Reading mode: Light Dark

Digital Wedding Sin?

Go to last post
J

jtelling

Well-known member
Messages
194
Reaction score
0
Location
Snohomish, WA, US
I attended a friend of the family's wedding this past weekend. I brought my 20D by request of the mother of the groom, who told me to get some good shots. When I arrived, I saw the the official photographer was also using a 20D. I had my 70 - 200 on, and when she went up to take a shot, I wanted to know what settings she was using, so I snapped this...



Wait a sec, was I seeing things correctly? Further zoom at home on the computer confirmed my suspicians...



It looks like P mode, showing a Tv of 750 and an Av of 16. Red eye reduction is on, and the camera is in Medium-Fine mode... Medium Fine? Personally, I would think that shooting in Large Fine, or better yet, RAW, would give more detail and allow for a crisper image after some post processing. Am I wrong in thinking this? Are JPG files from Medium Fine able to look just as tasty as the ones from using RAW?

What are your thoughts?

Oh, and FYI, I was shooting in RAW.

--
Joel Telling - Photographer at Large
 
Looks odd. I'm surprised that 1/750 f16 is achievable with program mode - it must have been awfully sunny.
jtelling said:
I attended a friend of the family's wedding this past weekend. I
brought my 20D by request of the mother of the groom, who told me
to get some good shots. When I arrived, I saw the the official
photographer was also using a 20D. I had my 70 - 200 on, and when
she went up to take a shot, I wanted to know what settings she was
using, so I snapped this...



Wait a sec, was I seeing things correctly? Further zoom at home on
the computer confirmed my suspicians...



It looks like P mode, showing a Tv of 750 and an Av of 16. Red eye
reduction is on, and the camera is in Medium-Fine mode... Medium
Fine? Personally, I would think that shooting in Large Fine, or
better yet, RAW, would give more detail and allow for a crisper
image after some post processing. Am I wrong in thinking this?
Are JPG files from Medium Fine able to look just as tasty as the
ones from using RAW?

What are your thoughts?

Oh, and FYI, I was shooting in RAW.

--
Joel Telling - Photographer at Large
Click to expand...
--
http://public.fotki.com/wibble/public_display/

 
At print sizes of 8 x 10 or less, and assuming you get it right in-camera, I doubt you'd be able to see any difference between L/fine and M/fine. You can downsample to roughly 50% pixel count without losing much real-life resolution. If she has her camera technique down pat, has white-balanced correctly, and has a well-run JPG-based workflow, I've no reason to think that the results would be anything short of excellent.

That said, I would've shot RAW too, and avoided going down to f/16 unless I had to.

Petteri
--
My flickr page: [ http://www.flickr.com/photos/primejunta/ ]
Me on photography: [ http://www.prime-junta.tk/ ]
Me on politics: [ http://p-on-p.blogspot.com/ ]
 
Sometimes people make mistakes with exposure, I am not worried about that - so long as the exposure is salvagable. She needs to remember to always check her settings. Having said that, we ALL make mistakes sometimes.

What I don't get is why she would put the effort of wearing a bracket (they really add weight and bulk to a camera) and then not use it. That just HURTS (assuming that the flash was being used).

I would have blurred out the poor girls face. Not fair to have it pasted everywhere.

--
The Nature Wildlife and Pet Photography Forum
http://www.nwpphotoforum.com
 
n/t
 
If I were paying someone several hundred bucks for decent photos, then I would expect "best practice" on their behalf. I assume the use of Medium-Fine was either just a genuine mistake, or more likely a feeble effort to prolong CF space. Either way, it's not very good!
jtelling said:
I attended a friend of the family's wedding this past weekend. I
brought my 20D by request of the mother of the groom, who told me
to get some good shots. When I arrived, I saw the the official
photographer was also using a 20D. I had my 70 - 200 on, and when
she went up to take a shot, I wanted to know what settings she was
using, so I snapped this...



Wait a sec, was I seeing things correctly? Further zoom at home on
the computer confirmed my suspicians...



It looks like P mode, showing a Tv of 750 and an Av of 16. Red eye
reduction is on, and the camera is in Medium-Fine mode... Medium
Fine? Personally, I would think that shooting in Large Fine, or
better yet, RAW, would give more detail and allow for a crisper
image after some post processing. Am I wrong in thinking this?
Are JPG files from Medium Fine able to look just as tasty as the
ones from using RAW?

What are your thoughts?

Oh, and FYI, I was shooting in RAW.

--
Joel Telling - Photographer at Large
Click to expand...
 
Sunny 16 = ISO 800??? Renders her flash useless beyond 10ft (HS mode). Why not ISO 100 with fill flash?

This could be accidental. I'd be curious to know how they turn out. No fill on a very sunny day is a bit scarey.

Mike
 
As a newbie to the 20D & EX580 Firstly when you shoot in RAW is it OK to use AWB for weddings with all that white around. Secondly when shooting with the flash inside & out what do you use as your auto focus point for the preflash. Surely not the white ?? What about the darker suits of the guys?? Can anybody help please.
--
http://www.sthaussie.photoshare.co.nz/?SRC=PHP
Photoshare.co.nz is a great site
 
Same here. I have a friend that shots for the NY Times. He shoots JPEG and in a medium format. He does not post process, that's what phot editors are for.
 
Shutter. said:
Hi Petteri,

It really isn't any harder in jpg than it is in raw. Why would it
be harder?
Click to expand...
I haven't yet found an 8-bit program that allows you to adjust the color temperature on the Kelvin scale, nor one that permits me to copy white balance settings from one shot to several.
Shutter. said:
I've often wondered why this is such a point of consternation with
shooting in jpg.
Click to expand...
It's a lot more work, 'sall.

Petteri
--
My flickr page: [ http://www.flickr.com/photos/primejunta/ ]
Me on photography: [ http://194.100.88.243/petteri/ ]
Me on politics: [ http://p-on-p.blogspot.com/ ]
 
O_o ... looks weired 1/750 at f/16 ... what is she shotting? the sun? lol ... then the lense looks like a 24-70 ... so why don't use a lower f#??? i really don't understand this shot ... then the flash has to shot a powerful blast with 1/750 f/16 ... maybe se is getting a portrait ... O_o ... i think ... but the background? ... very strange for me
--
my shots http://yaz77k.deviantart.com/gallery/photography/
^ ^ bye!
Piero Cicogna
 
. . . isn't really for TTL, as the markings suggest!

(I can't tell from the Promaster Web site).

Perhaps that's why the camera didn't recognize the flash and let her select T=1/750!

(Of course, the flash might have just been turned off.)

Best regards,

Doug
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top