elaine marie Posted October 23, 2006 Share Posted October 23, 2006 I took this shot through the tree branches with my 70-200. The branches were wrapped with lights. I thought they would show up as little lights but they look like orange blobs to me. What do you think? Interesting or distracting?<P>THanks <P><Elaine Marie<div></div> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elaine marie Posted October 23, 2006 Author Share Posted October 23, 2006 Better in B&W?<div></div> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silver Posted October 23, 2006 Share Posted October 23, 2006 I do not like it, but that is my opinon, I have seen your work, I know you have done better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stacy_austin Posted October 23, 2006 Share Posted October 23, 2006 If they were actually kissing, I would say to hang on to the pic, but since it looks like you caught it a little late (happens all the time!) then I'd toss it. Great lighting balance, though. :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
roxyandkaidotcom Posted October 23, 2006 Share Posted October 23, 2006 I'd just crop it a little. The guy in the background is just as distracting as the blobs! I know he was part of the wedding, but I think it would look better without him. Crop it and keep it! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elaine marie Posted October 23, 2006 Author Share Posted October 23, 2006 Stacy<P> It was right before the kiss so a little early , I have others but they all have the orange lights in them I was able to crop them out of one.<P> Thanks<div></div> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buckry Posted October 23, 2006 Share Posted October 23, 2006 I don't like it, if there were more it would make it look more interesting, but with only 3 of them, and a really large indistinguishable blob in the lower right corner, it just sort of looks like a mistake. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rtrace Posted October 23, 2006 Share Posted October 23, 2006 Tosser IMO. Also, why not use a shallower DOF? The guy overlooking is distracting. Or move around to get a clean background. Bogdan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kelvinphoto - arlington, t Posted October 23, 2006 Share Posted October 23, 2006 I don't like the shadow between the bride and groom, and the first pics 1/2 of the face of the groom is in the shadow. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
picny Posted October 23, 2006 Share Posted October 23, 2006 Bogdan, have you seen the EXIF? Shallower then 2.8? what kind of photographers do you think we are? :) 150mm less then 2.8? go find that 200mm f1.8 ($6400 retail and now discontinued), maybe 135mm f2 might blurr a bit more, but then again, Elaine would need to crop more and originally would have more branches in the lens. If anything I think a little gausian or lens blurr may help with blurring the guy behind. Elane, I agree with others and think that the orange spots as well as the white in the bottom right corner are distracting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elaine marie Posted October 23, 2006 Author Share Posted October 23, 2006 Thanks everyone,<P> I agree, I thought it was to distracting but just wanted to bounce it off of you all. Thanks for your time and suggestions. I had plenty of other shots plus I was the second shooter so not life or death on the kiss shot. Thanks!<P>Elaine Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
think27 Posted October 23, 2006 Share Posted October 23, 2006 Elaine - Please post one image and put the rest in a folder with a link. Thanks ;-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elaine marie Posted October 23, 2006 Author Share Posted October 23, 2006 Sorry Mary<P> I will be sure and do that next time. Thanks<P>ELaine Marie Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peterblaise Posted October 23, 2006 Share Posted October 23, 2006 . Yes, Elaine, I find it very distracting - why is the bride kissing the minister while the groom looks on? =8^o If your pictures lack something, maybe it's because there's too much in 'em, so get rid of some -- get closer! CROP! -- Peter Blaise, who would never even attend a wedding, let alone photograph one! ;-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peterblaise Posted October 23, 2006 Share Posted October 23, 2006 . Yeah, yeah, I know you were thinking of the flare, but here's a croppy version: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fotografz Posted October 23, 2006 Share Posted October 23, 2006 Elaine, sometimes you have to take the magic when it happens. Editorial recognition is often as important as shooting is ... when things are happening spontaneously. The anticipation of the kiss is powerful, and the emotion on her face is priceless ... rather than the ubiquitous standard kiss shot ... which apparently you also have. So, IMO this is neither a "tosser" nor unfixable. It can be cropped to strengthen the good part, while a few brief minutes in PS can eliminate the remaining distractions. Working on compressed jpeg here is less than ideal for showing what I mean, but with a little imagination the possibilities can be envisioned ...<div></div> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elaine marie Posted October 23, 2006 Author Share Posted October 23, 2006 Marc....WOW I Love it. I will give that crop a try. I think the anticipation that you point out is what drew me to this pose over the boring locked lip pose. Thanks for helping me see it.<P>Elaine Marie Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elaine marie Posted October 23, 2006 Author Share Posted October 23, 2006 Marc,<P> If you are still around could you please explain to me how to get that crop and keep the image tilted? THank you<P> Elaine Marie Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peterblaise Posted October 23, 2006 Share Posted October 23, 2006 . Ooops - too much crop - original, cropped, no flare, no onlooker / gawker. Just ideas. Thanks for the opportunity to play. Enjoy.<div></div> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elaine marie Posted October 23, 2006 Author Share Posted October 23, 2006 Okay, Marc I think I got it. Please check out my folder since I dont think I can post more pics.<P> www.photo.net/photodb/folder?folder_id=656934<P> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnnysks Posted October 23, 2006 Share Posted October 23, 2006 Great crop. I think the tilt made the crop. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rtrace Posted October 23, 2006 Share Posted October 23, 2006 "Bogdan, have you seen the EXIF? Shallower then 2.8? what kind of photographers do you think we are? :) 150mm less then 2.8? go find that 200mm f1.8 ($6400 retail and now discontinued), maybe 135mm f2 might blurr a bit more, but then again, Elaine would need to crop more and originally would have more branches in the lens. If anything I think a little gausian or lens blurr may help with blurring the guy behind. " Yes I did in fact look. Using a shallower DOF also means perhaps getting closer and using a shorter focal length... 175mm on a 20D = 280mm!!! Way too much DOF at that distance @2.8 as you can see! Or moving around as I was saying - if possible of course. Cluttered backgrounds are the biggest no-no IMO, and many times they CAN be avoided. Sure sometimes they can't and you do with what you have. Not sure if that is the case or not here. Elaine never commented. And yeah you can take almost anything and crop to death and fix in Photoshop. That topic has been beaten to death. One has to decide if the picture is worth it or not. To me, I don't see anything special that would warrant any cropping. That's just my opinion. Tossing wasn't used in a bad way! I toss my own stuff all the time! I think editing is equally important to composition - knowing what to keep and work on/salvage and what's not worth spending time on. And IMO, this picture to me is not worth spending too much time looking how to fix it. That's all. While the emotion on her face may be "priceless", the emotion on his face ruins it for me. Bogdan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rtrace Posted October 23, 2006 Share Posted October 23, 2006 The crop needs to have the "embrace"/her hands IMO - like Marc's crop, if you want to keep this picture. The other crop doesn't work for me - too tight. Her expression is nice but only goes with her hand, not without IMO. Still, like I said, the groom's expression ruins it for me. If moving closer wasn't possible, then a vertical composition to get that guy out of the way and not crop later might have worked better. In that case zoom to 200mm if that's what it takes. Again, I don't know the situation. Bogdan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
think27 Posted October 23, 2006 Share Posted October 23, 2006 You guys rock! Thanks for all your time and dedication! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rtrace Posted October 24, 2006 Share Posted October 24, 2006 "Great crop. I think the tilt made the crop." No - the PS work did.."Editorial recognition" may be as important as shooting, but is PS manipulation? This is not journalism, so anything goes right? As long as the client is happy? Sure, but it's sad to see people focusing on how to "fix" it in PS rather than talk about the points I made. Bogdan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now