Hi folks, I'm asking for some opinions here regarding using wide-open apertures and narrow DOF in low light situations. I've posed this question to a couple of friends on my most recent shot but thought I might throw it out there too. It's a long question so not for the faint-hearted ...
Here's the deal: I want to work in low light (shooting births), I've bought the gear - a 6D with great high-ISO capability and a 50mm f/1.4. I am well aware of the very narrow DOF being a hard thing to nail and feel like I'm slowly improving. I guess I figured it was pretty simple: ain't much light, so let as much in as possible. I've been keeping my shutter speeds around 1/125s as I'm shooting people and hand-held. Up the ISO as necessary. I just figure that these are the parameters, and accept that in this genre there will be soft-focus and grain.
HOWEVER, a couple of things recently that have made me question the simplicity of this theory. One was talking to the girl at the camera shop. She shoots a lot of concerts and festivals. She said something like "you can't use f/2.8 on a drum kit anyway because half of it will be out of focus". I still haven't figured out if she happens to have really great lighting usually, or whether she just ramps up her ISO to crazy heights.
The other was looking at another (very experienced) birth photographer's blog. Her most recent birth, she says, was the most challenging lighting conditions she's ever worked with - candlelight and ambientstreetlight. She says she used tables and walls for very long exposures. However, I noticed that even in the long exposures, she doesn't appear to be using her lens/es wide open. The images can be seen here, and you can view them large and with EXIF data by clicking on them (I'm interested in images 4-7 or thereabouts). http://adelaidebirth.wordpress.com/2014/08/31/the-arrival-of-ronan-adelaide-birth-photographer/
So my question basically is this: Am I wrong to just be using f/1.4 all the time? Is it not "technically correct"? Should I look at compromising in other areas? Or is it just an artistic choice?
I think at f/1.4 you will most likely always be fighting the shallow depth of field and focal point, but I don't think there's a definitive technical 'right' and 'wrong' here. It's ultimately what you want as an end product. As you mentioned, and I would agree, you will probably develop a mastery of shallow depth of field and it could very well end up being part of what defines the images of Alison Harvey Photography.
In the Adelaide images, I noticed they are shot with a D4 which has incredible high ISO performance. So good in fact, I'm a little surprised at the 2s exposures even at f/4. I'm inclined to think the ISO wasn't crazy high or the exposure time should have been less - even in candlelight. Also I would think getting mom to pose still for 2s in the middle of a labor pain is a bit unrealistic - and one of the images has strong motion blur to prove that. So unless the motion blur is wanted (and it may have been) the other option is your approach to go wide open and highest acceptable ISO for best shutter speed or compromise somewhere in between.
I can imagine you might want to experiment with some other aperture settings and you might be able to get by with an occassional shutter speed as low as 1/30 on a 3-shot burst selecting the sharpest one in post?
On a final note, love your images. The connections, emotion, and gesture in them is amazing. I'm sure you will be successful...all the best! :)
1.4 is usually just too narrow - just because the option is there doesn't mean it should be used. I'd be wary of going higher than 2.8 when shooting people with a full frame camera - when I shoot weddings and events, I usually try to keep it at 3.5 unless i'm really struggling with the lack of light and f/2 at the minimum. Of course with the 6D (or the 5D Mark III I use) I can shoot at ISO-6400 quite comfortably. Also, 1/125 is pretty fast - you could probably get away with 1/80 or even slower, and occasionally 1/30 if the moment allows it with a 50mm.
That's not to say I don't use f/1.4 sometimes, but when I do I know it will be difficult to ensure the eyes are always in focus, and if they are the nose probably won't be - which is fine if that's the effect you're after!.
Ultimately I learnt all this through trial and error, and you will too if you keep using your equipment in such settings - just try to learn on unpaid jobs!
I LOVE shooting in low light. It's precisely why I bought the 6D. I don't own a 1.anything. I start ANY low-light shoot by shifting to manual and then doing a series of single shots to figure out the settings I need in a given environment. I, typically, start at ISO400, f/4, and shutter at 1/100. Then I work down in shutter speed (1/80, 1/50, 1/30). If I want greater DOF, I hold f/4 (with my 24-70mm 2.8L), and bump the shutter speed. If that seems to let in enough light and hold the DOF I want, I'm good. If not, I hold the shutter speed and either adjust the f/stop down a tick or kick the ISO up a notch. In about 6 shots, I'm pretty close to what I want.
Another trick I use (bc I still consider myself a newbie with my 6D) is to shoot one pic in P-mode to get a feel for what the camera *thinks* I should be doing. Sometimes, that points me in a direction and, then, I can make choices about settings from there.
I agree with @vikdaddy in that I try to hold the ISO low and fiddle with the shutter speed first. Higher ISOs increase graininess. I'm guessing that's not what you're aiming for when you shoot births.
To practice, I shoot low-key still-life shots in bright light. It makes me think about the camera settings (and I don't have to strain to see the knobs on the camera!).
@voiceprintz Thanks for your input JT. I'm very comfortable with all of these concepts. My point is I'm working in MUCH lower light than this. In the delivery room, for example, there was one, maybe two lamps on the other side of the room. This image, being one of my favourites, was taken at ISO 12800, f/1.4, and 1/160s. As @vikdaddy rightly points out, there are many situations where I could decrease shutter speed and still get good results, but I'd chosen 1/160s to capture the action of baby emerging, and that was barely fast enough. This was taken 34 seconds later, and the exposure was still good, and to me capturing this moment or not was a more important choice than changing my settings for greater DOF. I'm still open to criticism (well, specifically asking for it!), but I'm not sure I had a better option here?
@icamera Thanks for your input, I really appreciate it :) Also good to know I'm not the only one who is surprised by her choice of exposure. (Interesting to note, too, that she's used flash in all the rest. I know this is something she does, and also something that some birth photographers consider unacceptable. I don't have a strong opinion about it yet but it's definitely something I plan to avoid if possible.) As for "getting mum to pose for 2s" - I actually doubt this was the case, as birth photography is (from my understanding) about documenting, NOT posing. I understand I have no idea what your experience with birth is but in my experience of natural birth, there is actually quite a lot of stillness/quietness. I don't think I will ever try for 2s, but I can see that it's completely possible this mum was pretty still for those kind of time frames.
I guess I also had an idea that shallow DOF is part of what defines birth photography in general, not just my own style. Hence all the questions I guess.
And I'm really flattered of course that you like my work :) Thanks for taking the time.
Alison, you have a point. You only get one chance at this shot. Here's another something I do. I set up my "old" Canon, with a good lens on a tripod, get all the settings where I want them and use that as a back up to my 6D. A set up like that might allow you to "play" with settings a bit more.
My older camera is a bit more low-light challenged, of course, so it takes a bit more time but I find it helpful, at times, to have it at the ready and use a remote shutter release. I can (almost) be in two places at once!
Alternately, you could use an off camera flash set to a quarter or a third of the power as a strobe so it doesn't overwhelm but throws a bit more light in the nano-second you need it. It could be set up on a stand and away from the main event so as not to intrude in the moment. Again, a bit of play with it when you're not in the thick of needing it would allow you to have a good handle on whether it would work or not.
f/1.4 is awfully wide even for a 50, and I imagine that the lady you reference shooting at no wider than f/2.8 is reluctant to push it for clarity sake, probably light drop off at the edges and of course for DoF. Even if your 50 is not image stabilized, most at this length are not, you should be able to shoot at 1/50 with no problem - the old rule of thumb for hand held safety being a shutter of 1/(full frame equivalent focal length in mm) - and even down to 1/25 easily if you practice your special forces sniper breathing control and hold/support the camera properly with your left hand all the way under the lens, as short as it might be. Personally, I regard high ISO noise as the enemy and not low light.
The off-board flash recommendation from JT @voiceprintz is well worth pursuing, but might be considered obtrusive in the delivery room. Look for the Canon high end knock offs from Meike. I use the Nikon SB-910 Nikon knock off from them and it works just fine at 25% of the price. It can open up lots of opportunities and you can learn a whole new set of lighting techniques for portraits. I am sure your 6D on camera flash operates as a wireless commander for TTL operation.
@vikdaddy Thanks for your input, much appreciated. Really good food for thought. Going through the full album I can see a lot of images (and times of not too much action) where I could experiment a bit. I probably should have pointed to the images I've posted on here too, since they have EXIF data:
I can see that in the first one, I had quite a bit of leeway, and perhaps in the second if I increased the ISO further, but in the third and fourth (above) I'm not sure even f/2 would have worked out?
Anyways really appreciate your input. I am on call now for my next job so glad to be having these conversations now :) I have booked another in November which I will be paid for, although I am starting low. Doing more than a couple free is a bit crazy given the weeks of being on call, so many logistical considerations, plus unpredictable hours on the job ... easily 10+!
@frankhymus I recognize the strobing flash may be a bit much in a delivery room. I thought through the obtrusiveness factor. With an off-board flash set to strobe and a lower power, it shouldn't be as objectionable. With the 6D, you don't need a LOT of light; just some.
Another option is to use the "night scene" setting. I use that a lot too. My issue is that it, automatically, kicks up the ISO. I've posted a night shot on the Fox River I wouldn't have gotten, imo, without the 6D (or something as sensitive) and it's night-scene option. I try to reduce the inherent noise a little bit with post-processing but I can still see splotches in places that should be smooth. ( http://365project.org/voiceprintz/365/2014-09-02)
Splotches would be bad in your setting, Alison! However, the graininess (auto-selected ISO - in this shot 12800) varies with the ambient light and DOF. It might be worth exploring when you're not in the thick of an important shoot.
Yes, Frank, the 6D on-camera flash operates as a wireless commander for TTL operation.
Personally I am a fan of shallow DoF and your photos from this session are great in my opinion. It is totally legit to shot wide open (f/1.4) it is a stylistic choice and I think a fitting one for the type of photography you are doing. As far a flash goes, yes it would make your life easier, but it would be very intrusive and most of your clients probably would not be very happy with a flash popping every few minutes.
If you want a wider DoF there are a few thing that you can do as DoF is controlled my more than just the aperture. DoF is controlled by the aperture, the focal length and the distance to the subject. I am not sure what the final product that your clients want is (i.e.. prints or just digital files) but if they are prints they probably are not larger then 8x10 or so. Where I am going with this is you can step further back and crop in post or you could shoot wider like 35mm and crop in post and still have a perfectly good file for an 8x10.
To put this is real world terms, if you where standing 5 feet away and shot an image with at 50mm at 1.8 your DoF would be about 4 inches. If you shot another image in the same spot with a 35mm at 1.8 or DoF would be almost 8 inches. So you would get about twice the DoF but a wider angle of view so you would have to crop it to match the composition of the 50mm.
Everything in photography is a trade-off. In the type of photography you are doing, you have very little control over anything that would make these situations easier to shoot. My advice would be to figure out what trade-offs you can live with (i.e. high ISO noise, shallow DoF), and mastering your ability to get the best images that you can make within those constraints.
@voiceprintz Great ideas (in theory!) :) Birth photography is such a unique genre that all the options that are available in other situations are simply not here. A huge part of the job is staying as discreet and out of the way as possible - which rules a tripod out. Equally important is not disturbing a labouring mother in any way - so no flash. (Interestingly, as I mentioned to iCamera, this particular photographer does use flash once baby is born, but some consider it out of the question. I'd prefer not to if possible.)
What is your old Canon? I have a 450D which doesn't cut it at all, although I bring it along in case disaster strikes, and would have to use my 50mm on that in that case. I also have a 24-70 f/2.8, but I've tried using that in both births I've attended without success - just not enough light. But I bring it too, in case I happen to be working in good light.
@frankhymus Thanks Frank, I definitely need to practise my special forces sniper breathing control :) Good reminder, thanks :)
I do own a Canon Speedlite, which I used to bounce with my 450D and haven't used since I purchased the 6D. I've also only ever used it bounced and am keen to figure out how to use it off-camera. However it's unfortunately not an option for professional birth photography due to the sensitive nature of labour and how bright light (not to mention flashing) can impact it.
@voiceprintz Love the story on that image JT! I'm curious what/where is the "Night scene" setting? I'm pretty familiar with doing night scenes, long exposures etc but I'm not sure what you mean by this setting and/or how it differs from controlling it manually? Also your EXIF data is missing from that shot.
@soren Haha tell me what I want to hear!! :) Yes I think you are spot on with everything you have said. As I've been mulling this over distance to subject has also come to mind. I notice that in the shots like this one https://www.facebook.com/alisonharveyphotography/photos/a.253745344822393.1073741829.246736175523310/253746471488947/?type=3&theater the DOF factor is MUCH less of a problem. Obviously in small rooms I won't always have the option, and even though the idea is to stay out of the action anyway, it's a good thing to keep in mind. I don't have a 35mm, but that might be a good one to keep in mind for the future.
Re products, I think the most common things offered are slideshows, books and digital files. So size is not really going to be a factor here. And lets face it, the files are huge. I have a large wedding print from a 4-or-so MB file made 8 years ago ...
Btw, your work is great :) Have I been living under a rock?? :)
@aliha Great shots and boy havnt you chosen a difficult subject to photograph.
Not only for the fact that it is normally low light but the action can come thick and fast with no repeats.
And that being on call thing... Man... that has to mess with your social life and issues when you have competing clients. Tough gig I must say.
Well as you know you have a few options and you have answered your own question.
1) Shutter speed
2) Aperture
3) ISO
4) More light
4 is a no go so that leaves three options.
1 is a no go as the risk of not capturing the moment is too great
2 is somewhat of an option but you run the risk of getting the focus wrong
3 you have some flexibility there.
while I dont take baby or birth photos I do a lot of events in low light and I use the following.
I accept the fact that I am going to shoot at a high ISO and I find that 6400 is a level that I am comfortable with.
So I lock that in. I then set my TV at a speed that I am comfortable with and I do the same for my AV.
Then when the rubber hits the road I can swap between the two and only adjust the setting which it is on and let the camera decided the other.
I also will change my metering to adjust to the event. Some are spot and some are center weighted. This will not normally not change.
I also mount flash in areas within the event so that I can turn them on and fire them remotely if required ad adjust as needed via remote. I normally set the lights to be 2 stops under so they just give a kicker and not take control of the light.
Most of my low light photography is fast action so I dont have the ability to do anything slower than 1/60 and most times its 1/200 if not higher unless I use flash.
As you are starting to get into this do you have a plan if things go south? i.e still born, etc
I know most people dont want to think about it but giving birth is a major thing and things happen so you need to be prepared mentally and professionally if that does come about.
I was going to donate my time to https://www.heartfelt.org.au/ but I am not sure if I could handle the grief that it would bring.
@agima Gotcha, thanks for the input. I usually shoot M but have been wondering increasingly if TV could be very helpful, and perhaps AV as well, so thanks for the tip. I must admit that every time I tell myself I'm going to practise in these modes (and P, and even auto ISO in M) I get frustrated and give up pretty quickly! But I do need to investigate them more thoroughly. And good point too about the metering modes - I think because I do a lot of exposure compensation, so maybe they will help.
YES, a great many things to think about in this line of work! :) Lots of parameters including limiting the number (and timing) of clients you can take on. But I dunno, it's like two of my biggest loves in one, so for now at least it's worth all the hassle and more appealing than going back to my previous job :) I have to say, having educated myself pretty well on natural childbirth, I am probably a lot more optimistic than many about the "impending disasters" of birth, although I am fully aware that things can and do go wrong even under the best of circumstances. I don't know how much "preparation" counts for in a tragic situation, but yes it's something to give serious thought to. I have heard of Heartfelt, and I keep it in the back of my mind. Perhaps when I am more experienced (both technically and emotionally).
Thanks for your two cents. Really appreciate it :)
@aliha ha ha ha P mode... I just had to look and see if my camera had it and what it does... bwhahahaha... Please dont tell me you use that mode for anything serious... Heck even if its not serious...
By prep I mean, do you continue to shoot, do you sell them the images, how do you approach them afterwards, etc etc etc.
Now while this might sound a little bit morbid you might find that in the event of things going wrong those photos might carry more weight than if things went well.
Either way I wish you all the best and I'll be watching from the other side of Facebook. lol
wow this is tough.. but +1 for @soren here... potentially stepping back but then you run into angle issues.
We just had a child in december last year and I understand the need for no strobes as you're trying to create a nice serene and non obtrusive situation. However, I think adding constant lights should be acceptable?
You should be able to get a small back of LED lights at a reasonable price. Then just place it on a stand out of the way or even hitting the ceiling. Bring lots of batteries as they'll chew em up, but depending on how you use them, you may be able to claw back a stop or so of light
Alternatively, have you tried pushing up the aperture and shooting with the same shutter speed so that its slightly underexposed (maybe a stop or half a stop) and then just recover this in post processing? IF your'e shooting RAW, you should be able to do this ? please note.. "should" lol.
@aliha Sorry, Alison, that it's taken me time to get back to you. I've been on a work deadline while being sick. A bit of a challenge to juggle everything.
On the settings dial: AV, TV, P, A+, CA, SCN...Go into SCN. There are a bunch of options to play with but only two you are (currently) interested in for the purposes of this conversation.
There are two night settings: night portrait and handheld night scene. The first allows you to take single shots. The ISO usually kicks up to around 12800 to begin with and can max at 25000 depending on your on-camera settings. The second takes three rapid-fire shots and processes them into an HDR jpg in camera. It causes a natural delay as it processes.
Given your intended use, I would suggest playing with the first. There are also in-camera ways to play with the night setting as well ranging from 'standard' through brighter, darker, vibrant, intense, etc.
Low-light and night photography were contributing factors to my buying the 6D to begin with. I have had lots of fun exploring and have gotten awesome results.
@agima Sorry, but "P" can be quite useful, especially for folks just getting out of Auto. It will present you with many "equivalent" exposures using the camera meter and the selected ISO and you can dial through them to get the combination of aperture and shutter that appears to work best in any situation.
@aliha@voiceprintz Auto ISO with the Canon equivalent of Nikon's ISO sensitivity parameters and Av will work well too. Set the maximum ISO and the longest shutter you can stand, and of course your fixed aperture, and the camera will do all the computations for you, raising ISO as the last resort. For me, ISO 1600 (four stops up from ISO 100) and 1/50 (four stops slower than 1/800) for a 50mm lens work flexibly and well. With an image stabilized lens (50mm primes usually aren't) you can even afford to go two stops or more longer on the shutter, down to 1/10. But it's best to practice sniper marksman techniques of breath and heartbeat control this slow, hand held. Personally, I think this gives better results, uses more exposure parameters and you certainly retain more control (you decide both how high the ISO and how slow the shutter can go) than with any "night scene" SCN automatic mode. And always remember as a last resort, RAW and a decent raw editor are your forever friends, as Brendan said.
@agima No, I never have! I have tried a couple of times and give up very quickly!
Yes yes I understand. Generally with BP pricing is either done separately for the service and for products, or bundled as a package which includes the service and some products, and generally these are paid for in advance. I'm not sure which way I'll go yet but I can definitely see myself waiving part of the cost in a situation like this (particularly for products if I separate them).
We generally also talk about "plan b" e.g. for a home birth transfer, or emergency caesarean. Some clients will know what they want, others are happy to play by ear. I think ultimately it's about careful discretion and respect and sensitivity, and I think you are right - if it's appropriate, it's better to capture than not.
@toast I did try this (underexposing slightly) when my nephew was born earlier this year. Not for aperture but for ISO as it was very dark in the delivery room. What I found was that a) trying to guess how much to bump the exposure in post on EVERY SINGLE IMAGE (couple hundred) was an exercise I'm not in a hurry to try again, and b) the noise I got from this method (which had lots of lines) was worse than the noise from the ISO (which was just grainy).
You also make a good point about adding a little extra constant light. I have read blog posts from doulas who are very scathing of photographers turning on background lights in other rooms (among other things), but I think if there is good communication and respect this could be possible. Ultimately labour hormones work best in dark, quiet environments and if a woman has chosen very low lighting, I don't want to be the one responsible for disturbing it! But I have mentioned to my next clients that if it's REALLY dark I might ask to turn a little background light on, and they are okay with this. (I had been thinking though, too dark for say f/1.4, 1/80s, ISO 12800 or something!)
Write a Reply
Sign up for a free account or Sign in to post a comment.
Tweets ahoy!
Join the Group
Pin With Me
In the Adelaide images, I noticed they are shot with a D4 which has incredible high ISO performance. So good in fact, I'm a little surprised at the 2s exposures even at f/4. I'm inclined to think the ISO wasn't crazy high or the exposure time should have been less - even in candlelight. Also I would think getting mom to pose still for 2s in the middle of a labor pain is a bit unrealistic - and one of the images has strong motion blur to prove that. So unless the motion blur is wanted (and it may have been) the other option is your approach to go wide open and highest acceptable ISO for best shutter speed or compromise somewhere in between.
I can imagine you might want to experiment with some other aperture settings and you might be able to get by with an occassional shutter speed as low as 1/30 on a 3-shot burst selecting the sharpest one in post?
On a final note, love your images. The connections, emotion, and gesture in them is amazing. I'm sure you will be successful...all the best! :)
That's not to say I don't use f/1.4 sometimes, but when I do I know it will be difficult to ensure the eyes are always in focus, and if they are the nose probably won't be - which is fine if that's the effect you're after!.
Ultimately I learnt all this through trial and error, and you will too if you keep using your equipment in such settings - just try to learn on unpaid jobs!
I LOVE shooting in low light. It's precisely why I bought the 6D. I don't own a 1.anything. I start ANY low-light shoot by shifting to manual and then doing a series of single shots to figure out the settings I need in a given environment. I, typically, start at ISO400, f/4, and shutter at 1/100. Then I work down in shutter speed (1/80, 1/50, 1/30). If I want greater DOF, I hold f/4 (with my 24-70mm 2.8L), and bump the shutter speed. If that seems to let in enough light and hold the DOF I want, I'm good. If not, I hold the shutter speed and either adjust the f/stop down a tick or kick the ISO up a notch. In about 6 shots, I'm pretty close to what I want.
Another trick I use (bc I still consider myself a newbie with my 6D) is to shoot one pic in P-mode to get a feel for what the camera *thinks* I should be doing. Sometimes, that points me in a direction and, then, I can make choices about settings from there.
I agree with @vikdaddy in that I try to hold the ISO low and fiddle with the shutter speed first. Higher ISOs increase graininess. I'm guessing that's not what you're aiming for when you shoot births.
To practice, I shoot low-key still-life shots in bright light. It makes me think about the camera settings (and I don't have to strain to see the knobs on the camera!).
I guess I also had an idea that shallow DOF is part of what defines birth photography in general, not just my own style. Hence all the questions I guess.
And I'm really flattered of course that you like my work :) Thanks for taking the time.
My older camera is a bit more low-light challenged, of course, so it takes a bit more time but I find it helpful, at times, to have it at the ready and use a remote shutter release. I can (almost) be in two places at once!
Alternately, you could use an off camera flash set to a quarter or a third of the power as a strobe so it doesn't overwhelm but throws a bit more light in the nano-second you need it. It could be set up on a stand and away from the main event so as not to intrude in the moment. Again, a bit of play with it when you're not in the thick of needing it would allow you to have a good handle on whether it would work or not.
I'm betting others have more ideas, too! :)
~~JT
The off-board flash recommendation from JT @voiceprintz is well worth pursuing, but might be considered obtrusive in the delivery room. Look for the Canon high end knock offs from Meike. I use the Nikon SB-910 Nikon knock off from them and it works just fine at 25% of the price. It can open up lots of opportunities and you can learn a whole new set of lighting techniques for portraits. I am sure your 6D on camera flash operates as a wireless commander for TTL operation.
I can see that in the first one, I had quite a bit of leeway, and perhaps in the second if I increased the ISO further, but in the third and fourth (above) I'm not sure even f/2 would have worked out?
Anyways really appreciate your input. I am on call now for my next job so glad to be having these conversations now :) I have booked another in November which I will be paid for, although I am starting low. Doing more than a couple free is a bit crazy given the weeks of being on call, so many logistical considerations, plus unpredictable hours on the job ... easily 10+!
Another option is to use the "night scene" setting. I use that a lot too. My issue is that it, automatically, kicks up the ISO. I've posted a night shot on the Fox River I wouldn't have gotten, imo, without the 6D (or something as sensitive) and it's night-scene option. I try to reduce the inherent noise a little bit with post-processing but I can still see splotches in places that should be smooth. ( http://365project.org/voiceprintz/365/2014-09-02)
Splotches would be bad in your setting, Alison! However, the graininess (auto-selected ISO - in this shot 12800) varies with the ambient light and DOF. It might be worth exploring when you're not in the thick of an important shoot.
Yes, Frank, the 6D on-camera flash operates as a wireless commander for TTL operation.
If you want a wider DoF there are a few thing that you can do as DoF is controlled my more than just the aperture. DoF is controlled by the aperture, the focal length and the distance to the subject. I am not sure what the final product that your clients want is (i.e.. prints or just digital files) but if they are prints they probably are not larger then 8x10 or so. Where I am going with this is you can step further back and crop in post or you could shoot wider like 35mm and crop in post and still have a perfectly good file for an 8x10.
To put this is real world terms, if you where standing 5 feet away and shot an image with at 50mm at 1.8 your DoF would be about 4 inches. If you shot another image in the same spot with a 35mm at 1.8 or DoF would be almost 8 inches. So you would get about twice the DoF but a wider angle of view so you would have to crop it to match the composition of the 50mm.
Everything in photography is a trade-off. In the type of photography you are doing, you have very little control over anything that would make these situations easier to shoot. My advice would be to figure out what trade-offs you can live with (i.e. high ISO noise, shallow DoF), and mastering your ability to get the best images that you can make within those constraints.
What is your old Canon? I have a 450D which doesn't cut it at all, although I bring it along in case disaster strikes, and would have to use my 50mm on that in that case. I also have a 24-70 f/2.8, but I've tried using that in both births I've attended without success - just not enough light. But I bring it too, in case I happen to be working in good light.
Anyways. Thanks for mulling it over with me :)
I do own a Canon Speedlite, which I used to bounce with my 450D and haven't used since I purchased the 6D. I've also only ever used it bounced and am keen to figure out how to use it off-camera. However it's unfortunately not an option for professional birth photography due to the sensitive nature of labour and how bright light (not to mention flashing) can impact it.
Re products, I think the most common things offered are slideshows, books and digital files. So size is not really going to be a factor here. And lets face it, the files are huge. I have a large wedding print from a 4-or-so MB file made 8 years ago ...
Btw, your work is great :) Have I been living under a rock?? :)
Not only for the fact that it is normally low light but the action can come thick and fast with no repeats.
And that being on call thing... Man... that has to mess with your social life and issues when you have competing clients. Tough gig I must say.
Well as you know you have a few options and you have answered your own question.
1) Shutter speed
2) Aperture
3) ISO
4) More light
4 is a no go so that leaves three options.
1 is a no go as the risk of not capturing the moment is too great
2 is somewhat of an option but you run the risk of getting the focus wrong
3 you have some flexibility there.
while I dont take baby or birth photos I do a lot of events in low light and I use the following.
I accept the fact that I am going to shoot at a high ISO and I find that 6400 is a level that I am comfortable with.
So I lock that in. I then set my TV at a speed that I am comfortable with and I do the same for my AV.
Then when the rubber hits the road I can swap between the two and only adjust the setting which it is on and let the camera decided the other.
I also will change my metering to adjust to the event. Some are spot and some are center weighted. This will not normally not change.
I also mount flash in areas within the event so that I can turn them on and fire them remotely if required ad adjust as needed via remote. I normally set the lights to be 2 stops under so they just give a kicker and not take control of the light.
Most of my low light photography is fast action so I dont have the ability to do anything slower than 1/60 and most times its 1/200 if not higher unless I use flash.
As you are starting to get into this do you have a plan if things go south? i.e still born, etc
I know most people dont want to think about it but giving birth is a major thing and things happen so you need to be prepared mentally and professionally if that does come about.
I was going to donate my time to https://www.heartfelt.org.au/ but I am not sure if I could handle the grief that it would bring.
YES, a great many things to think about in this line of work! :) Lots of parameters including limiting the number (and timing) of clients you can take on. But I dunno, it's like two of my biggest loves in one, so for now at least it's worth all the hassle and more appealing than going back to my previous job :) I have to say, having educated myself pretty well on natural childbirth, I am probably a lot more optimistic than many about the "impending disasters" of birth, although I am fully aware that things can and do go wrong even under the best of circumstances. I don't know how much "preparation" counts for in a tragic situation, but yes it's something to give serious thought to. I have heard of Heartfelt, and I keep it in the back of my mind. Perhaps when I am more experienced (both technically and emotionally).
Thanks for your two cents. Really appreciate it :)
By prep I mean, do you continue to shoot, do you sell them the images, how do you approach them afterwards, etc etc etc.
Now while this might sound a little bit morbid you might find that in the event of things going wrong those photos might carry more weight than if things went well.
Either way I wish you all the best and I'll be watching from the other side of Facebook. lol
We just had a child in december last year and I understand the need for no strobes as you're trying to create a nice serene and non obtrusive situation. However, I think adding constant lights should be acceptable?
You should be able to get a small back of LED lights at a reasonable price. Then just place it on a stand out of the way or even hitting the ceiling. Bring lots of batteries as they'll chew em up, but depending on how you use them, you may be able to claw back a stop or so of light
Alternatively, have you tried pushing up the aperture and shooting with the same shutter speed so that its slightly underexposed (maybe a stop or half a stop) and then just recover this in post processing? IF your'e shooting RAW, you should be able to do this ? please note.. "should" lol.
On the settings dial: AV, TV, P, A+, CA, SCN...Go into SCN. There are a bunch of options to play with but only two you are (currently) interested in for the purposes of this conversation.
There are two night settings: night portrait and handheld night scene. The first allows you to take single shots. The ISO usually kicks up to around 12800 to begin with and can max at 25000 depending on your on-camera settings. The second takes three rapid-fire shots and processes them into an HDR jpg in camera. It causes a natural delay as it processes.
Given your intended use, I would suggest playing with the first. There are also in-camera ways to play with the night setting as well ranging from 'standard' through brighter, darker, vibrant, intense, etc.
Low-light and night photography were contributing factors to my buying the 6D to begin with. I have had lots of fun exploring and have gotten awesome results.
@aliha @voiceprintz Auto ISO with the Canon equivalent of Nikon's ISO sensitivity parameters and Av will work well too. Set the maximum ISO and the longest shutter you can stand, and of course your fixed aperture, and the camera will do all the computations for you, raising ISO as the last resort. For me, ISO 1600 (four stops up from ISO 100) and 1/50 (four stops slower than 1/800) for a 50mm lens work flexibly and well. With an image stabilized lens (50mm primes usually aren't) you can even afford to go two stops or more longer on the shutter, down to 1/10. But it's best to practice sniper marksman techniques of breath and heartbeat control this slow, hand held. Personally, I think this gives better results, uses more exposure parameters and you certainly retain more control (you decide both how high the ISO and how slow the shutter can go) than with any "night scene" SCN automatic mode. And always remember as a last resort, RAW and a decent raw editor are your forever friends, as Brendan said.
Yes yes I understand. Generally with BP pricing is either done separately for the service and for products, or bundled as a package which includes the service and some products, and generally these are paid for in advance. I'm not sure which way I'll go yet but I can definitely see myself waiving part of the cost in a situation like this (particularly for products if I separate them).
We generally also talk about "plan b" e.g. for a home birth transfer, or emergency caesarean. Some clients will know what they want, others are happy to play by ear. I think ultimately it's about careful discretion and respect and sensitivity, and I think you are right - if it's appropriate, it's better to capture than not.
You also make a good point about adding a little extra constant light. I have read blog posts from doulas who are very scathing of photographers turning on background lights in other rooms (among other things), but I think if there is good communication and respect this could be possible. Ultimately labour hormones work best in dark, quiet environments and if a woman has chosen very low lighting, I don't want to be the one responsible for disturbing it! But I have mentioned to my next clients that if it's REALLY dark I might ask to turn a little background light on, and they are okay with this. (I had been thinking though, too dark for say f/1.4, 1/80s, ISO 12800 or something!)