Looking for your help to choose a photo. Ad opportunity

[personalphotos]

<p>Hi everyone. I need a little advice. I have a chance to get a shot on the cover of a regional Bridal directory. Very good distribution in my market and it would mean free advertising for a year as well as a high profile cover shot for the year. All with clear links to my site.</p>

<p>So here's the question. <a href="http://picasaweb.google.ca/ptz1961/RandomWeddingShots?authkey=Gv1sRgCOSznsy7ybLcGg">From this gallery</a> which is off my <a href="http://peiweddingphotography.googlepages.com/home">site here</a> and there are a couple shots on the home page as well. I have more work I could uploead but I've just been too busy to add more stuff lately.</p>

<p>I need to pick a couple of shots. I'm crappy at this because what I think has broad appeal is never what others choose. You can right click the shot as if to save the image on your computer and just record the file number you think I should submit. I can send in 3 and going from your picks, I'll choose those three.</p>

<p>Thanks in advance for your help everyone and for taking the time to have a look at this. I have a week to get the submissions in. I know it seems like me fishing for site hits but that's not it. This is the cover from this years directory: <a href="http://www.amybrandon.ca/links.htm">Wedding directory</a> If you see a shot you think on my site that could use a B&W conversion or an edit, please make suggestions.</p>

[jpo3136b]

<p>Peter, I clearly liked photo 12 of 91 above the others. It could be reproduced at any size, and still maintain a strong message. I think for that reason that it would serve well as an ad photo. Could be used from postage stamp to very large, and still work. Also, the proportion of the size of the people to the overall frame was such that the people were more noticeable when the images were small thumbnails.<br>

Link to photo I picked: http://picasaweb.google.ca/ptz1961/RandomWeddingShots?authkey=Gv1sRgCOSznsy7ybLcGg#5263173438933402050</p>

[roseberry guitars]

<p>I have to agree with John and with his reasons. I'm just a little concerned with all the black. The layup folks might have some issues.</p>

<p>So for that reason I have to go with IVP6734<br>

<a href="http://picasaweb.google.ca/ptz1961/RandomWeddingShots?authkey=Gv1sRgCOSznsy7ybLcGg#5362774089674910994">http://picasaweb.google.ca/ptz1961/RandomWeddingShots?authkey=Gv1sRgCOSznsy7ybLcGg#5362774089674910994</a></p>

[michael_elenko]

<p>Hi Peter,<br>

I appreciate your trusting the feedback of this forum for some input.<br>

I'm also glad that you posted a link to last year's directory as it provides some context. With headers and copy requirements, the most artistic photograph may not be the best photograph.<br>

I'll leave you with my three faves in order:</p>

<p>1. No. 6 out of 99 on the Pacasa site, file name <em>_IGP2407.jpg</em><br>

<em>Exotic romantic, enough room for header or two and a great location.</em></p>

<p>2. No. 39 out of 99 on the Pacasa site, file name <em>IMGP6713.jpg</em><br>

<em>-I like this because the man looks happy--most of the shots (yours and just about everyone else), the men seem a bit stoic and inhibited. <br /> </em></p>

<p>3. No 55 out of 99 on the Picasa site, file name <em>IVP_774bw2.jpg</em><br>

<em>-Great light, wonderful space for headers, a blissful peaceful shot.</em></p>

<p><em>ME<br /> </em><br>

<em><br /> </em></p>

[mel_unruh]

<p>Well, I couldn't pick just 3 so here's 5. All from the Random gallery.<br>

47<br>

45<br>

82<br>

93<br>

98<br>

Mel</p>

 

[garry_young1]

<p>As Scot and Michael have mentioned, I feel that certain shots might not be the best due to a very "full" image. But, Peter, I love your work! I almost want to get married agian! Grin grin, wink wink!</p>

<p>Here are my 3, and it wasn't easy to choose!</p>

 

<ul>

<li>IMGP0591 - great colors and light, and there is space above the lovers for text etc.</li>

<li>IMGP6713 - great moment combined with very good composition that shows off your experience and skill.</li>

<li>__IGP9693 - very pleasant aesthetically and also shows a fun side to this difficult job. </li>

</ul>

[garry_young1]

<p>And now that I have finished looking for myself, I have looked at everyone else's choices, and I want to add a secondary confirmation to Michael's choice of number 55, and Mel's choice of number 93. Both shots that I thought hard about too.</p>

[personalphotos]

<p>Thanks everyone so much for taking the time to look these over. Yes Michael, I do value the opinions of the shooters here. We're a small bunch but I've learned a lot from everyone here. I think in many ways, we've all 'grown' as photographers by sharing each others ideas in this little corner of the internet. The POTW has been great for that.</p>

<p>Thanks John (#12), Scott (#4) That was a quick 'grab shot' and completely unplanned. Sometimes these moments work the best. And Mel for taking the time (and I realize it would take a bit of time to do this). All your comments help in narrowing the list.</p>

<p>No. 39 IMGP6713 is getting some attention. It's an old shot but was a fun couple. He worked a comedy circuit for a few years and these 2 wanted cool/funny shots. All street stuff. I have one where he's coming out of a Porta-pottie on a busy street (there was a jazz festival that day) and he exits the "john" with his pants around his ankles and exposing some colourful boxers. All to the delight of several hundred jazz concert attendees. If you look closer at the shot, he's wearing black Converse all stars and she is wearing green ones (you can just see them in 77). Same for the entire bridal party. <em><em></em> <br /> </em></p>

<p>Garry, number 20 I like as well (IMGP0591) The sky is quite dramatic in that one. It was a funny situation. They were right in the middle of the reception and finishing dinner. I was watching the sky and asked them if they wanted to step away and take 3-4 shots outside the reception hall. I don't think they really wanted to but did anyway. Turns out one of the shots (more intimate than this version) is enlarged and hanging in their home. </p>

<p>Number 46 eh!? (IGP9693) I wouldn't have considered that as much.</p>

[ken_yee]

<p>I like 4 best but wish it were better lit up near her face (maybe move the vignette up?)</p>

 

[personalphotos]

<p>Ken, thanks for looking and commenting, there's a lot I can do with that shot. The original has no vignetting and I can adjust the crop as well so she's not so close to the top of the frame.</p>

[jgredline]

<p>Peter, I have been looking and looking and looking and really most of them are brilliant in my eyes. I forwarded the link to my wife and will wait for her opinion. Great stuff</p>

[jeremy_corbin]

<p>Peter, I'll throw in my two cents, and I'll ask my wife as well. Sometimes the "I know what I like but I'm not a photographer" viewpoint has quite a bit of value.<br>

My picks in no order:<br>

4<br>

18 or 21 (tied)<br>

24<br>

41<br>

89 or 92 (tied)</p>

[cyanatic]

<p>Quick gut reaction....(keeping in mind that the shot will be a magazine cover, and you will want it to draw in clients, not other photographers!)</p>

<p>From the Picasa website:</p>

<p>93 -- If it allows for headers, I really like the proximity and impact of this one. It clearly says wedding, but in a slightly different way than I'm used to seeing (you could not fill a thimble with my knowledge of wedding photography)</p>

<p>30 -- Soothing, pleasing, very romantic, room for header text</p>

<p>98 -- Suitable room for a cover, a little different (to me) due to the focus on the bouquet, good color impact.</p>

<p>Personally, I'm fond of 52. But unless potential clients are familiar with the work of Francesca Woodman it's probably not a good choice for the broadest demographic appeal.<br>

Update us on what you end up choosing and what the cover looks like. I'd be interested to see the final result. Congrats, and good luck!</p>

<p> </p>

[personalphotos]

<p>Thanks, yes I'll post the images submitted and then what they choose, even if i don't win the spot.</p>

<p>Steve, 93 is a bold shot and I like it. It's not for everyone. But I think different enough to catch your eye and I think the publisher might like that. It grabs your attention even if you don't like the shot.</p>

<p>Interesting picks Jeremiah, Some I wouldn't have considered. 4 is one I need to work on. 24 is a favourite but maybe not for this, I'm undecided. In 41 I climbed an apple tree for that shot :)</p>

<p>Javier, I appreciate that and would look forward to her opinion. It is a woman's subject and that opinion is valuable. I hope Maria and Rose can drop by.</p>

[bob-c]

<p>Peter, I just saw this thread, (been busy) but great work. I like many of them. If I had to choose it would be 3, 4 or 6. It sounds like a great opportunity for you - Congratulations and well deserved. I am sure whichever one you pick will be successful.</p>

[marclangille]

<p>Peter, what is the cutoff date? I've been away officiating at a National Championships in Bend, OR the last week (Dec. 8th - 14th) so if I have time I'd be glad to take a peek.</p>

<p>For what ever my opinion is worth of course.</p>

<p>Regards.<br /> Marc</p>

[personalphotos]

<p>Thanks for taking the time Robert and the suggestions.<br>

Marc, I have until midnight Dec 28th to get the submissions in. Actually I just talked to them and I can send in 4. There is only one photo being chosen from all the submissions. The exposure could be huge if I'm lucky enough to get the spot. I'd love to hear your thoughts.</p>

<p>Infact anyone who has a suggestion is more than welcome to comment. The shots can be re edited from the RAWS.</p>

 

[dugger]

<p>Awesome variety Peter! With that in mind, I look for emotional feel as to what makes me want to look even further (turn the page so to speak). Here are my picks:<br>

IMG 7141<br /> IMG 1692<br /> IMG 1323<br>

I really liked quite a few of the horizontal photos, but couldn't see them translating what I liked about them since they would have to be cropped to fit the magazine format and would lose a lot of what I liked.</p>

<p>Hope that made sense.</p>

 

[miserere_mei]

<p>Dude, you should have e-mailed me about this; I almost didn't see it!</p>

<p>OK, so I've gone through the whole gallery (which I almost know off by heart from looking at it often...and that's a compliment, by the way), and here are my comments on a number of photos. I haven't chosen 4 because it's very difficult to choose when you don't know what they're going for. Are they looking for cheesy, romantic, edgy, traditional...? Maybe the only thing we can assume for sure is that there has to be a bride in the pic and the groom is optional. If it has to be a cover, we can also assume that there has to be space in the photo for the title, and the photo should be in vertical format. With that in mind, on with the comments I go:</p>

<p><a href="http://lh5.ggpht.com/_ykNNbjMLWK4/SqRtvmOizTI/AAAAAAAAGfo/mskZCCAiohc/_IGP2407.jpg">_IGP2407.jpg:</a> Cheesy, but still engaging and romantic. Clone the seagull out. Convert to B&W?</p>

<p><a href="http://lh6.ggpht.com/_ykNNbjMLWK4/Syg3T6uaDeI/AAAAAAAAGs4/VESiS1_kRvs/IMGP0591.jpg">IMGP0591.jpg:</a> A bit conventional, but done effectively, making it attractive. As a plus, it is very croppable to make the artistic director happy.</p>

<p><a href="http://lh5.ggpht.com/_ykNNbjMLWK4/Sm-yFNZBpzI/AAAAAAAAGWk/iNOYVNEko4I/IVP_7807sm.jpg">IVP_7807sm.jpg:</a> Now this is Art...but I'm not sure they'd be brave enough to use it on a cover.</p>

<p><a href="http://lh6.ggpht.com/_ykNNbjMLWK4/Smxmn7eSdrI/AAAAAAAAGUw/Z6-OlR7-yko/IVP_7109.jpg">IVP_7109.jpg:</a> Edgy, I <em>love</em> it (I remember this one); wish this had been <em>my</em> wedding. Sadly, it's not in portrait orientation. Do you have another version?</p>

<p><a href="http://lh6.ggpht.com/_ykNNbjMLWK4/SpkfNfNz4hI/AAAAAAAAGcc/_lWKp5t4o9M/IMGP9856-2.jpg">IMGP9856-2.jpg:</a> Typical wedding photo that doesn't look typical when you took it, which is a good thing! Great real estate for the art director to cut to taste and place words where appropriate. However...I'm not sure it's working for me in colour. Now you know I'm way too B&W for my own good sometimes, but I just don't see the colour saying anything in this one. A B&W conversion with a green filter and some judicious tone curving could make this one a killer.</p>

<p><a href="http://lh5.ggpht.com/_ykNNbjMLWK4/SrjH470NVgI/AAAAAAAAGmE/sFoG-EEo_mo/IVP_774bw2.jpg">IVP_774bw2.jpg:</a> Is this one new? It blew my mind. Another one I wish I'd had at my wedding. It's powerfully emotional in an honest way, without a smidgen of cheese. But...unless this is a big crop from a larger image, I don't see this working on a cover after cropping to portrait. It would make a fantastic double truck, though.</p>

<p><a href="http://lh4.ggpht.com/_ykNNbjMLWK4/SbCE205ATVI/AAAAAAAAEAc/Gd0A4cn66iA/IMGP7932-14-1.jpg">IMGP7932-14-1.jpg:</a> This one just screams WEDDING to the four winds. Peaceful, ethereal, introspective, yet still somehow impacting. The real estate is again art director friendly.</p>

<p><a href="http://lh5.ggpht.com/_ykNNbjMLWK4/SbB1EIFUjsI/AAAAAAAAEAE/vVLfc3J4eiI/PN%20Submission%201.jpg">PN%20Submission%201.jpg:</a> I've always loved this one, although I would...you guessed it...convert to B&W :-) The downfall is that it says "wedding" in a beautifully unassuming and subtle way, while the people putting the directory together might want the cover to say "WEDDING". Again, we don't know what they're thinking or looking for...and they might not know it either!</p>

<p>That's my shortlist. If it were me, and I had to choose 4, I would try to choose 4 very different ones in the hope that one of them would appeal to what they're looking for. Because of this, my final 4 would be: <a rel="nofollow" href="http://lh5.ggpht.com/_ykNNbjMLWK4/SqRtvmOizTI/AAAAAAAAGfo/mskZCCAiohc/_IGP2407.jpg" target="_blank">_IGP2407.jpg</a> (no seagull, maybe B&W), <a href="http://lh6.ggpht.com/_ykNNbjMLWK4/Syg3T6uaDeI/AAAAAAAAGs4/VESiS1_kRvs/IMGP0591.jpg">IMGP0591.jpg, </a> <a rel="nofollow" href="http://lh6.ggpht.com/_ykNNbjMLWK4/SpkfNfNz4hI/AAAAAAAAGcc/_lWKp5t4o9M/IMGP9856-2.jpg" target="_blank">IMGP9856-2.jpg</a> (definitely in B&W), and <a href="http://lh4.ggpht.com/_ykNNbjMLWK4/SbCE205ATVI/AAAAAAAAEAc/Gd0A4cn66iA/IMGP7932-14-1.jpg">IMGP7932-14-1.jpg.</a></p>

 

[duane_mills]

<p>Hi Peter hope things are well. I'm going to offer a viewpoint that is a little different. Having spent several years with Robinson Blackmore/Print Atlantic and now consulting on direct marketing solutions with Canada Post, I feel that any photo you choose should clearly represent your brand "Islandviews Photography". That being said, any shot that includes the ocean, sand or any parts of the majestic Atlantic Canada coastline would be ideal. I really like 6 of 98 (with the seagull removed perhaps) but there are several others that illustrate and represent your brand well. </p>

<p>Cheers,<br>

Duane</p>

[personalphotos]

<p><br /> They called the other day to get larger versions of one shot. Needless to say, I was excited at the prospect of getting the phot and my web site on the cover. So, I played and got the Silver medal. Amy called just now and she was down to 2 images for the cover. Mine and another one. Now I know how the hockey team feels when they get to the gold medal game, loose and "win" the Silver. Doesn't feel like winning.<br /> <br /> But on the flip side, she had over 200 submissions and thought mine was that much better than most. The final choice was based more on emotion than on any technical aspect.<br /> <br /> The "silver" is attached. I think I should have cropped it better to make the couple larger......</p>

<p>Note: The web resizing here seems to make a halo around the heads and that's not in the original file. There was no shadow recovery used in this image as I used fill flash when I took the shot. In fact there's very little editing at all. A slight amount of burning on his chin and some cloning to remove the seagull that was in the image.</p>

<p><a title="ImageShack - Image And Video Hosting" href="http://img35.imageshack.us/i/igp2407.jpg/" target="_blank" title="ImageShack - Image And Video Hosting"><img src="http://img35.imageshack.us/img35/249/igp2407.jpg" border="0" alt="" /> </a></p>

<p>I submitted both versions for the final evaluation. <a title="ImageShack - Image And Video Hosting" href="http://img31.imageshack.us/i/igp2407fsbw.jpg/" target="_blank" title="ImageShack - Image And Video Hosting"><img src="http://img31.imageshack.us/img31/2835/igp2407fsbw.jpg" border="0" alt="" /> </a></p>

[miserere_mei]

<p>That's awesome, Peter! OK, OK, I know you didn't get the cover, but damn, out of 200 entries it ended up being a coin toss between your photo and another one. I think you're still a winner :-)</p>

<p>And I'm glad you got rid of that seagull... ;-)</p>

<p>PS: I don't get your hokey reference, probably because I don't know what hokey really is. It's what happens during the intermissions in Canadian boxing matches, right?</p>

[personalphotos]

<p>Ah Mis, I was watching the Gold medal game for the World Jr's (all future NHL players) and it was Canada vs the USA. The "bad" guys won <strong>:-)</strong> by one goal. So you work that hard to get to the big stage and loose in the last few seconds. So the looser "wins" the Silver medal. It's really like you lost the Gold and got the runner up prize.</p>

<p>Trust me that everyone remembers who won the Superbowl last year and can't remember who they played against.</p>

<p>Yes it's our version of boxing and we love it. Or at least we used to until the world became so PC!</p>

[shaloot]

<p>"it's not about winning silver, it's losing gold"</p>

[personalphotos]

<p>Somanna, Actually it turned out to be a blessing. They like the shot so much I got the back cover and it allows me to put any graphics on it I want. So it's a better ad than the cover.</p>