Wedding Photos 12th April

[alexisonfire]

Well yesterday was a big eye opener for me, not only was it my first wedding, it was my first time taking portraits (seriously anyway), and also my first event working for a customer. All i can say is i have huge respect for wedding photographers now. Its damn tiring making sure your in the right place at the right time all day, let alone standing on your feet for 16hours. I haven't ever taken photos for that long in one day, and its amazing the range of weather/light you get throughout the day. I think i experienced it all, bright sun, overcast, rain, night, day... challenging to say the least. Here is a select few of the day that i have chosen as my portfolio photos. (I won't bore you with all the group photos and speeches!)

 

[alexisonfire]

 

[alexisonfire]

 

[alexisonfire]

Fantastic mate, really well done

I'm going to be in the same boat on June 14th so would really appreciate any tips. What lens did you use the most? What flash do you have etc?

Cheers! If i were to give any tips, it would be don't be afraid to get stuck in. There is going to be a load of people wanting to speak with the bride and groom/guests throughout the day, but you need to step in when ever you need to so you can get the photo. Be happy, smile and joke with everybody and this will reflect in photos of them. I assume you will be using digital, if so, snap, snap and snap away! Not having to worry about film is a great advantage!

I used every part of my equipment on the day (see sig), but the god send was my SB600 flashgun. It worked flawlessly, and allowed me to get shots i simply couldn't without it. My most used lens was the 24-70 f/2.8, which i used for 70% of my photos (1000 i total). The 70-200 f/2.8 was used in the church, as i wasn't suppose to photographing the ceremony! Despite using f/2.8 and iso3200, i was still unable to get a fast enough shutter speed though

I used the 50mm f/1.8 for low light and small depth of field (almost every photo at the disco was with the 50mm) The 10-20mm came in handy for large group shots of the disco (bride throwing the bouquet, first dance etc)

I could have done the whole day with the 24-70 f/2.8, and highly recommend a lens of this focal range and aperture for a wedding

 

[alexisonfire]

I used a stofen diffuser, with a mixture of direct flash and bounced flash depending on the size of the room.

 

[alexisonfire]

There are some great shots there - you should be proud, especially seeing as it's your first time doing it.

Nothing says 'classy' like a stretched hummer limo, though. I'm surprised your lens didn't break.

The hummer was amazing inside, absolutely huge, very comfortable and great fun, exactly what the day was about! It was a great choice imo!

Very nicely lit all of them! did you diffuse, bounce, direct + fill in ? either way looks really nice and the colours are what I'd expect from the D80 and Nikkor glass, superb!

Were you shooting at 2.8 too ? really nice dof on them all.

Depending on the size of the room i was using a mixture of direct and bounced flash. A stofen diffuser was used the entire time. The only nikon glass used was the 50mm, the other 3 lens are all sigma! Most of the single portraits were shot at f/2.8, the rest were shot at around f/5 - f/8 to make sure everybody was in focus. I tried to place people infront of an open space to help with the bokeh

High quality wedding captures those mate. Particularly well executed and polished off nicely. Hope the client is happy.

Johnny

Thankyou mate, your words mean a lot as i love your work

 

[alexisonfire]

Just finished choosing and processing all the photos, its taken about 13hours! Thanks for the comments everyone!

 

[alexisonfire]

I'm not sure they've seen them yet!!!

I recognised one of the guys in the pics and sent him the link, to which he replied "I didn't even know they were done yet..." and he was the best man lol.

Matt or James?

These are a selection of the best which i wanted feedback on, the bride and groom won't be back for 2 weeks, which is when they will first see them, and then the photos will be released on a website for all family and guests to see

 

[alexisonfire]

Matt

I saw the thread and thought... "hmmm, I'm SURE I know that person..." even from the funny angle pics.
So sent him a link through facebook.

Matt is my brother-in-law! ( Unfortunately! )

 

[alexisonfire]

1 quick tip.

never take photos of the bride and groom in the church when they are getting married. unless you got a huge light giving in lens, you wont get anything good enough and your not allowed flash either.

The way to do it, or the way i do it, have a word with the vicar/priest/clergy and ask them if they have no other weddings right after, can you nip back in for 10 mins when the guests have gone, stage the vows once more and now you can get good shots.

I had a word with the priest at the wedding rehearsal and did try to arrange some staged shots afterwards, but due to a wedding directly after, it wasn't possible. I don't agree with your statement about not taking photos at the actual wedding. I asked the priest if was ok to take photos during the ceremony, he said i wasn't suppose to, but was not going to stop me if i took some discretely. Although i had serious problems getting a fast enough shutter speed, i managed to get 1-2 keepers of them actually getting married. If i hadn't bothered, i would have had none...

Your shots are good, 2nd pic with the food is nice, but next time move the bin lol.. Ive been doing weddings for years and still get nervous hehe, but i love seeing the results and 1000 pics is about norm, i will wittle that down to about 120 for them to pick 40 from.

If in doubt, snap it.

<ColiN>

I have to admit, i didn't even notice the bin when taking the photo, i don't think it detracts from the subject that much. After deleting completely unusable photos, i had roughly 1000 left, out of those i selected 115. I could process a lot more but felt i covered the whole day and stuck to the same quality throughout.

 

[alexisonfire]

Cheers all

 

[alexisonfire]

I wouldn't say that's true at all, the 350d is a perfectly capable camera, and will do the job fine. The most important thing is the glsas and his is fast and sharp

EDIT: was suppose to be quoting gadgets, I'm on my itouch so can't copy and paste it in

 

[alexisonfire]

define fine?

if i got the photo's free and they looked fine i wouldn't be bothered, if the photo's cost £100's or a lot more and they looked fine i would be well cheased off!!

a niffty 50 and a 17-50 is well short of what should be in a kit bag.

i bet the 50 won't even be used!

no wide angle for group shots, the 430 will fail to light up a large group because he will be too far away because of a lack of wide angle lens.

he needs atleast a 70-200 and it should be f2.8, the canon wide angle lens or the sigma 10-20 and the 580 flash and a sturdy tripod.

you are taking the responsibility for recording something that will only happen on that day, going with half the kit or substandard is not good for the customer or the photographer especially if you want repeat work.

He's right guys, your photos will be terrible if you don't use a white lens!!!1111.

I shot almost the entire wedding with a £200 lens. I know professional photographers that still use d50's and 350d's to great effect.

 

[alexisonfire]

colin I have about 10 photos in the church, including them walking down after the wedding. The photos I meant I struggled to get were when they were actually getting married (saying vowels etc) although I did manage to get 2.

 

[alexisonfire]

i have used 17 for a wedding as well and if you have a large group you either stack them 10 deep or 3 to 4 deep and wide to make sure you can see every person in the group shot.
17 is not wide enough for large groups especially if you get bad weather and are confined to the inside of the church.

You must photograph some bloody big groups!
Can't say i had a problem photographing around 15 people at 24mm. Was probably standing about 12-15ft away.

i have the SB800 which has a higher guide number than the 430 and that struggled to light a large group inside a church, i could have done with another one or two!

Again, i can't say i had a problem with the SB600, but then i didn't use flash in the church. The main room where the dinner and disco took place was huge though.

you said you used the 24-70 most, is not a £200 lens.

The sigma 24-70mm You don't need expensive equipment to take good photos. My entire lens collection cost less than £1k, and perform basically the same as the Nikon flagship equivalents.

 

[alexisonfire]

ha ha 15 people, was it a billy no mates wedding!?! With family and friends every wedding i have been to has been 40 or more

I was referring to the staged group shots, which normally consist of family and close friends. (Bride, Groom, parents of each, wedding party, brothers/sisters etc.)

if you have a large group in a church which are not the brightest of places the 430 or a 600 will not give you the results you need, you might be able to overexpose or will have to spend days in photoshop.

like i said you are recording that one day and should go equipped not on a wing and a prayer!

You are probably right there, neither of those flashguns would be good for inside a church photographing large amounts of people, but i can't really see this happening? I've never been to a wedding where theres more than 15ish people in one group photo.

Sigma will be proud to here you say that but i'll think you'll find there is quite a big difference between the Sigma 24-70 and the Nikon 24-70 other than £800!

I beg to differ, you pay a considerable amount more for the name, and the fact that its Nikon's newest flagship model designed for the D3 (inevitable scene tax). Take the 28-70 f/2.8 which was the flagship model before, it was pretty much perfect and was selling at almost half of what the 24-70 does. Im not saying the sigma will perform the same, but 5 times worse? No way.

i have 2 Sigma Lens the 18-50 f2.8 and the 10-20, and while they give really good photo's there is a significant difference between the Sigma and Nikon 18-50. My friend has the Nikon and i have played with it quite a lot and the pictures are amazing.

This confuses me quite a bit, you slate using budget equipment for a wedding, yet you use it yourself? Also i've never heard of the nikon 18-50?