Wedding #3 for the season and #18 overall. This was easily my most difficult wedding to date. Mostly because of the fact that it ran an hour late (the schedule was tight enough as it was)....and this was WITH a wedding planner! Then there was the videographer I wanted to punch in the neck. Dude just would not cooperate at all, but I managed to work around him. I swear I was trying to figure out how to throw him overboard without getting caught.
This was also my first wedding with Evan's old 16-35L II.
Equipment: 5D3 + 16-35L + Sigma 50/85/105 macro/70-200 OS + Phottix Strato II
I do have a question that I'd like to throw out there.
Like many others I really liked 10.
I'm assuming that 10 was shot in the same location as 9, with pretty much the same lighting and is essentially 9 shot for the highlights.
I just wonder what do clients think about shots like that. If indeed i'm correct, then 10 looks NOTHING like what the room would have looked to anyone in that room other than Alan's camera.
And yeah I realize Alan provided plenty of shots that are more "perceptual" but I still wonder.... if they were left to pick 10 as it's shot, vs 10 shot with the exact same exposure as 9, which one would THEY pick for an album?
Ale, 10 is definitely not a typical shot for me. Without the videographer blasting away with his video light, I might have shot that one differently. If I was the type of shooter that gave more direction, I would probably have had him start all over again (minus the video light). Since I try to involve myself as little as possible, I just went with it.
Good question as to what a client would think about what was created vs. what was actually there.
Thanks for the comments everyone. You guys don't miss much!
About #35: I wasn't totally happy with that one. I would have been better off allowing more outside ambient and using my video light to light the couple as opposed to using the cabin lights on the bridge. It'snot a bad shot, but I think the execution could've been better.
