Hi, Drew I've shot a dozen or so weddings for folk who, like you, wanted me because of the way I shoot and the way I have shot for years is available light - go with your gut... aside from the formal staged photos that are required...
But I would certainly bring a digital camera along , too... most importantly (I'll let others gab about the precise tech stuff) _shoot the reception too! Some of the best photos I've gotten (and read - most loved by the wedding participants) are those taken at the reception -- not just of the bride and groom, of course -- also, if you can, get some shots of the pre wedding process. Don't make the Bride and Groom spend a lot of time posing for you - they won't want to. It's a bear of a job - but it can be fun, too. ann drew wrote: >Hi there, >I'm relatively new to this list, but I would like to ask about a >scenario I have not been able to find much discussion about in the >archives. > >I nearly always use available light in my photographs, and I still use >film. I do work for a weekly newspaper and use a Nikon DSLR as time >restraints and deadlines dictate, but my love is shooting with my pair >of Pentax MXs and soon, a Pentax 645, which will replace my Mamiya C33 >as my primary medium format rig. (I also have a few Brownie Hawkeyes and >a Graflex 22 TLR that round out my low-budget yet fun to use MF gear.) > >To the scenario... I have been commissioned by some acquaintances to >shoot their wedding this fall. Ceremony will be outdoors, mid September, >at 4:30 p.m. at a mountaintop resort in West Virginia. (About three >hours before sunset, according to the US Naval Observatory.) > >Weather permitting, it should be a beautiful event, the light that time >of year is wonderful, and the backdrop will be a panorama of mountains >with leaves beginning to change. > >I'm also being asked to photograph the first hour of the reception, >which will be indoors, in a typical banquet hall setting at the >resort--the luminescent and aesthetic antithesis of the ceremony. Guests >are being provided with disposable cameras for the remainder of the >reception. > >Browsing this list's archives and a number of other respected forums, I >see the vast majority of folks shoot weddings using zooms (typically >~28-70 and ~80-200) and flash (often using a stroboframe or similar >bracket). My style, as mentioned before, however, is natural light and a >collection of prime lenses, excluding my "new" SMC-A 35-105mm f3.5. > >While it's not the way the majority of folks shoot weddings, this couple >approached me because they like my work. (And I've offered a reasonable >fee, since this is my first wedding gig. I warned them of the risk of my >inexperience, encouraged them to shop around for other photographers, >they did, and they came back to me.) > >I'm rather inspired to see that until recently, Jeff Ascough was >shooting by available light and on film, with Leicas, of course, rather >than the much under-rated MX. ;) He has since gone digital. > >The glass I plan to use includes the SMC-M 50mm 1.4, an Elicar 90mm 2.5, >and I'd like to pick up a SMC-M 34mm f2 for something wide, fast and >affordable that won't distort group shots. For the 645 I have the 75mm >and the 45mm. I may consider picking up the 150mm. This camera will >probably be relegated to the formal portraits, as I think the MX is more >suited to the PJ coverage of the wedding and reception, being >inconspicuous and less intimidating to people on the other end of the >glass. > >I'd like to hear folks' thoughts on lenses appropriate for the job, film >recommendations for such a scenario (I'm thinking Portra 160 and 400 -- >likely 800 for the reception and Ilford XP2 Super), and if I'm being a >crazy for eschewing flash. > >I look forward to hearing what folks have to say. > >Thanks, >Drew > > > -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
