WEDDING CRITIQUE OF THE WEEK 5/27/09 - AKA WEDDING PHOTO OF THE WEEK

<p>This week - we're taking on a shot of a Bride waiting to come out of the gate...</p>

The secret random member that chose this shot said: "I think my choice would be Linda M's image titled "Waiting". <br />

<br />

It may be interesting to see reactions to ancillary type shots without the Bride and Groom being the focus."

<p>In your critiques - Include what you would do to improve the shot or why the shot is perfect as it is and why.<br>

Remember that this is not a contest. Sometimes an image will be a winning image and sometimes an image that needs some help. </p>

<p>The photographer up for critique for this week should remember that the comments expressed each week are simply "opinions" and the effort and focus of these threads are to learn and to take images to another level. There will be times where the critique is simply members pointing out why the shot works which is also a way for others to learn about what aspects contribute to a good wedding photo. In reading all critiques -- You may agree or disagree with some points of view - but remember that there are varying approaches and often no right or wrong answer.<br>

<br /> Linda M is the brave photographer willing to accept critiques this week ;-)</p>

<p><a href="../photodb/user?user_id=3917811">Linda M</a></p>

<p> </p><div></div>

<p>I really like this shot. The colors are fresh and interesting, the subject is different and refreshing. Great job!</p>

<p>I like it because it's different. The only thing that bothers me is the lack of feet, but a crop below the hands IMO would take away from the effect. Well done.</p>

<p>I love the colors -- the earth tones of the fence and gate and the cute gal and the pink tinted dress. the flowers in such a position and the overall composition is EXCELLENT. Nice, thin DOF draws the eyes to the subject. Well done. The missing feet don't bother me too much -- 19 out of 20 clients would never catch on to that. Stuff happens -- get the shot!</p>

<p>One might say that the shot should have been framed to place the girl on the right 'thirds' line for better composition, but I think the shot works fine as it is. It's a great photojournalistic moment captured.</p>

<p>I really think shots should be picked that have more "issues" to address, instead of shots that are already fairly spot-on. I definitely saw some shots that were submitted this time which were in need of critique, in the interest of helping the photographer. This shot was not one of them.</p>

<p>I think it's a great shot Linda. Like Steve said, not much to critique here. However Mary clearly states that these things won't always be about shots that need help. I am personally interested in what post work has been done to it. It may be the monitor I'm using right now but have you added a little magenta? The overall color of the image is one of my favorite things about it. Well Done.</p>

<p>Linda - I am curious as to why you chose this photo to post for critique - I am wondering if this was a caught shot or a set up? I am also interested in post production? </p>

<p>Nice shot. I like the isolation technique ... a fairly neutral dominate space with the appealing subject, eye contact, and contrasing color drawing the eye.</p>

<p>Critique doesn't mean negative or "seriously needs to be fixed". A critique can inform by talking about what's right also.</p>

<p>A shot like this could also be seen as a critique on how to look at really good shots with an eye to make them even better if possible. </p>

<p>For example, maybe it could benefit from slightly warming the color cast. Still maintain the overall nature of the color, but try warming it ever so slightly.</p>

<p>I'd also slightly tweak the white flowers to extract a bit more detail if possible. Enlarge the image, wand the white flowers and slightly feather the selection, and use the Shadow/Highlight tool to pull up the highlights a bit.</p>

<p> </p>

<p ><strong >Technical / Framing & Timing:</strong></p>

<p >Two "half eyes", well framed. Quirky, adds impact of anticipation. Good moment / timing capture assuming there was some if not all, an element of spontaneous capture.</p>

<p > </p>

<p ><strong >Technical / Crop:</strong></p>

<p >The three quarter shot is the most difficult to pull IMO, particularly when a subject of either gender is standing: especially I do not think "stumps" enhance the female portrait, when in they are dresses / skirts. </p>

<p > </p>

<p >This image is a candidate for square format. Such will enhance and add impact and emphasis as well as remove a negative aspect.</p>

<p > </p>

<p ><strong >Artistic:</strong></p>

<p >Subtly of colour is very pleasing - there could be a tendency to ramp up the colour and contrast, which would ruin the juxtaposition of the warm/cool timber with the tone of the dress and hair.</p>

<p > </p>

<p >Good use of available light is noted. </p>

<p > <br>

WW</p><div></div>

<p>I agree with Marc, this is a real nice shot with a pleasing composition. The peekaboo factor adds some interest and a little pizzazz on the part of an attractive gal. I would like to see the image a little warmer and unfortunately the details in the white flowers could not be recovered (although it might be retrievable from the original). For my taste, I'd also like just a smidge more DOF to bring the gate latch into focus.</p><div></div>

<p><strong><em>"I would like to see the image a little warmer" </em></strong><br>

<br>

I had a little bet with myself, if David critiqued the image, he would write that :) . . . and, I was writing as Marc was writing, so I had not read Marc's comments either. I am very interested in this point: and I would like the Photographer's comments upon it. <br>

<br>

This is another example of how, even if the image is accepted as “good” by mostly all – there are areas where discussion of the image (and the critiques) is wildly beneficial to all, IMO. <br>

<br>

WW </p>

 

<p>An interesting shot using the foreground gates as your frame. I think the impact is perfect for the subject and while a little dull on the contrast/colors, holds a viewers attention in a more innocent light.</p>

<p>My thoughts in improvements may have included a slightly tighter crop and less DOF. for a little more isolation. Having said that, I do like (in this particular case) seeing some of the more harsh wood grain enveloping the BM.</p>

<p>Good work.</p>

<p>Nothing wrong with a nice, tanned image! I prefer images on the warm side.</p>

<p>I think this image is unique. The lack of much color in the gate helps her dress to really come out. I like the fact that she is not looking at the camera.</p>

<p>I do think there is too much gate...I would have cropped just a bit more out.</p>

<p>--Ryan</p>

<p>I like the original crop, if you remove the legs it makes it look as though she may be moving, and not waiting.<br>

Lovely shot as it was</p>

<p>Thank you all! I just checked back (my husband just got out of the hospital from back surgery - he's fine, so no worries there) and found my image chosen for critique. THANK YOU all for the comments!</p>

<p >"<a href="http://www.photo.net/photodb/user?user_id=4445796">Francie Baltazar</a> <a href="http://www.photo.net/member-status-icons"><img title="Subscriber" src="http://static.photo.net/v3graphics/member-status-icons/sub1.gif" alt="" /></a>, May 27, 2009; 05:36 p.m.Linda - I am curious as to why you chose this photo to post for critique - I am wondering if this was a caught shot or a set up? I am also interested in post production?"<br>

I chose it because I liked the shot. Not typical wedding choice. I shot this wedding May 16 and this was a completely spontaneous. I was waiting at the front for the processional to start and I caught this moment with my 70-200.<br>

I usually like warmer images too, but for some reason I felt this one looked best as is. I adjusted the contrast and probably boosted curves just a bit.</p>

<p>Oh after looking back at the original RAW file I had to crop off her feet because a guests foot was sticking out into the aisle blocking one of her feet from camera view. If I had moved to eliminate the protruding foot I probably would have lost her face from view behind the gate.</p>

<p>Her feet</p>

<p>Linda, from the original RAW file, were you able to pull the blown whites from the flowers?</p>

<p>Yes, the original RAW has detail in the flowers. I should merge the two and get it back. Thank for noticing. I hadn't.</p>

<p>Here is a jpeg straight from the raw.</p><div></div>

<p>Nicely done :-)</p>

<p>I had another thought. I was asked above if I had added magenta. I did not adjust the colors. The image was captured in AdobeRGB. I converted it to sRGB in Photoshop using "Convert to Profile". I find you get nice colors that way.</p>

<p>Linda - photoshop is your friend ;-)</p><div></div>

<p>Thanks!</p>