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.
:lmao:
