use of tllt shift lens at weddings

[roc1]

wondered what people thought of this look? have seen some nice examples using the canon 45mm recently from the likes of Jonas Peterson etc but the lens seems quite a luxury purchase!

anyone else use or have tried one out in anger?

 

[Vivid Art]

I have used the Nikon 24mm PC-E, but it's a bit stressful as you have to manual focus and the more tilt you apply the more meter offset you needs to be dialed in. Not helped in this instance by the fact that I had to stand on a stepladder in the middle of a field of cows.

Probably best to bracket shots initially and don't use for really important shots until you get the hang of it

 

[tommmy.star]

this is one hell of a beast to tame but I will use it at every wedding and that is for sure. I personally love this lens and I know couples do even more. If I was to give any advice it would be this:

- always set your exposure before tilting or shifting
- use LiveView to triplecheck your focus
- use smaller apartures 4/ 5.6
- whatever you shoot with this lens back it up with another nonTSE lens just in case
- read this article

As I said this lens is amazing but even though I have done hours and hours of practising the wedge shaped depth of field is really hard for me to sometimes comprehend and mistakes do happen often.

 

[JonathanRyan]

wondered what people thought of this look?

Hate it.

At the back of my mind I think I may have seen one shot I like with it but possibly not.

You know the "toy camera" modes they are adding to compacts? By comparison they look good.

There. I've said it.

 

[DG Phototraining]

I get a similar look with a LR4 preset

And because its all done with Gradient points with sharpening reduced you can move them about at will - not as good maybe, but good enough if you don't want to spent the time/money

Dave

 

[DG Phototraining]

Hate it.

At the back of my mind I think I may have seen one shot I like with it but possibly not.

You know the "toy camera" modes they are adding to compacts? By comparison they look good.

There. I've said it.

Oh - and I've not used it on any Wedding images for a client as yet cos I don't like it much either I just did these on Wedding shots now as that was the OP's question re Weddings

In an album - its right up there with colour popping for me

Dave

 

[JonathanRyan]

not as good maybe, but good enough if you don't want to spent the time/money

People who use these lenses tell me there's no comparison between a "real" version and a "fake it in post" version. And in truth I've never seen a full res one.

But most clients are going to think it's done in post anyway. And I hate the edited ones just as much......

Trust me: it's next year's spot colour.

 

[JonathanRyan]

In an album - its right up there with colour popping for me

Trust me: it's next year's spot colour.

Posts crossed

 

[DG Phototraining]

Posts crossed

Dave

 

[jpw]

When done well, it's a good, when done badly (e.g. blurring everyone's legs for the sake of it) it's... not so good. Not something I've tried but I do appreciate a good application of TS.

 

[spxxxx]

I agree with Dave and Jonathan ..... yesterdays news and way overdone by those that "suddenly" discover it

There are maybe a couple of people in the world that have the landscapes that suits it - Jonas is one and Bobby Earle another

In CS6 it is even easier to get the effect

 

[bertpalmer]

I use the subtly - that's the key really.

And only for a few choice shots.

Software emulation always looks a bit pants to me in comparison. You just down't get the same effect.

 

[DG Phototraining]

I
Software emulation always looks a bit pants to me in comparison. You just down't get the same effect.

Thereby proving JR correct in his earlier post

I didn't bother with the upgrade from CS5 to CS6 - was it worth it Simon ??? Other than this nice trick that is

Dave

 

[spxxxx]

Thereby proving JR correct in his earlier post

I didn't bother with the upgrade from CS5 to CS6 - was it worth it Simon ??? Other than this nice trick that is

Dave

..... a trick never to be used

TBH it is quite a bit quicker but apart from that - business as usual

 

[DG Phototraining]

..... a trick never to be used

TBH it is quite a bit quicker but apart from that - business as usual

Dave

 

[meonshore]

My understanding is that you can use tilt-shift at weddings when one of the following conditions is met:

- That number of vintage teacups and saucers exceeds 20
- There is a sofa in a wood as a key part of the reception
- The bride carries balloons (any colour although red is preferred)
- The groom wears odd socks, on purpose, and at the direction of the wedding coordinator

You should also be aware that failure to use a tilt-shift at a wedding where all of these are present will result in you immediately being vilified by Kat the Queen of Boho and cast into the abyss never to grace a wedding blog again.

Good luck

 

[freefall]

My understanding is that you can use tilt-shift at weddings when one of the following conditions is met:

- That number of vintage teacups and saucers exceeds 20
- There is a sofa in a wood as a key part of the reception
- The bride carries balloons (any colour although red is preferred)
- The groom wears odd socks, on purpose, and at the direction of the wedding coordinator

You should also be aware that failure to use a tilt-shift at a wedding where all of these are present will result in you immediately being vilified by Kat the Queen of Boho and cast into the abyss never to grace a wedding blog again.

Good luck

Hahaha this is so funny!

 

[bertpalmer]

My understanding is that you can use tilt-shift at weddings when one of the following conditions is met:

- That number of vintage teacups and saucers exceeds 20
- There is a sofa in a wood as a key part of the reception
- The bride carries balloons (any colour although red is preferred)
- The groom wears odd socks, on purpose, and at the direction of the wedding coordinator

You should also be aware that failure to use a tilt-shift at a wedding where all of these are present will result in you immediately being vilified by Kat the Queen of Boho and cast into the abyss never to grace a wedding blog again.

Good luck

Haha!

 

[ernesto]

Doesn't do much for me and agree it can look pretty much the same as the 'miniature' option on a compact but then this is not really what this lens is for is it? The miniature look is more a side effect that it's main purpose isn't it?

But then is the customer wants it at their wedding should it not be provided or do you put your likes before theirs?

 

[JonathanRyan]

You should also be aware that failure to use a tilt-shift at a wedding where all of these are present will result in you immediately being vilified by Kat the Queen of Boho and cast into the abyss never to grace a wedding blog again.

Gosh, upset Kat? Where do I sign up....?

But then is the customer wants it at their wedding should it not be provided or do you put your likes before theirs?

Well they cost about £1,500 and run the risk of messing up all your pictures.....

 

[DG Phototraining]

But then is the customer wants it at their wedding should it not be provided or do you put your likes before theirs?

People buy what you show - if you show tilt/shift (cos you like it) they may well want it - if you hate it and hence don't show it it's very unlikely someone will say 'Hey, can you do this for me please?'

Dave

 

[ernesto]

good points but as this 'option' gets out there I guess more couples will show an interest in it. Most weddings are not based on a high level of good taste after all...

 

[spxxxx]

good points but as this 'option' gets out there I guess more couples will show an interest in it. Most weddings are not based on a high level of good taste after all...

its been out there for years in weddings and has less appeal than spot colour .......

 

[ernesto]

its been out there for years in weddings and has less appeal than spot colour .......

guess there is hope yet then

 

[desantnik]

Its an odd twee effect for sure, maybe something to laugh at in the album but...

I suppose with the "instagram generation" this kind of thing will be popular - along with heavy vignettes, selective colour and adding "filmstrip frames".

Doubt if its worth buying dedicated kit to do it though, or the fiddle to make it work... just mash it up in software.

 

[ajax_andy]

I don't like it either tbh... one of the main reasons is that I sometimes suffer from severe migraines and what these pics look like it how my vision kind of goes during one.

Last thing I want to look at is an image that makes me feel like I'm having a severe migraine

 

[Organnyx]

I'm with JR, it's bloody awful, and belongs in the bin along with all those ghastly Cokin effects filters, beloved of the "I can make a cr*p picture brilliant with these things" brigade........

 

[Phil V]

I've got to agree with Simon, Bobby Earle does some great stuff with it, but then he's also one of the few photographers I know that gets away with hideously over processed images too.

It'd never sell round here.

 

[LongLensPhotography]

And I thought TSE is for maximising DOF as required, particularly when forced to large apertures, and of course dealing with converging verticals

 

[HoppyUK]

And I thought TSE is for maximising DOF as required, particularly when forced to large apertures, and of course dealing with converging verticals

LOL That is what they are primarily intended to do. And you can't do that in post

 

[Cagey75]

I always seen buying a tilt shift specific lens as a waste of money tbh. As proven above, you can get pretty much the same effect spending a few minutes in photoshop.

I personally don't like it. I think it only suits wide shots overlooking towns from a height, for that 'toy' look.

 

[Surrey Weddings]

can't justify the cost for something i'd not use much and something i can replicate in lightroom...

 

[Nod]

Tilt shift? Does that explain why the "temple" in post #2 is tilting?

People buy what you show - if you show tilt/shift (cos you like it) they may well want it - if you hate it and hence don't show it it's very unlikely someone will say 'Hey, can you do this for me please?'

Dave

At a guess, very few B&Gs could tell the difference between a shot from a TS and a PPed "fake".

Regarding post #2 again, surely the major USP of a TS lens is that you don't need to clamber up steps to keep verticals unconverging? Unless he/she needed the high viewpoint for composition purposes (in which case, surely the group would be centralised?).

Maybe the OP should try one of the better LensBabies to play with the effect before splasing out on a "real" TS lens.

 

[roc1]

Yeah wasn't going to buy one, would much rather put the money towards another prime, just interesting to hear thoughts on TS as have seen it used in a few blogs I've seen.

 

[HoppyUK]

Tilt shift? Does that explain why the "temple" in post #2 is tilting?



At a guess, very few B&Gs could tell the difference between a shot from a TS and a PPed "fake".

Regarding post #2 again, surely the major USP of a TS lens is that you don't need to clamber up steps to keep verticals unconverging? Unless he/she needed the high viewpoint for composition purposes (in which case, surely the group would be centralised?).

Maybe the OP should try one of the better LensBabies to play with the effect before splasing out on a "real" TS lens.

I don't think that's why step ladders are handy for group shots. They're mainly so you can see more faces and the higher viewpoint often looks a bit better too.

The one thing that T&S lenses can do that no other method can match is extending effective depth of field, and they do that very well. Other stuff like converging verticals and shallow DoF effects can mostly be replicated successfully in post processing.

The other thing is using the longer T&S lenses for product photography. DoF is often surprisingly shallow (I had to use f/32 for some small stuff recently, and that's not good!) and if you've got a lot to do for a catalogue or something, then also squaring up the verticals etc is quicker than messing around in post, while also keeping that under the photographer's control if a third party is doing the post work for repro etc.

 

[Haakon]

I have all the canon TSE lenses. But then I shoot architecture not weddings.

All I can see happening if people use these to get the toy town look at weddings is someone being out of focus on the periphery and the bride asking if you can remove that effect so we can see aunty Doreen or whatever... :bang:

And why do people always think that they're an alternative to step ladders...

 

[swanseamale47]

I'm afraid I'm old fashioned, I believe in capturing the day as it happens, yes I do use a lot of posed shots and I will add special effects at PP, but I don't believe in experimenting during the wedding just for effect because somebody else once did a shot like that.

A wedding is about the couples day not for playing with kit.

 

[Raymond Lin]

I agree with Dave and Jonathan ..... yesterdays news and way overdone by those that "suddenly" discover it

I can tell that is fake straight away, the trees are out of focus.

The plane of focus isn't going the distance, the focus is still shallow. Sure it will fool the client but I can tell and I guess i am too much of a purist to "fake" it.

When there is not much depth in the photo then this effect is easily applied and look real.

(this is a real TS btw)

But this photo, try faking this in PS. All the flowers are in focus. That is where the plane of focus is.

Think of the aperture you need in the first place.

 

[Nod]

Thanks for the explaination Hoppy. Never used one (played with an old field camera many years ago but not a TS lens - I'm happy with converging verticals!)

Haakon, see post above. Ignorance (as in not knowing!) on my part! Obviously for deep groups, a step ladder is a boon for including the other rows but IIRC, the posted group is one row deep. (On page 1 so not easy to see without new window etc)

Raymond, love the look of almost resignation on the (?) grooms's face!)

 

[spxxxx]

I can tell that is fake straight away, the trees are out of focus.

The plane of focus isn't going the distance, the focus is still shallow. Sure it will fool the client but I can tell and I guess i am too much of a purist to "fake" it.

When there is not much depth in the photo then this effect is easily applied and look real.

(this is a real TS btw)


But this photo, try faking this in PS. All the flowers are in focus. That is where the plane of focus is.

Think of the aperture you need in the first place.

Raymond that was just a quick example .... and as you can see from the tools it is infinitely tweakable