My Greatest Challenge

Frederick_Rider · #1 02-07-2005, 04:09 AM

Wedding Photography in Detroit can be very facinating due to the diversity of cultures and religions, but one of my latest events posed a challenge. The Bride is Caucasian in a broad white gown and the Groom is African American in a traditional black tux. The bridal party is also mixed with groomsmen in black tuxes and the bridesmaids in black gowns. The cathedral was dimly lit with very dark oak woodwork. And I was shooting all digital, Kodak SLRn with Quantum T2D and a wireless Metz 45 on a pole off to one side for some dimensional detail.

I shot a bit hot during the event, up to 1 fs over. All of the pictures came out fine, but with loss of tonal quality in the faces of the Caucasians. The pics were shot RAW and I did use Kodak DCS to recover up to 1fs in detail. The result was full color without any blowouts or hotspots and the details in the bride's gown were preserved.

I would like to assure, for the next time, that I can find a better balance in my exposures.

If anyone has experience with this type of wedding event, I will be very appreciative of any tips or suggestions you could pass my way.

Thank you for your help.

Cliff_Spicer · #2 02-07-2005, 12:12 PM

Hi Fredrick,

I shoot weddings in Toronto and we have a very ethnic diverse community here. In terms of exposure, if you use a handheld meter and have determined your correct exposure for you printing situations (I used a CC card and PS to make sure the white square was within 240-245 range) than I have found the subject matter doesn’t make a difference. I honestly do not do anything different than if I was shooting two caucasians both wearing white side by side than I would for two black people wearing black side by side. I find that a handheld meter is invaluable for weddings and using any sort of incamera metering way to inconsistent. For the church I would use a slow shutter speed such as 1/20th and shoot with a wider aperture and pull the light back so it falls on the background as well to open up the dark wood. The one problem is if the light is not off to one side you do get flair on the wood so I would probably shoot the images on an angle to get a flatter light as I would not want to accentuate any shadows the flash may cause.

Hope this helps,

Cliff
P.S. The shadow/highlight feature in PS is amazing for opening up shadows and maintaining highlights. Do this on your 16 bit file and you will be impressed what you can do with the shadows.

Frederick_Rider · #3 02-07-2005, 01:42 PM

Thanks Cliff,

I do have a hand held meter but was admittedly trying to rely on TTL since I switched from Medium Format to 35mm digital. I did do better when I used a meter and manual exposure settings.

Regarding the CC card, is there a CC card you would recommend? I was looking at a color management kit sold by B&H called QP ColorKit 1 and was also considering the Whibal sold at rawworkflow.com. I saw it recommended on one of these forums. Your technique sounds solid.

Your suggestions on lighting are also right on regarding problems with flare on wood surfaces. Especially in catherdals with dark ceilings where I have no opportunity to bounce light and the house rules limit your location to center isle shots. I just acquired the pole for wireless remote flash to help address this issue. It has helped, but I want to refine my technique to a level of certainty. If I pull back the light and add some elevation, is this effective at reducing flare off wood surfaces? I was also wondering if polarizers are effective in minimizing flare off wood surfaces.

No doubt, I still have a lot to learn.

Thanks for the great tips.

Sincerely,
Fred Rider

Cliff_Spicer · #4 02-07-2005, 06:24 PM

Fred,

There are two ways (sure there are more) to figure out the correct exposure. The first which I feel works just fine is the old shoot a series of photos (bracket in 3rds of a stop) containing a wide range of tones and do nothing to the photos except to convert to your labs custom profile and ask that the photos be run “as is” with no automatic settings or adjustments. Then simply view the images, select the one you like best and set your meter accordingly. This was the way we always evaluated exposure with transparency film and it works equally well with digital. Don’t worry about what the image looks like on the monitor (but make sure you are using a hardware solution for profiling and calibrating) as what you really care about is how does the print look. I see people and read reviews all the time evaluating digital images by enlarging the images on their monitors and pointing out deficiencies that never show up in a print so IMHO the deficiencies are irrelevant unless I am only concerned in how the image looks at X% on my screen. The other way to determine exposure is to take a gmb colour checker chart and shoot it (bracketing in 3rds) under controlled lighting and check the white square in PS info pallet for a reading of between 240-245 which most printers can hold the detail of white without blowing them out. I also highly recommend you use a handheld meter and ignore the camera meter as nothing will get you as close and it is quick when you have it on your belt. I use a handheld meter at press conferences and news events because it can be extremely quick and will give you consistent results. I also love the expodisc and find it easy to set up a couple, take a quick meter reading and fire off a frame through the expodisc at the light source. This gives me extremely consistent WB which saves time in post production. Like auto exposure settings, auto WB will get you close but for the two seconds it takes to pull out a meter, take a reading, then another second to set the manual WB using an expodisc you can save yourself hours in postproduction fixing inconsistent images the auto settings that all cameras produce.

Just my two cents,

Cliff

Frederick_Rider · #5 02-07-2005, 10:09 PM

The kindness and information you afforded me is greatly appreciated.

I have a Gretag Macbeth Color Checker card and an Expodisc in my shopping cart at B&H.
I've needed a color checker for sometime in order to calibrate a Kodak 8500. Just kept
putting it off along with the Eye1 Photo spectrophotometer $$$.

Also, I am dusting off the old Sekonic.

You've saved me countless hours and I cannot thank you enough.

Best Regards