Some more wedding questions! Confused about flash.

[electrolyte]

Following on from my dumb wedding question of a couple of weeks ago I have been doing a serious amount of research and reading on the internet from a variety of sources and I am really confused.

Some of the advice says that you ain't got a hope of getting decent wedding photos without using speedlight flash. Others say you don't need flash provided you have fast glass.

Here are some examples of conflicting advice:

From Wedding Photography 101 by Antony Hands

Originally Posted by Wedding Photography 101 by Antony Hands

4. The importance of fill flash

The use of fill flash is important for weddings in so many ways. For normal portraiture in the shade it can be used to gently fill in eye sockets, making shots more flattering. In bright sun it can be used to overpower the daylight, removing harsh shadows. The difference between the two applications is the amount of flash exposure compensation (FEC) applied. Overall, it is a very difficult thing to master, and something that MUST be practised.

And...

Originally Posted by Wedding Photography 101 by Antony Hands

5. Use of flash in general

When shooting a wedding you will be constantly moving from environment to environment. You need to be able to quickly change your flash settings to deal with these changes. Most photographers do not use flash regularly, and so they are unaware of what you can and can't do with flash, and how your camera is programmed to act on different settings and in different environments.

From All Things Photography:

Originally Posted by All Things Photography

As the guests start to enter the church I take a few shots until I am happy with the combination of exposure and fill in flash. I try to get the exterior background scene through the door well exposed as well as the entering guests.

And...

Originally Posted by All Things Photography

Wedding Ceremony Photography - The Brides Arrival.....Once you have the shots you need here (outside when the bride arrives), make your way to the church entrance. I usually get some shots from behind as the bride walks up the steps or into the church but I then ask them to stop as I myself get into the church before them.

This is where I change my camera settings to "inside" mode and switch on the flash. As the bride enters the church I fire away and you will normally not be alone. Be aware that guests will be all over the place standing, sitting, walking about trying to get the best angle for their own shots.

I have a 430EX II speedlight but I must confess I don't really understand how it works and have never really mastered fill in flash. I have always been a natural light kinda-guy and always prefer high aperture, high ISO photos to those taken with flash. So according to the guides I've read, I am setting myself up for a fall as I don't really do flash much.

But then again, Radiohead, our own resident wedding master, said in a thread back in March this:

Originally Posted by Radiohead

FWIW I shot my last 8 weddings last year with a 24-70mm on one body and a 50/1.4 on the other. Nothing else. No flash.

His photos are amazing and if he doesn't use flash then perhaps flash isn't so important. Hence I am confused.

On the day - which is only 2 weeks on Saturday - I will have some fast glass with me. I will have a Sigma 50mm f.1.4 and a Canon 17-55 f/2.8 IS on my 350D so I will have the right tools to use low light and wide aperture without the need for flash I hope.

So, here is my question. Should I go all out on an intensive "learn how to use my flashgun" for 2 weeks or should I not worry about it and just concentrate on using natural light, working on decent compositions and capturing expressions and the story of the day?

PS I did try to do a search about weddings and flash but if I do a search on here for "wedding" in the "Digital Photography General Chat" sub-forum the search tool says it can't find any posts with the word wedding in them. Very strange, something must be wrong here, either me or the forum software!

[springtide]

Not that I'm any expert, but I think this is personal choice. A friend is half way moving over photography being his primary job, and we've talked about this on several occations.

I think itt depends on the wedding (the lighting available) and what you have available to you. If you have a High ISO king body (read D3 or D700) then maybe you can shoot without flash anytime.

If you go back a few years when people uses film, ISO100-200 was the norm and the only way in dark conditions was flash.

You basically need nice light. You either create this light or you use what's available. Your choice and there is no magic involved.

Not sure wheter this helps, but you will get opinions stating that the only way to get the best light is to create it yourself, and others that state that High ISO bodies give them freedom to capture the moment without worrying about flash. Just different ways to achieve the same goal I think.

Not sure if this helps, or whether there is any truth in what I've stated.

[electrolyte]

Originally Posted by springtide

Not that I'm any expert, but I think this is personal choice. A friend is half way moving over photography being his primary job, and we've talked about this on several occations.

I think itt depends on the wedding (the lighting available) and what you have available to you. If you have a High ISO king body (read D3 or D700) then maybe you can shoot without flash anytime.

If you go back a few years when people uses film, ISO100-200 was the norm and the only way in dark conditions was flash.

You basically need nice light. You either create this light or you use what's available. Your choice and there is no magic involved.

Not sure wheter this helps, but you will get opinions stating that the only way to get the best light is to create it yourself, and others that state that High ISO bodies give them freedom to capture the moment without worrying about flash. Just different ways to achieve the same goal I think.

Not sure if this helps, or whether there is any truth in what I've stated.

Thanks mate. I only have a Canon 350D which doesn't have great high ISO performance but what I usually do is convert to B&W and then the noise adds to the feel of the shot. I will be taking a back-up body with me but this is an even older 300D which I am borrowing from a mate so this won't have good high ISO performance either.

[springtide]

Originally Posted by electrolyte

Thanks mate. I only have a Canon 350D which doesn't have great high ISO performance but what I usually do is convert to B&W and then the noise adds to the feel of the shot. I will be taking a back-up body with me but this is an even older 300D which I am borrowing from a mate so this won't have good high ISO performance either.

Just a FYI, I wasn't saying you need to use flash if you don't have a high ISO king, just that these cameras give you options without flash when the light is poor (or should I say, low rather than poor)

If you have a bright day and bright venue, then there is probably no advantage of a high ISO body. The other thing that we talked about is print size and noise. Generally, most of the images will be printed small in the album. And, although we all hate 'noise', it can be considered to be creative component.
The best bit of wedding advice I've read was, "the wedding is a special day for two people (and not three!)" [ref: Practical P]. I liked statement as it implies that this is not a platform for you to take over the big day and get the best photos you've ever taken, but more a day where you get the best photos you can without taking over the day.

Hopefully this is helpful.

[Some Bloke]

Search the internets for video tuts by David Ziser or join Kelby Training for a month.
He is F awesome.
David Ziser | NAPP | Wedding Photography Lighting Techniques | Kelby Training

[kBm]

I used flash for my brothers wedding last year for fill in flash, light bouncing and all sorts! I had used it before, not much, so let the flash do most of the work.

I think it acted as a extra layer of secuirty for a wedding first timer.

If you've got one use it. You can always switch it off at any time!

[hot-fuzz]

When i did my last wedding i took some shots with flash and some with a 50mm 1.4 and the ones without the flash turned out better.
For me you are able to control the way it look alot more without flash (but thats because i cant use it properly yet).
You should be able to get a decent handheld speed without flash it you can get 1.8ish or below (1.2 preferably but thats £1200 !!!!).
I used flash for when i wanted a fill flash outside in brightlight/shade.

Flash is very tricky to do and can give some extremely creative shots, but realy only pro's or some who has alot of practice with it can get that right.

My advice would be, take a flash, but get a fast lens, and use what light you have, there is plenty of scope in shooting mainly lit areas.

HTH

[kBm]

to add - i shot the entire wedding with my 18-200 VR lens. No nifty fifty for me!

[hot-fuzz]

Originally Posted by kBm

to add - i shot the entire wedding with my 18-200 VR lens. No nifty fifty for me!

For a zoom range that is ideal, maybe need a bit faster for low light, but certainly the range is useful.
I was swapping from 24-105 to a 50mm 1.4 most of the time. For future gigs im going to use 2 bodies, one with 50 1.4 for low light and the 24-105 for all other stuff.
Neither using flash until I become more competent with it.

[dave_bass5]

I don't shoot weddings but i go to around 30+ receptions a year as i play in a couple of wedding bands.
One thing i have noticed is that some places can be very dark. Especially for the first dance. Quite often the venue will have the room lights low (or off) and rely on the bands lights. Ours certainly aren't the right type for taking photos under.

Ive spoken to quite a few of the photographers over time and ive never seen one without a flash. They dont always use them 100% of the time but they are always mounted on the cameras 9or at least one body).

I would say its better to have it and not use it rather than to not have it and need it.

[harry66]

I was at a mate's wedding last year and he had hired some allegedly hot shot arty photographer to do reportage shooting of the event.
I was quite shocked to see this guy using no flash especially during the indoor evening event which was very poorly lit. The guy had a fast Sigma lens (the details escape me). I was also taking some shots using my D80+18-200mm VR + SB800 flash and was amazed this guy didnt need a flash.

I saw the finished results a few months later and whilst the photographer had captured some really arty shots I wasn't so sure about the lighting on the indoor shots. I could see in noise and grainy effect on many of the photos where he had boosted the lighting in software and some detail was lost at the edges of some peoples faces etc.

Also, the guy didn't deliver a single colour photograph. My mate disputed this with him as the agreement was some b+w and some colour photos. Despite my mate holding back payment the guy never did provide any colour photos of the indoor event.

My mate's missus was very upset as the photographer was chosen by my mate. Luckily between myself and a few other amateurs on the day we managed to provide my mate with some half decent colour photos and that kept the bride happy.

[electrolyte]

Originally Posted by Some Bloke

Search the internets for video tuts by David Ziser or join Kelby Training for a month.
He is F awesome.
David Ziser | NAPP | Wedding Photography Lighting Techniques | Kelby Training

Thanks, I'll check him out.

Originally Posted by kBm

I used flash for my brothers wedding last year for fill in flash, light bouncing and all sorts! I had used it before, not much, so let the flash do most of the work.

I think it acted as a extra layer of secuirty for a wedding first timer.

If you've got one use it. You can always switch it off at any time!

Originally Posted by kBm

to add - i shot the entire wedding with my 18-200 VR lens. No nifty fifty for me!

Thanks mate, I took a look at your flickr and your shots were great, esp for 18-200. Hope I manage to get shots half as good as yours.

Originally Posted by Spaced_K

When i did my last wedding i took some shots with flash and some with a 50mm 1.4 and the ones without the flash turned out better.
For me you are able to control the way it look alot more without flash (but thats because i cant use it properly yet).
You should be able to get a decent handheld speed without flash it you can get 1.8ish or below (1.2 preferably but thats £1200 !!!!).
I used flash for when i wanted a fill flash outside in brightlight/shade.

Flash is very tricky to do and can give some extremely creative shots, but realy only pro's or some who has alot of practice with it can get that right.

My advice would be, take a flash, but get a fast lens, and use what light you have, there is plenty of scope in shooting mainly lit areas.

HTH

Thanks. I will have fast glass - a Sigma 50 1.4 and a Canon 17-55 2.8 IS but I will take my 430EXII with me and have it mounted and use it whenever I feel I need to.

Originally Posted by dave_bass5

I don't shoot weddings but i go to around 30+ receptions a year as i play in a couple of wedding bands.
One thing i have noticed is that some places can be very dark. Especially for the first dance. Quite often the venue will have the room lights low (or off) and rely on the bands lights. Ours certainly aren't the right type for taking photos under.

Ive spoken to quite a few of the photographers over time and ive never seen one without a flash. They dont always use them 100% of the time but they are always mounted on the cameras 9or at least one body).

I would say its better to have it and not use it rather than to not have it and need it.

Thanks, that is really useful to know.

Originally Posted by harry66

I was at a mate's wedding last year and he had hired some allegedly hot shot arty photographer to do reportage shooting of the event.
I was quite shocked to see this guy using no flash especially during the indoor evening event which was very poorly lit. The guy had a fast Sigma lens (the details escape me). I was also taking some shots using my D80+18-200mm VR + SB800 flash and was amazed this guy didnt need a flash.

I saw the finished results a few months later and whilst the photographer had captured some really arty shots I wasn't so sure about the lighting on the indoor shots. I could see in noise and grainy effect on many of the photos where he had boosted the lighting in software and some detail was lost at the edges of some peoples faces etc.

Also, the guy didn't deliver a single colour photograph. My mate disputed this with him as the agreement was some b+w and some colour photos. Despite my mate holding back payment the guy never did provide any colour photos of the indoor event.

My mate's missus was very upset as the photographer was chosen by my mate. Luckily between myself and a few other amateurs on the day we managed to provide my mate with some half decent colour photos and that kept the bride happy.

Thanks. I like b&w so I will remember to take plenty of colours shots too!

[toadoftoadhall]

fill in flash is ok if your subjects are backlit, just use manual flash same aperture as the camera, shoot RAW and work on that.

I hate using flash and just shot a wedding where I was allowed to move around and take shots all through the ceremony. I didnt have my monopod with me and used a tripod with one leg extended. You can shoot down to 1/8 sec easy as long as the subjects are not moving. Without flash you capture all the church and congregation, with flash you get B&G plus the first row of people in a very dark church.
It does depend on the church though, this one was a modern church with fantastic windows, older churches are much darker, with very coloured windows which plays havoc with available light.

a couple of shots. One with flash one without. I had to use flash at one point as a big cloud came over and I was down at 1/4 or something stupid.

http://picasaweb.google.co.uk/toadof...ll/JpgsHighRes

all the best with the shoot

toad

oh yes, and I still dont understand why people want b&w shots. Ok for rugby players covered in mud etc, but weddings?

[electrolyte]

Thanks Toad.

I went to the hotel today where the wedding will be taking place and I took a few test shots. I was very worried when I went quickly last weekend without my camera as the room where the ceremony will be is very dark but today I managed to comfortably take shots at f/2.8 at a comfortable 1/80s using my 50mm f/1.4 lens with only an ISO of 400 so I should hopefully be OK without flash. I will still take my 430EX II with me and will put this on my camera but will only use it if I need to.

Thanks to everyone who replied, you've all been extremely helpful. Just goes to show how great AVF is once again.

[kBm]

Originally Posted by electrolyte

Thanks to everyone who replied, you've all been extremely helpful. Just goes to show how great AVF is once again.

We expect a thread full of wedding pics...

Originally Posted by toadoftoadhall

oh yes, and I still dont understand why people want b&w shots. Ok for rugby players covered in mud etc, but weddings?

B&W images can tell a story or moment during a wedding, your eyes focus on the people or moment in the shot, rather than the colour and the moment. Good B&W can be really classy shots that look great.