AV,TV,or P for weddings???

Toothie said:
it has been pointed out the file type doesnt not affect the exposure settings.
Click to expand...

Actually I would say it does. If you shoot to raw then ETTR (Expose to the right) is a valuable technique for capturing maximum tonal detail and minimising noise. You will also have more headroom to recover "blown" highlights if need be when you shoot to raw. If you shoot to JPEG then really you need to shoot to get the correct exposure in camera, and you will not have the luxury of highlight recovery. Where I might meter at +3 off the dress when shooting to raw I would probably only meter at +2 if shooting JPEG. Mind you, as I never shoot JPEG I'm not sure quite what the limits are. I'm guessing I'd want about 1 stop of extra safety margin.

p.s. On a camera with HTP (Highlight Tone Priority) I might also recommend enabling HTP when shooting to JPEG, but disabling it when shooting to raw. In fact, enabling HTP would probably allow me to shoot to JPEG with he exposure settings I would normally use when shooting to raw without HTP.
 
tdodd said:
Actually I would say it does. If you shoot to raw then ETTR (Expose to the right) is a valuable technique for capturing maximum tonal detail and minimising noise. You will also have more headroom to recover "blown" highlights if need be when you shoot to raw. If you shoot to JPEG then really you need to shoot to get the correct exposure in camera, and you will not have the luxury of highlight recovery. Where I might meter at +3 off the dress when shooting to raw I would probably only meter at +2 if shooting JPEG. Mind you, as I never shoot JPEG I'm not sure quite what the limits are. I'm guessing I'd want about 1 stop of extra safety margin.
Click to expand...

I can see your point but, an over exposed photo is over exposed weather taken in raw or not, its just with raw you have the possiblilty of reducing that over exposure.
 
Not strictly related to the original post.

I took my camera to a wedding reception a few months ago. Really enjoyed it, knew the photographers from a previous wedding I went to.

Thought mine came out ok considering I had standard 55-200mm kit lens and pop up flash (at night in poor lighting). I have 18-55 but preffered taking shots from a distance and catching people off guard.

That's the difference, I was doing it for enjoyment and getting people having fun. Whereas the togs were getting paid for the proper 'official' shots. They did look really proffesional, some very intersting angle's and choices of location. Made it look a bit special compared to the usual uniform wedding shots you see. Hence why you pay them the money you do!

I've now got a sb-600, so much more natrual looking shots. Can bounce the flash which is the crucial difference. Think if I go to a wedding again will hire a 17-70 2.8 or something along those lines.
 
fabs said:
Well this has to be one of the strangest wedding threads I've seen. I have to go with Toothie's post and ask which are you?
Click to expand...

I'd also be interested to hear the answer
If you are genuinely in need of help then quite a lot has already been offered,
and good luck with "your" wedding

But the thread does read a little "strange" maybe I have "miss-interpreted"
But you seem to have gone from not quite knowing what the exposure setting mean in your first post
to having a full compliment of equipment
 
tdodd said:
Actually I would say it does. If you shoot to raw then ETTR (Expose to the right) is a valuable technique for capturing maximum tonal detail and minimising noise. You will also have more headroom to recover "blown" highlights if need be when you shoot to raw. If you shoot to JPEG then really you need to shoot to get the correct exposure in camera, and you will not have the luxury of highlight recovery. Where I might meter at +3 off the dress when shooting to raw I would probably only meter at +2 if shooting JPEG. Mind you, as I never shoot JPEG I'm not sure quite what the limits are. I'm guessing I'd want about 1 stop of extra safety margin.
Click to expand...

sorry to go off topic does exposing to the right mean you over expose as thats the right hand side of the histogram, or under expose and shift it to the right later?
 
Josephine said:
Hi

I've just had a gander at your site. Very Nice!

I like your style You do seem to capture the essence of a person in the images. Beautiful.......Do you swap between Manual and AV?

I think i've been making things a little complicated, when really they don't need to be.....

Thanks for your straight forward tip...
Click to expand...

Thank you

Personally I try to keep things as simple as possible and I find that Av works for me, so why change. That's equally valid for anyone shooting shutter/Tv or manual. Find what works for you and suits your style. I'm more concerned with controlling my depth of field, so I manage that and keep control of my shutter-speed via that and ISO.

The only time I use manual is if I'm using flash as my main light source (which is rarely). Then I lob it at f4, 1/160s and ISO800 and leave it.
 
david1701 said:
sorry to go off topic does exposing to the right mean you over expose as thats the right hand side of the histogram, or under expose and shift it to the right later?
Click to expand...

You want an exposure that pushes the histogram over to the right when you take the shot. i.e. in the camera. However, you need to be very careful not to push the exposure too far and end up overexposing (clipping/blowing) the important highlight details. This will allow you to capture the maximum tonal information within the scene, including a bit more detail at the shadoy end of things. You can then use your raw editor to fine tune the look of the image. In my opinion, shooting to raw is basically about capturing as much data as you can within the camera. Making the image look as nice as possible comes later. That's not to say you can afford to be sloppy when you shoot. The idea is not to "fix up" a poor exposure. The idea is to maximise the potential of the raw data file.

Here is an example of a raw image, with no edits, and the histogram that accompanies it. Note that the histogram just touches the right hand edge, but there is no peak or abrupt spike at the extreme edge. This is an example of an ideal (IMHO) raw exposure. The WB might need some attention, and I could probably juggle around a little with the tone curve, but I have as much data as I could hope for with which to finesse the final image. You will note the little yellow triangle in the top right of the histogram. This indicates a smattering of blown pixels in the yellows. You can't see in this small image what is blown but it s a handful of pixels in the scarf/wrap, a few specular highlights on the pearls and some specular highlights on the lady's gold watch bracelet.

Although you can't tell from this that I was using manual exposure, you'll have to take it on trust that I was. Note that my manual settings allow a reasonable amount of the background to be exposed correctly, or at least fairly well, while my bounced flash just highlights the main subject and also helps fill out the room lighting a little more. I could have chosen a lower ISO, to reduce noise in my subject, but that would have worked the flash harder and led to a less pleasing balance between foreground/subject and background light levels.

MWSnap%202009-04-09%2C%2016_52_25.jpg


Direct link, if the image does not show - http://lh4.ggpht.com/_4_R8TkwT74w/S...F1MNlVYY/s800/MWSnap 2009-04-09, 16_52_25.jpg


If you underexpose withn the camera and then try to brighten the image later on you run the risk of seeing more noise in the picture, especially at higher ISOs like 800 or more. In really severe cases you can also see odd banding effects in the shadow tones if you brighten a lot. This effect is worse with underexposed JPEGs than underexposed raw files because you only have 8 bits of data per RGB subpixel (255 brightness levels) rather than the 12 bits (4096 brightness levels) or 14 bits (16384 brightness levels) that raw files have.

For a more thorough explanation look here....

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/expose-right.shtml

and here....

http://ronbigelow.com/articles/exposure/exposure.htm
 
I just stick mine on the green square and hope for the best. all this using AV, TV or M is a waste when you can let the camera make the right choice for you.
 
Thanks for your comments, Thanks to Tdodd your explanation of what each setting actually does made things so much Clearer . And also to Radiohead Your tip for staying on AV and altering the shutter by changing the ISO is a good one to remember. I just need to get on with it and practice around these functions to get used to using them. I am up to speed with Manual and being able to judge what the correct combination of ISO, Shutter and Aperture should be depending on the subject and lighting conditions, but was concerned that this would be to slow when having to react quickly in a wedding or event situation. My first Two weddings were done in a mixture of Automatic and Manual on JPEG. And i have never used TV, P or AV in this situation. Thats why i posted the question.

In answer to the question posted earlier. 'am i a Pro stirring things up or a Amateur'. Well, i am an amateur trying to learn as much as i can, in the hope at some point i might be a decent photographer.:) We all have to start somewhere right.
 
Josephine said:
Thanks for your comments, Thanks to Tdodd your explanation of what each setting actually does made things so much Clearer . And also to Radiohead Your tip for staying on AV and altering the shutter by changing the ISO is a good one to remember. I just need to get on with it and practice around these functions to get used to using them. I am up to speed with Manual and being able to judge what the correct combination of ISO, Shutter and Aperture should be depending on the subject and lighting conditions, but was concerned that this would be to slow when having to react quickly in a wedding or event situation. My first Two weddings were done in a mixture of Automatic and Manual on JPEG. And i have never used TV, P or AV in this situation. Thats why i posted the question.

In answer to the question posted earlier. 'am i a Pro stirring things up or a Amateur'. Well, i am an amateur trying to learn as much as i can, in the hope at some point i might be a decent photographer.:) We all have to start somewhere right.
Click to expand...

well i am glad you feel you have been helped jo:thumbs:

please dont be put off by some of the questions WEDDING THREADS have been a sore subject on this forum of late and have more often than not got out of control...

you will find that most folks will go out of there way to help " as proved in the thread so far"


good luck for the future and i look forward to seeing some of your wedding photos



md:thumbs:
 
Cheers dod, I have noticed noise issues in the blacks when upping under exposed raw's.

Never really properly tried that technique I shall have to have a go.

Also the flash/ambient balance is v nice in that shot IMHO just brings the couple out a little
 
its pretty simple how to take photos at a wedding its the same as any other situation


AV - use this mode to adjust the DOF in the image
TV - use this mode is you want to induce some blur eg panning
M - use this mode for flash indoors when the light is pretty poor. no real point in using this mode for anything else since you are using the camera's meter.

use ISO to adjust the exposure for each mode above.


I don't use flash for fill its generally unflattering but there are some that like it and its up to you what you do.
 
POAH said:
M - ... no real point in using this mode for anything else since you are using the camera's meter.
Click to expand...

Your camera's meter evaluates the scene correctly in all circumstances? Wow!
 
photon said:
Your camera's meter evaluates the scene correctly in all circumstances? Wow!
Click to expand...

depends where you meter from and its very very very rarely that I actually have to dial in more than 2 +/- EC so using manual without flash is not required.
 
photon said:
Your camera's meter evaluates the scene correctly in all circumstances? Wow!
Click to expand...

If your camera meters incorrectly every time then you need to learn how to use your camera's meter. The meter is a very simple piece of equipment it's not intelligent in anyway it just wants to meter what you point it at to 18% grey. You just point it at whatever you want to be 18% grey in tone and voila correctly exposed photos. EC allows you to point it to things other than 18% grey and get a correct reading.
 
Josephine

If you read the other "I wanna be a wedding tog" threads (if you are REALLY THAT BORED;) ) you might hopefully understand why some folks get so worked up about the topic

All I can say to you is, FORGET P and scrape the letter off your camera's controls...or cover it with black permanent marker...simply because it is bound to let you down sometime.

Letting the camera choose both shutter speed and aperture is never a good idea no matter what is photographed and no matter how clever we think cameras have become.

I don't think I have EVER used TV at a wedding because NO bride moves that fast.

The whole manual thing is a very noble idea IF you have loads of experience and if too many things don't change too suddenly but it is mostly a bit of a Tarzan club thing where some will think they are the dog's danglies because "we shoot only manual, you know..."

B*LLOCKS!!!

I would recommend you to learn the theory of depth of field and then to apply that knowledge to your specific kit and the result you would want to achieve...stick with AV and have a ball.

If and when you do have the time to play with and explore full Manual, do so. But, please do not do so with the important wedding shots unless you know you will nail it down perfectly.

HTH
 
inaneredstripe said:
i very seldom have time for manual at weddings.
(sits back and waits for comment)
Click to expand...

And I'll be first:D

An honest mere mortal doing wedding togging at last!!!

:thumbs::thumbs::lol:
 
If you know how to make proper use of it, manual exposure makes things such as wedding photography (and many other kinds) far easier than any autoexposure mode. This has nothing to do with being a chest thumping "Tarzan" type. It's all about making my life easier and giving me one less thing to worry about from one shot to the next, when the lighting conditions are constant, which often they are.

If you don't understand what makes manual exposure so useful, try reading this thread....

http://www.talkphotography.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=115623
 
I must confess to using aperture only at weddings, I am not confident enough in my skills with manual.Which is probably very silly really,Tdodd, your posts on the subject has given me more confidence and I`m second togging at one soon and am determined to go manual.
 
Don't get me wrong, I am not against Manual and use it wherever I can and for all the reasons you also mention...but, personally, I rarely use it on weddings.

What I am against is people who very openly proclaim that full Manual is the only way to shoot to be a "real photographer". Especially when those peeps have never done a wedding before.

OK, rant mode off...
 
antonroland said:
Don't get me wrong, I am not against Manual and use it wherever I can and for all the reasons you also mention...but, personally, I rarely use it on weddings.

What I am against is people who very openly proclaim that full Manual is the only way to shoot to be a "real photographer". Especially when those peeps have never done a wedding before.

OK, rant mode off...
Click to expand...

It's not about "real photographer", its when the lighting is constant, especially indoors, there are more advantages to use Manual than other modes.
 
Josephine said:
When shooting on Raw at a wedding is it best to shoot on P Mode or AV or TV.

Josephine:bonk:
Click to expand...

How about none. And how about I suggest that you don't even attempt to do a wedding until you understand how to use a camera.

You should be shooting manual [m]

I can think of 2 or 3 dozen reasons for using manual at a wedding, and only one for using the likes of AV - and thats that you don't know what you are doing.


and there is no reason a professional would ever use P
 
riddell said:
How about none. And how about I suggest that you don't even attempt to do a wedding until you understand how to use a camera.

You should be shooting manual [m]

I can think of 2 or 3 dozen reasons for using manual at a wedding, and only one for using the likes of AV - and thats that you don't know what you are doing.


and there is no reason a professional would ever use P
Click to expand...

Why [m]? You don't have to shoot in Manual 100% of the time, knowing when to make use of the other modes is a big part of it.

I wonder if you have actually read the rest of this thread, the OP has already stated that she has shot weddings before.
 
fabs said:
I wonder if you have actually read the rest of this thread, the OP has already stated that she has shot weddings before.
Click to expand...

she has mate she has done two i belive:shrug:

;)


ms:thumbs:
 
antonroland said:
What I am against is people who very openly proclaim that full Manual is the only way to shoot to be a "real photographer"
Click to expand...

That would be like poster #67 then ;)

I happen to know one of Britain's best Wedding togs uses P most of the time too

Surely what's important is what's captured, not how it's captured :shrug:

DD
 
riddell said:
How about none. And how about I suggest that you don't even attempt to do a wedding until you understand how to use a camera.

You should be shooting manual [m]

I can think of 2 or 3 dozen reasons for using manual at a wedding, and only one for using the likes of AV - and thats that you don't know what you are doing.


and there is no reason a professional would ever use P
Click to expand...

:cuckoo::cuckoo::cuckoo:
 
mole2k said:
... The meter is a very simple piece of equipment it's not intelligent in anyway ...
Click to expand...

Please note that I implied evaluative metering in #56. Current cameras in Auto modes will try to be intelligent, comparing the metered scene with thousands of test shots and applying what the designers regard as a good exposure.

I would regard spot metering and the application of exposure compensation as an extension of manual operation, with the hassle of having to remember to lock the exposure when the metered subject is framed outside of the metering zone, and the likelihood of less consistency than a series of manual shots with the same settings when the light is constant.
 
riddell said:
How about none. And how about I suggest that you don't even attempt to do a wedding until you understand how to use a camera.

You should be shooting manual [m]

I can think of 2 or 3 dozen reasons for using manual at a wedding, and only one for using the likes of AV - and thats that you don't know what you are doing.


and there is no reason a professional would ever use P
Click to expand...


Do us a favour mate - and see how many you can actually list without repeating yourself :)

DD
 
DiddyDave said:
.................................................................................
Surely what's important is what's captured, not how it's captured :shrug:

DD
Click to expand...


Can't argue with that. Spot on:thumbs:
 
DiddyDave said:
That would be like poster #67 then ;)

I happen to know one of Britain's best Wedding togs uses P most of the time too

Surely what's important is what's captured, not how it's captured :shrug:

DD
Click to expand...

Exactly!!

Personally I would NEVER use P but that is purely because it will let you down in terms of DOF when you can least afford it...and that is the beauty of AV.


We really are labouring the point aren't we?:naughty:

Although, I too, would like to see those 2-3 dozen reasons...:thinking::lol:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top