I need advice - a mixed but limited equipment setup for a wedding

[ted_smith]

Hi

I consider myself very honoured to have been asked to photograph the wedding of my close friends in Italy next year. I said I'd do it as a gift, so there's no payment coming my way - just a great opportunity (as I see it)

I've done a couple of weddings before but I'm by no means a pro. Back in 2011, I had one of my two Nikon F5's stolen (thankfully not the one i paid £200 to have serviced by Nikon!) and all my lenses (20mm wide, 50mm, 80-200mm 2.8 and 60mm Macro - gutted.com) and my SB800 flash.

I used the "opportunity" to migrate to Hasselblad. I now have a 501CM, 80mm, 120mm and 150mm lenses, a Metz 45CL4 flash, Sekonic light meter and a range of Lee ND grad filters. No spare film casettes. In addition I have my other F5 and the standard f1.8 50mm lens.

THe reason for my post is this: my friends know and I have made it quite clear that I am limited in that my Blad shoots 12 shots, then a new film is needed. My Nikon doesn't have a good range of lenses. Like many 30 somethings, Im mortgaged to the hilt, have debts, and two young kids under the age of 7. Money is not something I have much of and the costs of the film and development and scanning will be a few hundred in itself.

So I guess I'm in search of some very affordable suggestions.

I thought about perhaps buying one or two Nikon F100's so that I have both spare bodies and the ability to shoot 3 films concurrantly, to be reloaded in those rare moments of quiet. But even F100's are about £100 give or take, and besides, there's the small issue of lenses!!! Of which I have only one.

The cost of my former lenses seem more expensive now than I got them for 8-10 years ago. 80-200mm for no less than £400 on average.

So then I thought about getting more film backs for the Hasselblad instead, so that I can load those up. But again, £100-£150 each seems standard.

So my Blad has a good range of lenses, but I have only one of them, and only one film back.

My Nikon has a good range of shots, but it only has one lens! And I also only have one of those.

And one flash between them all (though I can pick up another one of those for about £50).

Any advice? Notes of re-assurance? I know some of you will say "just don't do it" or "if you don't have the kit, you shouldn't do it" and so on. But I'm very aware that 20 years ago wedding photographers shot weddings with one Hasselblad and a few film backs. I got married in 2002 and the photographer used a Blad. I didn't see him change anything but the backs and the lenses.

 

[MattKing]

I used to shoot weddings with a Mamiya C330 and either a backup 35mm or a backup 220 body. Neither of the backup options were ever needed. Admittedly, I had 220 film available to me, but it was doable.

The biggest limitation I see with what you have is that you don't have anything wider than normal available to you. With some weddings, you cannot get far enough away!

If I were you, I'd look to obtain a decent quality wide to moderate telephoto for your F5. Use the Hasselblad for the more formal shots, and the F5 for the rest.

 

[markbarendt]

I'd get a few more backs for the Hasselblad and call it good.

There is no reason that I can think of that would keep you from doing a good job with that tool alone. Doing a good job at a wedding isn't about volume, typical wedding albums only have about 40 shots in them.

There will no doubt be plenty of iPhones around to take the less important shots, worry about the shots that the happy couple want to put in their album or on their wall.

 

[markbarendt]

Another thought is that as a backup your F5 with the 50 is plenty. There is no reason that with a little imagination you couldn't do a whole wedding with that combo alone.

 

[analoguey]

Buy spare Film cassettes. Don't even consider mixing and matching Film formats on a frantic shoot unless you have assistants (which in this case, you're unlikely to have).

Mixing Film formats even on a planned shoot slows things down disproportionately.

Added-
If within budget, I'd suggest a spare body (borrowed or bought). Either ways, having shot few close friends events, it's not a good idea to do it free/cheap. (if really close, it's a great idea to not do it at all, enjoy the occasion instead w a few snapshots)





sent from tapatalk

 

[adelorenzo]

I shot a wedding a couple of years ago as a gift to friends. I agree with others, stick to one camera. In my case it was a Pentax 645NII. Bring whatever you've got as a backup but juggling more than one camera is just a pain. I dragged a second system around but only put one roll through it in the end.

Get a stash of 220 film like Portra or Fuji NPH and as many backs as you can buy/rent/borrow. Realistically you just need enough film to get through the ceremony itself without reloading. IIRC I had two 220 backs and two 120 backs.

My only other tip is research and plan ahead for locations to shoot with the couple and/or the bridal party (or family if desired) and try to book at least an hour of their time after the ceremony. This is by far the most fun part of the day, everyone can relax after the deed is done and for the photographer you actually get to try to create some cool shots. during the ceremony you are working under pressure and just trying to make sure you don't miss anything. (Also you'll probably miss most of the wedding. I had no idea what was being said or done, all I could think about was the photos)

 

[pentaxuser]

Hi


So I guess I'm in search of some very affordable suggestions.

I thought about perhaps buying one or two Nikon F100's so that I have both spare bodies and the ability to shoot 3 films concurrantly, to be reloaded in those rare moments of quiet. But even F100's are about £100 give or take, and besides, there's the small issue of lenses!!! Of which I have only one.

And one flash between them all (though I can pick up another one of those for about £50).

.

Ted, it will help if you say what your budget for extra equipment is. Based on the above it sounds as if it might be less than £150( £100 for a F100 and £50 for a flash)

Incidentally I wonder if a decent F100 can be bought for £100.

pentaxuser

 

[bdial]

I did one of these a few years ago too, in my case the shooting and film was the gift and the couple paid for the processing. I used a Hasselblad, two backs, 3 lenses, wide, normal and long. My wife served as my assistant to load film backs. If you're on your own for that, I'd still have two backs but just exchange the inserts. Whenever you get to a pause, reload the insert, so it's ready to switch when you need.

I happened to have a spare Hasselblad body, but you could use the Nikon as the backup to the Hasselblad, but like others have said, I'd avoid switching between them just for the sake of it though. In my case I shot the Hasselblad for the ceremony and post ceremony groups, then used a Nikon for the reception to conserve film and processing costs. I used a Metz flash, with a TTL module for the Nikon and used its built-in exposure automation for the Hasselblad.

On this side of the pond, Nikon AF bodies below F100's can be had very cheap, like maybe £2, there are lots of lenses that don't cost a fortune but are still decent quality, especially in 3rd party optics.
You could also look in to a Hasselblad EL/m body as either the spare or prime, they sell for considerably less than the manual bodies (at least over here), you just need a 9 volt battery conversion if it has a worn-out rechargeable.

 

[mgb74]

70 years ago, weddings were shot with a Speed Graphic, 1 lens, and 6 film holders. But I wouldn't recommend it now.

You haven't said anything about the wedding venue or style - or what the bride/groom wants. That might dictate some requirements. You mention "3 films concurrently" but that really complicates matters.

Most weddings today are shot with digital, often even a APS-C sensor. So you don't need to use medium format, 35mm full frame should be fine. I won't repeat the advice above.

As to the H'blad with one back, I think that's a non-starter. Unless the wedding is tightly scripted and you know the script, you're really taking a chance of missing something important. As close friends with the couple, you probably have the knowledge to get very meaningful candid shots at the wedding. That to me also argues against the H'blad with one back.

 

[jspillane]

I don't know much about UK prices, but in the US it is possible to find a non-cosmetically appealing but functional Hasselblad C-style back for around $50. "pretty" copies and A backs go for more like $75-100... I'd think if you hunted around a bit you could find one for less than £100. If you don't have someone to load for you, just practice loading backs a million times with a dead roll. Just imagine you are in the trenches, reloading a rifle...

I would get 1-2 backs for the Hasselblad. 220 backs can be found cheaper than 120 backs, so if you are going to shoot Portra (which still comes in 220) one of those could be a great option. Depending on the side of the group and space, you may be able to get through the ceremony with just the 80 and 150. I'd use the 120 for some details (ring shot, etc.). If you can some how obtain a Distagon 50mm (maybe rental if you are near a big city?) it would probably be advantageous.

I would stick with a single film for the ceremony. It will make metering and final consistency a lot easier. Everything else, I'd stick to one color and one b&w.

You have (almost) everything you need to shoot a great wedding. If you are doing all the work pro bono, I wouldn't be shy about asking the friends to spring for the extra backs and your film/developing costs. Honestly, I'd negotiate your 'pay' as 2 backs and a Distagon 50. It's a hell of a lot cheaper than hiring a pro, and they should understand that they shouldn't skimp on materials if they want quality pictures.

 

[cowanw]

Sometimes I think that it is forgotten that the technology determines the style and the current nature of wedding photography is predicated on the ten thousand shot, variable ISO, digital camera.
If you are using technology that is not the current favorite, then, don't shoot the current style.

W Russell Young in his thesis speaks to the history of photography modeled around the
determining character of technology and the interdependency of syntax, style and art.

In your case, the syntax impact on the job you are doing is determined by the technology you are using.
Forget about Candid shots, a thousand shot choice of photographs and shots to send over the internet: do the job in the style that the camera was developed for.
Organized formal shots;
you may only need 12.

 

[ted_smith]

Cowanw : " do the job in the style that the camera was developed for. Organized formal shots; " - I like that. I'll remember it. You're quite right. DSLR shooting has generated an expectation that doesn't fit with traditional Hasselblads. As it stands, my friends don't want loads of shots - they just want a few really nice ones of them and their family and friends as a group.

I liked the idea of the 220 A24 film backs, which are cheaper due to the lack of 220 film availability. The thought of having 24 exposures per roll vs 12 is\would be a great comfort. But, having priced it up (it's available in Kodak Portra from Calumet Photographic and AG Photographic), the maths make it unrealstic. 5 rolls of A24 = 120 exposures for £86. 5 rolls of A12 = 60 exposures for £22. So 10 rolls of A12 also = 120 exposures for £44. So numbers wise, with A12, I can get the same number of shots as A24 for £44 instead of £86. The £50 difference could buy me a another A12 back (well, nearly - one just went for £44 on eBay, and Ffordes have a few for about £65).

But I accept the suggestion was one of functionality. Having two or three A24 backs loaded and ready to go would probably see me through. As you suggested, I might run it by my friends and say "if you buy the film and a back which would be about £150, I'll be good to go".

All the posts have been quite re-assuring. I like the advice. Shoot with the Blad and take the Nikon F5 as a backup. I think the best thing is to find one or two A12 backs, and get some Kodak Portra 400 (to ensure I can deal with low light and bright light OK).

In the meantime, if anyone has any backs stuck in a drawer that they never use or can't envisage needing, there's a friend in need right here!!

Thanks guys

 

[absolutedesmond]

Maybe this is of interest: A professional wedding photographer shows how she shoots a wedding
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0XCjFZ0sJaE&list=PL4CDFB0153F5A04B1&index=13

Edit: Forgot to mention on film of course!

 

[ted_smith]

I googled forever trying to find a video like that - i.e. a video of shooting a wedding with a film Hasselblad and\or Nikon F5 (F100's and Contax in this case). A great watch. Very useful and also inspiring. Thanks a lot for the link.

 

[analoguey]

Maybe this is of interest: A professional wedding photographer shows how she shoots a wedding
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0XCjFZ0sJaE&list=PL4CDFB0153F5A04B1&index=13

Edit: Forgot to mention on film of course!

Thanks for sharing, that video is quite entertaining and interesting - and the approach of keeping it "fun".
The images are underwhelming though - the video seems to have better colour and exposure than the shots.

 

[markbarendt]

Thanks for sharing, that video is quite entertaining and interesting - and the approach of keeping it "fun".
The images are underwhelming though - the video seems to have better colour and exposure than the shots.

It's a particular style, not a glitch.

 

[BrianShaw]

Don't do it. Seriously. I'll explain why later.

 

[BrianShaw]

Don't do it. Seriously. I'll explain why later.

OK, I'm back... at a real keyboard.

So like others... I've been there, done that, and have the tee-shirt to prove it. But will never do it again.

Sorry to be the sole dissenting opinion but I think you should think about a few things before you get yourself too committed. I'm sure that you are a fine photographer and a great guy... but there is a reason why wedding photography is a specialty and good wedding photographers get paid well. It's not just about having the gear and the good intentions. Event photography is stressful before, during , and after.

A lot really depends on if it is a formal church wedding and catered reception, or an informal garden wedding. But no matter:

You will not be a guest at the wedding but just another vendor. Photographing an event is a full-contact sport and will require constant diligence. It is difficult to work and celebrate a sacred/joyous occasion at the same time.

Do you have a shot list? This is a must to ensure that you and the bridal party are on the same page. And then have a back-up plan. What if some shots are not possible; what if some shots don't work out; what if something really special happens unexpectedly; what if you are distracted and miss a shot? WHAT WHEN... because something will go wrong.

Do you have a detailed time line? This is a must to ensure that you and the bridal party are in the right places at the right times. And then have a back-up plan. What if... what if... what if. WHAT WHEN... because something will change!

Are you really ready to work with difficult people? Most people are nice enough but then there is always the one or two Aunties/Cousins who will make your photography difficult. If it's not one thing it will be another. That requires special people-skills and well-experienced kid gloves. Oh... and then there is Uncle Harry who will jump in front of you as you shoot, or find some other way to subvert your best attempts at posing your shots.

Are you ready for thinking fast on your feet? What if the Vicar tells you last minute: No flash during the service; You need to photograph from the organ loft; Only shoot my left side because I have an ugly mole on the right cheek? And if the Vicar doesn't make some odd and unreasonable demands, the wedding coordinator will.

And last (not really)... are you willing to have enough tension between you and your friend that may risk your friendship? All it could take is one bad or missed shot and his bride turns into the inevitable bridezilla. And if not them... they probably have mothers who can do as much, if not more, damage to your friendship and your psyche.

But if you insist: have the last paragraph of Bill Cowan's post tattooed to your inner eyelids so you never forget them. Don't attempt with less than 4 film backs. And teach someone how to load film because you WILL need help to keep up with things, and you will need someone to watch your gear when your pre-occupied (which will be a lot of the time). Back-up equipment... have back-up of everything.

See why I'm a bit of a pessimist?

But whatever you decide.. good luck and congratulations to your friend!

 

[analoguey]

It's a particular style, not a glitch.

I just find overexposed photos with the sky and even dresses blown out very tacky and sign of photographer without enough of a self critical eye. Frankly see too much of them on fb.

Nevertheless, the ideas in the video of keeping things positive pushing out great frame of mind or telling the Model ' it's near perfect, let's just change of things' are stuff that I will definitely use in my shoots -or adapt to my personality at least.

sent from tapatalk

 

[markbarendt]

I just find overexposed photos with the sky and even dresses blown out very tacky and sign of photographer without enough of a self critical eye. Frankly see too much of them on fb.

Nevertheless, the ideas in the video of keeping things positive pushing out great frame of mind or telling the Model ' it's near perfect, let's just change of things' are stuff that I will definitely use in my shoots -or adapt to my personality at least.

sent from tapatalk

All I was getting at is that they made a choice to print that way. It's a-la-mode.

I agree that they have great ideas.

 

[ted_smith]

Thanks for the advice Brian. You're right to point it out, but this isn't my first wedding but by equal measure, I don't consider myself a pro wedding photographer at all. I've experienced a few of those "oh bugger" moments at previous weddings, which is partly what inspired the post - knowing from previous experience that for a VARIED wedding shot, my range of kit might not be up to it. But for a fairly straight forward range of shots, I think it is and the others have pointed it out (though I do need some more backs, I accept).

To put you in the picture, it's a wedding abroad, in Italy. There's only a few dozen of us going, my wife and I being two of the lucky ones to be invited. Because it's abroad, they didn't want to rely on a stranger they meet for the first time an hour before or a day before the wedding to shoot their special day. And they love my photography (they see much of my photos I take of kids and landscapes and the like). So they basically asked, on the off chance, that I'd do it for them. They knew it was a big ask, and initially, I declined for exactly the reasons you state. Then I thought it over a bit more and basically said "look, these are my limits. I can do this and that but not that". They accept that and are delighted.

So it's not a cost saving thing - it's a personal thing. And they have assured me that they don't want a thousand shots - they just want a dozen or two dozen of really nice shots of them and their family.

I know there's a lot of people like me trampling on pro wedding shooters and I mean not to be one of them. But I have the odd friend here and there who asks me to do it. And I rather enjoy it when I do, at least, when it goes well I do!!

 

[pentaxuser]

Are you ready for thinking fast on your feet? What if the Vicar tells you last minute: No flash during the service; You need to photograph from the organ loft; Only shoot my left side because I have an ugly mole on the right cheek? And if the Vicar doesn't make some odd and unreasonable demands, the wedding coordinator will.

And last (not really)... are you willing to have enough tension between you and your friend that may risk your friendship? All it could take is one bad or missed shot and his bride turns into the inevitable bridezilla.

See why I'm a bit of a pessimist?

But whatever you decide.. good luck and congratulations to your friend!

Come on Brian. Tell us the truth. You knew things were going to be bad when the vicar said to you: We deal in lead friend and asked you to call him Vin

pentaxuser

 

[markbarendt]

I know there's a lot of people like me trampling on pro wedding shooters and I mean not to be one of them. But I have the odd friend here and there who asks me to do it. And I rather enjoy it when I do, at least, when it goes well I do!!

IMO it is a myth that people like you (or anyone else doing wedding work inexpensively) trample on the market of pro shooters, the argument is that the "cheap" photographers are keeping the price down. The reality is that the market is working, there are certain prices that people are willing to pay, and very little more.

For example a couple that's in the "$500US" market for their photography might pay $750US but they simply aren't going to hire a photographer that quotes them $2-3000US even if he or she is the only one available. They will have somebody in the bridal party or a friend do it with a smartphone or buy 10 disposable cameras before they would pay $2000US.

Conversely a bride in the "$2-3000US" market isn't going to hire a photographer charging $500US, she wants more service.

 

[mgb74]

Your description (post #21) puts a slightly different - and more positive - spin on things. There are many types of weddings. This one sounds more low key and personal than many. While you may not have to worry about bridezilla, you still need to know (as Brian said) about the location and restrictions.

Reading your posts, I get the impression you want to use the H'blad because you love the camera, rather than the results it will bring in this particular case. While that comes across as harsh, I don't mean it to be.

At the risk of repeating myself, I still think 2 Nikon bodies (one for backup and possibly a different film), a fast 50mm, and a good wide to moderate telephoto zoom. It sounds like using the F5 will be 2nd nature for you. You'll be more comfortable and perhaps enjoy (rather than work) the wedding yourself.

BTW, I like this wedding primer.

 

[bdial]

One point that Brian made is particularly salient; while you are shooting, you are a vendor NOT a guest. It's really difficult, if not impossible, to be both at the same time. How well you know them, etc. etc. etc. isn't relevant while you are recording this very special event.

I've done it a few times, I don't recommend it, and decided long ago that I wouldn't do it again, then did due to a somewhat special circumstance. It worked out ok, but still was awkward.

That it's (planned to be) a low-key affair helps quite a lot, but you, your friend, and his fiancé should talk make sure everyone is clear as to expectations. Once you've finished the last shot, and put the gear away, you can go back to being a guest, hoist a glass and make a toast. But, until then, your time is theirs, and if you approach it with that mindset it will be a lot easier for everyone.