I've spoken with several photographers now, and I seem to be getting more and more confused rather than informed. Every one of them, it seems, has propounded medium format and its ability to be enlarged. The photographer I'd like to hire uses only 35mm and says we can do large prints just as well and that it really depends on his skill rather than on the film. Also, could someone explain to me what the difference is between B&W prints from B&W film and B&W prints from color film? I'm told the former is better, but I'd like to know why. I'd appreciate some comments, and although I'm not a photographer, please feel free to get technical. Thanks.

-- Andrea E (andrea@reflexnet.net), January 09, 2001

Answers

35mm is totally inadequate for photographing large groups of people, especially using colour negative film, no matter how skilful the camera operator. The small negatives just can't hold the detail needed for well-defined facial features and good texture in clothing. Anything less than medium format for the formal group shots is going to look disappointing, although 35mm allows more candid and relaxed pictures at the reception, and for the less formal 'snapshots'.

Without using expensive specialist printing paper, you can't get good B&W prints from colour film. The reason being that normal B&W printing paper is insensitive to red, and colour negatives have a heavy red bias to them. In addition, any green, greeny-blue or blue tones in the subject are rendered reddish coloured on the negative, and will print either white, or far too pale to look realistic.
The exception to this is if the pictures are going to be digitally scanned. In this case, reasonable B&W quality is easy to obtain from a colour original.

From what you've said, it doesn't sound as if the 'photographer' in question is properly equipped to do the job. Find someone who isn't full of it.

-- Pete Andrews (p.l.andrews@bham.ac.uk), January 10, 2001.

Andrea, be sure to ask to see the portfolio/samples of the photographers' work, and also ask for references. You really should not have to concern yourself with technical details, be more concerned with the 'track record' of the photographers in question, and whether or not you like their work.

chris

-- Christian Harkness (chris.harkness@eudoramail.com), January 10, 2001.

Andrea, In respose to your preference, I'd say it is an impossibility to get any quality enlargements from 35mm. I would prefer a photgrapher who is medium format or Large format driven.

Speaking from experience of shooting my sisters wedding with both 35mm and medium, I came to the conclusion, as the person prior to me stated, it is an impossibility, to get the same quality from a 35mm camera as it is from a medium format.

(Just my humble opinion) In anycase, go with what you feel right.

-- Nauman Saghir (nsaghir@hotmail.com), January 10, 2001.

Andrea,

If the majority of the wedding photographers you have talked to recommended medium format, it makes you wonder why just one harked 35mm, hmm? As it has been stated before in this thread, enlargements benefit the most when you use the largest negative possible. Any wedding photograph has the potential to become an enlargement. With the event being "once in a lifetime", you would want it to be as good as good can get. I would go with medium format over 35mm. The only downside to medium format is that it will be more expensive than 35mm so budget accordingly.

Hope this helps!

-- Johnny Motown (johnny.motown@att.net), January 10, 2001.

I beg to differ. 35mm photographs taken with good cameras, good lighting, and good pro film with high quality processing will be perfectly satisfactory for 80 to 90% of the photographs taken. You will rarely enlarge guest photos, tosses, cake cutting, etc, to any size over 8x10, if that, and for that size 35mm will produce beautiful results, be more economical, and will allow more photos to be taken. For only those photos you want displayed in very large sizes (16x20 plus) should medium format be necessary, usually those of the couple, bride and groom portraits, and very important family group photos. All else can (and should) be done with high quality 35mm equipment and film.

where do you live?

-- Todd Frederick (fredrick@hotcity.com), January 10, 2001.

Todd. I've been there and done that, and used a Nikon with Nikkor prime lenses for the 35mm shots.
Even at 5x7 and 10x8 sizes the quality difference between 35mm and 6x6 is very noticeable. The formal group shots need medium format, as a minimum.

-- Pete Andrews (p.l.andrews@bham.ac.uk), January 11, 2001.

Andrea --

The best way to choose a wedding photographer is to actually see examples of his/her work. Checking references is useful. Photographers like to get technical about cameras and film; don't get caught in this trap. What you care about is the end result. Make your choice according to the results of the photographer's previous work.

-- Jeff Polaski (polaski@acm.org), January 11, 2001.

Want great photos from your weeding: get a photographer who uses Medium format and pay the extra money

Whant to use 35mm: heck your cousin can take the shots....

My point here is to get something good you have to spend the money for it!!!

good luck

-- Nauman Saghir (nsaghir@hotmail.com), January 11, 2001.

Andrea: Pay much attention to Jeff Polaski's advise!

Look at the work of several photographers. Pay attention to the detail. Learn what you like and don't like, then compare photographer's for price & quality. Budget is always a factor. Definitely get references and call them. Remember that personality is an important factor. This person will be at the wedding and how he/she acts towards the family and guests definitely does matter. Ask the references if how the photographer handled his/her subjects, whether he/she was respectful of the people and the ceremonies.

If you want B&W photos, then make sure your photographer uses B&W materials, not color, and see samples!. If you want color, then go that route.

-- Charlie Strack (charlie_strack@sti.com), January 11, 2001.

Wedding photography is changing.

Even Monte Zuker and Denis Reggie are using 35mm, and in B/W.

Documentary style is "IN"

It all depends on what is "IN" and what's "IN" determines the equipment requirements.

I agree, for images that will be reproduced in huge enlargement sizes, medium format is critical, and I include that in my services!

For the documentary images, where I must work fast and furious, to "catch" THE EVENT, I MUST use 35mm...there is NO other way!

Not everything must be enlarged to 30X40! Get Real!

Also, "magazine" collage style albums are "IN" and these lend themselves to 35mm.

Hey guys, and gals, keep up with the trends!

-- Todd Frederick (fredrick@hotcity.com), January 11, 2001.

Well, let's just hope that this style continues to be IN, so that the happy couple's grandchildren don't laugh too loudly at it. Or at least until the divorce goes through. :^)

-- Pete Andrews (p.l.andrews@bham.ac.uk), January 12, 2001.

To launch off from Pete's last comment, perhaps given the divorce rate there's no downside to printing *all* wedding work on Kodak color paper. The longevity advantage of Fuji's paper may have no great value here, since fifty percent of US marriages dissolve. In California only one in three survive!

-- Sal Santamaura (bc_hill@qwestinternet.net), January 12, 2001.

Andrea, do you want an album filled with beautifully composed and lit formal shots of the bride & groom and posed family group shots? Then you want someone who uses medium format and is a master of lighting technique. Do you want a more active photojournalistic style that catches a lot of the precious "moments" of your day? Then a shooter who uses a good quality 35mm camera and lenses is probably what your looking for. Some, like myself, use both. The real questions you should be asking are, aside from format, brand of camera, type of film etc., are, is the photography of good quality? Is is strong technichally/aesthetically? Does the photography present a defining style that fits the wedding you are going to have. Is the photographer of good charachter and integrity? Is he pleasing to be around, cheerful, a good communicator? Bring someone along with you to meet him, preferably your fiance'. Ask him for references. Find out from other clients how pleased they were with his work and his professionalism. Find someone who has an artistic eye, or photographic experience, if you need help judging one photographer's work over another. But don't get too bogged down in the technical details. The bottom line is, is the photography good? You don't need to know whether he used a Hasselblad or a Nikon to get them.

-- Paul Swenson (paulphoto@humboldt1.com), January 12, 2001.

I'm not sure if anyone is still following this thread, but I thought I'd add a few more comments.

The issue of 35mm or medium format for wedding photography is an endless and unresolvable debate, just as in the "which camera is best?" and the Fuji/Kodak film wars categories.

I do both traditional/formal wedding portraiture, and use medium format for images that need the detail, reduced grain, and enlargement potential. I also do documentary/photojournalistic wedding photography, and must use 35mm in order to take an abundance of images in order to give the event a complete workout. I do both at all weddings.

I agree with the answer above...it is not so much a question of which is better, but what the intended purpose is.

I worked with a large studio last summer to learn something about studio practices and policies, and every photographer there used a combination of 35mm and medium format. This is becoming standard practice, as is tilted framing, crossprocessing, b&w/sepia imagery, available light wedding photography, infrared, magazine style albums and offering digital services. The business is in the process of major changes and we need to go with it rather than fight it.

35mm can be a very effective wedding tool, and can provide a mobility and quickness of operation not possible with many medium format systems. I am also seeing more in the use of rangefinder style medium format cameras to help bridge that gap. I use a Fuji 645 for much of my wedding medium format, but use a 35mm for most of the reception and all of the black and white.

Good wedding photography is also not just a matter of what camera is used or the techincal competency of the photographer. There is a psychology to weddings and a good wedding photographer needs to be aware of that psychology...how to work with many different kinds of people, harmoniously, at a single event.

I am also concerned that many studios are out to cheat the client. I think the element of the integrity and honesty of the photographer and studio should be considered, and the suggestion regarding asking for references of previous clients is good. Talk with others who used that photographer or studio before.

Also check pricing and business practices, and make comparisons.

Many brides and grooms are on very tight budgets. Many major studios in my area charge $3000+ for an average basic wedding. The use of 35mm can fill a niche in the market to provide good services to less affluent clients at a lower cost, especially if the bride and groom does not wish to make huge display prints, but would be happy with a nice documentary proof album and a few 8x10 formal portraits. I think that's ok.

There is much more to wedding photography services than whether or not the photographer uses 35mm, medium format, or both.

That's my opinion.

-- Todd Frederick (fredrick@hotcity.com), January 13, 2001.