wedding help

andy owen

andy owen

Messages
336
Name
Andy
Edit My Images
Yes
Hey guys,
Ive got my 1st wedding booked in August. Ive met the couple (really nice) and agreed everything for the day. Ive done my friends wedding before now and it went really well. I feel really confident about it.
Is there anybody on here who is doing a wedding in the Manchester/Northwest area who may require an assistant for the day? if not an assisitant, just an 'on-looker'? it would be an ideal opportunity for me to gather some great tips and also boost my confidence for the day. This one will be my 'biggie' in terms of an exclusive spot on my website as I hope to advertise my services from there on

Cheers
Andy
 
Tips:
Bring a second body. Please don't rely on one!
Use 24-70mm equivalent on your main body and keep 70-200 on your second body. The 70-200 will allow you to get candid shots which look natural. Using a short focal length will get you noticed and people will either clam up or pose.
Bring a flash and a backup flash.
Bring plenty of charged batteries for those flashes.
Extra batteries for your cameras. Plenty of memory cards.
Shoot in RAW or use a grey card, or both.

Don't over-do the vignetting or dutch tilt. Avoid selective colouring like it's going out of fashion (which it has :lol: )
Get used to telling people what to do, project your voice and strike up a rapport with the guests. Don't say things like "Could the large lady in the green hat lift her head please". :nono: ;)
Visit the venue and find good settings for couple portraits and groups outdoors, and indoors incase the the weather is bad.
Practice using flash as fill without it looking obvious.

Don't forget to be creative. :thumbs:
 
User Name said:
Tips:
Bring a second body. Please don't rely on one!
Use 24-70mm equivalent on your main body and keep 70-200 on your second body. The 70-200 will allow you to get candid shots which look natural. Using a short focal length will get you noticed and people will either clam up or pose.
Bring a flash and a backup flash.
Bring plenty of charged batteries for those flashes.
Extra batteries for your cameras. Plenty of memory cards.
Shoot in RAW or use a grey card, or both.

Don't over-do the vignetting or dutch tilt. Avoid selective colouring like it's going out of fashion (which it has :lol: )
Get used to telling people what to do, project your voice and strike up a rapport with the guests. Don't say things like "Could the large lady in the green hat lift her head please". :nono: ;)
Visit the venue and find good settings for couple portraits and groups outdoors, and indoors incase the the weather is bad.
Practice using flash as fill without it looking obvious.

Don't forget to be creative. :thumbs:
Click to expand...

or shoot close and wide - having a 70-200 pointed at people makes them clam up and pose far more than getting close, interacting and building a raport with them ever will and thats the way to get the very best out of people
 
The 70-200 is great for receptions - stand at the back of the room and people won't even know you're there! That's what it's all about sometimes... blending into the background and being unnoticed.
You can't take a candid shot of someone if they are aware of a camera pointing at them!
 
User Name said:
The 70-200 is great for receptions - stand at the back of the room and people won't even know you're there! That's what it's all about sometimes... blending into the background and being unnoticed.
You can't take a candid shot of someone if they are aware of a camera pointing at them!
Click to expand...

and thats when a 70-200 really lets you down, watch someones reaction to having that pointed at them. Get in close, talk to people and act like your supposed to be there - they soon forget you have a camera
 
The purpose of using the 70-200 at receptions is to take NATURAL shots of people without them seeing you!
Not smiling looking at the camera, but smiling talking to each other.
It's impossible to strike up a rapport in the 5-10 seconds you have to take a photo with every one of 100+ guests no matter how much of a people-person you are. Some people just don't like a camera in their face.

Andy, if you have a set of small step ladders that can be useful for dancing people at the reception (and large formal groups).
 
User Name said:
The purpose of using the 70-200 at receptions is to take NATURAL shots of people without them seeing you!
Not smiling looking at the camera, but smiling talking to each other.
It's impossible to strike up a rapport in the 5-10 seconds you have to take a photo with every one of 100+ guests no matter how much of a people-person you are. Some people just don't like a camera in their face.

Andy, if you have a set of small step ladders that can be useful for dancing people at the reception (and large formal groups).
Click to expand...

without being rude - thats one of the biggest heaps of rubbish I've ever heard - for examples look at Duncan's and Guy's work. You see neither of them standing at the back of a room with a 70-200. It makes people very uncomfortable and you can get as natural a result with a 24-70 as you can a 70-200. Its a case of each to there own I suppose but all the truely insperational wedding work comes at 50mm or below.You get far more in peoples faces pointing a massive lens at a distance - they feel as though they're being papped. Never had an issue with people smiling and looking at the camera either Try it - trust me it works wonders

and step ladders in a reception - hmmm blends in?
 
Thanks for the tips guys.
I feel comfortable with what Im doing in August. Ive met the couple at the venue, I have an assistant for the day, and ive drawn up a list and agreed it with the couple for the shots they want, between the agreed shots I'll take my candids with my 70-200 f2.8

I was actually wondering if there was anyone on here I could accompany to one of their shoots, just to stand in the shadows and watch how they work. I know a lot of people who ask similar questions on here get slated by other togs (I have no idea why!! I'd jump at the chance of offering someone the opportunity to watch me work. Infact Id feel flattered by it), but I thought Id ask anyway.
 
andy owen said:
Thanks for the tips guys.
I feel comfortable with what Im doing in August. Ive met the couple at the venue, I have an assistant for the day, and ive drawn up a list and agreed it with the couple for the shots they want, between the agreed shots I'll take my candids with my 70-200 f2.8

I was actually wondering if there was anyone on here I could accompany to one of their shoots, just to stand in the shadows and watch how they work. I know a lot of people who ask similar questions on here get slated by other togs (I have no idea why!! I'd jump at the chance of offering someone the opportunity to watch me work. Infact Id feel flattered by it), but I thought Id ask anyway.
Click to expand...

edit sorry reread your first post
 
Get yourself on a course with someone who knows about wedding photography, posing and the business end. Dovecote training sounds good run by Zoe Richards.
 
boyfalldown said:
without being rude - thats one of the biggest heaps of rubbish I've ever heard
Click to expand...
Yes, that is damn rude.
You really can't expect to be noticed by 100+ people in a large reception venue all the time. Do you really expect everyone to be looking at and aware of a guy in the corner of the room with a 200mm? :cuckoo: If that is happening then you are seriously doing something very wrong. Maybe the clown outfit and fluorescent jacket should stay at home.

I would agree that 50mm has its place though, but there are only so many smiling looking AT the camera shots that the B&G want to look at. Candid is more natural.

boyfalldown said:
and step ladders in a reception - hmmm blends in?
Click to expand...

Try reading some of Scott Kelby's books - it's one of the things he advocates. A change of perspective is welcome in an album and you'll find dancers don't care much about having their photo taken. You'd use the step ladders with a wide angle.
 
User Name said:
Yes, that is damn rude.
You really can't expect to be noticed by 100+ people in a large reception venue all the time. Do you really expect everyone to be looking at and aware of a guy in the corner of the room with a 200mm? :cuckoo: If that is happening then you are seriously doing something very wrong. Maybe the clown outfit and fluorescent jacket should stay at home.

I would agree that 50mm has its place though, but there are only so many smiling looking AT the camera shots that the B&G want to look at. Candid is more natural.



Try reading some of Scott Kelby's books - it's one of the things he advocates. A change of perspective is welcome in an album and you'll find dancers don't care much about having their photo taken. You'd use the step ladders with a wide angle.
Click to expand...

any more rude then the clown comments? I don't think I presernt many looking at the camera & smiling shots - but quite a lot of very natural and contextual photos, something difficult to do stood at the back of the room. I'm not arguing about a change of perspective..........thats the issue - you really struggle to see how you could get close & have people act naturally don't you?

eta not sure how you'll change perspective or avoiding missing alot from your corner either? really - try getting in there instead - you will get so much better oppertunities then sitting on a sideline & being papped from the corner does make people uncomfortable
 
You are both talking rubbish!

A 600mm is where it's at boys ;)

To be serious for a moment there is room for both and personally I use both so I can see that both of you are actually right. When shooting candids I move round the edges (room permitting) and pick off shots with the 70-200mm but I also have a shorter lens on the other body (50mm or 24-70) and I will move through the guests taking the shorter range ones too.

It doesn't have to be one or the other and neither are right nor wrong but a matter of taste and style. So play nice! :)
 
Wow, wedding threads really do go downhill fast on here don't they? ;)

Andy, you're a bit far away from me unfortunately but if something comes up a bit nearer, I'll see if I've got a spot free. :)

There's a lot of good advice above (if you pick between the bitching). My personal preference is for one mid-length (24-105mm in my case) and a 70-200mm f2.8 on a second body. How you use 'em both is up to you. :)

Good luck with the wedding,
Si
 
If your main body is a full frame and your 2nd is a crop sensor would you still stick with the 24-70 on the main and then 70-200 on the 2nd body??

Edit: sorry for jumping on the thread!
 
Jchaplin said:
If your main body is a full frame and your 2nd is a crop sensor would you still stick with the 24-70 on the main and then 70-200 on the 2nd body??

Edit: sorry for jumping on the thread!
Click to expand...

Yes, definitely. Saying that there is no place for a 70-200 at a reception is just plain wrong and very short sighted. Illogical in the extreme. :cuckoo:
 
I've got a friends wedding coming up soon, he's asked me to take a few pics around the ceremony but they haven't gone for an official tog as they're not that fussed about pics.

So sorry to jump on the bandwagon here, but should I be shooting in manual mode, or is Aperture Priority a winner? What about metering, I think I read on here something about metering for the brides white dress and overexposing by a stop and a half, does that sound right? Are polarisers a goer or a strict no goer? I guess i'm a tad concerned if it's a nice bright day, I'm never comfortable overexposing in those conditions, but if that's the way to go, it's the way to go.....
 
Dman said:
So sorry to jump on the bandwagon here, but should I be shooting in manual mode, or is Aperture Priority a winner?
Click to expand...

Aperture priority is fine if that's what you are comfortable with. If you need fill flash with low DOF outdoors then you'll need to switch to high speed sync. Manual mode will ultimately give you more control over the ambient/flash light balance.

Dman said:
What about metering, I think I read on here something about metering for the brides white dress and overexposing by a stop and a half, does that sound right?
Click to expand...
Yes, that is one technique to keep detail in the dress. Use exposure lock, spot meter for the dress and compensate 1.5-2 stops (otherwise the dress will appear grey).
Dman said:
Are polarisers a goer or a strict no goer? I guess i'm a tad concerned if it's a nice bright day, I'm never comfortable overexposing in those conditions, but if that's the way to go, it's the way to go.....
Click to expand...
Not really necessary... if it's a sunny day you'll find somewhere in the shade and preferably with their back to the sun (+fill flash). A polariser won't be the most effective at that angle anyway. Polarisers also have the effect of increasing contrast, which can rob shadows of their detail.
 
Dman said:
I've got a friends wedding coming up soon, he's asked me to take a few pics around the ceremony but they haven't gone for an official tog as they're not that fussed about pics.

So sorry to jump on the bandwagon here, but should I be shooting in manual mode, or is Aperture Priority a winner? What about metering, I think I read on here something about metering for the brides white dress and overexposing by a stop and a half, does that sound right? Are polarisers a goer or a strict no goer? I guess i'm a tad concerned if it's a nice bright day, I'm never comfortable overexposing in those conditions, but if that's the way to go, it's the way to go.....
Click to expand...


I think going a stop and a half over is to much, expose for the dress though and to the right. If you're comfortable with manual then use it - it is the winner at the end of the day, if not no harm at all in using aperture priority and some exposre compensation. Remember to chimp often and check your histogram though. Espercially if you're using AP mode you really do need to understand your cameras metering though so you can use exposure compensation properly - a polariser is fine outside on a bright day.

Yes, definitely. Saying that there is no place for a 70-200 at a reception is just plain wrong and very short sighted. Illogical in the extreme.
Click to expand...

suggesting hiding in the corner with a 70-200 is the only way to shoot a reception is equally :cuckoo: working in a different way isn't short sighted, but another way of doing things. Getting close produces great results for me, it may not for you but don't dismiss it as a way of working.
 
SpiritFlier - Thanks ever so much. Im willing to travel too if you're doing one and Im available. That was all I was after with this thread, not a catfight. put your handbags away you lot!!!!
 
boyfalldown said:
suggesting hiding in the corner with a 70-200 is the only way to shoot a reception is equally :cuckoo:
Click to expand...

I never said it was the only way as I have already mentioned using a wide angle and a 24-70 on the main camera body. Shortsighted indeed. :lol: maybe you could read and educate yourself before jumping in with the heap of rubbish comments.
 
Mark and Hugh:

To be serious for a moment there is room for both and personally I use both so I can see that both of you are actually right. When shooting candids I move round the edges (room permitting) and pick off shots with the 70-200mm but I also have a shorter lens on the other body (50mm or 24-70) and I will move through the guests taking the shorter range ones too.

It doesn't have to be one or the other and neither are right nor wrong but a matter of taste and style. So play nice!
__________________

Ali B
Click to expand...

Agree to disagree?
 
User Name said:
I never said it was the only way as I have already mentioned using a wide angle and a 24-70 on the main camera body. Shortsighted indeed. :lol: maybe you could read and educate yourself before jumping in with the heap of rubbish comments.
Click to expand...

I love the out of context quote its great :thumbs: what did you say about reading and educating again?. In close and wide works for me and maybe doesn't for you. Yours is not, as you seem to suggest all along, the only way of shooting or getting people to act naturally, and you did say (amongst other things)

The purpose of using the 70-200 at receptions is to take NATURAL shots of people without them seeing you!
Click to expand...

and that shooting close will result in

but there are only so many smiling looking AT the camera shots that the B&G want to look at. Candid is more natural.
Click to expand...

working close means I get far more natural shots then sitting on the sidelines. Maybe that doesn't work for you, it doesn't stop it working for me though and it not working for you is not a reason to dismiss it out of hand;)

By the way - the rubbish comments and clown comments - getting a bit boring now so as Marc and NP have put it, lets agree there's more then one way to achieve this, and what works for you wouldn't work for me and move on.
 
Wow, another wedding thread going OTT, how unusual..........:lol:

Wedding photography must be the ****iest topic on here.
 
fabs said:
Actually, I find that the 70-200 draws attention even when away from people. Those big lenses do tend to catch their eye.
Click to expand...

The Nikon 24-70 with hood is nearly as big as my 80-200 :thinking:
 
boyfalldown said:
By the way - the rubbish comments and clown comments - getting a bit boring now so as Marc and NP have put it, lets agree there's more then one way to achieve this, and what works for you wouldn't work for me and move on.
Click to expand...

Super, about time :thumbs:
Use whatever you want, from fisheye to 200mm, but don't say it's a heap of rubbish when a significant number of professional photographers advocate using it.
Every lens has its place. Even 100mm macro is useful for portraits and the ring shots. I use 24-70 mostly, wide for dancing, and 70-200 when it's just impractical to be everywhere at once. When the bride is saying hello to family at one end of the room and the groom at the other, you either need a second shooter or long legs.
 
fracster said:
Wow, another wedding thread going OTT, how unusual..........:lol:

Wedding photography must be the ****iest topic on here.
Click to expand...

No! it's a very passionate thing. Emotions flow....That's what's so great about it! ;)
 
The 70-200 is great for weddings for some pics, some candids and especially for me, some B&G portraiture! We all have our own ways doing things. It's what works best for you. (IMHO)
 
NigelPaul said:
No! it's a very passionate thing. Emotions flow....That's what's so great about it! ;)
Click to expand...

No,it is not passionate,emotional,granted.

It is a subject where people who do it for a living think they,and they alone,who spout about it on here, have the god given right to be the only ones able to do so. Quite frankly, it is pathetic.If your good enough and give the customer what they want, then you will make a living.If you overcharge,take the pee and behave like Allah,then you won`t.Easy really.
 
fracster said:
No,it is not passionate,emotional,granted.
Click to expand...

Oooh! I have a passion for it! If I wasn't so busy with another business, there isn't anything that I'd rather do. At my age, and with my prime directive of maintaining a roof over my childrens heads, plus not being the greatest photographer :'( it would be a bit risky for me to do this full time. But when I do the odd wedding, wheather as a primary or 2nd shooter...I have a lot of passion :D.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top