Phil, usually the handful ways to do it go like this:

2.) One or two bare off-camera flashes on light stands positioned just to your left and right, "criss-crossed" to evenly light all the subjects. (It helps if you use the types of hotshoe flashes such as the Nikon SB80 that have a flash zoom built in)

3.) One or two umbrellas, with hotshoe flashes again but you could also start involving more powerful strobes, either shoot-through or bounce. (or the best is the "softbox-style" umbrella, if you know what that is) If you have two, you can put them to the left and right again, or if you want (and if you have a powerful enough flash / strobe) you can put a single diffused light up high on a light stand, relatively centered.

=Matt=

I could do 2 or 3 above. I guess the next thing is to figure out settings on flashes and camera. I will research that next.

Thanks much,
Phil

Sam

lifeinfocus wrote: »

I could do 2 or 3 above. I guess the next thing is to figure out settings on flashes and camera. I will research that next.

Thanks much,
Phil

The most accurate way is a flash meter, but if you don't have that and lack sufficient experience to guess at a starting point, your pretty much limited to trial and error.

Hopefully Mat can chime in on a starting point.

Sam

PS: Still working on getting paid, and yes I still have the images.

lifeinfocus

Sam wrote: »

The most accurate way is a flash meter, but if you don't have that and lack sufficient experience to guess at a starting point, your pretty much limited to trial and error.

Hopefully Mat can chime in on a starting point.

Sam

PS: Still working on getting paid, and yes I still have the images.

Thanks, I started that research. Looks like Sekonic L-358 is a starting point.

Phil

Sam

lifeinfocus wrote: »

I could do 2 or 3 above. I guess the next thing is to figure out settings on flashes and camera. I will research that next.

Thanks much,
Phil

lifeinfocus wrote: »

Thanks, I started that research. Looks like Sekonic L-358 is a starting point.

Phil

Yes, nice meter. This is the one I have.

Sam

Ed911

lifeinfocus wrote: »

Thanks, I started that research. Looks like Sekonic L-358 is a starting point. Phil

That's a pretty good meter...and one that I've seen used by a lot of pros and the one that I have and use.

I can't see setting up studio strobes without one...especially on location.

Just my two cents.

Sam

yaseralfardani wrote: »

Hey, I have found such great captures from this post. These photos are really looking elegant and impressive. I have found complete emotions from this pics.

Thanks for the kind words.

Well here it is Nov, 18 and still no money. :cry

I sent my last email to him this morning prior to filling in small claims court.

Of course the real losers are the poor couple.

Sam

jhefti

Sam wrote: »

Thanks for the kind words.

Well here it is Nov, 18 and still no money. :cry

I sent my last email to him this morning prior to filling in small claims court.

Of course the real losers are the poor couple.

Sam

Sam, not that I shoot weddings or anything like it, but I also live in the Bay Area and know some shooters who might get roped into being a second shooter for this person. Can you tell me his name? Private message is fine; I just want to be on the lookout and warn my fellow shooters here.