Wedding Photos 12th April
- Thread starter alexisonfire
- Start date
- Joined
- 8 Sep 2005
- Posts
- 3,684
- Location
- Chichester
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!
)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.
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>
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.
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>
- Joined
- 8 Sep 2005
- Posts
- 3,684
- Location
- Chichester
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...
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.
Soldato
- Joined
- 14 Apr 2004
- Posts
- 11,886
- Location
- UK
An excellent set, especially for your first wedding 
An excellent set, especially for your first wedding
I have got to agree. Well done.
i would say you are going well under equiped, most weeding photographers wouldn't even use the 350 as a back up.
- Joined
- 8 Sep 2005
- Posts
- 3,684
- Location
- Chichester
Cheers all 
- Joined
- 8 Sep 2005
- Posts
- 3,684
- Location
- Chichester
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
EDIT: was suppose to be quoting gadgets, I'm on my itouch so can't copy and paste it in
Last edited:
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.
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.
The 17-50 is a wide angle zoom (approx 27mm equiv. at the wide end) and the 430 is good for lighting subjects for up to 43 meters.
I don't really understand what you mean by:
gadgets said:
If the photographs look fine surely it doesn't matter which camera they came from? I bet if you put identical photos side by side using the same glass one taken with the 350 and one from a 1D you would be hard pushed to know which one is which.
I've never shot a wedding (only as a guest) but I do know some pro's and have been to many and I don't think I've ever seen a pro use a 70-200 at a wedding and only seen someone use a tripod once.
Rather than go weighed down with many lenses I'd say a backup body would be more important.
Aye - i didnt mean to throw any disrespect your way - the pics are good and easy to see you have out some good effort into them.
I only meant by the church pics that out of all the albums we have done, maybe the bride and groom walking down towards the door at the end of the wedding is the only ones i have ever seen them pic to put into an album, not counting signing the reg book though. I use that time in the wedding now to change batteries, check lens, get the 2nd body ready to go, clean off the camera/lens. I still cant help it though, i take pics too in the wedding lol, so cant say dont do it, they just not as important as the ones outside the church.
As for lens, we use a 16-80mm lens on one body - the S5 and the two S2's have a 50mm prime and a 19-50mm and that is pleanty as i find its wide shots you need mroe than zoom.
Have fun, keep asking and keep trying new things, as long as your enjoying it and they are happy, what more can you ask for...
<ColiN>
PS - isnt it hard to delete 885 pics from 1000 hehe... and the bin is an easy fix, i just like being picky on my pics, nothing personal.
I only meant by the church pics that out of all the albums we have done, maybe the bride and groom walking down towards the door at the end of the wedding is the only ones i have ever seen them pic to put into an album, not counting signing the reg book though. I use that time in the wedding now to change batteries, check lens, get the 2nd body ready to go, clean off the camera/lens. I still cant help it though, i take pics too in the wedding lol, so cant say dont do it, they just not as important as the ones outside the church.
As for lens, we use a 16-80mm lens on one body - the S5 and the two S2's have a 50mm prime and a 19-50mm and that is pleanty as i find its wide shots you need mroe than zoom.
Have fun, keep asking and keep trying new things, as long as your enjoying it and they are happy, what more can you ask for...
<ColiN>
PS - isnt it hard to delete 885 pics from 1000 hehe... and the bin is an easy fix, i just like being picky on my pics, nothing personal.
- Joined
- 8 Sep 2005
- Posts
- 3,684
- Location
- Chichester
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.
Last edited:
- Joined
- 8 Sep 2005
- Posts
- 3,684
- Location
- Chichester
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.
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.
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!
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.
you said you used the 24-70 most, is not a £200 lens.