Re: Wedding photography

[Stanee Rae Pettit Murray <stanee-rae@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

At 08:45 AM 8/20/96 +0000, Tom Benedict wrote:

>I just got back from a friend's wedding, and even though I had half
>a roll of IR left, I left the camera at home.  Good thing, too.  The
>bride (being as nervous as anyone who's getting married) was quite
>flushed.  I've seen in some medical handbooks how IR film can be used
>to make blood vessels show up quite sharply.  I was afraid I would
>wind up with some really scary looking pictures.
>
>Do you wind up with any bizzarro effects other than the haloes?  Better
>yet, if you can, upload some of your wedding pictures to the gallery!
>

Sometimes, on a very pale person, the veins in the neck and upper chest
show, but I've never had them turn out really noticable.

I've mentioned the "shark eyes" effect before.  When the subject is looking
directly at the camera, both the iris and pupil of the eye go very dark,
sometimes almost black.  This looks VERY SPOOKY, especially on a fair,
blonde subject.  For this reason, I don't do close-ups where the subject
looks directly into the lens; have the bride & groom look off to the side,
or down at the bouquet/rings.

Also, the satin on the groom's tux (lapels and pantleg stripes) will render
very light or white, even if the satin is black.

I use a Minolta x700, set on aperature-priority autoexposure with a Cokin
red (#A003) filter.  Kodak HIE rated at E.I. 200.

Stanee

Stanee Rae Murray, CPP, owner
Stanee Rae Studio
<stanee-rae@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
voice phone (908) 842-5268


------------------------------

Topic No. 5