achammar Loc: Idaho

I am getting started with wedding photography (done about 8 now), and for the most part they have all turned out well. I am getting vibes now that it would be better not to use a flash..which is fine, I think I'm fairly good at setting my camera to still get good photo's without a flash, but I have only done 1 that way (one of the first ones), and although it wasn't too bad, it was the least best. So I started practicing on lifelike dolls (my wife makes those), and everything turns out good except 1 thing. Unless they are looking directly into the light, the eye sockets come out black, or nearly so, even up close (and I've seen photos like this before), and they can't be fixed with Photoshop (at least I couldn't do it). This is my conclusion...I might be able to take good photos of my clients with no flash if there is plenty of light directly in front of them, or maybe the few pics that are taken with them zoomed way out, but if I want good close ups, I will have to use the flash...period....Is that a good conclusion? Suggestions??
ps..1 pic is looking directly (almost) at light...other 2 are just in the same location looking a different direction...

Direct light (almost) -Don't mind the hair-I was in a hurry :-)


Turned away 1


Turned away 2

skidooman Loc: Minnesota

Who's telling you not to use flash(pro photographers)?? When, during the ceremony, I would agree. Formals, use flash. I would add that direct flash is not recommended. I use strobes with diffused umbrellas for the formals, and have a stoffen omni bounce on my flash for the procession. Procession, use flash. There are times, (and limitations set by different churches and ministers) when it should and shouldn't be used. I'd say if you've done 8 weddings, you should be getting good at it by now, and probably experienced what I'm talking about. Do what it takes to provide a quality product to your clients, without violating any of the churches restrictions on what you can and can not do.

achammar Loc: Idaho

Thanks for your reply. That makes sense and I might be getting worried for nothing...I agree with what you say about when a flash should and shouldn't be used. I am learning that is my same general conclusion.
No one actually right out told me I shouldn't use a flash except the one wedding I mentioned the preacher did not want a flash used...and I read on this forum that a flash should not be used during a wedding if at all possible because it messes up videographers and can get annoying. The last one I did the minister never said I couldn't use a flash, but he didn't seem to like it very well. Just vibes like I said. I think I'll continue with the way I've been doing things, practice without flash at the times I maybe shouldn't use it (because I want to get better at that anyway), and come up with my way of doing the best possible with whatever limitations are given me if any. Thanks for your reply. I will remember that. Maybe I won't have to change my strategy much...:-)

chapjohn Loc: Tigard, Oregon

Flash during the wedding itself is distracting and hurts people's eyes, especially those of us officiating the wedding. Very few of us memorize a wedding, we are reading it and need to see. I do not allow flash during the ceremony.

achammar Loc: Idaho

Thanks chapjohn,
That's what I am trying to learn about... and how not to use the flash and still get good pics...like skidooman mentioned in his post, I think I've now learned there's a time for a flash, and a time not for one. I don't blame you for not allowing a flash during the ceremony and that's what I'm trying to get good at... It's just that clients will always want beautiful pictures and sometimes that can only be accomplished with a flash if the lighting is poor. But I think I have mastered the settings on my camera for being able to take good pics without the flash during the ceremony so I won't be as noticeable or annoying, but haven't actually done it yet, except for one of the first ones when I didn't know near as much as I know now, and do the processions, get the closeups and do the formals and such with a flash. Another reason I would at times like to not use a flash is because the entire room will have the same brightness too it, instead of being light up close and dark far away..plus if the flash can't be set just right...the brides white dress looks awful if it's too bright..
It's the dark eye socket thing that is my biggest concern with no flash, that's why I started this thread to begin with..but not actually having experience yet, and although I have seen it before in other pictures, maybe that won't be as big an issue as I think...

Thanks for your input.. :-)

etchersketch Loc: Florida

The 50mm 1.8 Helped me a lot in low lighting. A the photos came out well.

Dun1 Loc: Atlanta, GA

If you do decide to use flash, and in some instances flash is a no no during the ceremony, bounce the flash, or if you use the flash directly on the subject use a flash diffuser it will eleviate some of the harsh lines and shadows on the subjects faces, i.e The Stoffen Omni, The Color Right Flash diffuser, Gary Fong etc.
If your clients are telling you they want images with a flash, fine they are the eventual user, not some buy who is looking over your shoulder and second guessing your work, I would have done this I would have do that, well buddy thanks for the advice.
Link to Color Rite
http://colorright.com/
Link to Stoffen
http://www.stofen.com/index.asp
Link to Gary Fong site,
http://www.garyfongestore.com/
Both Peter Gregg at Color Right have some great vids on flash photography as well as Gary Fong on YouTube,

The best site or one of the best sites for flash photography info is the Strobist web site,
The link to Strobist
http://strobist.blogspot.com/

Hope some of this helps you decide on whether or not you need to use or will use a flash in the future. One other thing if you take group wedding shots you are going to have to use a flash for the most part, the on camera flash is only effective for 9' to 12' or so. Depending on the size of the group of course you would like Aunt Suzie in the second row left corner, and Uncle Bill in the right corner to be as illuminated as the middle part of the images, or you will hear that was a great shot, but, I cant see Uncle Bill and Aunt Suzie in those shots.

achammar Loc: Idaho

Thanks for the replies. I use a Nikon SB-600 Speedlight for my flash. It has a lot of options..(it's harder to figure out than my camera..heehhee...)
It will put out a very bright and distant flash, or a dim and closeup flash. Although it's the first and only I've had, so I can't compare it to anything, it seems to me to put out one heck of a flash if I need it too. It does have a built in diffuser that I'm just learning and starting to use, but I need to use it more. I've never bounced my flash though so I need to learn how and when to do that, and do that it sounds like..
Thanks for the replies and the links. I am going to have a look at those right now..:-)

achammar Loc: Idaho

I think I was wrong about having a built in diffuser. It's a wide angle adapter. I'm still learning terminology and definitions of some of this stuff and what it's for. It looked more like something that would be called a diffuser to me...and Canon has one that looks just like mine that someone did call it a diffuser...unless maybe a diffuser and a wide angle adapter is the same thing...??

Paw Paw Bill Loc: d

One of your concerns was the eyes. I have successfully countered some of those issues. Using PS, I mask the eyes and change the exsposure on the eyes only and not by a great amount. I then paint a small white dot (several pixels depending on the resolution) on the iris to imitate a flash reflection. Adds lots of 'life' to their appearance. Always, Always, Always, make the dot at the same location in all the eyes within a single frame.

When it is only the couple, I have made a second smaller white dot on the eye at the opposite side of the first. Gives the appearance of a primary and secondary light source. When viewing the 'doctored' and un-touched images, most comments are about how they look happier or better in this photo and not the other...and all the time not realizing that the difference is in the eyes...they could not tell me why one was better, but they would select the bright eyed one.

dpullum Loc: Tampa Florida

Ddun1 said "If you do decide to use flash, and in some instances flash is a no no during the ceremony, bounce the flash, or ... use a flash diffuser"

I have two weak slave flashes mounted at 7 feet on black pvc with thin white cloth towel to diffuse 10 feet away from the alter at the sides. They are set off with my radio flash trigger or by flash depending on the equipment I use.

I look at this way, It is the wedding of those who hired me and the memories will be lasting. I do not tell the minister what to do, he know his part and if he is offended, well, he can fill a complaint with big G. He is not the subject of most of the photos, except for one or two. The minister is a hired hand who has a license to perform the legal steps to the contract (wedding).

I take a lot of couples and children as they gather in the church, prior to the wedding and as they exit the church. The people are important,,, friends and relatives.

I wear dark clothing like a ninja, people are focused on the couple and have been desynthesized by my conversation and photo taking before the ceremony. I never cut across the field of view and only take from one side and from low angle and perhaps only about 8 of the ceremony, mainly just at the beginning, then ring and kiss.

achammar Loc: Idaho

dpullum,
I like your approach and idea on things. I will probably always use a flash unless I am absolutely restricted from it, and probably will start using a diffuser a LOT more too. I do the exact same thing you do..lots of pictures as people, couples and children are coming into the church, and lots while they are exiting, prelude, processional and such. I do normally take a lot more than 8 pictures during the ceremony though...my camera nearly never stops clicking, but I am beginning to see that that is way too much. I have so many duplicate pictures that there is no need. As I do more and more weddings I'm finding that I am deleting a lot duplicates (not all, but a lot) that there just isn't any reason for, and since I usually put together a nice DVD slide show afterwards, it takes a long time when you have over a thousand pics...I learned a great lesson on this last one I did. I will not be taking pictures continuously any more..!! Over a thousand pictures it was in 3-1/2 hours...had about 600 even after screening them out, and that took some time too, and about 15 hours to build the slideshow.
Back to the point though...I was glad to get your post. I believe a few hours of doing what it takes to get the best photos regardless of what that is, is worth the lifetime memories of my clients at any cost. I will still heed to absolute restrictions, but I won't ask if there are any, so I don't give any easy opportunity for someone to tell me I can't use a flash...I will still be as considerate as possible though, and train on not using it all the time, and bouncing my flash, using a diffuser and such...and definitely reduce the number of pictures I take!.. :-)

dpullum Loc: Tampa Florida

Achammar said:be as considerate as possible
Agreed, and glad you and I agree, at times I feel like a lone wolf on my approach to life in general.

When I said eight, I meant during the "words" My last one I was actually like a fixture sitting on the step to the platform laying toward the minister and shooting toward the couple. Before the words, I get the group waiting for the bride2b the groom, the minister etc. the bride approaching etc, lots of shots, during the word a few, then the ring exchange, the kiss, so perhaps eight refereed to scenes rather than fixed number.

I have two cheapOs to loan to the couple for friends to take photos, I accept all the photos I can get from friends/relatives and from the couple from their honeymoon. Always taking shots horizontal. (new rule based on the look in the slide show and extra work in editing). At the reception I take a lot, building, people, parking lot(cars get dated, so if shot in the 50s, the era would have been fixed by cars ) Lots of photos of people people people and the bride and groom. I learned to get a schedule from them in writing, will they be doing what when. How long do you want me to stay? etc. details...

I take the best shots and make contact sheets, duplicate, have them sort them and sequence by number (duplicate, one cut up so she can shift them around) ... The whole story is usually told in about 100 shots at 7 seconds each about 12 minutes ,, the young's span of attention. If the have lots of honeymoon shots then that may be a separate slide show at extra cost. By the way I use Ashampoo slide show 2 which I found to be the best because of the color fill and vignetting .. and general burning versatility even blue ray, if it becomes reasonable in price.

I edit all to 4x6 and some select at 8x10 so that they can get photos made for aunt Sally etc. I burn 4 disks with photo labels. Have set up for the surface etch disks but have not done it yet.

They or I supply the music for the show, or any other recording, narrative by bride (grooms are not that into it).

My clients are Young and low income usually (I am retired and so do not charge much) I tell them if they want "classic professional" like mom had than please hire some one else, I am photojournalist, candid, tell the story photographer, not a 3000 dollar type.

It is hard for us as photographers to see what they see in photos. We strive for a great photo, they just want a good one. I shot the bride coming down the isle and cleaned it up with great effort to get her only remove uncle joe the half wit right across the isle and the blemishes on the wall... she did not like the change,, so unc joe was in!!! ugh. Less edit or special effects the better for them, they want real, candid like stuff. via this conversation it is helpful.. will make up example of a shot edited not edited, sharpened etc and let her chose the approach beforehand. Circle choice and return, please.

I provide formats of show for email, cell phone, etc. MS Photostory 3 is a good program *plus free add-ons. All of these extras formats and all shots are on a disk so that they can do what they will with them later (usually file and forget)..

Regarding avoiding asking... If you ask the Sarge if you can go to the PX and he says no and you go then you in deep trouble. I you do not ask, go to the PX then he can only chew you out for not asking. I give the card to the couple and say if there is any one who has special instructions or requests of me they can email me. That puts the ball in their court. They should supply a guide to tell me who is mom, uncle, guide me to the reception hall that is ten miles away etc.

We live and learn and better to learn from others than from our own pain.

dpullum Loc: Tampa Florida

Flash Slide Show maker,,, today free,,, usually 30
www.giveawayoftheday.com

Every day they have some program that usually cost money and for a day it is free. Some of these are really good programs. Not sure about the flash slide show maker, but worth a check out. this is a small file for emailing i believe.

achammar Loc: Idaho

dpullum,
We are so much alike I can't believe it. All my clients have also been low income (except for this last one I just did, and they didn't have a whole lot, but it was a 50 year renewal of vows). But it was basically still a wedding. I don't charge much either. A lot of it is for fun, at least until I am very good, although I bet I could compete with a $3000.00 photographer, and I bet you could too (we might not win, but we could classify as a competitor.. :-) ). I don't make much, but a little. I hope to charge a little more when I get more under my belt. I do offer prints too though but almost at my cost. I only make a little bit on those too, and yes..I've found that most just seem to just want good pictures. I do the same disk labeling for the pic cd's and I do lightscribe the DVD sometimes, but I am going to get away from that. It takes up more time, cost more for the DVD, and I think I'm finding that the clients like the labels better anyway. They are prettier. Light scribing looks cool, but it's kinda dull and hard to see the picture on it.
I also offer phone videos, but at an extra charge though. I have AVS FOR YOU and it will convert just about anything to just about anything, and I just convert my original slide show to whatever it needs to be once I'm done with it. AVS does not have a high quality result though, but it works fine for phone videos or anything that needs to be a small file.
I started out just using Windows Movie Maker (WMM) and that actually does a pretty good job...lot's of effects and transitions...and the quality is pretty good, but it has it's glitches.
I bought Nero 11 just yesterday (after the trial version expired) mainly for the burning capabilities, but it has a killer slide show maker too that I've been playing with and I think it will do better than WMM. I also get music from my clients, or pick my own. They almost always tell me to pick it myself.
My slide shows have been a lot longer than yours though (between 30 - 60 minutes..8 second pics with 2.5 of that being taken up by the transition), and that's what takes up most of my time. That's going to change though, and get down closer to your slideshow length. I don't do any resizing of my photos though except for the ones I print myself when they want prints. (My printer prints in 1 picoliter dots, so they come out gorgous) I give them the CD with the pics just like they came out of my camera...about 4 - 5 thousand kb each...very large files.
Thanks for the link too (which I'll have to remember to check every day now)..I did go look at it, and it looks like it might be a good thing to have, but I'm the kind of person who can't stand to much stuff on my computer, and I'm getting there now after installing Nero. It is very large installation, but I think it will do all I need. It has all kinds of quality controls and settings on there. As little as possible on my computer is my motto..and my computers have always lasted me a long time and extremely rarely do I ever have problems.