photographing sparklers
I’ve had a few people ask me about this image which I posted as the opening image of a slideshow of a recent wedding I photographed. The question was how I lit this, and if I had used flash. The answer is perhaps a very reassuring one .. I only used the light from the sparklers, and no flash was used.
What helped here was that there were numerous sparklers, giving a fairly even light over the bridal party. The light from the sparklers is very short-lived, so you have to be all set to grab as many frames as you can when this opportunity arises.
With only the light from the sparklers and no flash at all, it immediately becomes obvious that I had to have used a high ISO and a fast aperture.
For that image (and the others in the sequence), I was at 1/80th @ f1.8 @ 1600, with my WB set to Incandescent. (I still had to adjust the overly warm image as part of my raw workflow.) I used the Canon 24mm f1.4 lens for the series of images of the bridal party here. The relatively high shutter speed enabled me to not lose too many images to blur as the people moved around. My exposure mode was manual, and I adjusted my exposure every few frames by checking my LCD preview.
As simple as all that.
For anyone who is hampered by a slow zoom lens, I would strongly recommend looking at some of the affordable fast primes such as the Canon 50mm f1.4 and Canon 85mm f1.8, or the Nikon 50mm f1.4 and Nikon 85mm f1.8 – sometimes you just need that fast lens where a slow lens (even with vibration reduction / stabilization) won’t suffice. These fast primes will allow you to take photos in much lower light, and even handhold in low light when necessary.
great shot, thanks for the explanation… I am actually doing some shooting tonight with sparklers, good to see the results you were able to achieve.
p.s. – I agree, I love my nikon 50mm f/1.4 it is a fantastic lens for low light
Thats a brilliant shot Neil, thanks for sharing!
At least one fast prime lens is so important.
I hope nikon releases some more to compete with canon.
Joseph
My initial reaction when noticing f/1.8 was that it would produce a dangerously shallow depth of field, leaving the bridal party blurry… but looking at a chart at 24mm at around 8ft. distance gives you almost 4 feet in focus. Shoot this with your 85mm f/1.8 lens (one of my favorite) and you’ve limited your DoF to only 3 inches.
Being a portrait shooter like myself and using the 85 focal length (or more) all the time, it’s no wonder I would probably never have remembered that a wide angle lens would dramatically increase the DoF here. Thanks for the lesson!
This is a great image! I was at a wedding recently, and those things really don’t last very long. Did you know they were going to use the sparklers before you changed lenses or was it on the spot…(Assistant…get my prime lens (body with prime lens), now!)
I always enjoy reading your posts! Thanks for sharing this tip with us.
I always understood the rule that wider apertures means shallower depth of fields. I didn’t realize that the depth of field could actually vary by the lens’ focal length and distance to the subject. I just found that link to the DOF calculator (http://www.dofmaster.com/).
wat would the DOF be wth the 50mm 1.8 lens (canon) on a 1.6 crop sensor body?
Hmm, Neil, your idea of affordable primes (the 1.4 canon) and mine are somewhat different :)
I never knew that — my fastest lens is my Nikkor 50mm 1.8 and while it is great it really is shallow when fully open. I really have to find something wider that is fast. I tried a Sigma 30mm 1.4 but it just didn’t work for me, focus and sharpness never satisfactory.
Phew. Dude, I owe you bigtime. I was having buyer’s remorse about getting the Canon 24mm f/1.4, and boom, I hit the blog and you used it in a wonderful shot. For a non-professional, that kind of investment can give one a smallish heart attack, especially when other lenses sit unused in one’s photo bag. But maybe my months of agonizing will be validated when I get this lens on the camera. I’ve long been frustrated by the results with flash (though your tutorials have helped), but with a faster lens, maybe some of those frustrations will be rendered moot. Thanks for the great timing, and for the ongoing insights into this often confounding realm.
I tend to use flash when groups are involved as the DOF is so narrow. But good use of the wide angle prime here. According to dofmaster.com the 1D gives 4 foot of DOF at 9.44 feet from the subject. How far were you exactly from the group? And you focused on the girl at the left of the photograph?
Thanks for the info on the shot. But how did you calculate your exposure before the shot? I see what you used, but how did you know what to use for the exposure?