lex_jenkins Posted July 17, 2009 Share Posted July 17, 2009 <p>I noticed this photo of Michael's in another thread a few days ago. At the time it caught my eye and some reflexive internal criticism over the same nits others have picked in this thread.</p> <p>But as I compare the original and some of the suggested tweaks, I'm more inclined to favor the original. Yeh, it's very warm. But it conveys a certain mood and seems in keeping with what Michael observed in the setting.</p> <p>Yeh, the bright windows at either end compete for attention. But I still find my eye drawn back to the couple. I like photos that persuade me to explore them. I'm not a huge fan of photos that are manipulated to force me to see it one way only. So the original pretty much works for me.</p> <p>Jen Lambert's and Marc Williams' suggested edits look good too. Either could work well as an alternative if the couple happened not to be happy with the orangey glow of Michael's version.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mbbrown Posted July 17, 2009 Share Posted July 17, 2009 <p>Just another quick note...</p> <p>When I'm shooting a wedding, I try and balance my vision of what I'm trying to achive and how to get to that point using what I know. It's being both a technician and an artist at the same time...though I would contend any artist of any genre' needs to play both roles to be successful.</p> <p>Specifically pertaining to this image, the sun was going down and I noticed it streaming through the windows behind them and knew I had a narrow window (pun intended) to get what I figured might be a really cool image. I snapped-off about 6 at different apertures, crops, orientations, and this one was clearly superior. In fact, I missed focus on two of the images because of the wide-open aperture and the swaying of the dancing. Then the sun fell behind the horizon and it was over.</p> <p>I'm not sure how to comment on the theory of where the eye is drawn to. My feeling is if your eye isn't immediately drawn to the deep glance of this couple, then you're just not looking. I've seen the studies and I've listened to the Masters, but I strongly believe the success of an image is 99% content. (give or take) I agree this is warm and underexposed (though I much prefer the term "low key" in this instance.), but I'm okay with that. In fact, I made it so. I could have blasted my twin SB-800's in thier faces, everything else being the same, and I think the image would have failed. Miserably.</p> <p>I try and go into every wedding remembering the vast difference between creation and documentation.</p> <p>Lastly, I'm not really a big conest guy. I used to be, but that was a long time ago. I can't remember the last time I entered a contest. Too busy doing weddings. :-D</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
William Michael Posted July 17, 2009 Share Posted July 17, 2009 <p >Crikey!</p> <p > </p> <p >My post has two parts. I looked at the image yesterday and didn't have time to comment - as always my "critique" is without reading any other comments:</p> <p > </p> <p > </p> <p >I believe the photographer’s intention is to covey the warmth of emotion of a particular moment and enhance that with the warmth of the room as it appears to me the Colour Balance / Colour Temperature is purposeful. Also the very shallow DoF was purposeful to enhance and attract the viewers’ eye to the couple: It is on this premise I offer this critique.</p> <p > </p> <p >I believe the image falls short of this goal in three major respects: </p> <p > </p> <p >Firstly the large window camera left attracts the viewer's eye initially and then is burdensome on the viewer thereafter - the image would be enhanced with it cropped out, but that would loose most of the OoF congregation which does add impact.</p> <p > </p> <p >Secondly, the camera viewpoint. Both subjects are perfect profile, which is a most difficult choice to get some decent view of either’s eyes, especially with back lighting and especially with such an harsh rim. IMO it would have been better to be positioned camera right and plan to capture more of the Bride’s Face.</p> <p > </p> <p >Thirdly, timing – and this is the least of the “how would you improve it” comments - I think the shutter release is a just a fraction out. The Bride’s eyes, IMO would have said more, just a moment before or a moment after this shutter release.</p> <p > </p> <p >The point is, shooting into the light and with such an harsh rim behind the Bride, her expression has to be spot on to pull her face out of the shadow.</p> <p > </p> <p >I believe the B&G will like the image & IMO I would leave it as is apropos colour balance etc: if I correctly interpret the Photographer’s intention.</p> <p > </p> <p >I think this Photo of the Week critique is becoming too much of a what can I do in <em >Photoshop</em> of the Week . . .</p> <p > </p> <p >*** </p> <p > </p> <p >Well now I have read through the thread and I have added my “Crikey” and the little forward sentence at the top . . .</p> <p > </p> <p > </p> <p >As to the wider discussion – I think the viewer’s eye on a photograph generally falls to the brightest part, initially. </p> <p > </p> <p >If there are people the image then the eye moves to the dominate people subject. </p> <p > </p> <p >I think there can be a “bright part of an image” which is overpowered by a person in the image and the viewers’ eye will go to the person in that particular situation, high key portraiture work can be an example of this. </p> <p > </p> <p >On the other hand, I think there can be a “distracting bright part of an image” which will dominate the viewer’s attention initially and then continue to distract. I believe the image above is one such example of this. </p> <p > </p> <p >The only way to test any theory <em >about this image </em>is by using this image and the relevant technology to follow the viewer’s eye – other than that we each have our opinion and that includes what we can at best say we each experienced. To this end, when the screen opened up, I believe I saw the two bright windows first; and throughout the scanning of the image my eye was distracted by the window camera left; and it was lead there by the rim light on the back of the bride. </p> <p > </p> <p >Irrespective of how this image might rate in a National competition or be judged by a Master Photographer, it is my opinion, as a Photographer on the ground, that I would have attempted to get a different angle such that the window camera left was not where it is and that I had more of the face of the Bride such that I had more exposure of her eyes – that’s merely answering “what would I have done to improve this photo” . . . </p> <p > </p> <p >All that is basically a few seconds work (preparation) and then the timing. </p> <p > </p> <p >I am not suggesting that there are not opportunity shots and that this might have been one of them.</p> <p > </p> <p >I am however strongly suggesting is that when one walks into a room like that . . . consider that <strong ><em >“windows”</em></strong> and <strong ><em >“background”</em></strong> should be a continuously ringing alarm bell – especially if one is choosing to shoot Available Light.</p> <p > </p> <p >WW </p> <p > </p> <p > </p> <p > </p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
William Michael Posted July 17, 2009 Share Posted July 17, 2009 <p>Obviously, Michael, I was writing at the same time as you - I take note this capture was more on the fly than not. I trust you will consider my tag about the "alarm bells", though.</p> <p>WW</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
betty_lowrey2 Posted July 17, 2009 Share Posted July 17, 2009 <p>I think we overthink things and forget the initial beauty of an image and it's direct impact. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
savagesax Posted July 17, 2009 Share Posted July 17, 2009 I'm a bit baffled at the wording "Natural." This is not a natural color; your eye doesn't see this orange and red through the viewfinder . Therefore it's a digital setting in the camera, perhaps it was shot on auto white balance maybe not. The digital setting doesn't matter. What matters is whether the bride and groom like it. Based on all of the comments, it's about 50-50, some like it some don't. It looks good to me in B&W and as already stated I like Jen's adjustment. So based on pretty much an even consensus, I'd probably show the bride and groom all 4 images. They may pick 2, Jens adjustment, the vertical crop, the original, or the B&W. I think it's cool how many different points of view were submitted and all of the different ways of presenting 1 single image. The bride and groom possibly may not know all of the presented images were actually just 1. I'm just not comfortable with the word natural. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peter_kervarec Posted July 17, 2009 Share Posted July 17, 2009 <p>This is a great image as is and Jens conversion is poor colour as far as I am concerned. As a strong observer of light I think the photographer here has captured that last minute sun coming through a window in all its glory. The colour is not only believable but probably actual. Beautiful image.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mbbrown Posted July 17, 2009 Share Posted July 17, 2009 <p>Duly noted.</p> <p>I think the word "natural" was used in reference to natural light. No artificial light used in this shot.</p> <p>As I stated, I purposely used daylight color balance on this for effect. I never use auto white balance.</p> <p> </p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kiva Posted July 17, 2009 Share Posted July 17, 2009 <p>The "eye" of the technical photographer is drawn to the lightest areas ... but, the "emotional eye" of almost all the veiwers / family members will be drawn to the emotion. The result will be a quiet smile and a thought about "the love" they are enjoying at the moment = winner!</p> <p>I'd definitely give the customer a black and white which, imo, would be even more emotionally relevant to the moment.</p> <p>A nice pick for the week.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
missy_kay Posted July 17, 2009 Share Posted July 17, 2009 <p>He loves her a lot... you can tell!<br> I think the best option is to throw it in bw...<br /><img src="http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2641/3729691798_18040dd3be_o.jpg" alt="" width="700" height="466" /><br /><img src="http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2497/3729691860_c5416f05f7_o.jpg" alt="" width="700" height="466" /></p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shirkwolfe Posted July 17, 2009 Share Posted July 17, 2009 <p>I have to say the rim light on his face and his expression are priceless. Great catch.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
francie_baltazar Posted July 17, 2009 Share Posted July 17, 2009 <p>I agree with William W.... witht he exception of the profiles - I think the profiles are beautiful... I think it is a bit soft focused and just way to orange for my taste. I like really warm photos and this one is just a bit over the top for me. I'm not keen on any of the fixes... if it could be toned down just a bit on the couple only via layers and remove the destrating highlights I think it would be much improved. I also find the window to the left where I look first and I would clone it with the windows behind the couple. </p> <p>this is one of those photos where does the emotion of the moment trump the distraction of the color... for me the color is off and the b/w really shows this couples love... and I would love to somehow see that in color...</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
constance_cook Posted July 17, 2009 Share Posted July 17, 2009 <p>Betty and Francie have it. This will be their favorite shot.</p> <p>I've seen it on two fora and both times I thought, "Don't we all want someone to look at us with that much love?" I don't see the windows or the other people -- just the emotion.</p> <p>Don't mess with it.</p> <p>Conni</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wedding-photography-denver Posted July 17, 2009 Share Posted July 17, 2009 <p>Really strong shot. I like the warmth though I do think it may be a little too orange for most. Beautiful light which for my taste would be ruined by the addition of anything but what it has.</p> <p>I would prefer to have stepped to your right one or two steps to crop out the french doors and include more of the onlookers. Of course, I was not there and have no idea what you were dealing with to get this shot.</p> <p>Best, D.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
david_schilling___chicago_ Posted July 17, 2009 Share Posted July 17, 2009 <p>Michael, I could understand that you're not really "a contest kind of guy" but the print competitions with PPA are more professional critiques rather than a contest. My suggestion was made on the basis of giving you access to an objective critique from respected/established pros. While there may be some people on the forum that thumb their noses at PPA-style critiques, I'd be willing to bet that it would enhance both your technical and artistic eye for images......</p> <p>As usual, I find that William W and I are on the same page. I agree that this thread often turns into a "what I can do with Photoshop POW"....but I'll give the PS attempters credit for actually doing something with the image rather than making some comments of what they think might work with PS or others who simply pan the PS submissions.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaycob Posted July 17, 2009 Share Posted July 17, 2009 <p><img src="http://img17.imageshack.us/img17/3193/00twy7154931684.jpg" alt="" /></p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fotografz Posted July 17, 2009 Share Posted July 17, 2009 <p>We have to remember that this is a photo of the client, not some stranger. You could hide the client subject like in a "find Waldo" poster and they'd still find the image of themselves. It is human nature.</p> <p>I've actually seen qualitative eye tracking studies done for national print ads ... put a kid in an ad and show it to a Mom, and you could put a sun ball behind them and the Mom's eye goes straight to the kid. Self interest is human nature.</p> <p>But that aside ... I'm curious as to why it is so important that a bright spot in an image may first draw the eye for a split second and then go to the people?</p> <p>So what? Why is that a problem? </p> <p> </p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danzel_c Posted July 17, 2009 Share Posted July 17, 2009 <p>i would make it a little more dynamic by additing a tilt and color correcting. i would keep in it in color. the lime green, blue, orange, and yellow looks nice.</p><div></div> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
francie_baltazar Posted July 17, 2009 Share Posted July 17, 2009 <p>Constance - maybe my comments weren't clear... I think the color well over shadows the couples look. I love the emotion and really dislike how orange it is...</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mbbrown Posted July 17, 2009 Share Posted July 17, 2009 <p>Let's see...a couple more quick comments...</p> <p>In terms of camera placement, I was a shoulder-to-wall with a wall directly to my right. I was as far right as I could go. Moving to the other side (if we're talking in terms of window placement and/or subject profile) would have proved worse yet as the DJ set-up was in the far right corner of the room.</p> <p>Soft focus was mentioned earlier...no soft focus enhancements were applied neither on-lens or post-event. I toyed a bit with some Ps stuff, but decided against it. This really is one of those images I defend unapologetically as-is. When I do post-wedding editing, I really do consider each image on its own merits. This is one, I feel, was 99.99% good right out of the camera. And those of you who fiddled with an image of mine of a bride from another wedding, in another thread, know I'm not a staunch purist who thumbs his nose at any Ps edits. But it was hard to do anything to this that I felt made it better. When I get home and back on my desktop (on my wife's MacBook now) I'll have another look at the raw file and conjure up a B&W as I also think it makes a great B&W image.</p> <p>All comments are appreciated and considered!</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
constance_cook Posted July 17, 2009 Share Posted July 17, 2009 <p>The orange doesn't bother me because I've seen that color once in awhile.</p> <p>Conni</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
david_schilling___chicago_ Posted July 17, 2009 Share Posted July 17, 2009 <p><em>"But that aside ... I'm curious as to why it is so important that a bright spot in an image may first draw the eye for a split second and then go to the people?........So what? Why is that a problem? " Marc W.</em><br> <em></em><br> I suspect your eye wants to go to the people. IMO, it competes for attention with the subject and in this case you have two bright spots on either side of the subject. Also, the general rule of thumb is: "if you want to feature something then light it, if you want to take attention away from something then you don't light it". It's also why a vignette will pull interest into the frame. Course this is just more of the stuff that I've heard from my mentors over and over again through the years..... I doubt that any of this is a problem for many others around here though. </p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lex_jenkins Posted July 17, 2009 Share Posted July 17, 2009 <p>I've looked at the original again several times over the past few days and still find it appealing. Rather than competing for my attention, I find the bright spots invite me to explore the entire photo. There's a lot going on, but it's not busy or cluttered. It seems to perfectly convey the moment. And I keep going back to the couple, with an appreciation for the entire milieu.</p> <p>Another problem with the technically "correct" edits - too much detail becomes apparent, which in itself is a distraction. Now I notice the freckles on the bride's arm, her earring, his corsage, etc. Too many unnecessary details. And the subtlety of the rim lighting is lost. The darker, orangey version works better for me.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
betty_lowrey2 Posted July 18, 2009 Share Posted July 18, 2009 <p>I agree with Lex. I think adding anything (like a vingette or dark areas) would really create unnecessary additions. I think other than maybe taking down the orange a TEENSY bit, the original is perfect.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
betty_lowrey2 Posted July 18, 2009 Share Posted July 18, 2009 <p>I just thought about this some more (what can I say, it's a slow night) and my mind went right to the client.<br> When showing a client a picture I took of their day, I would be absolutely crushed if the first thing they said was "wow...what good exposure". If they weren't taken by the IMAGE...by what was conveyed in the picture. If the only thing they could think to say was "that image is technically good" then I have failed at my job.<br> A camera on auto gets exposure right (most of the time)...but what the camera CAN'T do is pick your moment, capture that moment. Though I understand the ongoing talk of perfecting exposure, white balance, and light...sometimes, as is the case in many photos of the week, it's the moment that is indicative of why we are in the line of work we are in.<br> By trying to get the little technical details perfect time and time again, you may be missing moments like this one...where the look between the bride and groom is so perfect that you can do nothing but shoot it as is. THAT is your job. To notice those moments other people may miss and freeze them in time. That is what puts us above Uncle Bob...not perfect exposure.</p> 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