Site Links
|
 |
 |
 |
A Wedding Pros Confession I Still Use Medium Format Manual Focus Cameras, For My Work
By Steve Bedell January, 2001
| |
|
The square format is beautiful! By cropping this photo,
you’d either have to sacrifice the trees framing the
top or the leading line on the bottom. The square allows
you to keep both.
Photos © 2000, Steve Bedell, All Rights Reserved
|
|
First, let me state that I
currently shoot the majority of my wedding photos with a Bronica SQ-Ai
medium format 6x6 camera. I use Kodak Portra 400VC 220 film (I like the
extra snap in the contrast). It’s fast enough for 90 percent of
the lighting conditions I encounter, and if it isn’t, I carry a
few rolls of 800 speed Portra film, also. I use two 220 backs and a 120
back if needed for the 800 film. I have two bodies, two 80mm lenses, and
two eye-level finders so if one breaks I still have a complete system.
If you’re over 6’ tall you can probably live with one prism.
Add to that a 50mm and 150mm
lens, two flash units with brackets, a big reflector and tripod, a meter,
a few filters, and that’s about all I carry. I also have a separate
35mm setup, but that’s a different story. I have friends in big
cities that carry more lighting gear and fuss about multiple flash lighting,
but my specialty is using natural light. Most of my weddings involve outdoor
shooting, so my limited arsenal works for me. I usually refer the hotel
weddings in Boston to other photographers, preferring to keep my dates
open for New England coastal weddings. This keeps everybody happy.
I’m telling you this
because you must have some sort of rational behind your equipment choices.
I know 35mm and digital have changed the way people work weddings, but
you can’t just choose what one photographer or I or anyone else
uses just because they use it. It has to fit your shooting style and the
types of weddings you do. Here’s my rational.
|
| |
|
In this window light portrait, I like how the square cropping
is echoed by the design on the walls in back: 10x10 and
8x8 prints always look great in albums. |
|
I like shooting medium format.
I’ve been shooting medium format in general and square in particular
for so many years that I think I lean to the right without that camera
weighing down my left side. I look at scenes and visualize them in both
squares and rectangles. I settled on using one film speed (400) a few
years back for all my shooting so I know most of my exposures without
even looking at a light meter, although I use one. That means I just have
to lift the camera to my eye, focus, and shoot. I’m usually pre-focused
to about 8 or 10’ because most of the time that’s the distance
at which all the action takes place. What I’m trying to say is that
once you become used to your equipment, you can shoot very quickly without
all the bells and whistles like autofocus and exposure. More on that later.
The main reason I use medium
format is that, just like they used to say about muscle cars in the 1960s,
there ain’t no substitute for cubic inches. I am completely confident
that every shot I take can be printed 20x24", the size needed for a full-page
panorama, without worrying about image deterioration. I don’t take
some photos with one camera and others that might be made bigger with
another format, I just shoot them all the same. It’s also much easier
as far as keeping track of and sorting negatives since each one is in
its own bag, not in strips. Negative handling is also much easier for
the professional labs, as reflected in their lower price for prints from
medium format negatives vs. smaller sizes. There may be some photographers
who still buy into the mystique of having a bigger camera than everybody
else at the wedding makes you a real pro, but I’ve always been confident
enough to let my photography do the talking, so don’t buy medium
format for that reason. It’s the wrong one.
There are a couple of reasons
why I like the square format in particular. First, with flash photography
I’m not always flipping the bracket back and forth for horizontal
and vertical photos. It’s always in the correct position, about
10" directly above the lens. This eliminates "redeye," something no professional
photo should obviously have, and also allows the shadows to drop directly
in back of your subject so they become invisible. Nothing bugs me more
than to see a photo of people by a wall and see these little black heads
formed behind them by the shadows from a side mounted flash. I think that’s
one of the reasons I don’t use multiple flash units. I tried it
about 15 years ago and my clients started complaining about the shadows.
I’ve found over the many moons that I’ve been doing this that
people like flat light.
|
| |
|
Medium format allows me to diffuse the image and still get
beautiful print quality, as in this 8x10 example here. (Models:
Ed and Beth Parolisi.) |
|
Having duly noted all of the
above, let’s look at some of the technological changes that are
here now or will soon influence my decisions about equipment and technique.
First, autofocus. Now that my eyes are 50 years old, autofocus is much
more attractive to me. When I was writing this I knew of no square format
cameras that offer autofocus, although there are several excellent choices
in 645 format. I keep hearing that they are on the horizon but at this
point they are still rumors. I’d take a serious look at them when
and if they become available.
Then there’s the digital
dilemma. There are digital backs for medium format cameras but I’m
not at the point where I’d be comfortable using one on a wedding,
even though they have battery packs. As I write this, I’ve received
word of a new medium format camera just developed by Hasselblad and Foveon,
maker of a high-end studio digital camera, called the DFinity. Given the
companies involved, I’m sure this will be a very high quality imaging
device and be priced accordingly.
Negative handling is not as
big an issue as it once was. My lab in Massachusetts (Lustrecolor 800-827-7101)
is on the forefront of the digital movement for professionals. When I
get my prints back, I no longer have a stack of several hundred negatives
but just one CD. Using Kodak’s Lab Link program, I now order my
weddings on my computer and send it in via the Internet. I can even have
the bride lay out the album herself online!
|
 |
|
 |
|
|
 |
 |
 |
|