It’s always a bit of a thrill when a friend achieves success of some kind - in this case, my friend Michelle Turner who recently had her book on wedding photography published.  Even better is that this 128 page volume is filled with lovely photographs as she covers a wide range of topics - from equipment to the flow of the wedding day … all the way to post-production and albums.

(click on the image if you’d like to order the book via Amazon)

Whether you are simply shooting a friend’s wedding, breaking into the business, or wanting to refresh your approach, this book takes you through the essential skills and provides you with the newest tools and tips of the trade.

An interesting question I received in an email recently had me thinking about, and considering my style in photographing weddings:

Do you sometimes feel as if you can’t be inconspicuous in order to get a certain shot during a wedding? There have been times I feel like I’m not blending into the background enough. How do you handle this?    (Regina Coble)

In trying to verbalise my answer, I came upon some interesting insights for myself.

Firstly, although I believe there is a strong sense of story-telling in my photography, I’m not particularly purist about ‘photojournalism’ in wedding photography.  I do interact with people  and during the portrait session, I do direct the bride and groom -  all in an effort to give my couples the best wedding photographs I can.  Even when I interact with my couples and direct them, I still aim for spontaneity and genuine expressions.  

But then how do I blend in and remain inconspicious?  For me this has more to do with being accepted within the group of family and friends - and in that way less obviously stand out - than the ‘ninja’ mindset that many wedding photographers try to hold up, trying to become invisible.

A comment on my blog by a groom’s mom gave me a key insight into something I hadn’t thought of before or tried to verbalise before receiving Regina’s email. The groom’s mom wrote:

It was like a friend of the family taking loving pictures.
You made the photo shoots actually fun and it shows in your work.

As I already mentioned, I’m not a ‘photojournalistic’ photographer, although I do photograph largely in an unposed, unplanned style through most of the day …

… but during the course of the portrait session, I begin by directing the couple (and the bridal party), and interacting with them - and eventually they “take over” naturally and become themselves. At that point, they become spontaneous and act like themselves and in a sense I have become less of a distraction, and less noticed.

Once you’ve build that rapport with them, you become less noticeable. It does take confidence in working with people, and it does take time to build up that confidence.

.
During the portrait sessions, and engagement sessions, I try for a natural approach.  I do want my couples to appear relaxed and look like themselves.  To this end, I “take myself out of the picture”, by using a longer lens and having talk to each other and just cuddle and walk, and just be together. This will definitely help with any nervousness in front of the camera - and give portraits which appear casual and relaxed.  

I enjoy shooting destination weddings- and I’ve been fortunate to photograph weddings in Aruba, Miami, and St Augustine (in Florida).  Later this year, I’ll be photographing weddings in Las Vegas and the Bahamas.

These are weddings are often in exotic locales.  (Well, nearly everything will seem exotic outside of New Jersey, but I digress.)  Even even though it sounds exciting to photograph in faraway places, there is a challenge that comes along with that -  packing enough of my gear and getting it safely to my destination.  It is even more of a challenge with restrictions placed on air travel.

Since I frequently get asked via emails to show what I have in my camera bag, I thought I’d post some of what my camera bag looks like when I travel. (It is slightly different than when I photograph weddings locally, and can drive there in my van.)

For me it was an  easy choice for a camera bag - the Think Tank Airport Security. This roller case is sturdy, protects all my gear inside, and has roller wheels that just glide ever so smoothly.  It is also surprisingly roomy inside for a case that can be taken on-board an aircraft as carry-on luggage.

.
There are a few pockets on the outside.  These are handy for phones, and an iPod and airline tickets and various bits and pieces and papers.

But let’s have a look at what I keep inside …

As you can see, I don’t pack my roller-case super-tight with an overload of gear.  I still need to be able to pick this baby up when it is loaded.

.
Firstly, the inside of the roller case ‘lid’ in more detail …

Lots of zipped pockets for goodies, but mostly I keep this to stick various items onto the clear fronts of the pockets.  This is where I stick the CTS and 1/2 CTS filters that I use to balance my flash with Tungsten light.  There are also a few strips of gaffer tape. (Very handy stuff!  I never go without.)  And the white/grey/black card you see there is the Qpcard, in case I need it to easily correct the white balance in post-processing, for something I photograph in strange lighting.

.
The main compartment is where it gets more interesting …

… and here it is with the top layer of items unpacked outside the case :

Looking at the smaller items that I unpacked as the top layer …

The rows from left to right, (top to bottom):
  -  Visible Dust - Arctic Butterfly.  
      This is a handy device to clean my cameras’ sensor if I need to.
  -  two Canon CP-E4 battery packs, which I already have loaded with rechargeable batteries.

  -  two zip-lock bags with 8 rechargable NiMH batteries for the CP-E4 battery packs.
  -  two Tamrac memory card wallets.  
      Each wallet contains four 8Gb SanDisk CF cards, and four 4Gb SanDisk CF cards. 
      Each camera also has an 8Gb SanDisk SD card in them.
      (I use the SD cards to record medium JPGs on, as a safeguard against any of the CF cards failing.
      As an aside, I only shoot in RAW, other than the back-up JPGs.)

  -  Canon ST-E2 wireless TTL transmitter
  -  two Stofen diffuser cups, of which one has a hole cut in the top.
  -  a business card holder.  (It is the aluminium case with the red ends.)
  -  one spare battery for the Canon 1D mkIII bodies.
  -  two pieces of black foam which I use as my light modifiers,
  -  on top of this I have displayed the cord and plug to recharge my iPhone and my iPod.
  -  black hair bands.  (I use this to keep items in place such as the black foam light modifiers.)

  -  iPod, loaded with cool tunes.  (An essential item for travelling.)
  -  iPhone.  This is also essential in that I have my Calendar and Contacts close on hand.

If you’re interested in any of these items, check out these pages listing all my photo gear -  all which link to B&H’s website where these items can be purchased. 

.
And now, the larger items at the bottom of my roller case :

Firstly, the two cameras are both Canon 1D mkIII bodies.  They are currently my camera of choice.
The two flashguns in the front are Canon 580EX II Speedlites.

The lenses are,  in the back row, from left to right:
  -  Canon 16-35mm f/2.8L II
  -  Canon 24-105mm f/4L IS 
  -  Canon 70-200mm f/2.8L IS  (on the lens hood you can see another piece of filter stuck.)
The two lenses in the front are, from left to right:
  -  Canon 35mm f/1.4L
  -  Canon 85mm f1.2L II

As you can see, I favour zooms over prime lenses, but I do hedge my bets by adding two superb primes.

And again - if you’re interested in any of these items, they can be purchased via these pages listing all my photo gear, which all link to B&H’s website.

.
Perhaps as interesting, are the lenses I leave behind.
Two lenses which are covered (nearly) by the superb 16-35mm f/2.8L II, are:
  -  Canon 14mm f/2.8L  
  -  Canon 20mm f/2.8

Two other primes that I leave behind, are: 
  -  Canon 24mm f/1.4L
  -  Canon 50mm f/1.2L
This is a specific choice, in that I feel that the 35mm and 85mm primes make an excellent pair for their focal length and perspective. 

A zoom that I leave behind, is the Canon 24-70mm f/2.8L - and the reason for this is that the range is already covered by the 24-105mm f/4 optic.  And since most destination weddings tend to be in areas where light abounds, I don’t need the extra stop that the 24-70mm lens offers.  Besides, I am covered with the other zooms and primes should I need a faster lens than the 24-105mm f/4 optic.

.
Other items that I take with me, but don’t put inside this roller case, are various bits of minimal lighting gear, and my battery chargers.  I place them in my check-in luggage.  Should my check-in luggage be misrouted, I still have my core equipment to photograph the wedding shoot to my complete satisfaction.

.
As can be seen, I travel with a fair amount of gear, but carefully chosen.  There is back-up of everything, and redundancy in case of failure.  Since I’ll be far away from home and my usual resources, it is essential that I am self-contained, and can meet any challenge head-on.

A constant debate that I see online is whether a specific piece of equipment is justifiable.  And whether it is justifiable in terms of a business decision.  The discussion typically centers around something like the eternal, “What will the 85mm f1.2 give me that the 85mm f1.8 won’t? And is it worth $1000 more?”

But I feel that in phrasing the question like that, the real effects that equipment choice have on our style are disregarded. I firmly believe that:

Style should always be evolving, borne from our choices and not from our limitations.

And those limitations are quite often our equipment choice.  Indeed, f1.2 vs f1.8

So does it bring more business?  That I can’t say - but I do know that using the very very best equipment does affect how I shoot, and does affect my results.  It also directly affects my confidence during a shoot - and therefore during client meetings. I know I can pull it off,  no matter what is thrown at me during a shoot. I have the skills and the equipment.

So let me back that up with an image from a wedding this past Saturday:

… taken with the Canon 1D mk3 and the Canon 35mm f1.4

Yes, I could’ve gotten that moment with the mk2N and the 24-105mm f4 .. but it would’ve looked vastly different.

Using the fast optic and a camera that has a very usable high iso, I was able to change the way I use flash from before. I am now able to snoot my flashgun with black material and very carefully choose where I bounce my flash from. (I also gelled my flash for a Tungsten WB.)  With the mk3 I’m now able to integrate the way I use flash more subtly with the available light than ever before.

And in these choices, I was able to bring out an image that looks different than it would’ve with other equipment. I like this result much more than what I would’ve been able to get with equipment of lesser spec.

So the choice between the 50mm f1.4 and the 50mm f1.2  appears incremental when seen on paper.   (It’s a huge $1000 jump though.)  Similarly, the difference between the mk2N image quality, and the 5D image quality is incremental. And again, the difference in image quality between the 5D and the mk3 image quality is incremental.

Now add all those small increments up … and you will find the equipment now allows you to achieve results you weren’t able to before.

I know for a fact, and I can see it in the past three weekends that I have been using the Canon 1D mk3, that this camera is changing the way I shoot, and changing the way I use light. Incremental changes, but they are proving to have a profound impact.

The question remains however - does it bring more business? I don’t know if there is a direct correlation. In a sense the question becomes a trivial one for me … because right now, I am doing work I absolutely love, at a level I would never have dreamed of a few years ago. And if using the very best equipment adds to that enjoyment - well, I only have this one life to live.  It would be a sad waste in a way to have frittered it away in worries about f1.2 vs f1.8 and omygawd, it’s so much money!  Just give me the f1.2 already and let me see how much I can push myself in this endeavour.

This leads me to another point.  Right now, with an arsenal of f1.2 and f1.4 optics (and all the f2.8 zooms) at my side, the only limitations in my photography are my own.  I certainly can not blame my equipment … (ok ok .. aside from the error 99’s and backfocusing and the usual litany of Canon hiccups) … seriously, I can not blame my equipment and say that, “If only I had *that* lens, I could’ve pulled the shots out of the hat.”

Right now, my limitations are my own. And that is a challenging boundary to be at.

How is that for a business decision?

Someone asked me about the lighting I used at the reception of a wedding I recently photographed.

Here are two of the images I blogged there ..

I often vary how I set up additional lighting at reception venues.  In this instance, I had a 580EX flashgun that I held up high in my left hand, that was triggered by an on-camera ST-E2 transmitter.  I also had a second 580EX that was wirelessly slaved via the ST-E2.  I would therefore try and control my viewpoint and perspective, to have the second 580EX light up the backgound and give some sense of depth.  This would also avoid that dreaded black-hole background.

I haven’t really been happy with using the 580 as the on-camera master, since the results aren’t predictable. I’m getting more consistent results using an ST-E2 transmitter. The second 580EX was fastened on top of a CP-E3 battery pack that I placed on top of one of the DJ’s speakers.

In these images there was no wall behind me that I bounced off. Just the rest of the reception room.

The strobe on the DJ’s speakers was angled up, and not direct.
Because the ceiling is low, the light isn’t as spread out as I would’ve liked.
The way the light in the background is concentrated, is a result of the flash being bounced off a low-ish ceiling, and not because it was direct flash.

The flash in my hand - I don’t use it directly.
In this instance I had a Stofen on top of it, with the top cut off.
This way I can still direct my light to a large extent, instead of turning it into a barebulb type omni-directional light source.
With my hand I can also cover part of the front of the omni-bounce and have less direct light if I want.

I adapt my technique from wedding to wedding, dependent on the venue, the ambient light sources, and the results I want.
In this instance, the light levels were very dim, and I had to use flash.
But the ceilings were too low to use my Q-flashes that I most often use as additional light sources,
eg here: http://www.planetneil.com/faq/finding-the-light.html

Techie info for the first image:
Canon 1D mk2N / Canon 24-70mm f2.8 /  1/125th @ f2.8 @ 1600 iso

Techie info for the second image:
Canon 1D mk2N / Canon 16-35 mm f2.8 mk2 /  1/20th @ 4 @ 800 iso