Wedding Critique of the Week 6/28/10

[picturesque]

<p>This week's image was taken by Tomislav Kovacicek.</p>

<p>This is Part 2 of Wedding Photo of the Week. You can see all submissions in the thread with that title. In your critiques - include what you would do to improve the shot or why the shot is perfect as it is.<br /><br />Remember that this is not a contest. Sometimes an image will be a winning image and sometimes an image that needs some help. Try not to just say "great shot" but explain why it works. Or - "Doesn't do it for me" without explaining why.<br /><br />The photographer up for critique for this week should remember that the comments expressed each week are simply "opinions" and the effort and focus of these threads are to learn and to take images to another level. There will be times where the critique is simply members pointing out why the shot works which is also a way for others to learn about what aspects contribute to a good wedding photo. In reading all critiques -- you may agree or disagree with some points of view - but remember that there are varying approaches and often no right or wrong answer.</p>

<p>Technical Notes: Nikon D700, 50mm/1.4G@f1.8, ISO 200, 1/8000 sec</p><div></div>

[fuccisphotos]

<p>Love the joy conveyed in this photo. As I was showing my husband the shots for this week, the instant this came up, he was like WOW! Maybe it's just my monitor but the highlights on her dress seem just a tad bit blown out. But that light may be what gives it the effervescent quality. Nice Job!</p>

[joliephoto]

<p>I think this is a great picture ... it really shows the fun there... was it taken in Europe?<br>

I personnally would have crop it horizontal, just because (for me) it would be easier to read, as the attention would go directly on the bride, being between two blue notes (difficult to explain in english for me, words are missing). Because my eye is too much draw by the woman in the left in blue when it is vertical. I hope you understand me ;-)</p>

<p>It would be more or less like this:</p><div></div>

[William Michael]

<p>Smart use of DoF . . . extending the Shutter Speed to the limit of the camera: that might seem a corny comment in that it would be expected that one would purposely select a very large Aperture . . . bit all too often the Tech Specs do not make much sense: in this shot, they do.<br>

<br>

I agree with the landscape crop for more impact / less clutter – I would go even tighter:<br>

<br>

WW</p>

<p > </p>

<div></div>

[neilambrose]

I love this shot. It's got everything I value in an image: meaning, context and moment. I also love the composition,

especially the colour harmony from the symmetrical arrangement.

 

Only two weak points in my opinion: the shoes of the left hand figure, and the blown highlights in the dress. The first can

be corrected with a gentle crop, the second with exposure correction. Neither are very important, and don't dramatically

detract from the image; they're just subtle corrections in pursuit of excellence.

 

Although I generally agree with William on almost everything he suggests, surprisingly this time I don't share his taste in the crop. For my

money it's a little too drastic, and the environmental context has been lost. This is a shot that works because of the

inclusion of the left figure, not despite it. You need to see the bride observed by her friends. If you don't keep the framing, it becomes (if taken to extremes) a woman

dancing, albeit in a nice dress. The meaning is situational and I would therefore include it. My preferred crop would be more like Laetitia's, making more of the left hand figure and retaining the symmetrical balance, and keeping the perspective of shooting through a group, rather than directly at the subject.

 

Very nice picture. My congratulations.

[William Michael]

<p>Oh well . . . one of us is correct.<br /><br />Seriously though . . . why I wrote what I wrote: . . . <br /><br />The framing is either to be tight and energy focussed on the subject or "environmental" - (nice word) and “all encompassing”.<br /><br />If it were to be “all encompassing” I would have preferred the camera's viewpoint higher. <br /><br />When it got to the nitty gritty of pulling the image apart: my mind screamed very loud: “I want that really tight” - because of the low camera elevation I wanted to cut through the “clutter”. <br /><br />Just as a small child I felt overwhelmed by the clutter and I could not take it all in . . . but if you put me on your shoulders, Dad, I can cope with taking it all in.<br>

<em>"Very nice picture. My congratulations." </em><strong><em>I agree,</em></strong> I would not want that opinion lost, as we discuss other issues.<br>

<br />WW</p>

 

[david_schilling___chicago_]

<p>I really like the energy/emotion, selective focus, DOF, and layering. I don't care for the utility lines and there's really no excuse for the blown-out dress. I prefer the original crop....without the utility lines. Thanks for sharing.</p><div></div>

[William Michael]

<p>Now this raises another interesting issue: <br>

<br>

Is the image no longer Photojournalism / Reportage, with the utility lines removed from the shot ? ? ? <br>

<br>

WW</p>

<p > </p>

 

[david_schilling___chicago_]

<p><em>"Is the image no longer Photojournalism / Reportage, with the utility lines removed from the shot???" -WW </em><br /><br />For me the question is academic and of little practical value. At this point, I'd say the image is stronger, more aesthetically pleasing, more likely to be added to my personal folio, and more likely to be appreciated by the bride and her family.........</p>

<p>BTW, because of my film background, I would have likely taken this image from a higher vantage point to exclude the utility lines at time of capture. Airbrushing and retouching negatives back in the day was a serious expense. Had it been captured that way would that affect it's reportage/PJ status?</p>

[William Michael]

<p>I agree with the two points you make David – especially the second ‘bout airbrushing and thinking ahead in regard to post production etc.<br /><br /><br /><br>

My question was multifaceted and did have an element of my tongue firmly planted in my cheek and took into consideration the passion displayed on a previous thread. <br>

<br>

With hindsight, I think that it was silly of me to post the question. It would be a shame to divert the thread off on a tangent. <br /><br /><br>

 

<p><br />Sorry guys and girls, for my mistake.<br /><br /></p>

<br>

WW</p>

 

<p > </p>

 

[scottyt]

<p>Great shot.</p>

<p>I prefer your original to any of the other version's shown here.</p>

<p>It is not posed or planned, just a capture of a great moment.</p>

<p>Scott.</p>

[david_schilling___chicago_]

<p>How would anyone know that this image wasn't staged and/or planned by the photographer?</p>

[tomislav_kovacicek]

<p>-to <a href="../photodb/user?user_id=1769024">David Schilling</a> - Of course this image wasn't staged, its from a real wedding. Its form and looks are presenting it as a capture in moment - 9 out of 10 ppl would say its not staged. Dont you agree?<br>

-to <a href="../photodb/user?user_id=6107953">Laetitia Pat</a> - Taken in Croatia</p>

<p>I dont like anyone's crop simply because cropped - looses energy. The flags on the right are enpowering the picture already strong because the bride's energic dance and the girl to the left as an opposite to those flags - opens the view to the center - the bride.<br>

Blownout drees - eh, yes, my bad. Taken in the mid-day strong sun and didnt have time to meter off something else.</p>

<p>Thank you all on your comments so far!</p>

[john_deerfield]

<blockquote>

<p>Blownout drees - eh, yes, my bad. Taken in the mid-day strong sun and didnt have time to meter off something else.</p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>First, I like the image as shot. As far as the comment above, I don't know if it was a metering issue? I think it was just you chose to use Aperture Priority and f/1.8. The camera had nowhere to go above 1/8000th. I am thinking something like even f/2.5 would have been better.</p>

[bill_clark___minnetonka_mi]

<p>Help me.</p>

<p>Why is there no shadow from her right arm on the ground? Shadows around her just don't look right. My eyes, opinion.</p>

<p>Maybe I'm stupid, but was this image from another photo and moved in?</p>

<p>Nice job though.</p>

 

[tomislav_kovacicek]

<p>LOL, no, this is the original image. I'm happy though that you think its a fake. :)<br />And the shadow of her right arm is probably behind her. I dont know :)</p>

[tomislav_kovacicek]

<p>LOL, no, this is the original image. I'm happy though that you think its a fake. :)<br>

And the shadow of her right arm is probably behind her. I dont know :)</p><div></div>

[bill_clark___minnetonka_mi]

<p>Thanks.</p>

<p>It looks like the shadow of her right arm is shown on her dress then stops.</p>

<p> </p>

[david_schilling___chicago_]

<p><em>to <a rel="nofollow" href="../photodb/user?user_id=1769024">David Schilling</a> - Of course this image wasn't staged, its from a real wedding. Its form and looks are presenting it as a capture in moment - 9 out of 10 ppl would say its not staged. Dont you agree?</em></p>

<p>While 9 out of 10 people might assume that the image wasn't staged, that doesn't necessarily mean that the image wasn't prompted by the photographer. For instance in this case the bride might have been surrounded by friends and family while the photographer invited her to "give us a spin!" or "hey, show off that beautiful dress". In my folio, I have a shot of a bride who performed a spontaneous spin to the delight of her applauding groom that many might guess was prompted or staged. I have another shot where I invited the bride to give me a spin. Unless I inform a viewer who wasn't there that the shot was prompted, they could easily assume that it wasn't. Similar shots of the bride & groom cutting the cake appear to be unprompted or staged, but how do you suppose that the bride is almost always the one nearest the camera? My point is that many shots that appear not be staged, can be and that some shots that people might assume are staged, actually are not. Unless you were personally present when the image was taken, the best you can do is make a guess..............</p>

<p>BTW, I judge an image on the merits of the image itself, whether it was prompted or staged doesn't lessen the validity or the value of the image.</p>

[tomislav_kovacicek]

<p>I agree David. I didn't quite understand you the 1st time.<br />Well, fyi, this bride was a semi-pro dancer and she liked to dance. Later at the reception her friends wanted to suprise her so they dressed upto their usual dance costumes and started to dance (similar tap-dance). She joined in :)<br />It was so beautiful that the crowd went crazy cheering for more. 3 times. :)</p>