1st wedding as an amateur

[LocalHero1953]

Leaving aside the technical issues of kit etc, I think you should see your other half/assistant as more than someone to hold stuff and change lenses. I have never shot a wedding, and don't intend to, but the first thing I found I wanted (well one of them) when I started shooting people was someone to watch for all the little things that can spoil a technically great shot: bra strap showing, hair out of place, someone/something in the background, holding back the kids/waiters who are about to run into the shot, closing the open door in the background etc, etc, etc. And she can also help keep track of the group shots that have to be taken.

[Colin Southern]

It also helps to skirt around another potential issue ive come across yesterday in that in AV or SP modes on the 6d (and 550d for that matter), the max iso is 400 which probably wouldn't be high enough (depending on ambient light levels of course).

I'm confused - why is is your max ISO only 400?

i could, but they know what gear i have & im reluctant to obtain additional gear, essentially because of the cost & lack of time to learn it & test it

Can't say I really follow your logic on this one; they surely can't cost a lot to rent, and in terms of learning how to use it, I can tell you now that even in "set and forget" automatic mode, it's doing to give you damn site better exposures that you're going to get with a manual system. The 600EX-RT will auto-zoom to account for focal length and the ETTL II metering is damn near bomb-proof; probably about the only tweak you'd need to make would be adding about -2/3 FEC if you're just using it for fill flash (which takes about 2 seconds to turn the dial 2 clicks).

ive emailed the groom asking to meet both him and his partner asap to firm up what they want. i feel that the originally remit of "take pics of people enjoying themselves" will be replaced with something a bit more structured so when i know what they want, i can go from there & look at poses/locations at the venue

Good move. A normal wedding is one hell of a lot more than just a few photos of people enjoying themselves.

i do have back problems (i know, i know), so if i did have to give the 550d to my partner to help me & i kept the 6d, what set-up would you suggest on the 550d? flash on the hotshoe/camera or perhaps on that bracket i mentioned to the side of the camera?

For casual / fill flash it's probably not going to make much of a difference (if the fill flash is dialed down), but there's no way I'd be using that setup for flattering formal poses of anyone (I'd be bouncing and/or using off-camera flash held by an assistant).

also, is there any reason why on the 6d i can't dial in an auto iso of 125-3200 in AV mode & then go f4-5.6 in the couple/individual shots & a higher f number on the group shots?

None that I can think of, assuming you can set it to not drop below an appropriate shutterspeed for the focal length you're shooting.

[wellsie82]

Cheers Colin

Re the Max iso have a look at http://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/3590695 - I was shocked to discover this

Re renting a flash - the groom knows my gear has limitations but trusts me to get decent shots with the gear I've got. If I owned a TTL flash I'd use it but I don't.

And about that set up, I've got a diffuser and a few things I'll bounce flash off of to soften light as much as possible.

[wellsie82]

Thanks Paul - yes that's also down as one of her tasks for the formals

[Colin Southern]

Cheers Colin

Re the Max iso have a look athttp://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/3590695 - I was shocked to discover this

Ah - sorry - didn't realise you were meaning with a flash.

Doesn't make much difference though; aperture is going to be a given - then all you need to do is check your shutterspeed before releasing the shutter and adjusting the ISO if required; you shouldn't even need to look at the camera to do it.

[Glenn NK]

Colin gave the best advice I've read - in post #9:

To be honest Jason, all things considered (from what you've told us), I'd say "just don't do it". If you're doing it for money then you need to deliver a professional result -- in what is arguably the toughest environment to work in.

Apologies if it's not what you're wanting to hear. I'd suggest shooting a few weddings as a 2nd shooter first, and go from there.

While the groom may be a buddy/friend, the bride and/or the bride's mother may not be. There are horror threads on the net about photographers (pros) and their problems with the latter (and the problems were rarely if ever caused by the photographer).

Re renting a flash - the groom knows my gear has limitations but trusts me to get decent shots with the gear I've got. If I owned a TTL flash I'd use it but I don't.

This statement screams "trouble". You have so-so gear, but the good old buddy trusts you.

Are there any more reasons to duck this assignment and just enjoy your friend's wedding?

I really hope for your sake that it turns out well.

[wellsie82]

Colin gave the best advice I've read - in post #9:

While the groom may be a buddy/friend, the bride and/or the bride's mother may not be. There are horror threads on the net about photographers (pros) and their problems with the latter (and the problems were rarely if ever caused by the photographer).



This statement screams "trouble". You have so-so gear, but the good old buddy trusts you.

Are there any more reasons to duck this assignment and just enjoy your friend's wedding?

I really hope for your sake that it turns out well.

this is my biggest concern - he's coming across as though there's nothing to worry about & is dead casual, only if his bride gives off the same vibes will i begin to even consider stopping to worry about it all

i would feel as though im letting him down if i pulled the plug on it, especially this late in the day & for me personally, i think it would be a good experience & would learn a lot (even if that means knowing im never going to do another one)

back to the flash discussion, if i wanted to consider a ttl flash (and i mean buying one with the idea of maybe offloading the current manual one to offset the cost), what suggestions do you guys have for a reasonable budget?

[Andrew76]

I don't want this to come off as sounding brash, but here's how I see it. They're obviously not paying for a professional photographer, so why should they expect professional results?

I know they're your friends, so you don't want to disappoint them. But if they know the facts, and that owning a 'fancy' camera (or two), doesn't mean pro quality photos, and that you've never done this before - even anything remotely close to this.... Then what is there to lose?

Good experience for you, they won't be upset if they walk away with a handful of keeper photos, and they save some $$.

If, on the other hand, the bride is expecting a DVD with 600+ bridal magazine quality edited shots (I hope you've kept in mind the amount of time it's going to take you to edit 800 photos into your price?), then I would be running fast!

It doesn't appear to me, from what I've read that you're proposing to be a professional, and so they're expectations should reflect that.

I hope that helps ease some nerves.

[Ken MT]

One problem that I had on one occasion was that the grooms parents weren't talking to each other, made it very difficult to get a happy family group photo. Need to check out all eventualities

[wellsie82]

I hope that helps ease some nerves.

that sums it perfectly for me Andrew - it really does

ive got as many people telling me to run for the hills as ive got telling me "you'll be alright" - but you're right, if they wanted it doing properly then they'd pay someone to do it properly who's been there & done it, Vs not spending very much on a newbie doing it. when he first asked me, id never taken a proper image of a person before either, this leads me to believe that he's asked me simply because im into togging as a hobby & knows id give it my best shot

i'll find out more when i meet them both (which ive asked to happen asap) - if she's as laid back about it as he is then i'll be happy & calmer - it's all about their expectations

thanks again

[Colin Southern]

I don't want this to come off as sounding brash, but here's how I see it. They're obviously not paying for a professional photographer, so why should they expect professional results?

I know they're your friends, so you don't want to disappoint them. But if they know the facts, and that owning a 'fancy' camera (or two), doesn't mean pro quality photos, and that you've never done this before - even anything remotely close to this.... Then what is there to lose?

Good experience for you, they won't be upset if they walk away with a handful of keeper photos, and they save some $$.

If, on the other hand, the bride is expecting a DVD with 600+ bridal magazine quality edited shots (I hope you've kept in mind the amount of time it's going to take you to edit 800 photos into your price?), then I would be running fast!

It doesn't appear to me, from what I've read that you're proposing to be a professional, and so they're expectations should reflect that.

I hope that helps ease some nerves.

How's your tail boom

I'm all for people making informed choices, but unfortunately, a lot of the time they're NOT informed choices. I've seen it a lot where non-photography folks see lots of wonderful photos - and they hear about wonderful modern cameras that do everything from clean the bath to make a great cup of coffee; and rightly or wrongly, they conclude that it's pretty easy to get good photos because the camera is so smart. What they don't seem to realise is that cameras like my 1D X can take 14 BAD photos per second far easier than it can take 14 GOOD photos per second; after all -- the only photos they've ever seen on the web are the keepers; not the 99% that didn't make the cut.

And there-in lies the problem; (it's along the lines of "an amateur practices until they get it right -- a professional practices until they never get it wrong") if an amateur spends a day shooting and ends up with a few keepers then that's great because he has a few keepers; there was never any expectation or requirement for him to deliver ANY result, so anything more than nothing is a bonus. A professional who spends a day shooting a wedding and only gets a few keepers is is deep doggy doo doo - obviously because there is a HUGE change in expectation.

So here we have a situation where a professional result really IS expected - people just don't know it yet (because all you need to do is point a modern camera and it does the rest). The very last thing we want is for the groom to come up to his mate and say "hay mate - great photos - when can we see the rest of them?" - followed by "what do you mean these are all that there is?" Uh-oh.

Then comes the poor 'tog ("lambs to the slaughter" comes to mind) who really has no idea what he's doing to the point where if he was a pilot, he'd be so far behind the plane that he wouldn't arrive until 10 minutes after it had landed - been refueled - and tucked into the hangar for the night (not directing that at the OP - just how it works for just about every amateur jumping in the deep end). I've seen it time and time again. Sometimes they report back with a "well, that wasn't as bad as I thought it was going to be" - they show us some shots - and I just groan to myself. In many cases they're barely more than snapshot quality.

Honestly, an amateur shooting a wedding as a paid professional has about as much chance of getting a professional result as someone who's done a first aid course doing a heart valve replacement; it just requires such a high level of competence to perform well under harsh shooting conditions and time pressures. How will they handle low-light situation in the church (flash usually isn't allowed) - what are the key shots? - how will they handle the formals under time pressure under harsh sunlight with un-cooperative guests who are 1/2 way towards being drunk - not to mention Betty-Sue and John-Boy competing for the subjects attention with their point and shoots.

[Colin Southern]

ive got as many people telling me to run for the hills as ive got telling me "you'll be alright" - but you're right

My suggestion would be to give a LOT of weight to the qualifications and experience of the people giving the advice

Honestly, it's the easiest thing in the world to say "you'll be right" to someone, but (a) often it's based more on wishful thinking than anything scientific, and (b) they often don't have the knowledge or experience to base it on anything more than wishful thinking, and (c) they don't get to even feel guilty if the record of someones once in a lifetime event is a flop. There's a reason they don't throw major operations at newly qualified surgeons or put newly qualified pilots in charge of 747s

As I said to Andrew - if it is an informed choice then that's fine, but in all honesty, you really need to be saying "Hey buddy - wedding photography is one of the most demanding forms of photography that there is - it takes an experienced professional with the right gear to pull it off. I'm NOT an experienced professional - I don't have all the right gear for it - and it's possible (likely even) that we may only end up with 1/2 dozen great shots. On that basis, do you still want to proceed?".

Sorry to be so negative about all of this - but as Bill mentioned earlier, I just feel it would be unprofessional of me not to call it as I see it. Most would follow a path of thoroughly learning camera settings for different situations (and be able to select them without looking at the camera) - understand classic lighting positions - know how to work flash equipment (both on and off camera) - transverse through shooting social events along with more formal portraiture - and only then tuck themselves under the wing as a 2nd or 3rd shooter at a wedding - and after a season or two of doing that - consider taking on the responsibility of lead photographer.

My apologies in advance, but I wouldn't be being honest if I didn't express my concern at the number of these important steps that you're missing out.

[Glenn NK]

Here's another problem:

I've got this really great looking camera (actually two) with a bagful of lenses and a gorgeous tripod, and everyone that sees my gear says, "Wow that's a nice camera - it must really take good pictures".

So they expect that I'll produce great pictures - without any previous experience at weddings.

And it doesn't matter if they know you are an amateur - if the results are mediocre, there will be disappointment, and they will not look in the mirror for the reason.

Remember, it's their BIG DAY.

Colin has it right - absolutely right.

[Andrew76]

How's your tail boom

Point taken.

Colin, and Glenn, please don't get me wrong, I agree 100% with what you're both saying. Which is why I was very careful to clarify that the B+G would be happy to walk away with a (and I quote) "A handful of keepers".

If I paid a pro photographer $4,000 to shoot my wedding I would expect a catalogue of bridal magazine quality shots. If I could not afford $4,000, and asked my best mate Wellsie to bring his fancy camera to my wedding just to make sure we didn't miss moments like Aunt Hilda who's visiting from New Zealand, then I would take what I got at the end of the day. I'm almost certain that my buddy will at least capture 'snap-shot quality' photos of moments that we don't want to miss, better than Uncle Heinrich, would with his P+S, because at least Wellsie has been entrusted with the job of paying attention to what we would like to have captured. Uncle Heinrich will probably be at the bar while the first kiss is happening, and in the bathroom during the first dance, and more than likely passed out under a table during the cutting of the cake.

My point is that there are maybe people who just want memories, not necessarily wall hangers. And I don't think Wellsie is mixing words at all with how he is presenting himself to his friends.

Now, when he gets to meet with the bride, if she shows any trepidation with having an amateur photographer who may completely mess it up, then my advice was (and I quote), "I would be running fast"!

EDIT - One last thing I wanted to add for Wellsie. Colin mentions that you should give a lot of weight to the qualifications of those who are offering advice. And, he's right. I'm not familiar with all of the people posting in your thread, but I can guarantee that William, Colin, and Glenn have far more experience than I, and probably than I will have for a long time! I just wanted to offer a different 'field of view', as it were.

[Digital]

When you meet with the couple pay most of your attention to the prospective bride, and her expectations. I found out a long time ago that brides and/or their mothers usually are the ones you have to please. In my wedding days, it was the bride, and her mother that came to my place to view the proofs. I do not recall a single incident where the groom was present.
If you feel uncomfortable with the bride's expectations, I would not do the wedding as the lead photographer.

Bruce

[proseak]

You could do worse than show this thread to all concerned, especially the bride's mother.

I've done quite a few weddings, and have finally decided that enough is enough - no more.

[Colin Southern]

Here's another problem:

I've got this really great looking camera (actually two) with a bagful of lenses and a gorgeous tripod, and everyone that sees my gear says, "Wow that's a nice camera - it must really take good pictures".

So they expect that I'll produce great pictures - without any previous experience at weddings.

And it doesn't matter if they know you are an amateur - if the results are mediocre, there will be disappointment, and they will not look in the mirror for the reason.

Remember, it's their BIG DAY.

Colin has it right - absolutely right.

A brilliant example that I thought of all by myself ...

... OK, that was a lie - someone else here thought of it ...

... is to refer to ovens. I'm sure that even the non-cooking mere males among us can see that an expensive oven isn't going to make a better meal if the chef doesn't know what they're doing. On the other hand, if you're Gordon Ramsay (and limited by a simple and inexpensive oven) then yes - there would be a benefit in going to something bigger and better. And yet for some reason, while people don't assume that one must have a great oven to cook a great meal (or a great mouth to make nice compliments), they do seem to assume that one must have a good camera if they see nice images. I don't understand it either.

[Colin Southern]

Point taken.

Well for what it's worth, this morning I did a couple of high-speed reverse loops whilst maintaining an "active collective awareness" (making me a 3 out of 100) - and then did a simple flip - dumb-thumbed the collective the wrong way - and only saved grace by the rapid application of full positive collective ... which on a souped up 450 ... I'm sure you can envisage the violence of the maneuver. Back to being a 2 again

Colin, and Glenn, please don't get me wrong, I agree 100% with what you're both saying. Which is why I was very careful to clarify that the B+G would be happy to walk away with a (and I quote) "A handful of keepers".

I understand where you're coming from too (and I don't disagree) - but once the promise of money changing hands takes place (as it has) that crosses a legal and ethical boundary IMO.Just don't do what this guy did ...https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qmkmc9j-Kfc

Edit: This thread should really be called "1st Wedding as a Professional".

[Colin Southern]

When you meet with the couple pay most of your attention to the prospective bride, and her expectations. I found out a long time ago that brides and/or their mothers usually are the ones you have to please.

or SWMBO as we say (She Who MUST Be Obeyed).

[Colin Southern]

back to the flash discussion, if i wanted to consider a ttl flash (and i mean buying one with the idea of maybe offloading the current manual one to offset the cost), what suggestions do you guys have for a reasonable budget?

Sorry, I forgot to address this earlier:

My order of preference would be

Canon 600EX-RT / 600EX

Canon 580EX II

Canon 580EX

The advantage of the 600EX series is that (and don't ask me how they did it) the exposure metering (with my cameras anyway) is damn near bomb proof. I've done ridiculous things like hand-held in Av at low ISO inside and then gone manual up to 1/8000th - and got perfect exposures (of the flash illuminated part) each time. Nothing seems to trip it up. Earlier models were "OK" on this regard, but one usually had to keep at least one eye on them.

If there were one piece of kit that I'd want to take into battle with me at a wedding, it would be a good flash. Keep in mind though that pro wedding 'togs have a bag of tricks with flashes that can save the day, eg

- gels to balance the colour temp if you get a situation where you're shooting under fluorescent or tungsten room lights

- you can manually zoom a flash so that it doesn't illuminate unwanted foreground distractions

- If you're having trouble evenly lighting a group that's several people deep, back up and zoom on -- you'll get better light DoF that way.