Wedding Critique of the Week 6/6/11

<p>Hi William....I did as you suggested but was not willing to copy the image for this purpose, so showed it to a few interested parties in my office....<br /> Most were of the <em>"Oh, that's nice. What is it?" </em>One lad stared blankly at it and said nothing. Most were of the "That's nice." opinion, but really had to have it explained before further comments....<br /> About what I would have expected.......Generally enthusism was quite high after explanation tho'...</p>

<p>Hi Robert<br>

Thanks,<br>

I had the opposite result. The class is all Girls, 17 to 18yrs.<br>

Their comments varied but all mentioned the compound noun "Wedding Dress" in their answers - maybe our sample groups are way too diverse?<br>

I am interested in this.</p>

<p>WW</p>

<p>I'm not sure how you would make this image more obviously a wedding image, short of her wearing the dress and doing that all too common shot of the bride looking wistfully out of the window. That would be more obviously a wedding image, but this is so much more, it's a real moment, and like anything worthwhile it requires a little work from the viewer.<br>

I may be a wedding photographer but my personal goal at any wedding is to take lovely photos at a wedding, not to take lovely wedding photos. They're not widely different aims, but I think it does change the way you view a wedding, and makes your style yours, and not the generic shots that make up so much of what we see.</p>

<p>Believe it or not, I figured the whole thing out almost immediately, even without a caption for help. There really is no mistaking a wedding gown if you've dealt with enough of them. I think the image is very nice, lovely, catches a fine moment, needs no explaining. Perhaps I would have liked another variation where she turns her head slightly to the light just to pick up some other lighting features on the shadow side of her face beside the rim light type.</p>

<p>I’m with Robert. Not only is the dress not so clear … but<br />those windows make think this is a copy of 15^th century painting. Looks<br />like somebody going through treasures in the attic.<br>

Good photo but I’m sorry, not a bride getting ready. Wedding<br />photography is a subset of journalism. The photos must tell a story of a<br />wedding.</p>

<p>To those that say "this is not a wedding photo because it doesn't tell a story" Although there isn't some sort of indicator that screams wedding. She knows. She will always know. It's her wedding. It's her story. Isn't that my job -- to capture her story? I'm not ungrateful for the critiques that mention this, but I am really scratching my head over how you don't get it.<br></p>

<blockquote>

<p>Wedding photography is a subset of journalism. The photos must tell a story of a<br /> wedding.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I must say I beg to differ with Robert and Rafi. Wedding photography is subject to the style of the photographer. Whereas some adopt a journalistic style, others pose their subjects more formally, etc. The "...story of a wedding" can be interpreted in as many ways as there are wedding photographers. Every wedding has myriad little sub-stories within it. The fact that one has been chosen which is considered less "traditional" or obvious should not detract from the fact that this was a storytelling image, nonetheless. And a powerful one.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Isn't that my job -- to capture her story?</p>

</blockquote>

<p><br /><br /><br />Yes, and keep your clients happy.<br /><br /><br />Welcome to photo.net.</p>

 

<p>One sweet image. Very Jeff Ascough esq.</p>