Yeah, whether you agree with everything John says or not, he has a wealth of
information on wedding photography on his web site. He's gone to
considerable trouble to share that with us. From my perspective, I dislike
flash during the wedding ceremony. Usually I could find a good,
inconspicuous, vantage point to take natural light photos from a tripod
using a slow shutter speed. This works if you watch for action peaks so you
don't have to deal with subject movement. I also think one of the more
important aspects of wedding photography is for the photographer to be able
to blend into the scenery so you are not noticed.
/jim
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of Wayne Culberson
Sent: Tuesday, September 02, 2003 1:24 PM
To: olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [OM] Albert's quest/even more OT
>From: John A. Lind <jlind@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> I wouldn't dispute the flash capability. About half my weddings are "no
> flash" during the ceremony itself. The person officiating has the final
> word on the matter . . . along with restrictions on where I cannot be
> during the ceremony. Some are quite restrictive.
I'd like to add a comment here from the point of view of the "person
officiating". I've officiated at several weddings, and have one coming up on
the 27th of this month, and another, for my son and his fiance, on Nov. 1.
I can't speak for what others do, but I usually try to follow the wishes of
the bride as to whether there are pictures taken during the ceremony. As
John says, in the culture here, the bride is Queen for the day, and what she
says (and her mother) is mostly what happens. But my "advice", IF they
follow it, is to restrict picture taking during the ceremony to the official
photographer only, and to keep that at a minimum, and if possible without
flash. My reason for this is simply that too many flashes and too many
people jockeying for position (and I've seen it get quite bad) really
distracts from the ceremony. Depending on the size of the building and how
it is setup, the photographer usually has to position himself or herslef
between the guests and the wedding party, so it is a bit like standing
someone in front of the TV during the best part of the movie. My advice is
to have someone video the ceremony from the side, and take the pictures
after the ceremony. Having said that, I've also been behind the camera for a
couple of weddings, one of which I was asked to take photos during the
ceremony (against my advice again).
I can quite confidently say that the easier part by far is the officiating
part. And yes, while the bride expects perfection in every detail, a mistake
in the ceremony is much easier to pacify than one in photography would be,
I'm sure. When I meet with the couple to discuss their wedding, I try to
tone down somewhat their expectations of perfection on the wedding day.
As to my son's upcoming wedding on Nov. 1, he at first asked me about taking
pictures as well. I immediately remembered John Lind's excellent advice on
his web site, and responded that being father of the groom, officiating
person, and official photographer might be a bit much. So they are going for
the pro photographer. Thanks John,
Wayne
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|