Home · Register · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
Username  

FM Forum Rules
Wedding Resource List
  

FM Forums | Wedding Photographer | Join Upload & Sell

1
       2       end
  

Archive 2016 · Spoiled by fast apertures and high ISOs

  
 
form
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #1 · p.1 #1 · Spoiled by fast apertures and high ISOs


I use both of these frequently during wedding receptions. I'm used to them. They make it so I never have to worry about running out of flash power, even if the ceiling is BLACK. I don't worry about quantity of light, I am able to focus more on quality instead.

But not today. Today I felt like I was back in the earliest stages of photography, where I was struggling to get my exposures right in a really dark place (almost black ceiling too), because today I wasn't allowed to use ISOs above ~800 or apertures wider than f/2.8-f/4 (ISO400 and f/5.6-f/8 recommended).

I realized how accustomed I have become to just pumping up the ISO and opening up the lens and never having to worry about certain things...like flash recycle times for a double tap (once for the face caught mid-lipsmack and the second the one I really wanted, without the lip smacking), or...blasted-out faces or brows (because of certain flash angle usage required when using lower ISOs and smaller apertures with a near-black ceiling for bouncing), or overall meh quality results.

But the high ISO, wide aperture images with rear-corner-bounced flash consistently look better to my eye than any of the stuff taken with front-bounced flash, with its specular skin highlights and rather plain shadow profile. And that's probably why I migrated in that direction over time, not because it was easier (though in some ways it is) but because I felt it looked better.

But some jobs simply call for different flash use and camera settings. Coming from my old habits, it was amazing how difficult it could be to do something fairly basic when I reduce my light availability to about 1/16-1/64 of what I'm used to. Most importantly, the lights struggle and the exposure targets and compensation seem to be so much more persnickety.

So spoiled I've become.



May 12, 2016 at 12:48 AM
leethecam
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #2 · p.1 #2 · Spoiled by fast apertures and high ISOs


Why weren't you allowed to shoot above ISO 800 ?


May 12, 2016 at 01:00 AM
heikoM
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #3 · p.1 #3 · Spoiled by fast apertures and high ISOs


form wrote:
I wasn't allowed to use ISOs above ~800 or apertures wider than f/2.8-f/4 (ISO400 and f/5.6-f/8 recommended).





That sounds like crap.

But who says anything like that? With a D700 I might see the value in that. But with modern cameras? If you expose correcty, especially with flash, you get very good quality up to ISO 3200.

so please tell us in what situation this was.



heiko



May 12, 2016 at 01:18 AM
form
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #4 · p.1 #4 · Spoiled by fast apertures and high ISOs


Corporate photography, specific requirements, anything ISO1600+ is too grainy. It's a multi-state company, have to adhere to their standards.

The last time I shot indoors at f/4 was...well the only time I ever do it is with certain specific larger groups, and ring/closeup macro shots. And in those cases I use umbrella + flash off-camera. I could've added an umbrella'd flash this time too, but I was trying to "relearn."



May 12, 2016 at 02:07 AM
tntcorp
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #5 · p.1 #5 · Spoiled by fast apertures and high ISOs


ummm.... company requirement is needing an update to reflect the current state of technology.

are you required to shoot tether for direct transfer of unedited files to company's storage media?



May 12, 2016 at 04:51 AM
nolaguy
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #6 · p.1 #6 · Spoiled by fast apertures and high ISOs


tntcorp wrote:
ummm.... company requirement is needing an update to reflect the current state of technology.


Pretty much this. But there's more to it.

While it's a huge generalization, many, many times the larger the company is, the crappier and more archaic their standards become. There are reasons for that.

Smaller businesses are more fleet of foot and there is less pressure to make sure everything is perfect.

The poor souls that slave in service to larger corporations often drown in bureaucracy and have to make a considerable case for even the slightest of SOP changes. The courageous ones who often do the company the most good are the ones who break the rules.

For small independent contractors, the silliness can be like being waterboarded.


When working with your contact, it is sometimes useful to cut through the corporate paralysis and present the approach as options:

"You and I both know the standards are out of touch. Shall I stick to them and deliver this, or shall I do what will produce the best, most consistent images?"



I know. I know.

But we have to decide if we're going to be effective lions willing to endure risk or less effective sheep, delusion-ally safe from all but mediocrity. Sucks but, commonly, that's corporate America... and pretty much life in general.



May 12, 2016 at 06:08 AM
LeeSimms
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #7 · p.1 #7 · Spoiled by fast apertures and high ISOs


Did they also mandate a tripod and 4x5 view camera?


May 12, 2016 at 08:39 AM
Mark_L
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #8 · p.1 #8 · Spoiled by fast apertures and high ISOs


I wonder if you can just strip (or fudge) the EXIF rather than suffer this


May 12, 2016 at 09:25 AM
LeeSimms
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #9 · p.1 #9 · Spoiled by fast apertures and high ISOs


We have another business that does litigation multi-media support. Most attorneys still want DVDs and MPEG-1 video, which are both getting harder and harder to produce these days as the hardware manufactures have moved away from those protocols.


May 12, 2016 at 09:43 AM
BSPhotog
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #10 · p.1 #10 · Spoiled by fast apertures and high ISOs


Ha yes. all of my delivered stuff has stripped EXIF with the exception of my contact, copyright info, and date/time. They don't need to know my camera or settings, or that my camera bodies are a few years old and <$1000. Just look at the photos people.



May 12, 2016 at 10:22 AM
form
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #11 · p.1 #11 · Spoiled by fast apertures and high ISOs


Your points, whether valid or not, do not change anything. I am unfortunately familiar with corporate mentality, and I'm also familiar with being flexible (which often seems to require an individual, influential [or quiet] person rather than a corporation).

In what I delivered today, I provided a sample to the local contact who actually looks at the photos - merely for comparison - of an underexposed (ceiling was black, flash recycle time, exposures were very inconsistent, etc.) ISO800 image, which I pushed 2-1/3 stops in post (basically ISO4000-ish, though I told them it was ONLY 2 stops pushed). I did a version with luminance reduction and one without. There was a photo directly before it of the same subjects that was exposed fine at ISO800, for them to see the difference when output at the resolution requested (~4500x3000).

What I hope to accomplish with this is having additional flexibility, permission as such, to use higher ISOs...or at least to confirm where the absolutes stand.

But all of this is irrelevant to the original point I was trying to make, which was...how spoiled - and very out of practice with careful flash use and metering - being able to push ISOs and open up apertures has allowed me to become. I've apparently forgotten how to handle proper metering and focus point targeting, as well as how to try to make each FIRST shot count. The experience served as a wake-up call it was probably good for me to have.



May 12, 2016 at 10:32 AM
LeeSimms
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #12 · p.1 #12 · Spoiled by fast apertures and high ISOs


Place an add on Craigslist for associate wedding photographers. I can confirm, almost nobody knows how to light anymore.


May 12, 2016 at 11:06 AM
jeremy_clay
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #13 · p.1 #13 · Spoiled by fast apertures and high ISOs


leethecam wrote:
Why weren't you allowed to shoot above ISO 800 ?


Churches getting even MORE strict. Jesus hates digital noise.



May 12, 2016 at 11:50 AM
form
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #14 · p.1 #14 · Spoiled by fast apertures and high ISOs


How to light and how to use flash/proper metering with a near-black ceiling are IMO two different things. I think I know fairly well HOW to light, for instance, loop lighting, short lighting, broad lighting, butterfly, etc....but I clearly am not that good at getting reliable results with on-camera flash with a near-black ceiling in dark conditions at ISO800 and f/4-ish.

Yes, there are plenty on clist who "prefer available light" because they don't know how to use light or haven't been able to buy their own flashes/OCFs/etc...but they often aren't experienced photographers either, and I'm not sure if most clist photographers should count in the "almost nobody" group (though their numbers are great). And there are some, like me, who are lazy and prefer available light when possible because it's faster and often easier...and, also in my case, because I don't really see how things "could be" nearly as well as I can see how things "currently are."



May 12, 2016 at 11:51 AM
Mark_L
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #15 · p.1 #15 · Spoiled by fast apertures and high ISOs


While we are spoiled, the expectations on us continue to rise.

form wrote:
Your points, whether valid or not, do not change anything. I am unfortunately familiar with corporate mentality, and I'm also familiar with being flexible (which often seems to require an individual, influential [or quiet] person rather than a corporation).

In what I delivered today, I provided a sample to the local contact who actually looks at the photos - merely for comparison - of an underexposed (ceiling was black, flash recycle time, exposures were very inconsistent, etc.) ISO800 image, which I pushed 2-1/3 stops in post (basically ISO4000-ish, though I told them it was ONLY 2 stops pushed). I did a
...Show more

I guess the get-out is that sony sensors in nikon and sony cameras are almost iso-less so you can push in post.



May 12, 2016 at 12:16 PM
form
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #16 · p.1 #16 · Spoiled by fast apertures and high ISOs


Until about ISO1600-3200 they are pretty flexible yes, I really enjoy that feature.


May 12, 2016 at 12:38 PM
S-Man23
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #17 · p.1 #17 · Spoiled by fast apertures and high ISOs


I think if a potential client gave me specifications on what settings my camera should be on to shoot their gig I'd kindly tell them that I can refer them to some great shooters in their area and pass on it. If they know all the technicals it seems like some Joe on the staff should be able to shoot the thing. With settings like that you wouldn't need 'pro' gear and fast glass anyway. An old Canon Rebel XTi with a kit lens and some flashes would work.

But back to your point of being spoiled, yes I believe we are but that's what makes tech so great.



May 12, 2016 at 07:40 PM
mb126
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #18 · p.1 #18 · Spoiled by fast apertures and high ISOs


We are definitely spoiled but I would say that expectations have risen in proportion to how good technology has gotten.


May 12, 2016 at 08:51 PM
glort
Offline
• • • •
[X]
p.1 #19 · p.1 #19 · Spoiled by fast apertures and high ISOs



Being old and out of date, I have pretty much always stuck to the ways I learnt and practiced and been able to make them work so this would have not been anything different to me. :0)
Back in the days of MF and film, there was no other way.

I did find these less than ideal instructions and directives very annoy....errr, challenging,, when I did corporate work.
Often you were told to do something you knew was wrong and they would bitch about later when you did it even if you did tell them and they insisted.

What I soon came up with was bargaining. " I'll do it your way and then I'll do it mine. If we use your way, there will be no additional charge for my extra time but if you use my idea then you pay for me having to do it twice. :0) "
They always agreed.

They didn't always use my ideas, I have no doubt that pride alone took care of that, but well over I'd say 80% of the time they did.
The feedback was always ' Oh, we didn't know/ realise/ think of/ see it/ understand/ know you could do/ whatever... it like that!
Looks great and yeah, we want to use those pics.

Very seldom did I get to work with anyone that had a remote idea of the photographic side of it, maybe on occasion a graphic designer but most times it was the secretary/ production manager/ PR person or other non qualified pleb giving you the directive.

The " Your way then my way" strategy worked very well for me. I soon learned the hard way when you do things their way and they don't like them you get the blame even if you did tell them in the first place.
That bit often gets forgotten and even denied when there is arse covering to do with superiors.

Did they also mandate a tripod and 4x5 view camera?

No. that wasn't in their budget and they really wanted wet plate anyway. Seeing they couldn't have that, they had to make do with some other outdated ideas.



May 12, 2016 at 08:58 PM
nolaguy
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #20 · p.1 #20 · Spoiled by fast apertures and high ISOs


glort wrote:
What I soon came up with was bargaining. " I'll do it your way and then I'll do it mine. If we use your way, there will be no additional charge for my extra time but if you use my idea then you pay for me having to do it twice."

They always agreed.


Life is funny.




May 13, 2016 at 05:29 AM
1
       2       end




FM Forums | Wedding Photographer | Join Upload & Sell

1
       2       end
    
 

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username       Or Reset password



This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.