Please CC my Recent Wedding

[chimera_h]

<p>OK, so I recently shot a wedding and, of course, I see a million things I could've done better and I do see some things I like. I'd like some kind, professional constructive criticism. I want to get better and know a few of you can be kind, but honest. </p>

<p>Let me tell you a few things I see....Everything is too centered and I should have shot at angles. I also need to work on creativity. I just think the Phoenix wedding I shot (you could scroll and look at that as well) was more well thought out...however, for that one I had much more time to work.</p>

<p>So....here goes.</p>

<p>theweddingedition.blogspot.com/2010/02/south-coast-winery-wedding.html</p>

[wedding-photography-denver]

<p>Chimera, I generally agree that you have a bit of the predicable flow. If you were seeing that, you probably already know what you need to do. </p>

<p>I see well exposed (mostly) images and generally good quality work, but I could guess what was coming next with each image. Here is one quick suggestion: If you find yourself looking through your VF and your perspective is the same as it would be for anyone else who happened to be standing there next to you, get higher or lower, use elements to great frames, leading lines etc., etc. Perhaps use some off cam lighting to "grow" your vision a bit...?</p>

<p>Looking at your detail shot of the bottle, think about your subjects that way a little too.</p>

[chimera_h]

<p>Thank you David. I appreciate your help. It's interesting how I sometimes know what I need to do, but someone else can word it in a way that clicks.</p>

<p>A few other things.....1. When a bride has strong features, how do I angle myself to soften those? She just happened to be way taller than me as well so I don't think the angles were to her benefit.<br>

2. I tried to shoot a mix of photo-journalistic and posed images...however, I get the sense that she feels embarrassed by the photo journalistic ones (running in her boots,etc). She was a gorgeous crazy girl and super goofy, so I captured those moments. Not sure if she's going to like these at all.</p>

[david_schilling___chicago_]

<p>I wouldn't worry about the flow being predictable, it's a wedding and most are....save the worry about mixing things up and trying to be creative for later. Several of the images are well done, I particularly liked many of the detail shots. Your outdoor lighting and exposures need the most help especially the latter ones of the sequence.</p>

[wedding-photography-denver]

<p>I use strong features to bring the image a little more drama, versus less.</p>

<p>I think the big trick for me has been to realize that giving a bride a sense of confidence is key. For that reason I usually shoot an engagement session, following which (assuming I did my work well enough) they then know how great you can make them look/feel. That normally gives the confidence to be relaxed on wedding day. If you sell yourself as a journalist, you should be getting brides who are looking for that style. That will also help with the relaxation part.</p>

<p>Also, I never refer to any clients as "goofy". I am always looking for their personality, but in such as to draw out their beauty and relationships. </p>

<p>As a more practical answer to your question regarding the "angles" to shoot, shoot from; If you need (as in this brides case) to be elevated, you can either bring short steps with you (assistants are great in this case), get above where the ground is sloped, have the bride sit/crouch or lay on the ground. When someone has a longer face, compressing with a longer lens is always good, as is getting them to lift their chin up to the camera. The effect is to open their eyes more and have the top of their face "larger" than the bottom. It makes your point of focus on their eyes and less on their "strong" features. You can use light to foreshorten their features too. Wrapped light from a diffuser is good in this case. If you look at your images of here shot with less harsh light, you can see how her features are less pronounced. Angle of light is also key. Don't place your light too high as it will elongate the face/shadows. Don't get too far left or right of your camera position as this will again lengthen the face by creating stronger vertical shadows. There's some ideas to work with. I think your lighting is pretty nice for most all of your shots though.</p>

<p>Hope that is of some help.</p>

[chimera_h]

<p>Thank you for the detailed post. I love it and will use all of it. I do need help with exposure at sunset. I'll ask a few questions when I get back, but I wanted to quickly say that the word "goofy" was meant as young, crazy and endearing. She is full of life and so vibrant and funny. Of course I did not use that word with her, but obviously it can be taken wrong so I wanted to make myself clear. : )</p>

<p>Tips for sunset pics where the sun has not yet hit the horizon would be great!</p>

[picturesque]

<p>When the sun hasn't hit the horizon, the exposure is much like bright sun any other time--ISO 100, f11, 1/250th (or thereabouts), if you want to have the sun itself discernable as a ball of light. Unfortunately, whatever is in the foreground (not directly lit by the sun) is usually way darker. So you need to balance the foreground to the exposure for the sun. Usually this means flash, unless you want silhouettes.</p>

<p>After the sun goes down below the horizon, it's different. This is when you need to perhaps meter the colored sky. But you still need to match the foreground exposure to that EV.</p>

<p>Here's a quick and dirty way. Put your camera on shutter priority at ISO 100, 1/250th (evaluative ambient metering pattern). Use your flash on ETTL, compensated the way you normally would for the subject in front of you. You may want to change the flash metering to averaging, because evaluative will 'shut down' because it sees a bright light source (the sun). You may even have to put the flash in manual flash mode, because averaging will also have this tendency, just not as bad. Take the picture, chimp. Minus compensate the ambient for best sky rendition (underexpose for more saturation). Compensate the flash as needed but remember these two things are separate from each other. Also remember your flash is puny against bright sun, so you can't be more than about 10-12 feet from your subjects or you won't have enough flash power.</p>

[tholte]

<p>Lot of good shots and would bet that the bride and groom were pleased with the results. My only tip would be to get more casual shots.</p>

[neilambrose]

<p>I won't critique you on your technique. As far as I can see you're making great progress there. So I'll ask you a question instead.</p>

<p><em>What is it you strive to achieve when you photograph a wedding?</em></p>

<p>Because I couldn't tell the answer from looking at your images. As I went through your set I felt I'd already seen it all before. If I were to guess, I'd say your aim was to make this wedding look similar to other weddings you've seen from other photographers.</p>

<p>Unfortunately that's a dangerous route to take because it can be a shortcut to producing work that looks like a third generation copy of someone else's. It can also become mundane quickly, and stops being personal or special — both to you and the client.</p>

<p> </p>

[steve_hovland]

<p>I like your technical quality and I also felt you did well in terms of telling the story of the day. Your shots of the dress and shoes are better than average. </p>

[konrad_bilinski]

<p>I really like the colours in the series, also you captured the brides energy very well. I think what needs work is your composition. You should move away from such central composition. The shots of the wedding party would have been much better if the were walking into the frame, rather than dead center. Detail shots were great. Also shot #7 seems a tad too scandalous for a public blog. Maybe just put it into the grooms private collection. ;p </p>

[lovcom_photo]

<p>I think this wedding was shot very well. I really like many of the compositions. I have one little nit though, and this is subjective, but I think a few of the group shots outside showed a too sharp background...I think a nice blur in the background would've been really nice. But again, this is a matter of taste and just a nit.</p>

<p>Great work...I'm sure the clients are very happy.</p>

[lovcom_photo]

<blockquote>

<p>Tips for sunset pics where the sun has not yet hit the horizon would be great!</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Here is what I'd do for such a shot to get perfect sunset colors and perfect human skin exposure, and this can all be done in a few seconds (honest, and this method will give the task of exposing for the background to the camera, and the task of exposing for the humans to the flash):</p>

<p>1. Place camera in manual mode, flash in full auto E-TTL, evaluative, and make suer Hi-Sync is off.</p>

<p><br /> 2. ISO 100 or 200, set F-stop for required DOF; F5.6 is a good starting point. If you want a bit more blur of the background open up the aperture accordingly, making sure that whatever f-stop you use will provide sufficient DOF for the couple.</p>

<p><br /> 3. Since camera will expose the background, set the shutter speed accordingly. If you need faster then the flash sync, then drop the ISO down even as low as ISO 50. Now to really get the sunset colors to pop, the magentas, pinks, purples, blues, reds, incrase the shutter speed 1/2 stop; again if the speed is faster then the camera's flash sync, drop the ISO. Refer to your camera's exposure meter while you do this step. If at ISO 100 or 50 the shutter speed is still too fast for your camera's flash sync, slap on a2-3 stop ND filter on your lens.</p>

<p><br /> 4. Since the flash will meter the couple's face, again make sure it is on evaluative because we want the exposure to be heaviest weighted on the focus point you will manuall select (next step).</p>

<p><br /> 5. Manually pick and choose the appropriate focus point on his or her eye, and when you do release the shutter DO NOT plan on recomposing...not good to do if you want critical focus and accurate metering, especially if you're shooting with a fast f-stop.</p>

<p><br /> 6. Take a quick test shot...if the background is too bright speed up the shutter. If too dark, slow it down. If the human skin is under exposed, apply posative EC to the flash, if too bright, apply negative EC to the flash in 1/2 stops as required. Remember, the camera exposes the sunset, the flash the people.</p>

<p><br /> 7. Wait for the expressions you think are interesting and snap away...take several to determine which expressions are the best.</p>

[mike_hollander]

<p>Overall, I think it's a very good job. I liked the pictures of the ceremony 'from above'. It's an unusual angle and captures the location beautifully.</p>

<p>For some reason, the first association to the hanging dress picture in my mind was execution by hanging. There's something disturbing about it hanging from the two thin straps dead center in the frame. This is probably just my dysfunctional mind at work, but maybe something a little less geometric would look more romantic.</p>

<p>The picture of the bride in her boots, sitting with her legs open and holding the flowers in between her legs is not exactly pretty and seems to suggest something that was not intended. Or maybe it was done on purpose for fun and I'm being puritanical?</p>

<p>In the two pictures of the groom standing next to the minister, waiting for the bride, the little boy's head is cut in half at the bottom of the frame. It looks pretty bad. There seems to have been a lot of room for a better composition, but of course I don't know what else would have come into the frame if the boy's head and shoulders were included.</p>

[brian_m.1]

<p>I concur with what Mike said about the hanging dress. I also didn't like the legs and feet shots. Unless you are shooting foot and toe models they are best avoided. The one where she is wearing cowboy boots with flowers between her legs isn't that great either. Actually, I didn't like any of the shots with boots. But all in all, great shots. </p>

[dave_wilson1]

<p>It really is a very nice job! Only suggestion I have pertains to the handling of the gown in the posed shots. In general it's best to allow the train or tail to follow it's natural pleating and/or fabric lines/folds etc. So when you set up a bride for formal pics, avoid wrapping the gown around. Either change the brides angle to show more of the back or if possible change your angle. Also, consider a little more work with the feet to balance the bride. There are many variations but having the bride turn and extend their lead foot to the direction of the main light or toward you, whichever fits better your need is a good starting point and the hip will turn and transfer weight onto the brides rear/away foot creating a more elegant pose. If you carefully study and analyze some of the top bridal and fashion mags, you'll see more of exactly what I'm talking about. Anyway, I'm sure your couple is thrilled, and keep up the great work. BTW I like the sitting shot of the bride, the bride looked to enjoy it too.</p>

[scott_paris4]

<p>I think the pictures are just fine. There are 2 or 3 that I might not have included, but maybe the client asked for them? <br>

If I were the client, I think I'd be very pleased.<br>

The fact that a few photographers find the flow "predictable" is interesting, but really not relevant. The flow is probably NOT predictable for the clients, who don't spend their lives looking a sets of pictures. <br>

Keep it up! </p>

 

[sd_woods]

<p>I've seen it before and it always annoys me, that shot of the dress on the hook looks, at first glance, that the bride is being hanged. And even when I see it's just a dress, the connotations are still there..</p>

[chimera_h]

<p>Thank you Nadine and Dan (I think I got everyone) for helping with sunset pictures. I'm going to read over it again and may have questions!</p>

<p>Thank you to everyone else for your feedback. Seriously, I'm taking everything into account and can't wait to try everything out. </p>

<p>Dan-I shot the group pictures with a 28-75 2.8 Tamron...Could I have gotten a blurred background with that lens had I moved closer to the subjects or should I have used a different lens?<br>

re: the sitting pose...she was trying to be sassy , but the ground behind her was going downhill, so 1)the angle was awkward and 2) I should've had her move one leg to a more lady like position. </p>

<p>The boots were very special to her for personal reasons. The collage was simply of her walking, but for some reason I liked it. Maybe she won't. Not sure.</p>

<p>Re: Hanging Dress-never thought about it looking that way, but something to consider.</p>

<p>re: Boy's head cut off- There were large, unmovable planters in the way, so we could only get so close. I could crop the picture in though.</p>

<p>Again, thanks to everyone. I've enjoyed looking at some of your work as well. Hopefully, a year from now I'll be that much better.</p>

[emily_a1]

<p>Chimera, I can't really add anything in terms of technical advice, being a novice. But as some one who studies design could I suggest that the pink boxes around the photos and the constantly changing placement of your watermark seem a little distracting? Perhaps a smaller, subtler watermark in the same place on every photo. You don't want anything taking away from your gorgeous photos.<br>

And I for one, love the shot of the hanging dress! </p>

[lovcom_photo]

<p>Here is an example of what I outlined above, in regards to a good technique one can use to shoot a backlit couple, to get a good sky, and/or sunset, and exposed well human skin:</p><div></div>

[chimera_h]

<p>That's a beautiful picture Dan. Thanks! I'm actually talking about the sun when it's so low in the sky that it's hitting the lens straight on.</p>

[lovcom_photo]

<p>Chimera, my method would work for that scenario too...perhaps the only difference would be shutter speed...just remember, the body exposes for the background (setting an intended under exposure to pop out the colors) with no regard for the people...the flash will paint them in...without the flash you get a wonderful landscape and the people are black shilloutes...again, the flash paints them in. In the picture I posted above I used three Canon 580ex flashes, one on an L-frame (on the camera) and two either side of me, held by two friends...I managed to eeek a blue sky and blue water in the process.</p>

[ellie_smarks]

<p>I will never look at the hanging dress shots in the same way again! Might keep it to myself and have a private giggle whenever I see it in friend's wedding albums! xx</p>

[david_schilling___chicago_]

<p><em>"That's a beautiful picture Dan. Thanks! I'm actually talking about the sun when it's so low in the sky that it's hitting the lens straight on...."</em><br>

<em></em><br>

In which case a good exposure isn't possible. You'll need to get one of your subjects or something to serve as a gobo and you'll likely need to find an angle that prevents the light from hitting your lens dead center.....unless of course you have a flash with nuclear power :-)</p>

<p>If the sun is that low, wait a bit for the "golden hour" and have at it.</p>