Informal wedding shoot experience

I have some friends that were to be married on Veterans Day this year. Originally, they had not expressed any interest in photographs, but a mutual friend convinced them otherwise. Somehow I was roped into the event as they have seen my trip report photographs and asked if I would do this.

Having never shot a formal wedding, I was terrified of the prospect of doing this. I poured over dgrin.com and the anxiety level went through the roof seeing their work. Then I reminded myself that this was an informal wedding and I wasn't charging for it, so there would be no expectations. Besides, I said I'd offer a money back guarantee if they didn't like the results.

Shooting a 3pm event in Texas on a clear day presented it's own challenges, primarily sunlight as bright as it was. The shadows were harsh at times and the fill flash was an absolute must. After the event, they wanted to make The Oasis for sunset pictures. Again, no pressure since I've never done those either.

I used Nikon's D90 on "A" mode at ISO 200 with a Nikon Speedlight SB900 and Nikon's 18-200VR set at f/8. The speedlight did all the shutterspeed calculations which was a breeze. I only did a few bracket shots and honestly, the time to set it up and get the subjects to wait for three shots was way too much for them. I did use the continuous shooting mode and could rattle 3 shots off pretty quickly. Post was done using a combination of Lightroom v2.2 and Photoshop Elements. I shot RAW and .jpg Fine, but wound up doing all post in .jpg. I've only had LR for a week and am still figuring it all out. Total investment thus far is six hours for the event and about 12 hours post processing.

In the end I came away with a greater appreciation for people that do this professionally. It's not easy work. So, here's a few that I thought I'd share in hopes of constructive C&C. The full slideshow is HERE

#1


#2


#3


#4


#5


#6





.

PRIMO!

My daughter is planning a low-budget outdoor wedding for next May. Might be in touch.

I like Hebrews 12 in that photo - excellent reminder to saints of the living God to live in accordance with His Word.

great shots. They can't beat the price.

did you use the strobe to fill in on the outdoor people shots?

did you dodge & burn #3 (looks good, just notice the oval highlight--really helps draw your focus to the ladies.

Heck, those look better than most of my friends' wedding pictures. You should've charged. Good job, man.

If there's one thing I universally hate, it's over-produced, over-edited, overly sappy wedding shots. It's great that you were straight-forward in your approach to composition and made effective natural use of the shooting environments. In my opinion, the final collection of photographs is more honest when done in such a way.

My only critique is that I would never use a Dutch Angle (as in the limo shot) in a wedding pic, no matter how informal the occasion. Dutch Angles are a method for conveying dissonance or fearfulness -- not something you generally want to say in a wedding album.

Otherwise, awesome.

The only recommendation I would make on the shots on this thread is with number one:

Try dropping the overall exposure a stop or maybe a bit more and then use the LR adjustment brush to bring the exposure back up on the rings or maybe put a vignette in there.....this is only a personal preference...the photo is still way good the way it is.

Oh...photo three....I would have turned the bride a bit and not have the slit of her dress head on to the viewer...that's about it.

Good job!!

BTW....I have done four weddings and will never do another one!!! Love taking potraits, HATE weddings!!

::shudder:: I did this full time for 6 years. I just got some flashbacks. Your shots look very good and I'm sure they exceeded their expectations. Be careful getting into photography for more than just yourself, it's a very quick way to ruin a good hobby

NitroRoo said:

::shudder:: I did this full time for 6 years. I just got some flashbacks.

Click to expand...

Mmm hmm. I've always refused to do weddings outright. My clients know up front that when they give me a photo assignment, they get it my way. I know how to get a good shot and I have my own style for getting it. That policy tends not to work in the setting of cat-fighting mother-in-laws, pretentious brides, and self-important wedding planners.

Tim Kreitz said:

My only critique is that I would never use a Dutch Angle (as in the limo shot) in a wedding pic, no matter how informal the occasion. Dutch Angles are a method for conveying dissonance or fearfulness --

Click to expand...

So, what's the problem using them in wedding photography?

Chirpy said:

So, what's the problem using them in wedding photography?

Click to expand...

I was waiting for that.

Tracker said:

did you use the strobe to fill in on the outdoor people shots?

did you dodge & burn #3 (looks good, just notice the oval highlight--really helps draw your focus to the ladies.

Click to expand...

Yes. The SB900 was mounted on the camera hotshoe the whole time and fired every time. That strobe is amazing. It just 'knows' what the subjects are, where they are for distances, takes the camera settings into account such as "A" mode/f-stop and applies the correct amount of flash. I think one of those is on my wishlist now.

Yes. #3 has a slight black vignette to it. That really highlighted the colors that were just a big higher on the color saturation then just the bride/son pic.

Tim Kreitz said:

If there's one thing I universally hate, it's over-produced, over-edited, overly sappy wedding shots. It's great that you were straight-forward in your approach to composition and made effective natural use of the shooting environments. In my opinion, the final collection of photographs is more honest when done in such a way.

My only critique is that I would never use a Dutch Angle (as in the limo shot) in a wedding pic, no matter how informal the occasion. Dutch Angles are a method for conveying dissonance or fearfulness -- not something you generally want to say in a wedding album.

Click to expand...

Presented was only six or so of the 50 in the series linked above. I guess I like the photojournalism (PJ) style of recording events. It's start to finish and gives the viewer a feel for the days events.

Heck.... I had to go lookup Dutch Angle! I didn't think much about it being a fearfull shot when I took it. It was more whimsical and fun. OK - I had to clear the flash on the top of the camera from the car's headliner and that required tilting the camera/flash. Better? lol....

STScott said:

The only recommendation I would make on the shots on this thread is with number one:

Try dropping the overall exposure a stop or maybe a bit more and then use the LR adjustment brush to bring the exposure back up on the rings or maybe put a vignette in there.....this is only a personal preference...the photo is still way good the way it is.

Oh...photo three....I would have turned the bride a bit and not have the slit of her dress head on to the viewer...that's about it.

Click to expand...

My gut kept telling me #1 was overexposed or too much contrast. But I tried to show the white pages of the bible and the only way that happened was in the result. I like the idea of a vignette around it.

Yeah, my wife said the same thing on #3. Honestly, I never noticed it when taking the shot. I was more concerned on getting her and the kids expressions and trying to see what was in the background. I'll have to work on the composition a bit more 'cause I see some stuff not yet mentioned as well.

NitroRoo said:

Be careful getting into photography for more than just yourself, it's a very quick way to ruin a good hobby

Click to expand...

I'd tend to agree with you if I were doing a formal wedding shoot. Inspite of the fact this was informal, there was still a tremendous amount of pressure to get it right and provide them with what I wanted to be a decent capture of the day's events. The informal environment made it fun since I know the couple as well. I'd really have to think long and hard to do something like this if I didn't know the people personally. Just too much pressure because there's so many emotions. Now dog portraits I might be able to handle.

Thanks for the comments/critique so far. Keep 'em coming!

.

M38A1 said:

My gut kept telling me #1 was overexposed or too much contrast. But I tried to show the white pages of the bible and the only way that happened was in the result. I like the idea of a vignette around it.






.

Click to expand...

Hope you don't mind...played a little bit with the ring picture in LR






Not the greatest edit job....looks like I over sharpened it....but you get the idea.

STScott said:

Hope you don't mind...played a little bit with the ring picture in LR

Click to expand...

The problem is that this edit contains tons of out-of-gamut color, which makes it essentially useless for anything other than viewing on a computer screen. This is a common mistake among hobbyists and is no big deal for just showing on the Web. But since most couples want to receive hi-quality prints of their wedding photos to assemble in an album, making color adjustments that exceed the ink limitations of process printing is a massive error.

Note the exclamation marks in the color-formula analysis I sampled from the rings. This is Photoshop's way of saying, "You messed up":

Tim Kreitz said:

The problem is that this edit contains tons of out-of-gamut color, which makes it essentially useless for anything other than viewing on a computer screen. This is a common mistake among hobbyists and is no big deal for just showing on the Web. But since most couples want to receive hi-quality prints of their wedding photos to assemble in an album, making color adjustments that exceed the ink limitations of process printing is a massive error.

Note the exclamation marks in the color-formula analysis I sampled from the rings. This is Photoshop's way of saying, "You messed up":

Click to expand...

Thanks.....could you explain this further? I have had no issues with prints or complaints from clients before....but if I could be doing things better I sure would like to know how.

I'm far from a critic (P&S won't allow it) so I'll just comment on the ones I liked.

The first one (rings and bible). I think that is almost my favorite of all of them. Definitely the best opening shot.

The newlyweds and the sunset. You just can't beat a shot like that.

The sunset alone. WOW!

Now, I just have to say (and I mean no disrespect to any of the attendees) when I saw the first shot of the blonde in the black dress, all I heard was "always the bridesmaid, never the bride!". LoL

Great shots, all of them. I too prefer the reduced-drama photos at a wedding.

Me and my running buddy eloped!! I recomend it to everyone... saved a bundle on wedding crap AND had a longer honeymoon!!! It did confuse the girls at work thou.. like cows looking at a new gate .. no dress, no cake.. NO CAKE!! REALLY?!?..
was so funny.. Still, we mad a great time, made wonderful memories and still had money when we got home..

Our entire wedding cost right at 200.00 including a great photographer and preacher lady!!!
The honeymoon.. 5 days in Albuquerque, NM on the Sandia Mountains!! Discount booking on Oritz,, hotel was under 300.00 after taxes,, all the rest.. gas and food...There are some great ways to have wonderful wedding services out there!!

STScott said:

Thanks.....could you explain this further? I have had no issues with prints or complaints from clients before....but if I could be doing things better I sure would like to know how.

Click to expand...

Sure. First, take a look at the following diagram. It gives a good representation of just how small the process printing gamut of reproducible color actually is:



Process printing uses different mixtures of four colors of ink to create thousands of tones. The four colors are cyan, magenta, yellow, and black -- often referred to as 'CMYK' or Subtractive Color Mode. 'Subtractive Color Mode' simply means that as you subtract color, you approach white, which is a mechanical necessity when working with inks.

Unfortunately, the amount of visible color our eyes can perceive is vastly larger. CMYK is, in fact, the exact opposite of how our eyes work and also of how a computer monitor works. Computer monitors produce color using the Additive Color Mode. 'Additive Color Mode' means that as you add color, you approach white. The primary colors of red, green, and blue are used in this mode, or 'RGB':



In editing photos or doing any other type of graphic design work that will be printed, one of the most important factors is to not use digital color formulas outside the CMYK gamut. Otherwise you are assigning a tonal value to the file that a four-color printing press simply cannot reproduce. This can result in some nasty, terrible-looking results. Believe me, in 16 years of working professionally in creative media, I've seen some truly awful stuff roll off a press due to this mistake. Therefore, it is advisable to work in CMYK mode in Photoshop when editing a photo to be printed. In fact, printing facilities will reject files submitted in RGB mode, because most presses can't even understand them.

It is also advisable to setup your Photoshop preferences to work with the specific type of paper you'll be printing onto. Ink saturation limit and a variety of other factors come into play when setting these parameters, and is the subject of an entire other post I could write.

All that said, there are a few ways around the limitations of Subtractive Color Mode -- namely, the use of what is called "spot" color. A spot color is a specifically formulated custom color assigned to its own channel in the digital file. At the printing facility, the custom ink is loaded into the press and prints on its own color pass to add greater depth than CMYK can provide. Companies such as Pantone make tens of thousands of spot colors, ranging from golds and chromes to uber-punchy oranges and blues.

Another type of mechanical color reproduction is Hexachrome, or CMYKOG (cyan, magenta, black, orange, green), which is an extremely expensive, but ultra beautiful printing method. That, too, is another post in and of itself.

I hope this made some sense and was helpful. I tend to get very geeky when it comes to this stuff.

So let me toss out the big question next......

IF one was to have paid for these shots (and there's quite a bit more than these HERE, what would have been a fair price for the shoot? Is this a $500 proposition to provide a disc with the 150 gross/culled images of which 50 have been heavily post-processed? More? Less? Would one provide an album of what I thought were the best? Would you wait for the bride/groom to tell you which ones were the best and then tweak/print? What sizes?

Not that I want to get into photographing weddings, but I do sort of wonder where this type of work fits in the grand scheme of pricing for the pics delivered.

.

M38A1 said:

Is this a $500 proposition to provide a disc with the 150 gross/culled images of which 50 have been heavily post-processed?

Click to expand...

I think Cher and I paid that amount for our wedding pics in 1994. I'd figure it based on time plus the cost of prints (assuming you handle that aspect, which I recommend for quality control).

Just as a go-by, my time for freelance video, audio, photography, and design is $100 per hour. So figure about four hours of shooting, two hours of editing, an hour of art direction in producing the prints, and the cost of printing. That would work out to about $1050.

Note: If you were to waive your copyright restrictions for the buyer, I'd tack on an additional fee for that, as well.

Good advice above - I would add to NOT underprice yourself. Starting out $500 - $1000 is a fair starting point, but I would look to increase that to $2k+ QUICKLY. I found that the majority of budget weddings were actually a LOT more work, harder to shoot, and the people (in general) were harder to please. Whereas people who paid me $4-6k for a package were kind, grateful, dressed better, had better venues, better friends, etc, etc. Hate to stereotype it like that but after about 50 weddings a year for the last several years I'd have to say that was the trend. Factor in ALL of your costs including your time shooting, editing, selling, everything. Then make sure you are also making a profit on your product, then make sure you are making enough to cover equipment and other overhead. Add it up and you'll see why serious full time photographers regularly charge $2k-$10k+ per wedding. I was charging $300/hr for shooting, editing, and proofing w/ a 4hr min. Then prints and albums were additional. I'd say I was in the upper middle end of the price range in my area (Tampa Bay). Hope that helps!

NitroRoo,

Your advice might be in line with commercial prices for such services. As a father who will be funding a good part of my daughter's wedding, we'll do without fancy, high quality photos rather than pay $1,000 or more. The marriage is what's important, not the wedding. I don't look at my wedding pictures once a year, but I enjoy my wife (some days more than others) every day.

So if I took $100/hr as Tim mentioned and spent five hours shooting, there's $500. Then another twelve for post or $1200, does what I shot realistically fall into the $1700 category? ie: if a wedding couple paid $1700, would it have been a good value for them?

To be fair, that was the first time I used LR, so cut post in half for $600 and call it learning curve. Would $1,100 have been fair to deliver 150 culled images, 50 of which were tweaked in the link above?

Like I said, I'm not going to attempt to do this for money, but knowing what it's worth would be interesting.


.

"What it's worth" is completely subjective with photography. Some would say their photos are priceless, there are others that regret spending as much as they did. It's all in the eye of the beholder

$1100 is fair....if you want to add in an album then you need to add another $500 at least.

I did my four weddings at a break even price because I wanted the work to build my portfolio and get the experience...so I think I did charge right around $750 for the full shoot with bridal portraits beforehand and gave the bride and groom a DVD of the edited photos.

Tim...thanks for the explanation on the printing stuff.

STScott said:

Tim...thanks for the explanation on the printing stuff.

Click to expand...

You're quite welcome.