A film for low light wedding

[Finnkare]

I'm getting married in a couple of months (yikes!).

My friend is gonna take the pictures. I was up for slides, because I just love giving slide shows with a projector, but my fiancée prefers prints. We have an excellent professional print lab with a proper enlarger for analog neg/pos-printing. With slides it's always a bit tricky, because there's no analog pos/pos-printing service available in the whole country (Finland)! I don't know what's the case elsewhere, but anyway, I'm not sending my slides anywhere for this occasion. And I think the negs will do anyway in prints, I'm just accustomed to slides in color pics, and have actually not "really" shot colour negs.

The light in the place of the reception is quite dim. I measured it, and in the middle of the room it's about EV 8 @ ASA 800, so 1/60 with f/2. The light is also privided by bulbs and candles, so a conversion filter is needed anyway, which demands one stop more. Without a flash we would actually have only one option, I think, the Fuji 1600. I'm just running a test film, but I'm not that hopeful.

My friend prefers using flash with a yellow filter. He dislikes fast film, because they're more sensitive for underexposing etc. And the picture quality is also more messy.

In the church it's maybe not quite as dim, but I was hoping that it could be handled with the same film, in order not to get so different tones throughout the whole set. For outdoor pictures and the official portraits we would choose a slower film. Maybe also a portrait or two with b/w-film, propably APX100 (35), FP4 or Acros100.


So, can you recommend any films? I trust the indoor film would be around ASA 400 maybe? The outdoor film could be anything in the slower range. If you recommend not using flash, these comments are also welcome.


I have another friend who loves Fuji Reala, but I read from another thread here someone recommending Kodak Portra instead, at least for portraits. I shot the only wedding portraits I have shot with Portra NC, and was not that happy. Although I took them to quite a bulk lab, which was not a disaster, but worse anyway, I trust. The developement can also be ruined, not only the prints, if you're not really pro and interested in giving the best service...

Thanks!

[ndjambrose]

If you choose Portra make sure you use the NC version, not the VC version. Otherwise you'll have excessive magenta in the skin tones. But personally I'd recommend something different.

Fuji Pro H 400 is an excellent choice for outside shots in any light conditions. It renders beautiful skin tones, nice vibrant greens and subtle reds. It's my favourite film for weddings. I'd also suggest Fuji Pro 800Z for low light. It's got good latitude and produces much crisper tones than 1600, due to its superior grain structure.

For b+w you'll do well with XP2 as it has excellent exposure latitude; you can underexpose it by an entire stop and not even notice the difference. (The same is not true of traditional b+w films, which will require pushing and will lose some mid-tones).

f2 @ 1/60 isn't unreasonable if you're planning on using a RF, although not recommended with a SLR. A flash will be useful (essential even?) for dance shots and group shots indoors, and don't overlook that fact that you'll almost certainly need fill flash outside for portraits if it's a bright day. In all cases good flash technique will be needed otherwise the results will look poor; especially when balancing flash with ambient light.

When you mention a yellow filter with flash, do you mean using a yellow filter on b+w film when using a flash; or gelling the flash with a yellow filter when using colour film? I can't really tell what you mean.

If the former then no problems - it will look good. If the latter, then remember you'll also need an 80A filter on the lens otherwise there'll be no daylight equivalent light at all and all your shots will have an orange cast.

[Finnkare]

Thanks for the answer, ndjambrose.

Originally Posted by ndjambrose

Fuji Pro H 400 is an excellent choice for outside shots in any light conditions. It renders beautiful skin tones, nice vibrant greens and subtle reds. It's my favourite film for weddings. I'd also suggest Fuji Pro 800Z for low light. It's got good latitude and produces much crisper tones than 1600, due to its superior grain structure.

Hmm, maybe I'll test the 400H along with a couple of others. For some strange reason there's no 35mm version of the 800Z available in my favorite local shop... Maybe I'll order from B&H or something, if I decide to use it.

Originally Posted by ndjambrose

For b+w you'll do well with XP2 as it has excellent exposure latitude; you can underexpose it by an entire stop and not even notice the difference. (The same is not true of traditional b+w films, which will require pushing and will lose some mid-tones).

The XP2 is quite an unexplored territory for me. I have never understood the point of C-41 b&w-films... And I have never seen their performance on paper either. I have only considered if it was possible to cross it in E-6 and get interesting b&w-slides...

I think we might go with traditional b&w, it's safer for us. And it's not that many frames anyway.

Originally Posted by ndjambrose

f2 @ 1/60 isn't unreasonable if you're planning on using a RF, although not recommended with a SLR. A flash will be useful (essential even?) for dance shots and group shots indoors, and don't overlook that fact that you'll almost certainly need fill flash outside for portraits if it's a bright day. In all cases good flash technique will be needed otherwise the results will look poor; especially when balancing flash with ambient light.

There is an option for both kinds of cameras, RF and SLR. His lenses for the RF are 28/2.8 (so 1/30 tops), 45/2 (1/60) and 90/2.8 (1/30), so he'd have to shoot with full aperture practically all the time. Maybe I don't want to push him to that position.

Fill flash isn't necessary outdoors; we have a Lastolite and most likely some extra hands too. And with dancing you can always pan, or use a tripod even... But of course it's a nice option.

Originally Posted by ndjambrose

When you mention a yellow filter with flash, do you mean using a yellow filter on b+w film when using a flash; or gelling the flash with a yellow filter when using colour film? I can't really tell what you mean.

If the former then no problems - it will look good. If the latter, then remember you'll also need an 80A filter on the lens otherwise there'll be no daylight equivalent light at all and all your shots will have an orange cast.

I mean the latter. As I said, the available light is provided with bulbs and candles, so we'll use a 80A (KB12) anyway. And in order not to mix the colour temperatures, the flash needs a yellow thingy on it, doesn't it? I'm not at all used to use flash, but that's how I have understood it.

[ndjambrose]

Originally Posted by Finnkare

.... And in order not to mix the colour temperatures, the flash needs a yellow thingy on it, doesn't it? I'm not at all used to use flash, but that's how I have understood it.

It only needs a 'yellow thingy' if you're using tungsten balanced film. All the films you've mentioned are daylight balanced. Normal (unfiltered) flash is also daylight balanced, so as long as the flash exposure is greater than the ambient exposure you won't see colour casts. But if you're using an 80A filter in conjunction with a CTO gel on the flash it will be fine.

Originally Posted by Finnkare

Fill flash isn't necessary outdoors; we have a Lastolite and most likely some extra hands too. And with dancing you can always pan, or use a tripod even... But of course it's a nice option.

A lastolite has limited coverage. It will work fairly well for single portraits, but is of zero use for group shots. Plus it needs to be used close-up, which again precludes anything other than a portrait. A normal small group wedding shot will be taken at around 12 feet and will have 6 - 10 people in the frame; a large group can be much more. Your lastolite will need to be over 10 feet in diameter to have any effect; and in strong sunlight at that distance it will have no effect at all. And if you're thinking of a small foldable one circa 2 feet diameter then you might as well leave it at home. The only reflector with the power and range for this type of setup is a sunbounce, and they're huge; usually seen only on fashion and automotive shoots for a reason.

Dancing shots without flash are tricky. They can look good, and I always take some as an ingredient of wider dance coverage, but don't expect a success ratio better than 1 frame in 10. You're dependent on the right combination of expression, body position, background elements, sufficient sharpness, and finding accurate focus on a moving subject in low light. (Remember also that the lights generally get switched off because it's more romantic!)

And tripods are of no help in this case. Your goal is to capture the moving people. A tripod will only help capture the non-moving background. Not being funny, but there is a reason why wedding photographers use flash for this part :-)

[earleygallery]

Originally Posted by Finnkare

I'm getting married in a couple of months (yikes!).

My friend is gonna take the pictures.

I would let your friend decide. Shooting a wedding is stressful enough without added pressure from the client trying to tell you what to do! And yes, a good flash is essential, I was told to get a Metz Hammerhead as a minimum, you need the power to cover a group shot indoors, should that be necessary.

[Finnkare]

Originally Posted by ndjambrose

A lastolite has limited coverage. It will work fairly well for single portraits, but is of zero use for group shots. Plus it needs to be used close-up, which again precludes anything other than a portrait. A normal small group wedding shot will be taken at around 12 feet and will have 6 - 10 people in the frame; a large group can be much more. Your lastolite will need to be over 10 feet in diameter to have any effect; and in strong sunlight at that distance it will have no effect at all. And if you're thinking of a small foldable one circa 2 feet diameter then you might as well leave it at home. The only reflector with the power and range for this type of setup is a sunbounce, and they're huge; usually seen only on fashion and automotive shoots for a reason.

You're quite right... Hmm. We have a portable studio flash unit in your camera club, that could be one option. The other is to either take them in a shadowy place or wish for an overcast day. He has a Metz, but the GN is aroud 40-50, so it's not a huge torch...

It's just boring to bring a huge bag just for fill flash for a couple of portraits. The wedding is on a big island, so we have to carry all the stuff there with a ferry. Well, maybe it could be brought. If we for some reason decide to take indoor portraits too.

We also have a big reflector, propably about 2m (6 feet?) in diagram, but i don't know if it's sufficient. And there's no one holding it for an all-people group. My lastolite is not that big, maybe a meter (3 feet) or so.

Originally Posted by ndjambrose

Dancing shots without flash are tricky. They can look good, and I always take some as an ingredient of wider dance coverage, but don't expect a success ratio better than 1 frame in 10. You're dependent on the right combination of expression, body position, background elements, sufficient sharpness, and finding accurate focus on a moving subject in low light. (Remember also that the lights generally get switched off because it's more romantic!)

And tripods are of no help in this case. Your goal is to capture the moving people. A tripod will only help capture the non-moving background. Not being funny, but there is a reason why wedding photographers use flash for this part :-)

This is quite true too. If we chose a no-flash-line, we'd have only one kinds of pictures, many of which a bit too blurred. A tripod shot of a dancing croud could be nice, but several is not maybe necessary anymore. It's hard to variate.

[Finnkare]

Originally Posted by earleygallery

I would let your friend decide. Shooting a wedding is stressful enough without added pressure from the client trying to tell you what to do!

That's how I feel too. Although I'm giving him a lens and a filter and some hoods for a pay...

[Rolo]

I've just returned from viewing Peckforton Castle location for Robin Hood, Prince of Thieves) where I'm shooting a wedding next month. It is a very dark location and I'll struggle to avoid fill-in flash. The bar is underground and lit by candle light.

The secret is to use the available light where ever it is and fill-in if you must. However, there's always more available light than you anticipate, but you must find it and stick with it.

Use 800 iso film indoors and change to 160 iso when outside. A Leica RF will allow you to shoot to 1/8s and get a 50% hit rate which increases dramatically by the time you are using 1/30s. f1.4, or even f2 at 1/8s with 800 iso film means you can capture light in a very dark place and retain some image quality. I prefer to do this than using higher iso's on a dslr.

I'll use an elbow against a wall and have used a table top tripod to assist at times, placing it on my chest, a wall, or a church pew etc. There's always somewhere when you realise you can't hold it steady enough.

I've only used tungsten balanced film at a wedding once and it cost me so much to develop and push process I never bothered again.

Filters are out, so use the standard daylight film and pull some colour back in post-processing.

Bounce boards are good, but a pain to manage, so it's best not to bother.

The dance is quite another thing. I now use flash with a dslr to increase the hits, but only started to do this in the last 12 months, For no flash, the white lighting has to be good and of course the dance floor is full of coloured disco lights, so it's a choice. Watch for the red light crossing over the face of the bride. I always, always, point the flash away from the dancing couple and just lift the general level of the lighting.

At the end of it all, it's f1.4, 1/8s and then fill flash.

Here's a dance shot taken without flash and 1/50s, @ f3.5, so f1.4 would have provided 2.5 stops more.

Rolo

[NZDavid]

Not detailed advice, just thought I'd mention this quote from a pro photog:
"If you can see it, you can photograph it."
And even if you can't, sometimes.
Just remember to relax and enjoy the day! :-) You won't get a rerun.

[vickersdc]

Originally Posted by ndjambrose

It only needs a 'yellow thingy' if you're using tungsten balanced film. All the films you've mentioned are daylight balanced. Normal (unfiltered) flash is also daylight balanced, so as long as the flash exposure is greater than the ambient exposure you won't see colour casts. But if you're using an 80A filter in conjunction with a CTO gel on the flash it will be fine.

I'm getting a bit confused now as you seem to be talking at cross-purposes...? The original post mentioned that the area was lit by bulbs (tungsten I guess, rather than fluorescent?), so this would tend to give an orange cast when using daylight film. If you want to use daylight film, in an area with tungsten bulbs and flash then you've a couple of options depending on what is going to provide your main light source (bulbs or flash).

If it's flash then just stick with the daylight film and no filter as the flash will be daylight balanced anyway. If you're going for the tungsten then I would be tempted to put a 1/2 - 1 CTO gel on the flash and an 1/2-1 CTB on the camera (or an 80A as suggested).

If you are going to use tungsten film then no filter on the camera, but stick with the 1/2-1CTO on the flash.

But really, if you're at all not sure, test before the wedding day!

[honcho]

Originally Posted by Rolo

I've just returned from viewing Peckforton Castle location for Robin Hood, Prince of Thieves) where I'm shooting a wedding next month. It is a very dark location and I'll struggle to avoid fill-in flash. The bar is underground and lit by candle light.

There is plenty of light at Peckforton Castle. You just need to look for it.....

[M'Ate]

Originally Posted by honcho

Oh dear.....Flash??? No thank you!
There is plenty of light at Peckforton Castle. You just need to look for it.....

WOW, Fantastic....... Looks more like a model shoot though.

Any images of the ceremony to show how that worked out ?

[honcho]

Originally Posted by M'Ate

WOW, Fantastic....... Looks more like a model shoot though.

Any images of the ceremony to show how that worked out ?

Thanks. I'm a wedding photographer. She was a bride. I don't shoot models :-D

The ceremony was held in a church, Peckforton Castle was the reception venue.

[gesper]

Originally Posted by M'Ate

WOW, Fantastic....... Looks more like a model shoot though.

What bride doesn't want to look like a model? Great shot. My wife would have loved one like that in our album.

[Finnkare]

Originally Posted by vickersdc

I'm getting a bit confused now as you seem to be talking at cross-purposes...? The original post mentioned that the area was lit by bulbs (tungsten I guess, rather than fluorescent?), so this would tend to give an orange cast when using daylight film. If you want to use daylight film, in an area with tungsten bulbs and flash then you've a couple of options depending on what is going to provide your main light source (bulbs or flash).

If it's flash then just stick with the daylight film and no filter as the flash will be daylight balanced anyway. If you're going for the tungsten then I would be tempted to put a 1/2 - 1 CTO gel on the flash and an 1/2-1 CTB on the camera (or an 80A as suggested).

If you are going to use tungsten film then no filter on the camera, but stick with the 1/2-1CTO on the flash.

But really, if you're at all not sure, test before the wedding day!

I don't generally like flash, and I especially don't like not capturing the nice intimate candle light feeling on film by giving flash the status of a main light source. And anyway, isn't it wise not to mix colour temperatures in the first place?

My plan with the light and film, one more time:

-tungsten light (or warmer)
-flash light filtered yellow (I don't know the code, haven't ever used them and not yet bought anything - tips are welcome)
-daylight-balanced film (around 400 ASA, I suppose, the available light being about EV 7)
-lenses equipped with a 80 A filter, exposure compensation accordingly
-outdoors, off goes the filters on both, the flash and the lens (except maybe sunrise and sunset)

[Riccis]

I love the look of the Fuji Film (Pro 400H and 800Z) since they give very nice pastel looking colors. I don't like the Kodak film since it shows too much magenta for my taste. As far as B&W, Neopan 400, 1600 and Delta 3200 are my faves.

Whenever I shoot a wedding in film, I always overexpose the film by 1/2-1 stop but let the my lab do a regular development.

Hope this helps and best wishes on your wedding day.

Cheers,