Something Completely Different

You are excused from reading this post just as soon as your eyes start rolling into your head, which shouldn't take long. But Chicago friends should read the last paragraph before lapsing into REM sleep.

A couple or three years ago a couple asked me to be the photographer at their wedding. I knew something about them, and even though they offered to pay me I knew they really couldn't afford to. So I cheerfully offered to do their wedding gratis, and it was an honor to do so.

I thought I could just show up for the wedding with a camera and, since I know an f-stop from a shutter speed, do as well a professional.

Stupid, stupid me.

By the time it was over, I swore I'd never photograph a wedding again. It was work! Hard work! With some significant pressure thrown in. Although everyone was kind enough not to mention them, I made some monumental mistakes. Like not getting pictures of the bride's family (whom I did not know). That's not all, but it gives you the flavor. If I were to catalog them all I would break down in uncontrollable sobbing.

I've shot three gratis weddings since then (they got what they paid for), with varying degrees of success, and one thing I noticed each time was that the experience pushed me to better understand what I was doing right and, more frequently, what I was doing wrong.

When I get in one of those places I start buying things: books on photography, books on wedding photography, videos on photography, videos on wedding photography, a new lens, gizmos for the camera, and so on. And I scour the internet for training materials, and magazine articles to validate my purchase of books on photography, books on wedding photography, videos on photography, videos on wedding photography, lenses, cameras, camera gizmos, and so on. I basically do everything except go out and take some pictures.

So I tried something different. In the past few weeks I've taken a couple of photography courses at Calumet Photographic's Chicago store. Both courses were taught by a highly skilled photographer and teacher, Bill Skinner, who's shot more than 1,500 weddings and knows his way around a photo studio pretty darn well, too. Two weeks ago was Introduction to Lighting and Portraiture, which started out slow with explanations of what an f-stop is [well, the syllabus did say "Introduction"], but finished in a flurry of really useful information.

Yesterday was a full day of Wedding Photography, and my mind has been blown. I think I've got it! The rain in Spain stays mainly in the plain!

The pictures are from yesterday's class.

That's Bill pushing light up the model's nose. No, actually, he was demonstrating the effects of the different types of reflectors and diffusers.

Loop lighting, short side.

I've known for more than 25 years about the four classical lighting patterns: Split, Rembrandt, Loop, and Butterfly. For some reason, though, I've always viewed them as things to evaluate portraits with after they were taken. Looking at my pictures I might say, "This is an example of Rembrandt lighting." I might say that. But usually what I'd say was "This is an example of garbage," because I was paying no attention to the lighting pattern while taking the picture.

Bill showed me how a professional photographer – or any portrait photographer who knows what he/she is doing – builds the picture with the light. I am transformed.

And he gave me some powerful information, if I have but the courage to use it. Such as:

1. When shooting with a strobe, such as an off-camera flash, the exposure of the subject is controlled by the aperture; the exposure of the background is controlled by the shutter speed. So what? Well, if you want a sky that's richer and bluer than it really is, adjust the shutter speed and let those colors soak in. The subject will still be properly exposed. I know you knew that, and I have about 20 books that tell me that in so many words, but somehow Bill managed to actually beat it into my brain.
2. If you need to know which aperture to use when taking a flash picture [because the aperture – not the shutter speed – is what gives you the proper exposure], divide the guide number by the distance between the flash and the subject. Then you can play around with the shutter speed (see item #1).

Our principal model for both sessions was the lovely Leigh – or maybe Lee. Here Bill is setting her up to look great:

And then I swoop in and take a shot like it's my studio:

If it really were my studio, I'd have Leigh's eyes in sharper focus. That's butterfly lighting, by the way.

Leigh, like many brides, knew what she was doing in front of a camera. To represent grooms, who don't, Bill brought in a young man who had never modeled before.

He did a great job and reminded me of every groom I've ever photographed. (All four of them.)

The classes were a great experience. When I started talking to people in the class I discovered that, in addition to doofuses like me, there were people there who knew what they were doing and were there to get their batteries juiced, so to speak. A woman I talked to at lunch had done documentary shoots for non-profits in Brazil and Iraq. Another had been second photographer for a DC wedding photographer for two years, and was now ready to hang out her own shingle.

I'd love to do more weddings, but don't want to make a business out of it. I'll be happy to do the best job I can for people who just can't afford a professional.

In the meanwhile, I've got to get out and take pictures. I've imposed upon my friends in the past to serve as models for me. Friends, start thinking up excuses, because I'm comin' round again.