What do you like to see with a 2nd shooter at a wedding?

Question

I am, and have been interested for some time in getting into wedding photography. The only issue is that I have zero experience when it come to that sort of thing. That is one reason that I would really like to get some experience as a second shooter. What I am looking to get from it is proper experience from someone who has obviously been doing it longer than my self and maybe some shots to help build up a portfolio. What are some qualities that you look for in a second shooter? What equipment do you prefer, or would like to see them have? What level of experience? What is the best way to get paired with a good wedding photographer? Currently I have sold my Canon equipment to get into medium format. My setup is a bit slower and bulkier than the canon setup but overall I feel that I can get much higher quality from it.

I am shooting with the following:
Hasselblad h1
Hv90x prism
Hvm waist level viewfinder (non metered)
80mm f\2.8 lens
150mm f\3.2 lens
Leaf aptus 54s digital back (22mp)
Rechargeable grip/cr123 grip
Monfrotto tripod/ monopod
16-32 film back
Light meter

I also have a mamiya rb67 pro sdii with a few lenses but I don't know how economical it would be to use film. Some insight on this would be helpful as well. Some things that I do see myself needing is a faster lens ( the 100mm f\2.2 ) and some moonlights paired with some portable power. Any insight on this will be nice. Thanks,

Answer 1

One problem that I foresee is that most of the primary shooters are using 35mm or APS-C SLRs. You might have a problem if you show them up when you walk in with a blad. Secondly, you don't list a flash among your items. You do mention that you want to pick up some moonlights. Are you going to get an assistant to go with them? Not likely for a second shooter. Lastly, the second shooter must be agile and quick. A medium format camera is not quite up to the task, sorry to say. You should have kept your Canon gear. Truly, your setup is more appropriate for the primary shooter. So I think you should rethink the second shooter aspect.

Answer 2

The best approach would be to ask the professionals you would like to work with. They may require that you have some formal schooling or a portfolio of your work. Equipment is probably less of a concern to them than skill. (after all the client does not care about the equipment, but the "end-product").



As far as your film question, although most people expect digital, don't let the naysayers discourage you from using film (an good wedding photographer should know how to use both formats, even if they stick to one). There still are few highly regarded wedding photographers who use both (you can check out the book "wedding photography unveiled" for examples; I think there was one guy from Solvang, CA who used exclusively film). That might actually be a nice thing to have (having the main photographer shoot digital and the secondary shoot film). But to shoot film, you must be absolutely certain that you know what you are doing (there is no "chimping" with film. If you screw it up then you really screw it up).



As far as your equipment, the old adage "it's not the equipment, but the photographer" applies. Your comment that you feel you can get much higher quality from medium format equipment than from your canon equipment is a red flag to me. This almost sounds like a post to show off your alleged equipment rather than a sincere question. (?)



Medium format is bulkier, but it doesn't have to be unwieldy (I think one of the photographers in the book I mentioned uses a contax 645 for weddings). A few years ago I would have said it wasn't such a great idea to use bulky equipment because the photojournalistic/documentary approach to wedding photography was very in vogue (and still is), and that requires smaller more manageable equipment. However, there appears to be the recent phenomena of "boutique" wedding photography (the hallmark of which is carefully structured poses, but not the old-fashioned overly formal way from long ago). Funky quirky compositions and bright colors. Medium format equipment is probably fine for this kind of photography.



The best thing is to know your equipment like the palm of your hand and be able to provide consistently good pictures in various conditions, as that is how you make it in the demanding high stress world of wedding photography. (otherwise the bridezilla might shove the hasselblad up your you-know-where).



As others have said, don't forget the flash. People who can do flash photography and do it well have an edge over those who don't (I know many wedding photographers are scared of using flash, which is why those that CAN have distinct advantage)

Answer 3

Your system is so slow to use, wedding photography is not the old form a group, record a high quality image of it any more, and hasn't been for a long while. Today it's more like shooting a documentary and for that you need gear that you can use quickly.



I have been shooting digital for years, for sheer quality of image they are much better than film. Even more so these days with the improvement in sensors.



The APS sized sensor on my Pentax K5 beats the full frame sensor on my Nikon D3s for low noise and dynamic range. The only drawback is getting good wide angle lenses.



I mostly use my Pentax 645D in the studio or when working with crew, they do record much better images, but only when the lighting is right, it captures the subtleties better. But you can't use them effectively 'on the hoof' as it were.



There is no flash or other lighting in your kit, this is the secret to taking better than average images. You create the perfect lighting and the camera records it, that's all cameras are, an image recording device, my 645D records with higher fidelity than the K5, but what you put in front of the camera matters much more than how the camera records it.



I have been on magazine shoots where the lighting took most of the day to set up and in all honesty a point and shoot would have recorded a more than useable image. The secret is in the lighting and your mastery of it. It will take your images to beyond the next level, the camera is far less important.



Your gear will record superb images if you have the time to set them up, in a wedding you rarely have that luxury, one reason why I rarely shoot weddings.



Manual flash is a good way of controlling the blend between the ambient (moonlight) and the flash lighting components simply by altering the shutter speed. Surprisingly (perhaps) flashguns (strobes) are better at this than studio flash as they control their light output by shortening the flash duration so shutter speed has no effect on the flash component and just effects the ambient.



Chris

Answer 4

Perki and Joedlh have made some good points.



For a wedding shooter, I would prefer 2 cameras (one with a pro grade zoom lens, and one with a good prime lens 50/85mm for service shots...plus other glass to cover needed shots), external flashes (with battery packs), and the knowledge to use their equipment intuitively/ instinctively.



IMNSHO... Hassie and Mamiya are great for studio work. Outside of the studio, where you need speed and agility, they fall short really quick...and as a wedding shooter (especially 2nd string), you can NOT just say "Okay....hold that pose! Hang on, I have to [meter the light/ change lenses/ etcetera]" during the wedding.



It almost sounds like you have too much money and not enough overall experience

Answer 5

I don't think second shooters should be "practicing." My second shooters are experienced established photography professionals. I pay them $1,000 to $1,500 per day.



They are responsible for a lot of big shots. They do all of the group formals, and critical shots like the bride walking down the aisle, and the groom getting ready.

Answer 6

I prefer my second shooter to have two digital SLRs and Flashes and various lenses. I like my second shooter to be able to go to the grooms house and do photos, to be on the opposite side of the church from me and shoot and do be experienced in candids. I have not used film in a decade for weddings.

Answer 7

it is going to decision pretty relying on the photographer. For that wedding ceremony, my kit might want to be $4,500 for the images and album, and about $1150 for my vacation expenditures. different photographers will be drastically more lower priced or extra intense priced than me.