Is this too far?

<p>I shot a wedding a week ago, and I was just editing the photos, matter of fact have been doing so all day. I'm pretty good at getting what I want in camera, but sorting through the bride getting ready, I discovered I was rather annoyed with a heavily mixed tungsten and daylight mix, heavy enough it was too much trouble to deal with the color clash so I instead opted to do a lot of B&W. Normally I spend lots and lots and lots of time editing, and wind up hating what I did, because its too stylistic, you know, that moment you love it but in 10 minutes you look at it again and it looks so overdone? However this time around for whatever reason despite its heavily stylized look, I really liked what I ended up with. As I said earlier its been a very long day and as I look over the image, I keep thinking I must be crazy, that its just too much, I've messed with the image to the point it looks fake. Normally I would win with this argument but tonight I've got myself at a stalemate. I love my over stylized B&W conversion but I'm afraid that I'm just too tired\in love with my work to see the plane and simple truth, its over done.</p>

<p>So the only thing to do is ask the opinion of my peers. Do you think its over done and why? Or do you think I'm just second guessing myself too much?</p>

<p>(for the record no PS was used, LR 4, basic contrast, clarity, shadows, exposure etc, no localized adjustments)</p>

<div></div>

<p>Overall - I vote no (it's NOT overdone). Like you, I don't care for over-stylized but every once in a while...<br />I think it has a lot of drama. Keeps the attention on her eyes.<br />Ok, I'm slightly disturbed by the blurry bridesmaid (I assume) with only half a face - but not to the point of distraction. That's my eyes looking over every last detail.</p>

<p>Sorry I'm not a great fan of this image, would be keen to see a copy of the original to see what else could be done with it.<br>

Don't like the washed out face of the bridesmaid and washed out of the brides back.</p>

<p>Just my thoughts though.<br>

John</p>

 

<p>BEST ADVICE: take a look at your image when you wake up tomorrow....<br /><br />If this on one shot, that could be fine.... if it is the entire "bride getting ready" sequence... NOPE!<br /><br />my 2¢: does it look overdone? yes - looks like a lot only to fix white balance issues...<br />the exploded whites in the hairdressers face, brides shoulder and behind the chair mixed with cartoony contrast of the face ruin the effect for me... perhaps adding noise to the image "might" make it look a bit more "natural"<br>

QUOTE: (for the record no PS was used, LR 4, basic contrast, clarity, shadows, exposure etc, no localized adjustments) - It doesn't matter to me if it was done in any software... there is no added value to one or the other.... I don't car if you did it in Microsoft Paint! - maybe you should do localized adjustments or use photoshop to "fix" your photo.</p>

 

<p>Best Advice - Show it to the client and see if they like it. </p>

<p>Honestly - it doesn't matter what a bunch of photographers think - what really matters is what the clients (bride and groom) think about the work and images. </p>

<p>If they don't come back and say - do you have any of this sequence in color or can we see this image in color? Or they come back and say - "WE LOVE THIS IMAGE!!!!" then you have succeeded. </p>

<p>Dave</p>

 

<p>@ Maria, Thanks! I agree, one or two drama images adds flavor to a sequence.</p>

<p>@John: Thanks for the opinion! I will post a copy of the original and I will be interested to hear your thoughts.<br>

<br />@Denis: I agree. Now that I look at it this morning I've taken one step back to retain detail in the hair dressers face and the bride's arm, as Maria put it, its a drama pic, and I like it dramatic, but one step back is still dramatic while retaining detail. As you can see from the original image I've posted I've got harsh blue from a window directly behind the bride and a nasty tungsten florescent right in front of her. Makes it really difficult to balance nasty orange with blue blue. The bride's face ends up being white while behind her its blue blue blue, or the there is a nice white backlight and nasty looking orange fill light for her. If I balance it in between in my humble opinion it ends up a mucky mess of both colors. I think the B&W is far more elegant than an extreme color shift or a mucky mix of both. For the record the cartoony contrast of the face is somewhat natural, partially because the mirror she is holding is basically a silver bounce from the soft window right into her face. Obviously heavy color correction has dramatically increased the effect.<br>

<br />The reason I posted my program settings is because when I critique an image I like to know where its at. Has the editor pulled out all the stops or has he just done generalized touch ups? As you and most others pointed out the hairdresser's face is a bit strange. Since you knew from my post that I had not done localized adjustments you could suggest that I do so with her face (which I did based on the comments). If I told you I used Microsoft Paint then you'ld know I was one amazing Microsoft Paint artist, but you might suggest I put other tools, easier and more powerful tools to good use ;).</p>

<p>@David: Good point. I suppose the clients opinion is the only one that really matters. I do feel strongly that a client hires me because I'm an expert in image creation, well maybe not an expert, but experienced pro. Sure the client may love it today, but maybe 10 years down the road, they may say that's so 2012. Especially with wedding photos that will hopefully be remembered for virtually forever, I do strive to keep a certain timelessness, and that's something the client, unless they are photographically inclined will probably have no sense of, so I was seeking the opinion of others who understand lighting, composition etc.</p><div></div>

<p>Final image:</p><div></div>

<p>I like the original better... try tinting or a cross-processed look perhaps</p>

<p>I wouldn't have wasted any time on this image, I would have binned it. Aside from the many distractions, the expressions are just awful. The bride appears to be snarling and her eyes are turned too far, not very attractive. Sorry, but you did ask. And the broad lighting does nothing for either of them. </p>

<p>Skyler -</p>

<p>I've got plenty of classmates who were married in the 80's - complete with padded shoulders, big hair, mullets, and pastel tuxes... Those photos are among their most treasured memories. (At least the ones who are still married to the same person.)</p>

<p>Unless you completely butcher the photo or style - very few clients are going to look at the style of photo and say - "You know - I liked that in 2012 - but now in 2020 - the edit on it sucks..." - They're more likely to look at it and say - "I remember when she was doing my hair....and so and so was next to or behind the photographer!"</p>

<p>Facial expression wise - you know the client better than us... was she annoyed at something or someone? Or just telling someone to hurry up?</p>

<p>And seeing the color image - yes - B/W is the way to go on this one.</p>

<p>Dave</p>

<p>Lindsay, as I was reading your opinion, I realized that all the things you named as being bad things are exactly what I like about the image. I like that she appears to be snarling and that her eyes are turned to far to be attractive. I like that there are many distractions. I have plenty of nice bridal portraits once she's all made up, where everything is attractive and all nice proper. I liked the honesty of the image. No, its not an attractive moment at all, hence the reason I like it!</p>

<p>Skyler, it's important to detach yourself from your work, at least to an extent. I see this all the time when I judge or mentor new photographers - many find it hard to accept constructive critique because they are too attached to their own shots, even those lacking any merit. If you think your client will like it (and you know her better than we do) then by all means show it to her. But I wouldn't. An image can be "honest" and also well crafted. One of the hardest parts of developing your skills lies with self critique - you may be happy to show this to your client today, but I hope that in a year or two you'll be of a different mind. </p>

<p>Don't think the image needs that much work. I don't like the Arm of the chair or the brides bent finger. Cropping gets rid of the arm of the chair but decided to leave the finger as the image to me doesn't work if cropped in too tight to remove the finger as well. </p>

<p>Done a couple of gradual masks in Lightroom to increase the warmth from the window and tone down the tungsten light just a little. Paced a very fine vignette to draw the eye more towards the bride and done a little skin softening on the bride.</p>

<p>Regards<br>

John</p>

<div></div>

<p>Lindsay,<br>

I've been shooting feature films, commercials, music videos, and documentaries for famous clients in locations all around the world for the past 6 years. While I am somewhat new to photography, I have extensively studied acting, and I've had the pleasure of working on many feature films where I got to spend months working with a variety of actors performing every single day. While I do notice that my composition, lighting, and fashion require some work, I do feel my ability to spot emotion is well developed. The fact that you completely missed it, made me question yours, so I looked up your profile, and I must confess, you are quite an established photographer. I was very impressed with your photos, they are very well crafted. Its made me think about how we photograph people. While your images were very impressive composition, color, lighting and editing wise, I was not terribly impressed with your poses or the looks you choose to use. You do a very fine job photographing people as they want to be. I've never had the opportunity to do this because in my work it rarely if ever produces good results. Actors don't win Academy Awards for playing the perfect hero we all see ourselves being in an action movie, they usually win for playing the grimy, dirty movie, that often times most of us are. Am I making sense? You work to make people look their best and I work to make people emotionally available. Your kind of photography reminds me of product photography, where the product just happens to be a human being. By no means am I trying to be insulting; I am truly impressed by your work, and I am very honored that you are taking the time to converse with me. I am honestly weighing with you have to say, its difficult for me because the type of art I've been practicing successfully is very different than the kind of art you have been practicing successfully.</p>

<div></div>

<p>I like John's tweaks the best. This isn't a B&W image. There isn't enough tonal separation between background, veil, and bride.</p>

<p>Let's just get back to David Haas' comment... there are times when whatever thoughts I have of myself or of "my art" the jealousy of seeing the bride looking at her friend's cellphones, browsing pictures of her and screamed "Eee I like this! Tag me on fb okay!" is just surprisingly unbearable.</p>

<p><br /> There should be reasons why they hire you, and that should be because they've seen your samples, I guess you should be fine with whatever you do to the image. I liked to tweak colors sometimes ago, and call them "my style," but there's where the problem lies: because it's my style, it's not everyone's style.</p>

<p><br /> I guess there are reasons why camera manufacturers have those <em>standard, neutral, portrait, vivid</em> color styles. And I guess they are proven styles based on "market research". So these days, I just let them be, and it saves me from subjectivity issues. Artists have the right to declare their freedom, while, sadly, most of the times business demands everything else. Doing photography for money has taken me away from the things that I love doing regarding photography, but it's better than doing my day job ;)</p>

<p><br /> What I'm trying to say is, this is truly subjective, and it doesn't matter what we say, if the client is happy, that's it, if you can come up with a better version later on, you can give it to her in a way proper to your business.<br /> I guess nobody is questioning your integrity, it's just the way this kind of public forum works, some of us just spurt it out.</p>

<p>Bytheway, I like what John McCosh did to your image, and in terms of expression, I don't see any problems with what's in there.<br /> Have a nice day..</p>

<p>I'm not trying to offend anyone, nor am I trying to be defensive. Its more a disbelief thing. I'm truly in disbelief that no one else can see the value of expressions, especially those that are unflattering, because usually they are the most honest. Don't get me wrong, at least in some respect I like to try and flatter the image a little, whether through color correction or lighting or something, there has to be something to make it palatable, I'm just amazed that the requirement for a good look was that it has to be flattering. I do not shoot photography to flatter people or things. Yes it is called for, as are shots that are not flattering in my book</p>

<p>Lots of photography isn't about flattery, but wedding photography is. </p>

<p>Skylar, I appreciate your response, and rest assured you did not insult me in any way. If you are able to earn a good full-time living from your photography then it can be argued that is justification enough. In a collection of wedding images, you have as you say presented a number of photographs which are more classic and more flattering, and chances are these are the images your bride will choose. Taking some shots "for you" is fine, as you say it is your prerogative. But a forum such as this which is open to all, from beginners to professionals, will result in a far kinder critique that you would receive on a pro only site.</p>

<p>One of the key things you'll see over and over again (where the finest and most successful documentary photographers are concerned) is this: they never show the client an unflattering image, or one which may depict the client (or the photographer for that matter) in a poor way. A shot can be honest, it can be shocking even, it can convey a gamut of emotions - but it should also demonstrate some technical understanding of the subject and good use of the environment, because otherwise the obvious flaws within the shot will obviate everything the photographer is trying to achieve. That is all I am trying to say to you Skylar. I always advise getting the basics straightened out before letting the whole "I am an artist" notion take over.</p>

<p>Lindsay +1</p>

<p>Lindsay,<br>

Thank you for your opinion. It has been duly noted.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>No, its not an attractive moment at all, hence the reason I like it!</p>

</blockquote>

<p>This is the first time I've seen a wedding photographer say "I want to show this image to my client because it depicts her in an unflattering way." </p>

<p>I think your outlook might make sense in other genres, including true photojournalism. Hence your conflation of the unflattering nature of this photo with "honesty," where most photographers would see this photo as a mistake. Wedding photography clients do not typically hire us for this particular kind of honesty. That's probably why you're seeing consensus here that the photo is not a keeper. </p>

<p>A wedding photo that depicts a bad expression can be a good photo if it provides context in which to interpret that expression -- particularly if the moment that produced the bad expression makes for a good story, later. But this image is unflattering with no overriding purpose.</p>

<p>Actually, most mediocre wedding photographers could see this as a mistake ... could be just as valid a statement.</p>

<p>Wedding photography is fast becoming a commodity product because of standardization and rules of engagement that are easily mimicked with a little technical effort.</p>

<p><strong>To Skyler,</strong> IF your intent is to tell a story, to create an essay of the wedding day, then stay the course and work to improve on that, not be assimilated so you are like everyone else. </p>

<p>If your intent is honesty ... the way it was ... then study the great photo essay photographers that went beyond just the subject matter and revealed more of the humanity in a personal way ... and study the greats at capturing the "decisive" moment. One thing I can guarantee you will not see is liberal use of blurring in post to the point the person looks to be straight from the Monsanto Plastics factory. The better approach is to become a student of light ... it's direction and quality and use it to do the work. If you want honesty, don't abandon that in Photoshop.</p>

<p>This is not to say one doesn't flatter and make beautiful ... but there are ways to do that without the "fake and forced" so prevalent in so much work. Take a peek at the more "journalistic" wedding work of Jeff Ascough to see real beauty ... unstructured, natural and elegant ... a master of using light BTW.</p>

<p>IF you chose to be a story teller, to include images like the one you posted, then it has to speak only to the subject as a single image (who was there), but more importantly be part of the context of a story line that ends up in a slide show or wedding album (like a movie or storyboard for cinematography). While this sort of image rarely sells as a single print, it can be an essential accent in the story line of an essay presentation to deepen the experiential take-away of any viewer.</p>

<p>Your instincts seem good, you just need to focus on the intent of those instincts without splintering off into too many directions ... and become the master of none.</p>

<p>Best of luck.</p>

<p>-Marc</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Skyler, in terms of your original question: yes, I think you've taken the image way too far. I did a quick tweak along with a little de-saturation and wouldn't have spent more than 30 seconds in PS working this image. I also would have had no issues presenting this image along with approx 600-850 images to the bride. ESP! Emotion Sells Photos and you never know which images will appeal to the emotions of the B/G and/or family and friends. I also agree with all of Marc's comments above.</p>