I do see the point in hiring a pro, if the budget is there. We did, and got a great album out of it, but my bro did everything on a budget (not that ours was very expensive, no church). For a given candid shot anyone with a quick camera can get it, but the extra polishing of the official shots such as avoiding little distracting things in the background or coaching the pair through the fixed shots is useful.
Mol - I often use a flash loose in my hand - off camera is off camera, that half to one meter difference is a lot really. My D90 controls that flash TTL via the commander mode from the internal flash, so it's easy to do. You could also do it with a radiotrigger if you set up the flash power and exposure manually. Main prob is I wish for a 3rd arm to hold two flashes but still hold the camera!
FWIW an independent flash, but mounted on cam, with rear-curtain sync, is still that much nicer than most peoples' experience with compact cameras/internal flash that they will love the pics anyway. All manner of small reflectors/light modifiers are available that can still be used while the flash is in the hot shoe. Lumiquest is a major brand, and while I haven't tried them yet, gold reflectors are supposedly very nice for people shots.
Mols ... off camera shoe cable? lets you place the line of flash further away from the lens line. Either as fill to decrease contrast ratio, or as main light to increase. Can also be done remotely with some systems (nikon have this nailed) or through the use of a radio slave (we use the pocket wizard system with Quantums).
A lot of flashes also have a flash / light trigger built in, so can shield the on camera flash to create enough output to fire the off camera flash, without overpowering the subject.
Fairly similar result as bouncing flash without the resultant loss in GN and useable outdoors obviously.
FWIW an independent flash, but mounted on cam, with rear-curtain sync, is still that much nicer than most peoples' experience with compact cameras/internal flash that they will love the pics anyway.
Agreed.
MM - yeah. Also you can move the flash around really easily whilst snapping away. I expect it helps when going from portrait to landscape cos you don't have to stop and re-swivel the flash away from the floor 🙂
I don't think I have radio flash activation on my camera, it uses the built in flash to activate and there's a limit on the angle it will control at. Plus my flash is the non-remote version - d'oh. Are you talking about retrofit radio triggers there?
as long as the power can be controlled manually on your flash you could try something like the Cactus radio triggers. Pro-level Pocketwizards or Radiopoppers are better and can do TTL these days, but are $$$$$.
Indoors particularly, the IR signal from the internal flash bounces around enough that I don't always need proper line of sight.
The flash produces IR?
Hmm will have to investigate. When I shell out 200 notes for another flash gun.. 🙂
As far as I know the Nikon creative lighting (commander) system actually works with IR despite 'flashing'. You can also buy a Commander unit (SU-800 I think) that controls groups of off-cam flashes without being a flsh itself.
Depends on how co-ordinated you are 🙂 Fairly easy using a smaller prime ... more difficult as the lens bulk increases without putting the flash onto a monopod or similar. Also adjusting any camera settings becomes a bit of a balancing act depending on hand size.
Like anything does require patience, and practice. I do remember seeing an image of a pap a while back, basically had a monopod shoved done the back of his pants, with the light 4 foot above his head. Worked for him I suppose. In my early days of assisting (pre digital) a lot of time was spent simple holding an omni-bounce or an off camera flash near the subject. Worked well as the reportage era came in but haven't seen (or used) that method for a long while.
Cable is the cheapest / easiest method and should (depending on cable) retain TTL metering, more so if you can pre-fire the flash to meter (again Nikon do this so well !) Downside is you can end up completely entangled and looking like a complete moose !
Radio slaves are dependant on system, some allow control of the flash output but you will in general lose any metering. More suited to setup shots as opposed to candid run arounds. Other downside is you typically do need a sync socket on the flash side of the setup.
The nikon (and further back Minoltas) flash system is hands down superior (and I have been a canon user for ever). The latest Canon (esp 5*** and above) flash units are starting to get there when it comes to multi flash set ups, but to be honest if you are getting into that (and you are not Nikon) you may as well invest in a Quantum or similar system.
PS apologies for the post hijack !
putting the flash onto a monopod or similar
Along these lines?
[img] 
[/img]
The flash produces IR?Hmm will have to investigate. When I shell out 200 notes for another flash gun..
On Nikon cameras that have a built in flash it can be set to 'controller', couple of other tweaks in the menu and it will also not flash but it still fires other remote Nikon flashes that are, oddly enough' set up as 'Remote'.
Whole thing can be used in TTL ('automatic' flash, or you can take control and work it all in 'manual' mode)
Not sure if that applies to all Nikon camera bodies. and the flash thing only applies to SB-800 and 900 models.
Nikon flash system is really rather good.
'Downside' is that IR does not work well outside in bright light and does not 'go around corners', that's where radio units come in...
My (now) wife made me hire a pro for a grand and a half. A grand and a half?! For a few hours' work?! WTF! Thought we were being taken advantage of.
In retrospect, he would have been worth double that.
My (now) wife made me hire a pro for a grand and a half. A grand and a half?! For a few hours' work?! WTF!
It's not just a few hours work anyway - could be at least 3 days in total with pre-meeting, processing etc, and including some very expensive gear (and skills hopefully).
By the way you can do all that fancy flash commander stuff with my 7D, not sure about other Canon bodies.
Personally I don't care that much about pictures of the 'special day'. I already have the best souvenirs that I see every morning when I wake up 🙂
add SB-700 to the remote flash list for Nikon. rather usefully, it will also add as a commander on cam to reach angles the built in won't!
Still as happy with Olympus molgrips? 😉
(I'm a pretty happy Nikon user, but rue the fact that Canon has some lenses that I can't replicate at sensible cost - e.g. 400 5.6 L for birds/nature)
Still as happy with Olympus molgrips?
It cost me £300 new, so yes 🙂 And it does do remote flash, just not via radio.
I do appreciate that it's worth paying for skilled work. I also appreciate that being a wedding photographer would involve a lot of ground work, then a day's photography, and then a good deal of post-processing.
BUT THREE GRAND?! Shit the bed, it'd take me the best part of three months to pay for that.
I've thought for a long time now that anyone who has anything to do with wedding services just uses it as an excuse to take the piss. Caterers, photographers, dressmakers, venues etc etc all know that you're handing over tens of thousands of pounds already and can therefore invoice you for a dry bumming and you'll probably go "yeah, alright then."
I'm in the wrong job. I think I'm going to start contracting myself out as Wedding IT Support.
I've thought for a long time now that anyone who has anything to do with wedding services just uses it as an excuse to take the piss
Yep, same as baby gear manufacturers.
What you need there is singlespeed babies.
With the greatest of respect to the OP, the timescale (end of the month) and the admission that he doesn't really know where to start say it all. Don't start buying new kit, software or trying to learn new techniques with weeks to go.
I think the most important thing is to manage expectations. You're not a pro, so the pics won't be pro. So long as that's what the happy couple are expecting, you should be fine. Shoot lots, use the gear and settings you're comfortable with, and leave it at that. A shot list is very useful, but only if it's realistic in length and scope.
+1
Massive tendency for people involved in any way with photography to overstate the importance of gear, it seems 🙂
Hmmm, I don't think buying a cheap fast lens is going to hurt though, and it's hardly complicated to learn how to use.
With the greatest of respect to the OP, the timescale (end of the month) and the admission that he doesn't really know where to start say it all. Don't start buying new kit, software or trying to learn new techniques with weeks to go.I think the most important thing is to manage expectations. You're not a pro, so the pics won't be pro. So long as that's what the happy couple are expecting, you should be fine. Shoot lots, use the gear and settings you're comfortable with, and leave it at that. A shot list is very useful, but only if it's realistic in length and scope.
+1 - kind of what i'd said in my posts that went AWOL - only Seb puts it better!
+1
Yep, though that trait is far from limited to photogs - anything that involves 'the next best thing' attracts all that kind of 'geekery' - not that it happens on STW o'course 😉Massive tendency for people involved in any way with photography to overstate the importance of gear, it seems
I do appreciate that it's worth paying for skilled work. I also appreciate that being a wedding photographer would involve a lot of ground work, then a day's photography, and then a good deal of post-processing.BUT THREE GRAND?! Shit the bed, it'd take me the best part of three months to pay for that.
3k? Hmmm! I'm not sure anyone would want to repeat the experience because the discount photographer had bodged it. If the photographer is good/excellent and wedding pics are your thing it's got to be worth it.
I second what Seb said, it's a big ask. I personally wouldn't want the responsibility of being a wedding photographer.
Personal choice would be a long lens like M_F had done, very successfully btw, so you can get more natural behaviour.
I have heard, maybe here, of the happy couple supplying lots of disposible cameras and letting the guests take pics. Take a bit of pressure off you.
"Hmmm, I don't think buying a cheap fast lens is going to hurt though, and it's hardly complicated to learn how to use."
I disagree. The whole point of a fast lens is to be able to use it wide open. And shooting wide open, and doing it well, needs absolutely spot-on technique. How does that fit with 'don't know where to start'? 🙂
You lot have clearly gone to far and frightened the OP away completely! He was obviously easily swayed by the first 'don't do it yourself and enjoy the wedding' comments.
You lot have clearly gone to far and frightened the OP away completely! He was obviously easily swayed by the first 'don't do it yourself and enjoy the wedding' comments.
Or still in the camera shop destroying the credit card.
Massive tendency for people involved in any way with photography to overstate the importance of gear, it seems
Massive tendency for amateur weekend dabblers playing at photography to overstate the importance of gear, it seems
FTFY
Men seem to have a natural ability to massively overstate the importance of their gear in general I find.
I disagree. The whole point of a fast lens is to be able to use it wide open. And shooting wide open, and doing it well, needs absolutely spot-on technique. How does that fit with 'don't know where to start'?
I dunno, I think a few weeks taking test pics and reading up a bit would mean you could get some really nice shots with a fast lens - depends how much time you are willing to devote to it.
Not that it's the best approach for [i]every[/i] shot by any means, but shallow DOF gives something you can't do with the compact cameras/phones everyone else will have.
Massive tendency for amateur weekend dabblers playing at photography to overstate the importance of gear, it seemsFTFY
You've really perfected the tone of smug condescencion, bravo! (I bet you've got some pretty fancy gear haven't you)
Men seem to have a natural ability to massively overstate the importance of their gear in general I find.
Racist! 🙂
😛
helpful as always eh Captain, you certainly live up to your user name - do you have a dodgy tash too?
No, but he does have quite bulky jowls, and disproportionately small ears...
He's clearly a handsome man 🙂
If they weren't going to bother with a photographer then they can't be that bothered about the photos. No need, then, to be really stressed about buying more gear and learning how to use it etc. Just do as you suggested, don't stress too much about it because they clearly aren't.
We did something which hasn't been suggested thus far. Before the church we went to the photographers house and did about 45 mins worth of shots. I guess they'd have to be as chilled as us about the traditions etc, but it did mean we got some nice pics in a controlled environment where neither of us were too stressed. Worth suggesting to them?
You can't see the bride before the ceremony! 100 years of bad luck on you richpenny. That's actually a good idea though
If it's going to be a bright day then find a slightly shady spot or get lots of shots of folks squinting in to the sun 🙂
My wife is Polish, they have a whole different set of traditions. To start with whilst planning the wedding we just kind of assumed they were the same 😉 Then after plenty of confusion we just rolled with whatever suited us. Our wedding was pretty chilled, no real speeches or anything too formal. My wife was friends with the photographer beforehand and had done some modelling work for him, so that helped. He charged us £100 🙂
Just as a quick retort to prices, typically the packages we were offering were between £1k to the £2.5K mark, based on that you'd have both a photographer and an assistant (7 years degree training in Photography between them), varying between preparation / reception / up to sit down through to Dawn to finish. Output from a rage of Graphire / Queensbury and Album Australia's.
The market was the £10-£30k weddings.
The £1000 packages were basically loss leaders, profit was made on reprints / parents albums etc. The higher packages basically tailored everything you needed up front.
Given the UK wedding season typically (or rather historically) lasts 6 months, and you have a finite number of days to actually shoot weddings (ie weekends mainly Saturdays) Lets say for argument that you run 75% capacity so 40 weddings (typically what we would shoot). Average out the packages at £1.75K and you're at £70k gross turnover, VAT territory so knock 20% off that so you're down to £58k.
Typical album cost ... between £300-600 so consumable costs of £18k, marketing on average 8-10 wedding fairs per year plus a website so another £10k including exhibition kit.
Camera kit, on average you'd go through a shutter and / or body (or both) every 18 months. so factor in £2k for wear and tear against at least £20k of kit (triple that if you're using digital medium Format).
Suddenly you're down to £28k to pay not only wages (for both of you) but also any premises / insurance and incidental costs not taking into account depreciation.
Meanwhile you're competing against the "£500 for a disk of images" brigade.
Granted, loved the job and some weddings were a breeze, but when you earned your money you REALLY earned it, such as the occasion I was assisting when the Bride, who had booked out Tatton Park broke her nose on the Bathroom sink the night before. They has taken no insurance so had to go ahead regardless. Three weeks of retouching to get it presentable (semi charged for).
And don't get me started on hysterical brides, wedding planners that don't have a clue what they are doing, florists who think a slither of vine is going to hold 5kg or wet dangling roses together for a day, or Vicars who still think photographers steal peoples souls !
Brides (dont bash me for this) want the dress and the album, one to show their children and the other to show their friends and family ...
Don't miss it (ok maybe a little)
My wife was friends with the photographer beforehand and had done some modelling work for him, so that helped. He charged us £100
Say no more, say no more....
I'm sorry Rich; I just coon't resist. 😳
A nods as good as a wink to a blind bat....
You are the one on the right then Elf?
😆
Mate of mine could do that sketch word for word. With almost the same voice, too.
You didn't answer my question!
Mightymarmite your post is astounding, that's a ridiculous amount to pay for photos! That said, I know people who would have died of shame if their wedding came in at less than £20k so figures I suppose.
I bet you've got some pretty fancy gear haven't you
yes i have some gear but it has to earn me money. plenty of amateurs have more camera equipment than me.
Thing is Emma, marmite has clearly shown how big the costs are for relatively little return. It's not like those prices are getting him a new car. I think it's the (sad) truth that it's hard to make money as a photographer these days. The 500 quid and a disk guys mentioned are kidding if they think they are making a profit and increasingly people think the pro prices are ridiculous compared to getting a mate to do it. I'm pretty serious about making the best of my photography but I'm not about to quit my day job thinking it will pay the bills instead. My amateur gear is already a few thousand, so paying less than the price of one lens for a pros work starts to sound ok again.
FWIW, the pro we used cost about 1500 euros, for pre-prep,office ceremony and formal shots, NO reception... The second highest individual cost of the day. 1st place went to inviting most of my rugby club to the reception (buffet/bar)!
It's a changing market. Back when everyone had a 35mm PaS and send their films to Truprint (remember them?) hiring a photographer brought in obvious skills and equippment that everyday folk couldn't match. Nowadays the gap between what's possible with little knowledge and a pro is much narrower. Although still there, of course.
I think a fair few 'pros' could do with raising their game though. A friend of a friend is a pro (althoguh I am not sure to what level) and her pictures are quite ordinary. What she does though is come round your house and that makes an occasion out of it that just wouldn't happen if it were another family member. The pics are fine, but not striking imo. However one pic she put on her website was technically shocking in my view. I'd have binned it if it were one of mine! Actually no, I'd have taken the shot and bloomin well done it right 🙂
I understand that the photographer has to make some money but I suppose as mol has just mentioned, some pro's are awful and don't take very nice photos but charge a fortune whereas a mate might by chance take some brilliant ones. I don't think I'd ever do a wedding if I was a photographer, brides will never be happy, I've not met a bride who has said to me 'my photos were amazing', generally they've not been happy with them, or wished they'd had something different which just makes me thinks it's all part of the unnecessary circus we all seem to get sucked into with weddings. That said, I have a photographer booked so can't be too much of a hypocrite!
