# Asked to shoot families for church photo directory



## Rocketman1978 (Dec 10, 2013)

Today my pastor asked me to shoot each family in our church for the annual photo directory, this is not a paying gig but simply a favor, I have no intentions of ever doing a paying gig as this is merely a hobby for me.  The previous individual that shot for the directory used full auto, a wrinkled up cloth backdrop, on camera flash (had some pretty blown out faces), missed focus something terrible and used no post processing whatsoever.  Basically the bar hasn't been set very high is what I'm saying so I'm pretty confident in my abilities to please, lol.  I've got a couple of weeks until the first round of families so I'm piecing together how I want to go about this.

So my equipment list is below, I'm not very experienced at ALL using flash so it pretty much sits in my bag at the moment, leaving me with natural light photography.  I'm not opposed to using it, it would simply take some practice in the room I decide upon (which I would do anyway).  Classrooms in the church are very well lit, auditorium lighting is pretty terrible and foyer is so-so.  Classrooms are pretty small (approx 15x15, 15x20) so shooting at the long end of my 70-200 is out, my intentions are to use my prime, its good and sharp so I shouldn't have an issue there.

I guess my biggest concerns are posing and backdrop.  I've only done posed photography a time or two (I mostly shoot candid) and in my opinion it didn't turn out too bad, though the max posed was 4 and families at the church range from 1-8.  The previous person shot from the waist up.

Regarding backdrop, I don't have anything on hand being a hobbyist so I'm not sure how to tackle this.  The church building itself is older with mostly cinder block walls painted semi-gloss white and 80's style wooden paneling in one classroom.  Frankly I'm more concerned about my lack of backdrop than anything, lol.

Any suggestions for my endeavor would be greatly appreciated.


----------



## EIngerson (Dec 10, 2013)

I see you are from Michigan. That eliminates the outdoors suggestion I was going to make. lol. 

A semi gloss white wall could make a good enough back drop. If you don't have umbrellas or soft boxes, find a smaller room and bounce the light off the ceiling and walls. that will make a nice even light on the subjects. I also used to use white foam boards to bounce the light back on subjects. It actually works surprisingly well. 

Check out some family portraits online to get ideas for stacking and posing. It doesn't sound like you have to go overboard as it is just a phone directory. I would guess clear, recognisable images would be a win for this project. go to the location ahead of time with an assistant and really play around with lighting schemes so you have it dialed for the actual shoot. Plus that will allow you to get right down to rotating families through. (I am not envious at all. lol) 

Good luck. I'd love to see some of the results when you get done.

Eric


----------



## SnappingShark (Dec 10, 2013)

I would get a group of 5 friends (or other church goers) to act as your test subjects when you find a great backdrop

Then get your settings and position, and then say you're ready to go.

Step and repeat through the families! hehe 

Hope it all goes well for you!!


----------



## Mach0 (Dec 10, 2013)

I'd bounce the flash and use your 70-200 ( maybe try f3.5 as a starter) and let the brick background blur out.


----------



## gsgary (Dec 11, 2013)

hirejn said:


> My suggestion is leave this to the pros and forget about it. Just because someone offers you a gig doesn't mean you have to take it. You'll be subjecting the clients to something you don't know how to do. You may not care, but they will.



Its only church photos its not a big deal

Sent from my GT-I9100P using Tapatalk 2


----------



## bratkinson (Dec 11, 2013)

I'm somewhat surprised I haven't been asked to take church directory pictures myself. Our last directory was perhaps 12 years ago and done by a professional company (Olan Mills) that specializes in school photos, church directories, and probably some shopping mall setups as well. 

As I recall, they had set up a 3-sided backdrop, with the two sides perhaps at a 30 degree angle from the center backdrop. I wouldn't be surprised if they were simply light blue painted 1/4" sheets of hardboard, commonly referred to as Masonite. Then they had two flashes on stands at about 45 degrees left and right of the subjects, maybe 15 feet back. As the camera was about 15 feet away as well, it allowed for easy ingress and egress of the subjects without tripping over any of the gear. They set up such that the entrance to their temporary studio was on the backside of their backdrop, ensuring that nobody would be walking near the tripod mounted camera on the way to the posing position. As the shots were all shot from the waist up, sometimes chest up, the various height stools they used for the subjects to sit on were never in the shot. Needless to say, the shoot was done over a couple of weeknights, so every family could schedule some time. I ended up taking about 5 or 6 individuals that couldn't make it during the scheduled shoot a couple of Sundays later. Fortunately, we had light blue curtains in the sanctuary, so I posed them in front of the windows with closed curtains...standing up.

As far as using some semi-gloss walls as a backdrop, about the only 'blank' walls we have are in the all-purpose room in the basement...kind of boring to use as a backdrop, although I have used that during some events at church. All the classrooms and other rooms at church, including the sanctuary, have a variety of windows, chalk boards, bulletin boards, doors, light switches, outlets, fire alarm 'pulls' as well as lights, and even emergency lighting on them. Too many times, I've 'discovered' all these detractors during post processing. No fun to clone them out...en masse. So, for that reason alone, I'd strongly suggest either a painted backdrop or some simple plain fabric hanging from temporary 2x4 supports. 

As far as lenses, I'd use your 24-70 rather than your 50. The reason is simple. For family shots, you will need to zoom out. And for singles or just husband and wife, zoom in. Of course, having the camera on a tripod and remote release are absolute requirements. 

One of the things that the commercial photographers had was either a wired connection or something (it probably pre-dated wifi connections) to a laptop computer they had that the subjects could see the results of the pictures on. They had an assistant running the laptop. That way, if someone had their eyes closed, had a screwy expression on their face, or maybe the baby wasn't looking in the correct direction, they could immediately go back into the (production-line-like) queue and get a re-take. With your 6D, I'd strongly recommend doing the same.

And as for scheduling, as there's no paid photographers/company to deal with, doing it on several successive Sundays after services would probably be the easiest way to get everyones' pictures.

One last thing...shoot with a low enough ISO (least noise) and high enough shutter speed to guarantee to stop all subject movement...1/125 or faster. AI Servo, too!

PS...be ready to make some prints, too.  Paper is cheap!  Maybe a buck each just to cover cost and time.


----------



## sm4him (Dec 11, 2013)

Last year, I found myself in the same position as you. My pastor "asked" me to do the photos for the directory. I really had no experience in portraiture whatsoever, but he can be quite persuasive, and I knew there wasn't a chance in the world he was going to actually HIRE someone who knew what they were doing. If I said no, he'd have someone in there with a 3mp point-and-shoot.

We picked a room that wasn't currently in use and set it up for the portraits so we could leave everything up. At the time, I had no off-camera flash, but I *did* have a cheap continuous lighting set I'd bought on Craigslist and a couple of umbrellas.  I just googled a basic lighting setup and found one I thought would work.  We did the whole sheet as a backdrop thing, but it wasn't wrinkled; both my pastor AND I are far, far too OCD for that. He built a stand for the sheet, we ironed it on site and clipped it over the stand.

The room was really too small, but you work with what you have.  I'll be doing some of the new members after the first of the year; this time, I have two off-camera flashes I'll use instead of the continuous lighting, and I have a reflector as well as a couple of different umbrellas. Honestly--I too, would be interested in the advice of those more experienced as to the best way to set that equipment up. 
I'd suggest at least getting an umbrella and a reflector; they could be had for pretty cheap, and perhaps you could the church to buy them?

I used my 50mm prime, because it was the best option I had. I used manual zoom: for big families, you move the tripod back farther, for small families you bring it closer. 
I also shot them only from the torso area up--one reason for this is that a lot of members would only "dress up" for the picture from the waist up. The other reason was just the difficulty in getting the larger families completely in the frame. 

As for the tethered laptop for viewing the photos--we went with a much lower-tech solution.  I used two or three small-size sd cards (I had some old 1- and 2gb cards). I'd shoot about 4-6 different shots of each individual or family--then, I'd hand them the card and they would take it to the room next to me, where someone would insert it in the computer, save it to the hard drive, make a backup to the external drive and then delete the contents of the card.  Then they'd show the pictures to the families, they'd choose the one they wanted to use, and that filename (oh, all the files were renamed to the family's last name, plus a number...Smith01, Smith02, etc) would be indicated on the form and copied into the "final photos" folder for directory use.

Meantime, while that family was viewing their pictures, I'd be using another card to shoot the next family. We just kept rotating the cards out so I could keep shooting without holding things up to show people their photos.  It worked pretty well.

Finally--I also did exactly what BrightbyNature suggested. We set up a test run, using all the volunteers who were going to work on the directory, and the pastor's family. We ran through not JUST the photo setup but the entire thing--checking their form of information for the directory, taking the photo, viewing the photos--just to make sure it all flowed smoothly, and we were allowing enough time between each family, but not TOO much time.


EDIT:
Oh, two other things. As someone else mentioned, if the  family/individual didn't like ANY of the 4-6 photos, they simply went  back in the queue to try again--that only happened a handful of times in  the 150 or so families I shot, though.

For scheduling, we planned a period of time this would be done. We had a lot, so it took, literally, about a "month of Sundays." We scheduled MOST sessions for Sunday after the morning service, and about a couple of hours before the evening service.  We spent about a month before asking people to sign up for their slot; then we started making calls to regular attendees who hadn't yet signed up to see if they wanted to.  (Separate volunteers did all of that--all I did was shoot the pictures!).
We also contacted all of our homebound members; those who were once regular attendees but who were unable to get out due to their health, and offered them the opportunity to be in the directory. They had the option of having us come to their home and take a picture, or providing us with a photo.  Of course, that meant some of the photos had a different "look" to them, but in some cases, it was the only one to ensure they could be included.


----------



## The_Traveler (Dec 11, 2013)

I've seen the Olan Mills Directories and, believe me, you couldn't do worse than that. The best you can say is that they were adequately lit.


----------



## Rocketman1978 (Dec 11, 2013)

All fantastic suggestions, thanks so much for your input!  Very, very helpful as usual!  

To answer some of the items that arose, I am indeed in MI, EIngerson, so yeah- outdoors is "out", lol.  I do not have umbrellas but I do have a white plastic slip-on diffuser for my 430 EXII and I have toyed around with bounce flash.  The few dozen shots I took with it seemed to turn out well so I am comfortable giving that a try.  I do not shoot "Auto" on camera but I do use the auto on my flash because as I stated, I'm a complete novice when it comes to flash photog.  I seriously look at the thing like its from space.  

So I was thinking of using my 50, and then my 70-200 was mentioned as well as my 24-70.  I do like bratkinson's mention of the ease of using a zoom when dealing with varying group sizes so I plan to follow that advice and use either my 24-70 or 70-200, whatever I can get away with.  Now for the best background blur I'm wanting to shoot at the longest end of the focal range possible, correct (aside from some zooming with different size parties)?  Any pros/cons to using my 24-70 versus my 70-200 if I can actually use either in the room of choice?  

gsgary, thanks for the backup friend.  Our church consists of 100-125 attendants on an average Sunday and we certainly don't have stockpiles of money lying around, lol.  We do things right as they should be done but we aren't likely to hire this gig out anytime soon, too many other areas for money to be spent.  As another mentioned having Olan Mills hired for their church shoot, I also attended a church that did this however for some perspective, that church ran 2,000+ (I.E., more $$$).  Maybe we can do that in 10+ years if we're 5 times the size, at which time I would have NO issue whatsoever stepping down as the hobbyist and letting a pro take over.  As the only one in the church with a non-P&S camera I felt that if we're going to produce a decent-looking phone directory that I had to oblige the request.  With the aforementioned "photographer" no longer attending the church, I actually look forward to some better-looking images for the directory even if its me that has to produce them.  

Thanks for all of the info bratkinson and sm4him, a lot to digest but all great stuff!    I will definitely heed some of your great advice, specifically reflectors if needed (which I do have), remote shooting and scheduling.  The 6D has WiFi as you know so setting up an after-shot display on my MacBook shouldn't be an issue and the schedule is exactly what was mentioned, "just come by room such and such after service", I'd then keep a list, check-off names and once completely done go to PP.  

Any recommendations for PP other than clarity, white balance if needed, color if needed and fixing some minor issues?  When learning photography I pretty much tried (and now own) all of the major software packages, Aperture, LR4, LR5 and PS.  While still new at it, I've been using PS solely these days.


----------



## Rocketman1978 (Dec 11, 2013)

Okay don't laugh and remember, I'm a hobbyist with no ambition for paid gigs.  I Googled basic lighting setup as sm4him suggested and come up with the following:

https://www.kaezi.com/magento/index...-studio-kit-black-white-backgrounds-bw01.html

or 

http://www.jensenbest.com/900_WATT_..._p/34604.htm?gclid=CKmFr7a0qLsCFbBFMgod-0gA0A
(you can choose something other than a green screen like black or white)

Now I would ONLY use this once per year to do this directory shoot, no other purpose, so I don't need anything high-end, fancy or expensive.  What do you think?  I'm looking for cheap yet functional.  Would this make my life easier or more convoluted since I've never messed with lighting other than natural?  I don't have months to experiment and learn, literally only 2-3 weeks.  If the above is crap does anyone have a link to a very low end continuous kit that would suffice?  If I shouldn't even consider this for this year then just say so.


----------



## Designer (Dec 11, 2013)

Rocket; use the longest room with white walls.  Keep your groups away from the back wall to blur it as much as possible.  Make a home-made diffuser for your speedlight with some sheer white cloth pulled over a fairly large frame of some type.  Get a remote cable and light stand to get your flash off to one side.  If the ceiling is white, you might get acceptable light by bouncing light off the ceiling.  

Or purchase a large white umbrella, light stand, and remote trigger for your flash.


----------



## Derrel (Dec 11, 2013)

If you want to spend a bit of money to get some gear that would make this easy, here's my shopping list for you. I would skip the continuous lighting kit and buy this $99 monolight. Flashpoint 320M 150 Watt AC/DC Monolight Strobe FPML320M with free shipping
Then, I would order a BIG silver umbrella, like a 60-incher. Westcott 60 inch Optical White Satin Umbrella, Cover - Fiberglass Frame 2021

I would also order a 9.5 foot light stand Flashpoint 9.5' Lightstand, 5/8" Top Stud with 1/4-20 Thread L3050A

A big umbrella placed high and at 11 o'clock or 2 o'clock and angled down at 30 degrees or so will give you a simple, easy way to light all sizes of family groups, from Man and Wife pairs, up to larger families with two parents and five to six kids. Two adjustable height posing stools are very useful as a way to seat the parents, then to position the kids around them. Think of head heights and inverted "V's", diamonds, etc for the head spacing. Older, taller kids in the back, standing, smaller kids in front standing, toddlers held, seated, on the knees of mom or dad or both. Pretty simple stuff. SEATING the parents most of the time is a simple, efficient way to get proper head spacing in a horizontal frame, without Herculean posing methods, and using only two stools.

This is an efficient umbrella, and 150 Watt-seconds is plenty in such an umbrella. Set the ISO at whatever level is needed to deliver an f/9 exposure. With an UMBRELLA, and NOT a softbox, you can feather the light in front of a big group and get even light output across a big,big group. A softbox does not work the same way!

Work in a big, long room. Make sure the back wall is far behind the people, and the wall will drop right off into deep shadow, due to the light being relatively close to the people. Do not worry about a background. Shoot at a relatively longer focal length, from farther back, rather than close-up and with a short focal length...trust me, it's better to be FARTHER back on groups than closer. For a big group, I would shoot at 20 to 24 feet at 70mm...it works much better that way on multiple fronts.

You only need ONE LIGHT source, aimed properly.


----------



## kundalini (Dec 11, 2013)

*Lastolite's School of Photography* has many useful tutorials on all sorts of photography gear and techniques.  Obviously, they are highlighting their own equipment, but the theories are pertinent to anything you have that closely emulates.  The particular video below is about their posing tubs, which is not especially what you're after, but pay attention to how he directs and positions his models.  The first twenty minutes is devoted to couples, but then he gets into group photos.  Lots of good information IMO.  After watching a few of his videos, you do get passed the stutter.  The posing tubs have been on my wish list for some time and eventually........

*Using Posing Tubs « Lastolite School of Photography


*Just to add to Derrel's recommendation about the light stand, I would make sure it is rated as Heavy Duty.  I like 13' tall ones for more options.


----------



## Rocketman1978 (Dec 11, 2013)

Derrel said:


> If you want to spend a bit of money to get some gear that would make this easy, here's my shopping list for you. I would skip the continuous lighting kit and buy this $99 monolight. Flashpoint 320M 150 Watt AC/DC Monolight Strobe FPML320M with free shipping
> Then, I would order a BIG silver umbrella, like a 60-incher. Westcott 60 inch Optical White Satin Umbrella, Cover - Fiberglass Frame 2021
> 
> I would also order a 9.5 foot light stand Flashpoint 9.5' Lightstand, 5/8" Top Stud with 1/4-20 Thread L3050A
> ...


Ahhhh yes, I love shopping lists, and this one isn't too costly.  Thanks a million Darrel!

For good background blur shooting at 70mm as you advised how far would YOU place the subjects from the wall behind them?  

I can see this setup in my head except for how far from the subject(s) to place the light stand.  

Also, if I am using lighting like this with the distance so great I assume I wouldn't need my 430EXII at all in this case, correct?  



kundalini said:


> *Lastolite's School of Photography* has many useful tutorials on all sorts of photography gear and techniques.  Obviously, they are highlighting their own equipment, but the theories are pertinent to anything you have that closely emulates.  The particular video below is about their posing tubs, which is not especially what you're after, but pay attention to how he directs and positions his models.  The first twenty minutes is devoted to couples, but then he gets into group photos.  Lots of good information IMO.  After watching a few of his videos, you do get passed the stutter.  The posing tubs have been on my wish list for some time and eventually........
> 
> *Using Posing Tubs « Lastolite School of Photography
> 
> ...


Thanks for the link and video, I'll definitely check it out!


----------



## curtyoungblood (Dec 11, 2013)

I also think that the Olan Mills/ Lifetouch route is a good idea. Shooting good portraits of families in a very short amount of time is difficult, and those guys do it every day. They're trained in proper posing techniques and have a lighting scheme that looks professional. They also have the ability to put together a really nice directory for the church. It also sounds like you're pretty misinformed about how these operations function. The major directory operations don't charge the church to do the directory, so there wouldn't be any outlay of cash on the churches part. Instead, they provide the directory in exchange for the opportunity to book a bunch of family portrait sessions and sell prints to the families. I know that sounds sketchy and high pressured to a lot of people, but it is also the only opportunity many families have to get in front of a (at least semi-) professional camera and have a (somewhat) nice portrait made for a reasonable price. You may also want to consider that this project is likely to drag out if you do it, but they'll get it done in a couple of days.

EDIT: I forgot to mention that I once worked for Lifetouch, so that's where my knowledge of how they do things comes from.


----------



## Derrel (Dec 11, 2013)

Ideally, I would have the background behind the family be quite a good ways behind the posed group. Like 25 to 40 feet if possible, in a big room. Moving the umbrella back a ways minimizes rapid fall-off and evens out the light lost across the width of a group. It also makes the lighting just a little bit crisp...and using ONE, single light source keeps eyeglasses from flaring from a fill light. These days there's a tendency toward people urging the use of massive light sources, which is fine, but on family groups for a novice shooter, adding a fill light introduces a lot of reflection issues for eyeglasses, and adds complexity. Using the 150 W-s mono in that umbrella at full power, the background if it is 25 to 40 feet away will most likely be very dark with the lens at f/9 and the shutter at 1/125 second, and not a "ton" of ambient light spilling in from outdoors.

In a group shot, soft, shadowless light just allows everything to mush together. A 60-inch parabolic umbrella, the exact kind I linked to, will provide a big wash of moderately soft/moderately hard light, with just the right amount of shadows to make people look good, and with it placed at NOT too extreme an angle, it's fairly on-axis, but not dead on, so it minimizes big nose shadows, and also keeps the shadows falling moderately straight back, so you will not have a lot of problems with shadows from having the main light too much off to the side.

You are NOT AFTER a side-oriented, Rembrandt-type lighting scheme here!

I'm trying to suggest a setup for a beginner, that will work and work well, with basically zero training. Kundalini mentioned a 13 foot light stand...I'm not. I'm suggesting a 9.5 foot stand and a specific umbrella and a specific light. 13 foot stands are however, bigger, wider-based, and almost always qualify as moderately heavy-duty, so that is one reason to consider a nice, air-cushioned, 13 footer, but that much height will not be a necessity. I do NOT think I would use the 60 inch umbrella any higher than 9 feet for a few reasons, but mainly shadow placement, and the fact that I am telling you to work with the parents SEATED. This has several advantages. it keeps clowning around down. It gives parents control over the littler kids. And it removes the need for another 3.5 feet of stand height, and it also keeps the camera at a workable camera height. Among other things.


----------



## Rocketman1978 (Dec 11, 2013)

Derrel said:


> Ideally, I would have the background behind the family be quite a good ways behind the posed group. Like 25 to 40 feet if possible, in a big room. Moving the umbrella back a ways minimizes rapid fall-off and evens out the light lost across the width of a group. It also makes the lighting just a little bit crisp...and using ONE, single light source keeps eyeglasses from flaring from a fill light. These days there's a tendency toward people urging the use of massive light sources, which is fine, but on family groups for a novice shooter, adding a fill light introduces a lot of reflection issues for eyeglasses, and adds complexity. Using the 150 W-s mono in that umbrella at full power, the background if it is 25 to 40 feet away will most likely be very dark with the lens at f/9 and the shutter at 1/125 second, and not a "ton" of ambient light spilling in from outdoors.
> 
> In a group shot, soft, shadowless light just allows everything to mush together. A 60-inch parabolic umbrella, the exact kind I linked to, will provide a big wash of moderately soft/moderately hard light, with just the right amount of shadows to make people look good, and with it placed at NOT too extreme an angle, it's fairly on-axis, but not dead on, so it minimizes big nose shadows, and also keeps the shadows falling moderately straight back, so you will not have a lot of problems with shadows from having the main light too much off to the side.
> 
> ...


Okay got it!  I just ordered the exact setup you presented me from Adorama, it should be on its way today or tomorrow; thanks again for assembling a 'beginner kit' for me.  That is truly all I needed, something inexpensive yet functional that a lighting novice can use to help with my opportunity as well as give me a platform from which to learn lighting techniques.

Last question, how far from the subjects shall I have the umbrella that is 11 or 2 o'clock pointing down at a 30 degree angle?  I see you referenced subjects 25-40' from the back wall but I don't see your mention of the distance between the single light source/umbrella and subject.  

Thanks again, Derrel, I think your advice is going to really help me.  Before I was scratching my head a bit as to where I was going to shoot these people, now the possibilities have opened up significantly since light isn't as much a concern.


----------



## kundalini (Dec 11, 2013)

Derrel said:


> ..... Kundalini mentioned a 13 foot light stand...I'm not. I'm suggesting a 9.5 foot stand and a specific umbrella and a specific light. 13 foot stands are however, bigger, wider-based, and almost always qualify as moderately heavy-duty, so that is one reason to consider a nice, air-cushioned, 13 footer, but that much height will not be a necessity. I do NOT think I would use the 60 inch umbrella any higher than 9 feet for a few reasons, but mainly shadow placement, and the fact that I am telling you to work with the parents SEATED. This has several advantages. it keeps clowning around down. It gives parents control over the littler kids. And it removes the need for another 3.5 feet of stand height, and it also keeps the camera at a workable camera height. Among other things.


The suggestion for a 13 footer was aimed at options for future uses, if the OP is going to make a purchase anyway.  I haven't had to extend the stands to their full length, but have easily exceeded 10'.  This has kept the smallest diameter extension (read weakest) mostly still in the column.  With the center column collapsed, it is only about chest high.  The air-cushioning has reduced pinching skin when lowering with a monolight and larger modifier mounted.  I only use the 8 & 10 foot Medium Duty stands for speedlights and holding reflectors/diffusers.  

Just my 2¢.


----------



## Derrel (Dec 11, 2013)

Yes, that makes sense. Overkill on stands can pay some benefits. The more a person uses stands, the more it pays to go "big" or "heavy". The last 5 years I've moved to C-stands, which will almost certainly outlive me. Lighting distance from the umbrella's stand to family groups is going to be in the 9 to 12 foot range...not so close that it's got rapid fall-off! What I am envisioning for you is working with a fairly broad "wash" of light that'll be easy to work with. Not trying to get a soft, soft "wrap-around" look, but rather a 50/50 soft/crisp look. A "moderately crisp" light look is what I am suggesting, and that's why I said a 60 inch umbrella, white, reflecting, on a 9.5 foot stand, and also not aimed down steeply, but at roughly 30 degrees inclination and at 11 or 2 o'clock, and from not too close a distance.

On the biggest groups, like say 8 people, I would move the light to the longer distance, and kind of aim it "past the middle" of the group, and also move it more off to the side, not at 11 o clock or 2 o'clock, but more like say 9 o'clock or 4 o'clock, but kind of "aim in front of the group", so that the light level will more or less "equalize" by "skimming" the light more in FRONT OF THE LINE of faces.

Again...the CLOSER the light is to the people, the more-rapidly it falls off to deep,black shadows. Moving a larger light, like a 60 incher, farther back cuts the f/stop, but it also makes the rate of fall-off less of an issue. I'm mentioning this because you have no flash meter.


----------



## bratkinson (Dec 12, 2013)

One of the things the OP mentioned was doing WB during post processing. I'd be more likely to set a custom WB in the camera and go with that for the whole shoot. I'd also shoot both JPG and RAW. In the interest of saving PP time, if I thought I could 'get away with it', I'd probably use the CWB shot JPGs and do a very light 'across the board' touch up of whatever I thought was needed in Lightroom. Of course, shooting with only RAW and doing all the WB in post is the 'better' choice. But realizing that the finished 'work' will be roughly 1.5"x3" small pictures printed on some glossy paper, having everything 'absolutely perfect' isn't a requirement. I have to keep telling myself the same thing for the church events I've been shooting. I even have one this week!

But...I'd also expect some of the members to ask about getting a couple of prints. I get it all the time when doing church events. Being that I shoot with my glasses on and not pressing very hard against the eyecup, most of my shots are 'wide'...all the way around. The downside, of course, is my finished pictures must all be cropped. The upside is I have lots of leeway to crop for printing...4x6, 5x7, and even 8x10. For that reason, my post processing sequence is a bit screwy in that I output a full set of everything where all the PP is done EXCEPT for cropping. Then I make one or 'passes' using either LR or PS elements to crop to specific sizes for 'show' or printing, as needed.


----------



## Rocketman1978 (Dec 12, 2013)

Derrel said:


> Yes, that makes sense. Overkill on stands can pay some benefits. The more a person uses stands, the more it pays to go "big" or "heavy". The last 5 years I've moved to C-stands, which will almost certainly outlive me. Lighting distance from the umbrella's stand to family groups is going to be in the 9 to 12 foot range...not so close that it's got rapid fall-off! What I am envisioning for you is working with a fairly broad "wash" of light that'll be easy to work with. Not trying to get a soft, soft "wrap-around" look, but rather a 50/50 soft/crisp look. A "moderately crisp" light look is what I am suggesting, and that's why I said a 60 inch umbrella, white, reflecting, on a 9.5 foot stand, and also not aimed down steeply, but at roughly 30 degrees inclination and at 11 or 2 o'clock, and from not too close a distance.
> 
> On the biggest groups, like say 8 people, I would move the light to the longer distance, and kind of aim it "past the middle" of the group, and also move it more off to the side, not at 11 o clock or 2 o'clock, but more like say 9 o'clock or 4 o'clock, but kind of "aim in front of the group", so that the light level will more or less "equalize" by "skimming" the light more in FRONT OF THE LINE of faces.
> 
> Again...the CLOSER the light is to the people, the more-rapidly it falls off to deep,black shadows. Moving a larger light, like a 60 incher, farther back cuts the f/stop, but it also makes the rate of fall-off less of an issue. I'm mentioning this because you have no flash meter.


Feeling a little more intimidated than previously but I'll experiment with light placement.  Fortunately for me the average size of the groups is 2-3.  Our church consists mostly of middle-aged to older couples with a few families of 3 and 4 sprinkled throughout.  I can only think of one instance where we have a large family and they have 8 (if they're all present that day).

I stopped in and took a gander around, room size and unobstructed wall space isn't looking to be in my favor.  I dug up some old shots of when we moved into the building and sent via PM.



bratkinson said:


> One of the things the OP mentioned was doing WB during post processing. I'd be more likely to set a custom WB in the camera and go with that for the whole shoot. I'd also shoot both JPG and RAW. In the interest of saving PP time, if I thought I could 'get away with it', I'd probably use the CWB shot JPGs and do a very light 'across the board' touch up of whatever I thought was needed in Lightroom. Of course, shooting with only RAW and doing all the WB in post is the 'better' choice. But realizing that the finished 'work' will be roughly 1.5"x3" small pictures printed on some glossy paper, having everything 'absolutely perfect' isn't a requirement. I have to keep telling myself the same thing for the church events I've been shooting. I even have one this week!
> 
> But...I'd also expect some of the members to ask about getting a couple of prints. I get it all the time when doing church events. Being that I shoot with my glasses on and not pressing very hard against the eyecup, most of my shots are 'wide'...all the way around. The downside, of course, is my finished pictures must all be cropped. The upside is I have lots of leeway to crop for printing...4x6, 5x7, and even 8x10. For that reason, my post processing sequence is a bit screwy in that I output a full set of everything where all the PP is done EXCEPT for cropping. Then I make one or 'passes' using either LR or PS elements to crop to specific sizes for 'show' or printing, as needed.


Honestly I typically shoot AWB and the result is rarely what I want when shooting indoors so I find myself correcting WB via LR or PS afterwards.  I like your thought of shooting JPG and RAW, that's assuming I can get what I want SOOC.  Good point about the shots ultimately being 1.5"x3 (actually smaller if I remember correctly), however as a courtesy to our members we do provide a free 8x10.  LOL, maybe we can do a 5x7 this year so I'm less worried about perfection.


----------



## Derrel (Dec 12, 2013)

When exposing with electronic flash, setting the camera to the FLASH WB setting works pretty well with most white umbrellas. Auto WB is not what one wants to use, since the ambient light will almost always be way off from what the electronic flash color temp is. Smaller groups of two to four are the easiest, and allow much more freedom in posing and in the location where a "group shot" can be made. You can DO this job!


----------



## Rocketman1978 (Dec 14, 2013)

Derrel said:


> When exposing with electronic flash, setting the camera to the FLASH WB setting works pretty well with most white umbrellas. Auto WB is not what one wants to use, since the ambient light will almost always be way off from what the electronic flash color temp is. Smaller groups of two to four are the easiest, and allow much more freedom in posing and in the location where a "group shot" can be made. You can DO this job!



Thanks a million Darrel, both for the posts here and time via PM! Thanks to everyone else also, can't thank you guys enough! I got my Flashpoint setup yesterday, anxious to do some practice both offsite and on.


----------



## astroNikon (Dec 14, 2013)

Rocketman1978 said:


> Derrel said:
> 
> 
> > When exposing with electronic flash, setting the camera to the FLASH WB setting works pretty well with most white umbrellas. Auto WB is not what one wants to use, since the ambient light will almost always be way off from what the electronic flash color temp is. Smaller groups of two to four are the easiest, and allow much more freedom in posing and in the location where a "group shot" can be made. You can DO this job!
> ...



That's jumping in with both feet (buying equipment) and a positive attitude  :thumbup:


----------



## Rocketman1978 (Dec 14, 2013)

astroNikon said:


> Rocketman1978 said:
> 
> 
> > Derrel said:
> ...



Ha, that's the way I do it. Appreciate your offer of loaning equipment and teaching about controlling light. I may still take you up in the latter!


----------

