This was the condition at the wedding last weekend, strong backlight behind the head table. I was wondering what everyone else would have done, gone through the effort of getting lights out? Or are lights not powerful enough to help out in this situation. Or just deal with it by doing tight crops or wide takes? Any input appreciated, thanks.

http://fiskephotography.smugmug.com/photos/i-2DcBksp/0/XL/i-2DcBksp-XL.jpg

That is a challenging shoot I must admit, even with 1K lights it won't be enough to off-set the sunlight. I have been in a similar situiaton, the head table was behind a lake and it was a lunch reception. The best I could do was shoot on the side & do a tight zoom.

My 2 cents!

Yeah I get this a lot. As Noel said, slide to the side, shoot tight and manually adjust the exposure for the skin then just let the background blow out. Nothing else you can do.
You'd probably need a bank of 6 or more 1ks to overpower the backlight and I guess we all know that ain't happening.

This was the condition at the wedding last weekend, strong backlight behind the head table. I was wondering what everyone else would have done, gone through the effort of getting lights out? Or are lights not powerful enough to help out in this situation. Or just deal with it by doing tight crops or wide takes? Any input appreciated, thanks.

http://fiskephotography.smugmug.com/photos/i-2DcBksp/0/XL/i-2DcBksp-XL.jpg

Greg, the MOH and BM actually stood in a pretty good postion for you. You could have had your back against the window and used the naturaly light to your "advantage". Of course you wouldn't see the bride and grooms face unless you had 2 cameras. As a one person crew, I'd have one camera on a tripod pointing into the window to get the shot you show here, then I'd take a 2nd cam and stand with the windows at my back and shoot the MOH and BM using that natural light. You were lucky, the MOH and BM usually stand directly behind the B&G.

I just added this to my list of things to mention to the bride while the wedding is still being planned. If back lighting is taken into account, a different layout can often be used. One of the worst back light problems I had was at the Capitol Club in San Jose. The entire ceremony was in front of a bright window.

This is also something that is a good input for your wedding planner friends. If they are aware of the back light problem, they can help avoid it also.

I feel for ya on this one. I did a wedding last year that was outside under a tent ... about 98 degrees and the sun was at their backs. There was no way to shoot between them and the sun so we had to take it head on. Much of my footage looks similar, but as mentioned ... keeping a tight shot and exposing for skin was all we could do.

Quite often venues have blinds of some sort which you can request be utilised, at least for immediately behind the couple. Then get the room lights turned up if appropriate.

Pete

What Don said is what you must do. You "should" have moved to the left so you were not pointing at the window, and then zoom in as needed with a tight shot of the speaker.

I find it can be more tricky when there is strong cross lighting such as this shot below.

It was in a room with floor to ceiling windows without blinds or curtains, it was not possible to move the table. Just as they started the speeches the sun came out at this very acute angle and it's beam slowly moved along the line of the top table. Each person went in and out of the beam or the shadow of the window frame. Even tightly cropped it was difficult to keep one from burning out or the other from being in deep shadow.
I have a couple of venues around me where this can happen at certain times of the year. And a couple of churches as well where if the sun comes out it's almost as if a spotlight is shining through a high window hitting the spot where the bride is standing just as they start their vows. The result is the bride lights up like a light bulb. Stopping down for her the groom is lost in the shadows, opening up for the groom burns the bride right out.

George, I feel for you. I've been there-done that. No matter what you do you know you'll end up working hard in post. Having said that, the still you posted looks pretty darn good and if that's what the entire video looks like you did well my friend, I certainly wouldn't complain about the look at all but I really do people would put just 1 minute of thought into some ot the things they plan for at a wedding like table placement during certain times of year. <sigh> I guess that's why they pay us the big bucks.

Thanks Don. It did take a lot of pulling in post to get that. On the day the people in shadow looked completely lost on the monitor. The worse was when the best man was speaking, he rock backwards and forwards, one second in the light the next in the shadow, some shots there's just a nose poking out of a dark cavern.
No matter how long you do this job for or however much experience you have there are still situations that will tax us.

Nice save George!!
I too have had some really scary ones!!! The bride thought the ceremony would be great with the sun behind the bridal party (so it doesn't shine in our eyes!!) They forget that we are on the other side fighting with exposure.... Over here we have a lot of civil weddings in Gazebo's designed for the purpose in most Wineries....the entrance always seems to be facing East so we usually have an afternoon wedding with half the bridal party in the shade and half in the sun AND it's changing all the time!!! Last weekend I shot in a Church with a snow white wall behind the altar and a window high up opposite with illuminated the wall like a giant floodlight!! Then again at least I did have even lighting over the couple as only this megabright wall was the problem.

If only couples would think a bit when arranging a ceremony...that's why I always turn up to a rehearsal ...if I do see an issue at least I can make a few suggestions on a new position without ruining the bride's careful plan

Chris

This is what it looked like on the monitor.


To expose for the bride would have been like the second image.

This is what it looked like on the monitor

This was the condition at the wedding last weekend, strong backlight behind the head table. I was wondering what everyone else would have done, gone through the effort of getting lights out? Or are lights not powerful enough to help out in this situation. Or just deal with it by doing tight crops or wide takes? Any input appreciated, thanks.

http://fiskephotography.smugmug.com/photos/i-2DcBksp/0/XL/i-2DcBksp-XL.jpg

Greg, when something happens at a wedding that I can't control, I have a saying.. "It is what it is'.
Hope this helps.

Hey that's what I say too! Must be the videographer creedo. ;-)

George, it's too bad you couldn't combine the 2 then you're post workload might have been cut in half.

I really just wish people would think a bit before they act. That would make our lives so much easier.
(I'll keep wishing)

Don, that's where photographers have the edge, quite easy to combine multiple gradings in a still photo but with constantly moving light and the people moving as well it was a matter of trying to hit a happy medium. I don't charge enough to be able to got through grading it frame by frame; but then I am there to capture the day in it's reality and if that's how it is, that's how it is.

George, where photographers have the edge is with a professional grade flash unit, which all pros have. While the backlit scenario in this case would not be ideal for anyone, photogs included, the flash will give them a very usable photo, as long as they know how to use their equipment, which most do.

Jeff where they really have the edge is that they only need to achieve one good frame whereas we have to sustain both continuity of image and synced sound without any real means of control over a constantly changing situation; once it's underway we have to roll with it.

I've lost count of the times when a ceremony or speeches have started with flat overcast lighting only to suddenly have the sun break through and flood the room with strong light. I'm not one to halt the proceedings and move everyone around to suit the new settings. I just react with an internally thought "WT*" and start driving the iris.

Who has it harder, video or photo? Been beaten to death in other threads. I was referring to the specific scenario from the original post. In that scenario, the photog has flash, we cannot compensate in that situation, backlight was too strong.

Lighting changes affect us all. I was working with a rookie couple of weeks ago who kept freaking out when I ran my light for the cake cutting, because they didn't know how to deal with it. If they miss a moment they have nothing. If we have difficulty we can usually salvage something. Six of one, half a dozen of another, as they say. It's not easy for any of us.

Jeff once again the limitations of a written forum causes a misunderstanding of tone. My comment was not intended as a swipe at photographers, it was a continuation of an side comment made a few posts earlier by Don. My retorts, which were only intended to be light-hearted, seem to have been misjudged as an attack on photographers. Sorry if my contribution has moved the discussion away from the opening post.

Hi George, you did or said nothing wrong, and I obviously misunderstood you, and I apologize.

There is another thread somewhere around dvinfonet that is dedicated to the discussion of photographers and how hard they make life for us as videographers. If the discussion were concentrated on solutions, etc it would be fine with me, but they end up abusing photographers quite a lot, and it really got under my skin. I get along with and respect photographers and I'm (obviously) overly defensive of the subject for this reason.

In regards to the topic... backlight... the photographer can momentarily overpower the strong sunlight with their flash to get a viable exposure which the camera can then usually compensate for to get an effective capture...

The video guy OTOH would require a multi-thousand watt "mini-sun" offering continuous light... blinding or sunburning the "talent" to achieve the same "effect". or get close in with a lesser light, thereby becoming a distraction...

We deal with those "flashes", and know how they affect a few short frames (our cameras aren't "in the loop" with the flash trigger, so they can't adjust quickly enough, the way the still camera does). Those frames are the ones that are "properly" exposed to the photographer...

It's like anything else, you have to learn to use your tools - a photog has to learn to use both ambient light where possible, and "augmented" lighting when necessary. Same for the video dude.

Reframe if you're running auto so the camera re-sets exposure to get the faces in proper exposure, ride manual exposure to achieve the same end, or get close enough in to use a reasonably powerful "fill" light in a similar manner to a flash (with light falloff, you've probably got to get in pretty tight, but it's a possible solution).

The two disciplines aren't that "exclusive", we both still have to deal with lighiting, for better or worse, and it couldn't hurt to bone up on photographic lighting techniques as well as those for video - light is your friend AND your enemy, the better you grasp how to work with it, the easier your shooting life will be.

USUALLY a photog will actually appreciate your using a fill light, as it makes their life easier too... as long as you're not pointing it into their lens!

Dave, good points all. It's challenging for all of us; the remedies we have at our disposal vary in how we must implement them according to our medium.

Regarding fill light, most do appreciate it, but the occasional one hates it and doesn't know what to do with it. The more seasoned ones either don't care, or really like it, as you say.

In Greece all churches have an east-west orientation and the couple is always facing east.
When the ceremony takes place outside the church and as most ceremonies start between 3 and 1 hr before sunset almost every ceremony is with strong backlight.

The only thing that saves you is a good and clean lens that doesn't flare that much.
Expose for the face and let the background blow.