Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Shooting Digital MF in Wedding Photography  (Read 11141 times)
haring
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 219


WWW
« Reply #60 on: January 20, 2013, 07:32:58 PM »
ReplyReply

Hyper image quality is not a priority in event photography. Telling the story is and capturing the memories.







This is SOOOO True! I am curious how many brides will notice the medium format look...Smiley They couldn't care less. Canon and Nikon rules....!!!
Logged

FredBGG
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1651


« Reply #61 on: January 20, 2013, 08:07:50 PM »
ReplyReply

This is SOOOO True! I am curious how many brides will notice the medium format look...Smiley They couldn't care less. Canon and Nikon rules....!!!

Haring

Damn... you can really tell the story well. Brilliant portfolio. Very emotional, many touching moments and while the tones are rich the images have a natural feel to them.
I think your work is a very good example of how the speed and agility of the cameras you use free you up to capture the story and move around capturing your interesting angles
and moments.
« Last Edit: January 21, 2013, 03:23:12 AM by FredBGG » Logged
kdphotography
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 731


WWW
« Reply #62 on: January 20, 2013, 11:03:16 PM »
ReplyReply

The images that your clients will notice the difference in quality (using a MFDB) is with bridal portraits, and selected wall portrait enlargements. 

No one ever said when you shoot with a MFDB that you have to abandon other tools in your bag.  As a photographer (yes, I photograph weddings) I actually use three different camera formats, and different lighting options as well.  I simply pick the best tool (camera) for my wedding client that will best help me create the best image.  My Phase MFDB, Canon DSLR, and an IR converted camera work well together.

Your clients don't necessarily need to know the effort you go through in capturing different images, but often it does show.  And sometimes it's enough to simply have that personal satisfaction.  That's what's important is making that image, with tools that I personally select.  These rants in their various forms against medium format digital are worthless and old.  I'd rather read about others using different tools in the profession, even if those tools aren't the right ones for me professionally.  You just might learn something.  What a concept.
Logged

ErikKaffehr
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 7676


WWW
« Reply #63 on: January 20, 2013, 11:30:23 PM »
ReplyReply

Hi,

Haring's images are refreshing.

Best regards
Erik


Haring

Damn... you can really tell the story well. Brilliant portfolio. Very emotional, many touching moments and while the tones are rich the images have a natural feel to them.
I think your work is a very good example of how the speed and agility of the cameras you use free you up to capture the story and bolt around capturing your interesting angles
and moments.
Logged

bcooter
Guest
« Reply #64 on: January 21, 2013, 01:14:30 AM »
ReplyReply

I don't do weddings, personally or professionally, but this is what an "old "p21+ sensor looks like at iso 400, hand held on a wobbly bed, shot focus and recompose.

I profoto 400 watt hmi, bounced to wall for fill.

Shot, I dunno in about 5 or 10 minutes.

80mm lens. F. 2.8 something, 400 iso, 125th second.



I also don't like pixel staring, but for once here goes, this is a screen grab at 100% from a cmyk file.

100%

I bet the "not old" mfd backs and lenses look pretty good too.

I'm sure someone won't agree, but hey, the internets free.



IMO

BC

P.S.  A non paid endorsement, no agenda except I'd like to get a deal with Contax to update my lenses.  I know there has to be leaf shutters for them somewhere and if they're not too expensive I might rent one or two.   
« Last Edit: January 21, 2013, 01:50:43 AM by bcooter » Logged
Ben Rubinstein
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1733


« Reply #65 on: January 21, 2013, 02:01:38 AM »
ReplyReply

I don't do weddings, personally or professionally,


Shot, I dunno in about 5 or 10 minutes.

80mm lens. F. 2.8 something, 400 iso, 125th second.


BC


10 minutes is often what we get to shoot pretty much all of our B&G shots. 25 or so separate setups.
Logged

bcooter
Guest
« Reply #66 on: January 21, 2013, 02:08:41 AM »
ReplyReply

10 minutes is often what we get to shoot pretty much all of our B&G shots. 25 or so separate setups.

That impressive seriously.

What's B&G?

IMO

BC
« Last Edit: January 21, 2013, 02:29:40 AM by bcooter » Logged
yaya
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1137



WWW
« Reply #67 on: January 21, 2013, 02:48:04 AM »
ReplyReply

P.S.  A non paid endorsement, no agenda except I'd like to get a deal with Contax to update my lenses.  I know there has to be leaf shutters for them somewhere and if they're not too expensive I might rent one or two.   
Ask them for the special ones with the programmable MTF curves where you draw a red circle on the model's eye and the lens automatically deforms and the camera will beep once that eye is at at least 180 lp/mm

Note that it has to be a RED circle! If you pick another colour some very strange things can happen!

Good luck getting that deal!!!
Logged

Yair Shahar | Product Manager | Mamiya Leaf |
e: ysh@mamiyaleaf.com | m: +44(0)77 8992 8199 | www.mamiyaleaf.com | yaya's blog
FredBGG
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1651


« Reply #68 on: January 21, 2013, 03:27:17 AM »
ReplyReply

That impressive seriously.

What's B&G?

IMO

BC

B for Bride and G for Groom
Logged
FredBGG
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1651


« Reply #69 on: January 21, 2013, 03:58:02 AM »
ReplyReply

The images that your clients will notice the difference in quality (using a MFDB) is with bridal portraits, and selected wall portrait enlargements.  

Really?



Lighting, setup, composition, makeup, hair, photographers direction, location, how the bride feels.... will all make more difference than MFD vs state of the art
35mm DSLR.
« Last Edit: January 21, 2013, 04:29:48 AM by FredBGG » Logged
kdphotography
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 731


WWW
« Reply #70 on: January 21, 2013, 09:36:18 AM »
ReplyReply

Really?


Yes, really.

You don't shoot weddings do you Fred?  You don't print large wall portraits yourself do you Fred?  Not that I'd give a f**k if you did....the point being from my post is that a MFDB is simply a tool, and you're not foreclosed from using any other camera/equipment alongside when shooting a wedding.  Professional photographers can and do use different cameras/equipment to create images---their own vision.  A good photographer can and does use different cameras and can create great imagery.  So post some images if you have them from your old P25+ that you had for a few months.  

We get you don't like medium format digital.  Ad nauseum.  Get over it.  If you're happy with using the D800, goody for you.  It's a great DSLR.  But the hasty generalizations, constant posting of the same images, the same charts, the google searches, and the same rants are seriously old. It really detracts from the quality of this forum.  Instead of insights into medium format digital "__________," it seems every thread initiated here quickly becomes a witch-hunt against Phase One and negative medium format digital ramblings.  Helpful?  Not in the least.

 Roll Eyes
« Last Edit: January 21, 2013, 09:38:18 AM by kdphotography » Logged

Ben Rubinstein
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1733


« Reply #71 on: January 21, 2013, 10:27:18 AM »
ReplyReply

That impressive seriously.

What's B&G?

IMO

BC

Hi,

B&G is Bride and Groom, sorry I'm used to wedding forums and forgot that not everyone speaks our strange language Cheesy

Not having a DSLR vs MFDB fight here but would like to address a few issues so that those interested in wedding photography may have some balance.

Here are 4 setups from a total of 19 from a recent wedding. Seriously humid, I couldn't see much through my glasses, was kinda shooting based on experience cause I couldn't see much  Cheesy. The first photograph of the session has a metadata time of 9:31pm and the last at 9:45pm and the wedding planner was hurrying us the entire time, no kidding! All shot at iso 1600 and f2.8 (I think) using Canon Wireless ETTL and a 1:8 ratio within the ETTL system using two speedlites in a brolly off camera held by an assistant and on camera fill. No time for manual flash, test shots, tripod, multiple strobes, etc. Couldn't have begun to do this with our DF, heck it wouldn't have managed the focus, the aperture, the handheld shutter speeds, the high ISO or the wireless TTL flash with ratios. Did I mention that I was using a canon 5Dc bought 7 years ago?









For this kind of photography medium format digital is just not at all possible. If you have time and the ability to use the necessary lighting and most of all clients who buy into the static portraiture look  then you could use MFDB's but then I would seriously question whether the MFDB could possibly be economically viable for all the very highest end shooters. The difference in IQ is unlikely in 99.9% of the cases to bring in a difference in income equal not only the cost difference of the MF gear but also the need for working in a MF way, the higher end lighting, etc, etc. I would also seriously question whether most clients would be able to see said difference in IQ, from ten years of shooting weddings I highly doubt it.

I'm also rather nervous about putting all the horses into the 'kill ambient with heavy flash' look for weddings. From what I can see in the market that ship has already sailed and the look like so very many others is now something that many consider passée. It's still big in the advertising/fashion world but far less so now for the wedding market. Whether I am right or wrong re the market, I have little doubt that in time it will be passée leaving couples with a style which is no longer in fashion. IMO a very dangerous type of photographic style for a wedding photographer to invest an entire career into which is what they would be doing if they invest to this extent.

I'm now out of the wedding game, my legs have given up on me for good, however I'm wary of photographers marrying a look to the extent of having to invest these kind of amounts, I'm extremely wary of a look which may require extrememly questionable business investments and I know that for most photographers MF is not going to be fluid or broad enough as a tool and that for most clients it would be a waste of money.

For those who can and do make it work I have the utmost respect. I do believe however that it is so niche a requirement that the number of said people will never be more than a very few. All the photographers I know using MFDB for weddings did not buy the camera for wedding work, it's a commercial shooting rig that they are bringing along to the gig.
« Last Edit: January 21, 2013, 10:31:47 AM by Ben Rubinstein » Logged

MrSmith
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 910



WWW
« Reply #72 on: January 21, 2013, 11:03:37 AM »
ReplyReply

not a wedding photographer but i know enough that you can't cover a wedding with just a MFD if you need to do the informal shooting from bright sunshine to candle-lit church, you could use both but not having an 1600/3200iso camera that will focus in the near dark is putting yourself at a disadvantage. great to shoot your 'hero' shots and the big group outside with a bigger camera but i personally wouldn't want to rock up without a quality DSLR that i could grab and capture that once in a lifetime memory.                                                   
Logged
FredBGG
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1651


« Reply #73 on: January 21, 2013, 11:37:02 AM »
ReplyReply

Yes, really.

You don't shoot weddings do you Fred?  You don't print large wall portraits yourself do you Fred? Not that I'd give a f**k if you did....


When faced with a simple side by side image that shows comparable image quality the response is a personal attack
and four letter words.....

Regarding wall portraits... and printing them. Well I am a portrait photographer. A-List clients.
And as far as printing them big I think it would be safe to say I have gone bigger than you might imagine.
Canon IFP 8100. Its a 44 inch printer and I print large to very large on a regular basis.

While I have shot only a few real wedding I shot for many years for the biggest wedding and bridal magazine
in Italy. I shot quite a few stories that were mock wedding in a similar time frame as a wedding.
I also gave workshops when I had the time and to many wedding
photographers. In particular the portrait part.


Your clients don't necessarily need to know the effort you go through in capturing different images, but often it does show.  And sometimes it's enough to simply have that personal satisfaction. 


I would not say that it's enough have "that personal satisfaction". However I do agree that using a tool that personally satisfies you
and inspires you to do a better job can be a good thing  If you feel more inspired when you pick up your MF camera and you find that it gets you going
that is fine.

However that is quite different from letting that enthusiasm and gear infatuation spill over into  spill over into
rather unfounded technical articles, especially considering the amount of money involved and how challenging the market is.

My point is to share my experience on how the tremendous advancement in less expensive cameras have made it possible
to produce outstanding quality with far more agile and accessible equipment.

Readers of these discussions can take a look at the portfolios of those that took part.
They can take the information shared and go and make their own choices.

Some photographers feel threatened by the "democratization" of image quality.



« Last Edit: January 21, 2013, 12:43:59 PM by FredBGG » Logged
ErikKaffehr
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 7676


WWW
« Reply #74 on: January 21, 2013, 01:14:34 PM »
ReplyReply

Hi,

The reason Fred reposts the same images is in part that there are few valid comparison images available. You really need two well executed images shot of the same subjects under identical conditions. Here are two sets:

The first set illustrate the resolution advantage of IQ180 over Nikon D800E (Left: Phase One, Right: Nikon D800E)


The second one compares Phase One IQ180 and Nikon D800E for shadow detail:


All the above images were published with kind permission of their copyright owners, Marc McCalmont and Tim Ashley in this article of mine: http://echophoto.dnsalias.net/ekr/index.php/photoarticles/71-mf-digital-myths-or-facts




Yes, really.

You don't shoot weddings do you Fred?  You don't print large wall portraits yourself do you Fred?  Not that I'd give a f**k if you did....the point being from my post is that a MFDB is simply a tool, and you're not foreclosed from using any other camera/equipment alongside when shooting a wedding.  Professional photographers can and do use different cameras/equipment to create images---their own vision.  A good photographer can and does use different cameras and can create great imagery.  So post some images if you have them from your old P25+ that you had for a few months.  

We get you don't like medium format digital.  Ad nauseum.  Get over it.  If you're happy with using the D800, goody for you.  It's a great DSLR.  But the hasty generalizations, constant posting of the same images, the same charts, the google searches, and the same rants are seriously old. It really detracts from the quality of this forum.  Instead of insights into medium format digital "__________," it seems every thread initiated here quickly becomes a witch-hunt against Phase One and negative medium format digital ramblings.  Helpful?  Not in the least.

 Roll Eyes
« Last Edit: January 21, 2013, 01:50:22 PM by ErikKaffehr » Logged

opgr
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1125


WWW
« Reply #75 on: January 21, 2013, 01:41:18 PM »
ReplyReply

The reason Fred reposts the same images is in part that there are few valid comparison images available.

one swallow. And spamming the forum ad nauseam doesn't make it so…
Logged

Regards,
Oscar Rysdyk
theimagingfactory
Rob C
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 12213


« Reply #76 on: January 21, 2013, 02:30:11 PM »
ReplyReply

À propos of not much at all, were I given the choice to shoot for Condé Nast's Sposabella or to cover the highest of high society wedding, I'd take the magazine any and every day, regardless of the financial rewards from the real wedding.

One would be fun, and the other (for me) would represent a friggin' nightmare and huge sense of betrayal of why I became a photographer. I'm odd that way.

Rob C
Logged

TMARK
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1843


« Reply #77 on: January 22, 2013, 09:29:24 AM »
ReplyReply

À propos of not much at all, were I given the choice to shoot for Condé Nast's Sposabella or to cover the highest of high society wedding, I'd take the magazine any and every day, regardless of the financial rewards from the real wedding.

One would be fun, and the other (for me) would represent a friggin' nightmare and huge sense of betrayal of why I became a photographer. I'm odd that way.

Rob C

I'm with you 100% on this, and I suspect for the same reasons.
Logged
gerald.d
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 388


« Reply #78 on: January 22, 2013, 10:28:07 AM »
ReplyReply

Yes, really.

You don't shoot weddings do you Fred?  You don't print large wall portraits yourself do you Fred?  Not that I'd give a f**k if you did....the point being from my post is that a MFDB is simply a tool, and you're not foreclosed from using any other camera/equipment alongside when shooting a wedding.  Professional photographers can and do use different cameras/equipment to create images---their own vision.  A good photographer can and does use different cameras and can create great imagery.  So post some images if you have them from your old P25+ that you had for a few months.  

We get you don't like medium format digital.  Ad nauseum.  Get over it.  If you're happy with using the D800, goody for you.  It's a great DSLR.  But the hasty generalizations, constant posting of the same images, the same charts, the google searches, and the same rants are seriously old. It really detracts from the quality of this forum.  Instead of insights into medium format digital "__________," it seems every thread initiated here quickly becomes a witch-hunt against Phase One and negative medium format digital ramblings.  Helpful?  Not in the least.

 Roll Eyes

I wouldn't be surprised if other people are just as fed up with dealers circling around forums like vultures and seemingly treating every new post on pretty much any subject as a sales opportunity, diving straight in with "Whilst you may be asking questions regarding <insert pretty much any kit here>, perhaps you might also want to consider <insert kit the dealer sells here> and the benefits a dealer can bring. Oh, and by the way, as you'll see from my signature, I just might be able to help you out with that!". Followed up with copious quantities of FUD to try to deter a potential punter from ever even consider buying MF kit from anyone other than a dealer.

Perhaps if those dealers weren't so damn pushy all the time, Fred wouldn't feel obliged to constantly remind people there are other options out there?

I'll say one thing for him though - he could certainly teach a few around here a thing or two about manners and common decency.
Logged
Jeffery Salter
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 68



WWW
« Reply #79 on: January 22, 2013, 11:04:49 AM »
ReplyReply

"I wouldn't be surprised if other people are just as fed up with dealers circling around forums like vultures and seemingly treating every new post on......."

Actually Gerald.  You seem to forget that the dealers on this forum are also accomplished photographers.  They are not used car dealers.  They are resources who will gladly share information on a wide range of gear (not only what they sale).  I can guarantee that many professionals on this site have picked up the phone and asked technical questions on a project from the dealers.  As matter of fact I recently photographed Steve Harvey (An American comic and actor) for a magazine cover.  This was great, however the magazine gave me the assignment with only 48 hours notice.  That may seem like a lot of time.  But not when you have have a gold throne constructed and put together a team to do the shoot.  Dave. G. fedexed me in Miami at 110 mm (rental) LS which I needed.  It's called teamwork.

So what if they want to sale a lens or body or whatever. That's what they do.

Yes FRED does provide other options.  And he's entitled to his opinions.

But if you are working professional who has to produce consistent quality on time or a weekend warrior (with 48 hours to produce some beautiful Ansel Adamest images) you may want to listen to other positive, inspirational voices on LL.

Thank you,
Jeffery Salter
Logged

Jeffery Salter
___________________________________________________________________________________
www.jefferysalter.com

Loving life one frame at a time.
Pages: « 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad