Lunagraphy

I had a great photographer Mike Hari www.mikehariphotography.com write me asking about wedding photography. I got done with my email back to him and thought I would post it here as well.

Mike,
Thanks for the compliment. I like your work as well. If you aren't submitting work for stock, you should. I think you have really sale-able images. Regarding wedding photography, fire away with the questions.

Wedding photography is great fun, but it is a tough job. It can be very physical (we are sore all over on Sunday's) and can be pretty harried. We carry full insurance on ourselves and for our liability. Not only is the capture critical (only get one chance for the big moments) but items such as the handling of files is equally as critical. It would be tough to explain that you lost all the images of someone's wedding.

The equipment investment can be steep. We have four camera bodies and many lenses. You have to have two camera bodies minimum, both capable of shooting the entire event if need be. We use Canon and even though I have an EOS 1D Mark III, I have a backup 5D body. I have in my box a 24-70 2.8, 16-35 2.8, 70-200 2.8, 15mm fish 2.8, 50mm 1.4, 85mm 1.2, 200mm 2.0, and 24-105 4.0 (just trying it out right now, think I am going to sell it) plus I have 3 580EX flashes, one MR-14 ring flash and a bunch of auxillary battery units for the flashes and a tripod, light weight light stand and bounce umbrella that I use as a set up for formal portraits (but we don't do many of these). And we shoot mostly natural light, are true photojournalistic in our shooting style, and minimize formal portraits, believe it or not! My wife has a 5D as her main, a 30D as her second body, has a 24-70 2.8, 10-22mm 2.8 for the 30D, a 200mm 2.8, 100mm 2.8 macro, 50mm 1.4, and a 35mm 1.4. Weight is a concern, because the Mark III with a flash unit and a bigger lens like the 70-200mm is tough to swing around for 7 or 8 hours.

Shooting primarily "natural light" we have found that it is difficult to survive in most receptions without bouncing some light off of the walls. If you try to shoot down at 1.4 or 1.2 the depth of field is so shallow you have a hard time with focus point. The nose is in, the eyes are out! Many times the venues are so dark, the camera will not autofocus without the flash's infrared assist! Keeping the aperature up at a reasonable 2.8 (for depth of field issues among multiple subjects) and the ISO at 1250 or below (to keep the noise in the image down), lots of venues will require 1/8 of a second, which is totally unworkable. So we flash - for "natural light" shots. New cameras with low noise - high ISO settings are still going to be a challenge to focus. And manual focus? The old guys could do it I am sure, but having been raised on auto focus... think shooting sports photography in the dark. That is what you are up against many times. That said, it sure is thrilling.

In closing, a large part of your value is in the way you are controlling risk for your clients. They really need to have the shots delivered and there is no chance to re-take. Delivering consistently good images of the key events of the day is also a large part of the value. Most of these are not the scripted events, but are emotionally based and unscripted.
Will