Help with a crappy wedding scenario please!

[Forkie]

They're budget-limited, and because of that, are usually forced to accept a crap product.

With that in mind, is it the "fauxtographers" fault? I mean, unless a pro wants to do some charity work, the bride and grooms two options are either to take the best available to them, or just not have pictures. They may be expecting/hoping for a miracle, but I don't think its the person taking the pictures fault when that bubble bursts. By all means urge them to get a professional and over stress your shortcomings, but at the end of the day, if they say ok, then its on them. Noone is pulling a fast one on them. I didn't make their budget. Should they be advised to NOT get married until they can afford several grand for photos? I mean there are many angles to look at this from. Personally, I grew up in a very low income rural area. People there were lucky to even be able to afford a wedding at all, let alone all the bells and whistles. I guess if you believe he is possibly going to ruin someones day, you can also believe that he may also be saving someones day and providing a service to those in need.

(I mean "you" in the general sense, not "you" as in TiredIron specifically)

Yeah, I guess I didn't get that out quite right. What I was trying to say, in my own, painful way was that there are times when it's fine for someone without traditional skills or equipment to take on a wedding, BUT at the same time, it's NOT fair for someone (usually because of financial limitations) to think they're going to get a quality product from a Craig's List Fauxtographer.

never mind... I know what I mean, but I can't seem to articulate it. Just washed my tongue and can't do a thing with it....

I get what you mean. Some folks are fine with paying less and receiving non-professional quality photos. Some people simply want a record of the day, and aren't bothered about exposure, DOF and bounced flash. There are a few non-vain people around!

If someone buys a new car but can only afford a Fiat Panda, they shouldn't expect to get the quality of a BMW M3.

 

[bennielou]

You have a good point here, Forkie. Budgets are budgets. And while I'm happy that people go overboard with budgets from a business and visual standpoint, I myself am always looking to get the best bang for my buck.

But the deal is, is that there ARE great seasoned photogs out there in the budget range. (The people who are trying to get together a port after learning and apprenticing for a while). That's why I feel a lot of this falls on the back of the consumer. You have to weed through a lot of yuck before you find the diamond.

But I also feel that sometimes people with cameras see a pot of gold at the end of the rainbow, and they just run for it. And how many people find a pot of gold in this manner?

Best to make a solid base, IMO, even when you know you have to start at the bottom and work your way up.

 

[tirediron]

...But I also feel that sometimes people with cameras see a pot of gold at the end of the rainbow...

Very, very true.

 

[table1349]

...But I also feel that sometimes people with cameras see a pot of gold at the end of the rainbow...

Very, very true.

I thought it was naked women at the end of the camera rainbow. Man, what a drag. That gold gets heavy to haul around. :lmao:

 

[Noxire]

I thought it was naked women at the end of the camera rainbow. Man, what a drag. That gold gets heavy to haul around. :lmao:

Wait, so you're telling me the creation of a model mayhem account and writing a profile where I present myself as an "artistic nude photographer" was all for nothing? D:

 

[table1349]

I thought it was naked women at the end of the camera rainbow. Man, what a drag. That gold gets heavy to haul around. :lmao:

Wait, so you're telling me the creation of a model mayhem account and writing a profile where I present myself as an "artistic nude photographer" was all for nothing? D:

Depends, here is a client for you: http://www.fairfaxunderground.com/forum/file.php?40,file=34311,filename=old_20woman.jpg What do you think? :lmao:

 

[Kerbouchard]

I find the whole pack mentality of forums to be so tired and boring. Let me see someone stand up on their own and actually have the back bone to not want to be one of the 'cool kids' and actually help this woman out. I would, but I'm new myself so I have no clue about lighting. However, I don't judge her for wanting to do what she can with what she has to make money. (snip)
Also I won't be reading any responses, I don't do internet fights.

I think you will be reading some responses, or at least I hope you will, because I want to address this main issue. I am one of the three photographers that Bennielou mentioned earlier who just finished shooting a wedding in the dark. Have two this weekend in broad daylight. Actually, the broad day light ones are probably going to be harder.

In any case, I have no idea how to help the OP take the kind of pictures that I find acceptable with the equipment she has. I just don't.

It's not that it's a pack of wolves around here. There just isn't any good advice to give other than not to do it or get better equipment and the knowledge to use it.

You mention that you are new and don't know how to help the OP. Most everybody else has mentioned that they have a lot of experience and also don't know how to help the OP. If we could shoot weddings without professional equipment, without backups, without lighting, don't you think we would do it? Heck, all that gear is expensive and it gets heavy after lugging it around all night.

There is a reason that gear exists. Heck, there is a reason wedding/sports/portrait/whatever photographers use the gear they use. It's not reasonable for somebody to pick up a DSLR and assume that they can take the same shots that pro's do using specialized equipment.

The OP said they don't want shadows, can't bounce flash, that they don't know how to use lighting gear, and that they have a camera body that can't handle a high ISO. What do you want us to tell her?

She only has a few options...
Blurry photos at too low a shutter speed.
Noisy photos that will probably still have motion blur.
Direct on camera flash dialed down to -3 to -5 exposure compensation in TTL and live with harsh shadows and a background devoid of light.

Those are the options.

For most photographers, all 3 would be considered failures.

If somehow I got myself in this position, with the OP's gear, I would choose the third option and try to position the subject between the camera and one of the few available lights with a shutter speed that wouldn't lead to ghosting, an ISO that wouldn't have a ridiculous amount of noise, and probably wide open on whatever lens she is using because I wouldn't have a choice for most of the reception. I would also be on the lookout for any wall I could put my back to so that I could bounce my flash. I would take a few creative shots using only the Tiki lights with the bride and groom very close to each other and about as close to the torch as I could get them without having the torch in the frame and without getting anybody burned. I would beg, borrow, or make my own tripod so I could at least get good shots of the details...rings, flowers, arrangements, guestbook, venue etc. Those would be available light, medium aperture, base ISO and long shutter speeds, possibly using my 'assistant' to hold a reflector to be able to bounce flash back down if necessary. For the ring shot, I would also try to bring in the Tiki torch to get some reflections. If this is a wedding at somebody's house or if I was given a wide berth, I might even try to make use of the vehicles that are there and try a shot or two with the couple backlit by several of the guests headlights. If there is a porch, pavilion, overhang, etc, then there is also a place to be able to use bounce flash.

So, those are the kind of things I would try, and I'm still not sure if I could pull it off with the OP's gear.

Edited to add: I realize I am late to this thread and the OP probably won't be back. Hopefully, somebody will get something out of this post anyway.

 

[Noxire]

Depends, here is a client for you: http://www.fairfaxunderground.com/forum/file.php?40,file=34311,filename=old_20woman.jpg What do you think? :lmao:

Wow, well err... Perhaps a little skin smoothing can fix it?

 

[KAikens318]

I find the whole pack mentality of forums to be so tired and boring. Let me see someone stand up on their own and actually have the back bone to not want to be one of the 'cool kids' and actually help this woman out. I would, but I'm new myself so I have no clue about lighting. However, I don't judge her for wanting to do what she can with what she has to make money. (snip)
Also I won't be reading any responses, I don't do internet fights.

I think you will be reading some responses, or at least I hope you will, because I want to address this main issue. I am one of the three photographers that Bennielou mentioned earlier who just finished shooting a wedding in the dark. Have two this weekend in broad daylight. Actually, the broad day light ones are probably going to be harder.

In any case, I have no idea how to help the OP take the kind of pictures that I find acceptable with the equipment she has. I just don't.

It's not that it's a pack of wolves around here. There just isn't any good advice to give other than not to do it or get better equipment and the knowledge to use it.

You mention that you are new and don't know how to help the OP. Most everybody else has mentioned that they have a lot of experience and also don't know how to help the OP. If we could shoot weddings without professional equipment, without backups, without lighting, don't you think we would do it? Heck, all that gear is expensive and it gets heavy after lugging it around all night.

There is a reason that gear exists. Heck, there is a reason wedding/sports/portrait/whatever photographers use the gear they use. It's not reasonable for somebody to pick up a DSLR and assume that they can take the same shots that pro's do using specialized equipment.

The OP said they don't want shadows, can't bounce flash, that they don't know how to use lighting gear, and that they have a camera body that can't handle a high ISO. What do you want us to tell her?

She only has a few options...
Blurry photos at too low a shutter speed.
Noisy photos that will probably still have motion blur.
Direct on camera flash dialed down to -3 to -5 exposure compensation in TTL and live with harsh shadows and a background devoid of light.

Those are the options.

For most photographers, all 3 would be considered failures.

If somehow I got myself in this position, with the OP's gear, I would choose the third option and try to position the subject between the camera and one of the few available lights with a shutter speed that wouldn't lead to ghosting, an ISO that wouldn't have a ridiculous amount of noise, and probably wide open on whatever lens she is using because I wouldn't have a choice for most of the reception. I would also be on the lookout for any wall I could put my back to so that I could bounce my flash. I would take a few creative shots using only the Tiki lights with the bride and groom very close to each other and about as close to the torch as I could get them without having the torch in the frame and without getting anybody burned. I would beg, borrow, or make my own tripod so I could at least get good shots of the details...rings, flowers, arrangements, guestbook, venue etc. Those would be available light, medium aperture, base ISO and long shutter speeds, possibly using my 'assistant' to hold a reflector to be able to bounce flash back down if necessary. For the ring shot, I would also try to bring in the Tiki torch to get some reflections. If this is a wedding at somebody's house or if I was given a wide berth, I might even try to make use of the vehicles that are there and try a shot or two with the couple backlit by several of the guests headlights. If there is a porch, pavilion, overhang, etc, then there is also a place to be able to use bounce flash.

So, those are the kind of things I would try, and I'm still not sure if I could pull it off with the OP's gear.

Edited to add: I realize I am late to this thread and the OP probably won't be back. Hopefully, somebody will get something out of this post anyway.

Thank you. I understand I have ****ty gear for the situation I am in. And as people have been talking about, they are on a very tight budget. They looked over my portfolio and chose me over 6 other photographers. They must have seen something they liked. And it's not that I was the cheapest one, because I wasn't (One of my friends was "interviewed" by them as well and she is $300 less than me). When I took this job, I did not know this was going to be a no-lighting event. If there is a tent, I am fine with bouncing a flash. I managed to pick up a few odd jobs and scraped together enough to rent a Nikkor 2.8 Fisheye and also a 70-200 2.8 Nikkor with VR. Hopefully these will be enough to get me through. I have been looking at the Strobist, been to the book stores and checked out all the books I could that dealt with lighting, wedding poses, and such. I love the creative side of these events, and am great with the detail shots such as the cakes and such. Thank you for your suggestions, I will take them in and use them if possible.

Shadow Box, thank you. You didn't have to subject yourself to the wolves, but thanks.

To everyone else, look at that, someone managed to give some tips on what they may do should they end up in a situation like this. They didn't make snap judgements, they didn't bash me into the ground. I am not a 'fauxtog'. I have worked hard, I have taken classes, I have done research. I practice, every single day. I take at least 10 photos of different things every single day and PP them in different ways so that I can get a feel for my creative side and for PS. I have done research on lighting techniques, but just can't seem to grasp some of it.

I work hard for this. I want to do this. I didn't take my first paying job until I had been shooting for four years for free, and even then my first wedding was only $350 for an entire day with CD included. The next wedding was free, but they both came out pretty well, the couples were very happy, and sparked six referrals. I am shooting weddings every weekend this month, all word of mouth referrals based on my portfolio, not because of a Craigslist ad. I don't advertise on CL.

Someday I will be able to update my equipment, and when I do I will practice more and eventually start raising my prices, but for now that is something that is far in the future.

I am going through with this wedding, I have done multitudes of research, tomorrow I have someone modeling for me in a pitch dark park where I am going to practice with just one strobe and then adding the others once I feel comfortable with that. I am not taking this lightly, I am not passing this off as something that is just another day or another shoot. I know how important wedding photos are. I know that there is only one shot at this. I was just looking for a little help with what I had, but ended up getting my a&& reamed for it. Not everyone can afford photogs of your caliber. I don't live in an area where people have a ton of money. I am not in a high priced market, but I am okay with that because I know I shouldn't be charging a ton until I have better equipment (although honestly, the equipment a photographer does not make).

I did not just pick up a camera one day and think...hmm...this could be fun, I think I will start charging people. No. I am even enrolling in a Bachelor's in photography program at a local college because that is how badly I want this. I am sure I could get the same teachings from other photogs for a cheaper price, but I would rather have the solid education that I could add to my credentials so that I can be that much better for my clients.

Don't judge me before you know the story.

 

[mrstravis]

I don't think people were trying to be rude, I think they just wanted you to see the severity of the situation. I have learned through reading threads on this forum that you can't take things personally. If someone says something you disagree with, thank them for commenting and keep it moving. If you start to argue or defend your position in every thread (not saying that you have done so) you will start to dislike the forum and people will stop helping you. Just sharing what I've learned thus far. Anyway, good luck!

 

[MissCream]

Why did you rent a fish eye for a wedding :S

 

[Kerbouchard]

Thank you. I understand I have ****ty gear for the situation I am in. And as people have been talking about, they are on a very tight budget. They looked over my portfolio and chose me over 6 other photographers. They must have seen something they liked. And it's not that I was the cheapest one, because I wasn't (One of my friends was "interviewed" by them as well and she is $300 less than me). When I took this job, I did not know this was going to be a no-lighting event. If there is a tent, I am fine with bouncing a flash. I managed to pick up a few odd jobs and scraped together enough to rent a Nikkor 2.8 Fisheye and also a 70-200 2.8 Nikkor with VR. Hopefully these will be enough to get me through. I have been looking at the Strobist, been to the book stores and checked out all the books I could that dealt with lighting, wedding poses, and such. I love the creative side of these events, and am great with the detail shots such as the cakes and such. Thank you for your suggestions, I will take them in and use them if possible.

Seems there is more to this story... What are you charging, if you don't mind me asking? Honestly, based on your money issues and gear, I didn't think you were charging an amount where somebody could be $300 dollars less than you, and if you are and have 5 weddings booked this month, I guess I'm not understanding why you are having so much trouble updating your gear.

I was also a bit curious about the rental of the fish eye. It's good for 1 or 2 shots, but it just wouldn't be high up on my must have list.

 

[KAikens318]

Thank you. I understand I have ****ty gear for the situation I am in. And as people have been talking about, they are on a very tight budget. They looked over my portfolio and chose me over 6 other photographers. They must have seen something they liked. And it's not that I was the cheapest one, because I wasn't (One of my friends was "interviewed" by them as well and she is $300 less than me). When I took this job, I did not know this was going to be a no-lighting event. If there is a tent, I am fine with bouncing a flash. I managed to pick up a few odd jobs and scraped together enough to rent a Nikkor 2.8 Fisheye and also a 70-200 2.8 Nikkor with VR. Hopefully these will be enough to get me through. I have been looking at the Strobist, been to the book stores and checked out all the books I could that dealt with lighting, wedding poses, and such. I love the creative side of these events, and am great with the detail shots such as the cakes and such. Thank you for your suggestions, I will take them in and use them if possible.

Seems there is more to this story... What are you charging, if you don't mind me asking? Honestly, based on your money issues and gear, I didn't think you were charging an amount where somebody could be $300 dollars less than you, and if you are and have 5 weddings booked this month, I guess I'm not understanding why you are having so much trouble updating your gear.

I was also a bit curious about the rental of the fish eye. It's good for 1 or 2 shots, but it just wouldn't be high up on my must have list.

I charged $500. My friend doesn't charge much because she doesn't feel good enough about shooting weddings to charge fully, but she does a good job. Again as I said, the couple is on a very tight budget and they were looking for someone who has cheap, but also could put out good photos, and they liked mine. My weddings this month are all as cheap. I have trouble updating my gear because anything that I make from these weddings goes to the bills that my regular job doesn't cover. It goes towards not getting my car repoed, not getting evicted, buying food for myself and the munchkin, insurance for my gear so that should anything happen I will not be completely SOL.

I rented a fisheye because it was the only other lens that was in stock that was cheap enough where I could afford it and it was low light capable. Also, another wedding I am shooting this coming weekend (free wedding, one of my best friends) asked if I had one because she loves the fisheye affect. I most likely will not use it that much at the paid wedding. Maybe for a few shots of the venue. But for the most part I will be using the 70-200 and the 50mm 1.8 that I own. I also have a 24mm 2.8 that I could use, but it's manual focus, so I may use it in the venue when there isn't much action going on.