How much is too much? (photoshop that is)

[mark_parker2]

I've been playing around with some new Photoshop techniques. I like the effect

and plan on giving the couple a choice of having these images with or without

the effects. What do you think? Is it a lttle to "edgy" for wedding work?

 

<br>

<br>

Photo 1 <br><img src="http://www.marksbrides.com/dpreview/wedding1.jpg">

<br><br>

Photo 2 <br><img src="http://www.marksbrides.com/dpreview/wedding2.jpg"><br><br>

Photo 3 <br><img src="http://www.marksbrides.com/dpreview/wedding3.jpg"><br><br>

Photo 4 <br><img src="http://www.marksbrides.com/dpreview/wedding4.jpg"><br><br>

Photo 5 <br><img src="http://www.marksbrides.com/dpreview/wedding5.jpg"><br><br>

Photo 6 <br><img src="http://www.marksbrides.com/dpreview/wedding6.jpg"><br><br>

[kari douma]

Personally I like them. I think you either like that kind of style, or don't like it. I don't think it is too much, but I can see where you would want to offer them both choices.

[mariah_smith]

I think they're great!! There's no such thing as too edgy as long as the couple saw that in your work before they hired you...if not, two options is definitely a good idea since it's takes someone who appreciates art to like what you've done.

 

1 is definitely my favorite...is the steeple really crooked?

 

Honestly, 2 is a bite too white/flat for me. If that's what you were going for, than it looks good. Just isn't my style but it looks well done.

 

Great job!!

[schnellimages]

Mark,

 

I have been wrestling with the same thoughts myself. As well as wondering if I would run the danger of being identified by my PS style, rather than my photography.

However, I would agree with Mariah in that if these styles are represented on your site or marketing materails (and thus expected) - I don't know that I would even offer alternatives. This is the vision the clients want.

I like the images myself, and do not think it is too much. My god, look at the work Jesh de Rox is doing, and being hailed as a genius (which is not a slam on Jesh, I really like the vision, but it ain't sublte).

[pete_s.]

I think 1,2,3 are ok. 4 is fine except the radial blur which is too much. 5 is fine (strange shadow on her bosom though). 6 is way over the top on the diffuse glow.

 

Generally the diffuse glow and blur will look more prominent on a 8x12" than on a 4x6" so when they are super-apparent on the web, well, it's usually too much. Taste differ though and only you can decide what you like.

 

My thoughts on this subject is that the clients shouldn't be aware of any effects, photoshop or otherwise. They should just see it as my style of imagemaking. In line with that I wouldn't want to give them different versions of the same shot. There should only be one version, the one I "shot".

[surfidaho]

Howdy!

 

Most of my comments are about composition, not effect. Understand that I just call them as I see them, and I tend to take a conservative viewpoint. I also try to temper my criticism with humor:

 

1. The top of the steeple is cropped. (Did you bend it)? This distracts from an otherwise nice composition. Also, is the fence really twisty that way?

 

The whole scene kinda reminds me of Nightmare Before Christmas type of animation, where everything is a little out of kilter. Good for a Haunted House advertisement, not so good for a wedding.

 

2. A rear leg kick by a woman is best done with full passionate kiss on the lips from her beloved. (It symbolizes A Moment of Ecstasy). It looks contrived if she is facing the camera during this moment of private joy.

 

3. This picture reminds me of the old schoolyard joke "Read between the lines", aka, Flipping The Bird. A better idea would be to grasp the rings themselves with the tips of the fingers and hold them at arms length in profile. Also, the gentleman's hand is unnecessarily clipped.

 

4. Best of the bunch. Lots of leg, but VERY tastefully done. I don't think the radial blur is bad, but I would have used a feathered Gaussian blur instead.

 

5. On a clear day, you can see forever. A little bit too far over the top (pun intended).

 

6. Second best of the bunch. Glowing and ethereal. Almost heavenly. It may be too much effect for some people, but if it's the exception rather than the rule in your collection, it would fit nicely.

 

Hope this helps.

 

Paulsky

[annealmasy]

I like all but the last two. The glowy effect on the last one just doesn't do it for me, and the

skin in the second-to-last looks way to liquified. The first three are nice though.

 

Just remember: once you start you can't stop. If you plan to go crazy in PS for certain

wedding images, just be VERY clear with your clients (verbally and contractually) about which

images will get this extra care: how many, who picks, are the originals available as well, etc.

[gina_marie1]

I think the first 4 look great, like the blur in 4 and slight desaturation works in the first couple. IMHO, the 'too much' would qualify for the last two though. The portrait looks a little too smooth. I think retouching the skin is great, but still needs a bit of texture and soft smile lines around the eyes and mouth to look "real". After we do our facial retouching, I usually down the opacity a bit to achieve the look we want.

 

I'd down some of the glow as well, a bit softer around the bride so that you can distinguish between her arms and shoulders and the grooms. But again, JMO.

 

Overall, I think the best is to do things in moderation and keep in mind that what you do now could look 'over' and out dated in a year...like cross process, desaturation and soon to be- textures. We usually only give the couple a small perecentage of images that may include the trendy processing techniques.

[William Michael]

4, 2, 1, and 5, in that order, grab me as art works: except I would loose the soft focus in 4, to my eye, it is quite tacky.

 

 

But I reiterate that is my opinion `as art works`.

 

 

As a business oriented comment, considering the selective inclusion of some images in this genre in most Wedding you cover might be a winning idea.

 

 

If this style is to be your mainstream product offer, it would be in your interests that the client be fully aware of this fact, prior to signing the contract.

 

 

 

I think offering these or similar as `extras` or `as a choice` is a good idea, but, just like the brandy balloon and wedding certificate of years past: emphasising these images at the initial sales meeting (should you conduct one) can backfire if it leaves the Customer with the impression that all you do is gimmickry.

 

 

 

WW