Wedding Photography - Advice Please

Thanks for the tips (see how it should be done Randull?)

I very much see the general theme here about the lighting. Ideally an
on-camera flash is not the best, but if for no other reasons other than the
most practical one that I have never used proper equipment before. I have
borred another friends wedding pictures (professional!) and the are
beautiful and have given me good ideas about the framing and composition. I
hadn't thought of getting a copy of "Bride", I'll pick one up tomorrow (the
budget can stretch to that!).

Lots of other good simple tips that I hadn't thought of too. Hadn't really
thought of avoiding people eating for example - would that be a nice sight,
that snap of grandma chomping into a sausage roll with flakes of pastry up
her nostrils and false teeth hanging half out.

Sorry about that. What an image.....

 

I've been out of the photo biz for 9+ years.

Business was that good?

I never disputed that. I just thought you were an arsehole, that's all.

There is always one of "you" in every single news group on the net. Flaming
wars can be fun sometimes, but in the end you'll disappear because everyone
gets bored with you and nobody replies to even your nasty messages. Then a
new "you" will come along. And a new newbie like me will take the bait and
flame you back. It's just one of those facts of life. Like it or lump it.
But I tell you what, will you read that in ANY of those Internet tutorial
books that are available. Nah.

I'm bored with you now. I've had my fun.

 

It is a guide number...a number used to determine what aperture to use when
using flash. It varies with film speed. Naturally.

To use: GN/subject distance = aperture.

--
dadiOH
_____________________________

dadiOH's dandies v3.0...
....a help file of info about MP3s, recording from
LP/cassette and tips & tricks on this and that.
Get it at http://mysite.verizon.net/xico
____________________________

 

No, my first camera was a 127 Brownie. But I did buy the Hasselblads
with my own money. As for Sigma, they've always manufactured crap,
I've never wasted my money on it, but if you want to waste yours on it
then be my guest.

 

Yeah, whatever...

 

This is a tough place to make a living in. There were a number of
reasons that I quit though, none of which are any of your business.

Yup, tell the truth and you're an asshole.

No flames here, just statements of fact.

 

Amateurs built and flew Kittyhawk, professionals built the Titanic!!!!!!

 

Ah - sounds like a little something that is pretty useful to know. Thanks.

 

a) The subjects loved them

b) Who cares what you think?

 

Thank you.

 

That's what the world needs more of... smart arsed comments.

 

More accurately,

GN/subject distance = aperture @ ISO100.

Your 160e is rated with a GN of 16 (distance in meters), covering a
frame shot with a 35mm lens.

So, with your f1:3.5-6.3 lens and ISO400 film, the maximum flash
distance with the aperture wide-open is 9 meters (29.5 ft.) at 28mm
and 5 meters (16 ft) at 300mm.

If you're going to put a tissue paper over the bulb to diffuse, you'll
lose about a stop. Multiply the above figures by 0.7 to adjust.

In my opinion, you probably still need more flash. Rent a larger unit
with a multifocal bounce-head (zoom, tilt and pan) for a day.

 

That is all new to me and interesting to know - thanks (it is certainly
another one of those "print it off and keep it with my camera stuff"
messages!)

As it happens, I didn't use the Speedlight in the end. On the morning of the
wedding I had a brainwave and remembered that my late father had flash with
an adjustable head. After a bit of a search I found it. It is a Nissin
360TW. I don't know that that make is any good, but it seemed to work..

As pretty much everybody said to me about wedding photography, it was very
hard work and I was pulling my hair out at times, but I took about 280
pictures through the day so hopefully there will be a few good ones in
there.

Cheers,
Scott

 

Well done Scott. Glad to hear it all went so well. Please try to put some
of your pictures on a website so we can have a look.
Dennis

 

It's always a good idea to use equipment that you haven't tested and
are unfamiliar with for an important once-in-a-lifetime event.

"Hopefully" there will be a few good ones? That's encouraging.

 

You sad miserable sod.

 

A wedding is a once-in-a-lifetime event and should be photographed by
someone that knows that they're doing. Taking a ton of pictures with
unfamiliar equipment and then "hoping" that there's something good in
there does not bode well.

 

You sad miserable sod.

I think you're a miserable sod too, but I do agree with you on the above
point.
Get a professional, and stick to informal shots.