Been Quite A While

Well grand daughter getting married. I've done some weddings but it's been a while. So they wanted a few for announcements and stuff. Needed the practice before the big day.

 

 

 

 

Edited July 22, 2018 by William Michael

It's a bigger job when you are related to the Bride.

 

They appear a relaxed Couple in front of you and your Camera, you're halfway there with that aspect.

If you're looking for feedback, I'd suggest that you frame a fraction wider for any tight shots, for example the two half shots, you've clipped their arms and hands.

I like the use of the soft lighting - dappled light can be a challenge.

The Front-on Bust Shot (I think) is an hard one to pull off well (any Front-on Shot is, IMO) and you've done a good job with this one. Perhaps the Camera Elevation could have been a tad higher, or having the Bride not leaning her head back as far. I like the diagonal that she makes on him. Nice lines and good rapport to the Camera and Viewer.

 

Have a blast at the Wedding.

 

WW

I agree with William. Show more of your subjects. The last picture shows 50% of them and 50% of a tree stump. I am not sure of the importance of the tree or the beauty. The first picture the girl has her eyes closed. In any case I don't want to sound hard on you. It's always a little rusty when coming back to photography after some time off. keep practicing as you are only as good as your last job.

I agree with William. Show more of your subjects. The last picture shows 50% of them and 50% of a tree stump. I am not sure of the importance of the tree or the beauty. The first picture the girl has her eyes closed. In any case I don't want to sound hard on you. It's always a little rusty when coming back to photography after some time off. keep practicing as you are only as good as your last job.

Actually the tree is very important. It is where she learned to swing. She had many a picnic with her dolls or friends shaded by that old tree. Sadly it is not going to around much long. The base is rotting.

Actually the tree is very important. It is where she learned to swing. She had many a picnic with her dolls or friends shaded by that old tree. Sadly it is not going to around much long. The base is rotting.

 

The viewer would not know the backstory just by looking at it. Still not sure how that relates or communicates an engaged couple that need announcements.

The viewer would not know the backstory just by looking at it. Still not sure how that relates or communicates an engaged couple that need announcements.

Weddings and wedding pics are fairly intimate things. It’s likely that many guests who will be seeing this picture will already know the story of the tree and the importance of it to the bride. Wedding pics don’t necessarily need to have universal appeal, where the viewer who is a stranger may not get the import of certain elements or surroundings. But, knowing the backstory of the tree made me, even as a stranger, appreciate the photo much more and, as I said, I suspect many of the friends and relatives viewing this photo will get it and appreciate it.

Really nice lighting, I like how you lit them, nice work. As a wedding photographer myself, I totally appreciate and respect shooters who know how light their subjects and aren't afraid (or just lazy) to do so at live events. As everyone knows, weddings almost always take place in the worst lighting (indoors and outdoors) where we're always trying to make the outside look like inside and the inside look like outside. Command of your speedlights and strobes is critical. It's a labor of love and struggle but it's a big part of the job and you demonstrate your fine lighting skills in these pictures.

 

I guess I'd echo what others have already said and that's cutting off limbs is a no-no (every photographer has made this boo-boo), especially when you have plenty of space to back up. Also, mix up the shots.....head to toe, waist up, shoulders up, portrait and landscape. I can't seem to figure out what focal length you shot at in these but I feel like it's wider than 50mm...... anywhere from 85mm to 200mm would be the optimal focal lengths for portraits like these, anything wider than 50mm are going to look somewhat off.....unless you're doing an environmental and want to make them smaller in the frame, then go wide.....but wide angles distort easily, as you are probably well aware.

 

Best of luck at the wedding, you're going to do well and make photos your granddaughter will cherish.

Edited August 1, 2018 by Thomas J.

. . . I can't seem to figure out what focal length you shot at in these but I feel like it's wider than 50mm...... anywhere from 85mm to 200mm would be the optimal focal lengths for portraits like these, anything wider than 50mm are going to look somewhat off.....unless you're doing an environmental and want to make them smaller in the frame, then go wide.....but wide angles distort easily, as you are probably well aware. . . .

 

My expectation is that the two Profile shots were pulled at FL = 59mm and the Front On shot was pulled at FL = 70mm, (using the EF 24 to 70 F/2.8 L USM on an EOS 5D MkIV). Each image’s EXIF is embedded in the three images.

 

***

 

A couple of points, not necessarily addressed to the OP or Thomas, but rather for those who might not be aware:

 

1. If I understand the meaning of Thomas's warning correctly: Wide Angle (Lenses) do not distort easily, but rather using Wide Angle Lenses too close to the Subject creates distorted facial and body features. So expanding on what Thomas wrote, if one is using a Wide Angle Lens for Portraiture, then stepping back to make an "environmental portrait" (as he0 mentioned) means that the Subject Distance would be increased to about the same as what we have for an Half Shot using for example a 70mm lens. It is all about the Subject Distance which creates the Perspective and the relativity of the Facial and Body Features.

 

Expanding on the other aspect that I think Thomas was considering - when using Wide Angle Lenses is, the alignment of the lens in the Vertical and the Horizontal is more critical - for example making a Portrait whilst tilting the lens upward or downward to the horizontal can create undesirable face and body features.

 

2. I think that a suggestion for the use of any Focal Length also requires the mention of a Camera Format. These days, Wedding Photographers are using many Camera formats.

 

For Half Shots of two people, such as the three examples, I’d tend to use an 85mm Lens on a 5D Series Camera. Maybe a 135mm lens, sometimes. Personally, a 200mm for an Half Shot of two people flattens the nose and cheeks too much. Additionally the Subject Distance can be too great for good Rapport and/or effective use of On Camera Flash Fill.

 

Back to the point about mention Camera Formats when recommending Focal Lengths of Lenses – for example a 200mm lens for an Half Shot using a Micro 4/3rds or APS-C Camera creates a Subject Distance of about 30~40ft or 10~13mtrs – which is a very big gap to traverse for Rapport and a very large arc of circumference to move around when one needs to adjust the Camera Angle quickly.

 

Apropos suggestions for Focal Lengths of Lenses (for a Wedding Coverage), less is often more. Considering 135 Format Cameras, (i.e. “Full Frame”) I tend to advise not wider than 35mm is ‘safe’. Personally I rarely used wider than 35mm, not because I couldn’t manage it, but because I didn’t necessarily need the added thinking about it and thus introducing a mistake when shooting under the pressure of time: for example Aunt Mary or Uncle Fred having “fat arms at the end of the group portrait”. And rarely used longer than 135mm – any longer lens means that is can be way too difficult/slow to move to get the best Camera Position on the action; take too long to get there and the shot is gone.

 

Two main cameras working, I’d often use a 35 and an 85, or the 24 to 70/2.8 is an ideal main working zoom.

 

WW

Hi, Some interesting thoughts. Really appreciate all the help. I just recently bought the 24-70 2.8. I have some other lens but having rented it a couple of times felt confident I could crop and still have enough for good prints. I just ordered the 70-200 2.8 as well for some shots. I have been doing scenic and little birds for a long time. People not so much, fun stuff mostly. I really need to watch cutting off arm, hands and head tops. Thanks for the help, I need all I can get.