First engagement shoot

[hfd4177]

<p>Hello all. I just completed my first engagement shoot. I was a nervous wreck and was sweating like crazy but in the end the couple was happy. Please C&C if you have the chance. Please be honest and let me know the good and the bad. I have fairly thick skin. www.bkgphoto.com/Proofs/Heather/12313124_jqqxM#879002305_oG7Gv--Here is the link to the gallery.</p>

[scottyt]

<p>Good job Brian. You should be happy with that as your first engagement shoot.<br>

A couple of things I'd suggest...<br>

1. Less is more. Don't be afraid to delete. I think if you cut down by half, you'd have a much stronger set. You'll know which ones.<br>

2. Try for a few more candid type shots. Have the couple walking around and talking to each other and work around them. You'll get some really natural shots which are often the best.<br>

I'm sure someone will comment on the more technical aspects.<br>

Keep shooting.</p>

<p>Scott.</p>

 

[theresa_skutt]

<p>The - thing that jumped out at me was her teeth. I would <em>discard the closeups of her mouth</em>, sorry to say. Also in some of them the guy is looking off to the side for some reason?<br>

The + was the creativity of posing and the water shots especially.</p>

[mark_ridout1]

<p>Hey Brian,<br>

I had a general overall look at your engagement session. Here are some pointers on what stood out for me.<br>

1/ The majority of the images are taken 3/4. You need to move back and give the viewer some space...tell a story. The couple don't always need to fill the frame. Move around....move back.....</p>

<p>2/ Book your engagement session earlier or later in the day and get out of that horrid sun. Later when you have a better understanding of light then use the sun to your advantage. To many images are hot from the sun directly at the subject or crossing on a 45. In a number of the images the sun has blown out any detail ie: 18of65<br>

3/ I would do a better job of culling the images. Too many images are similar. ie: 50, 51 and 52 You need more variety and less of the same pose<br>

4/ there are a few images with direct flash that are leaving the dreaded flash shadow. Leave the flash in your camera bag and buy yourself a reflector.<br>

5/ I'm not a big fan of the "nostril" shot. Shooting up at a couple into the nose makes me sneeze 61of65<br>

So in closing....get out of the sun(that might explain the sweating)....look for open shade or buildings that give off a glow....give us better variety. Not a great set of images, but for a first go I'll give you a 5 out of 10 ( I'm a hard old bas%$d that doesn't give 10's easily) You didn't fail so that's a good thing :)</p>

[fuccisphotos]

<p>Brian, I'd agree with Scott. Less is often more. For her teeth you switching it to B&W was good, also you can in photoshop make them a bit more white. If you notice in the 2nd shot you did in the shade how much more of the details of their faces you got, vs the direct sunlight shots. That's a good thing. In the future if you are outdoors, look for shady spots and pop your flash on for some fill flash, that will result in a better shot overall. Some I think could also benefit from some cropping. The one of them touching foreheads and noses is very cute. That area is the interesting part of the shot, so I'd crop down on that. The rest of it, the hand placement, his lower back, etc, I don't feel really add to it. I think cropping it would really strengthen the composition. <br>

The hands on the pinning him to the wall one is interesting. Did you intentionally do that to draw the attention to the hands and her engagement ring?<br>

Also, the order you show them in don't have to be chronological. Start with the strongest image, and end with a strong image that can be good as a closer. Say a photo of them walking away holding hands, etc.<br>

Definitely like the water in the background and that you somehow kept them from being absurdly light and the background turning into a dark pit.<br>

Another tip is to tell your subjects at the start that everyone looks their best standing up straight, even when they are sitting down, shoulder's back, etc. If she'd done that, she'd look a bit more happy and a little less vulnerable/scared.<br>

Generally try to avoid positioning people square on to the camera. Even if their faces are at say 7/8ths that's much better than face on. And if you are insisting on face on, at least turn the body a little bit.</p>

<p>I like the one of them in BW #22 but I would in photoshop darken the background behind the peak of his head and I'd dodge her arms etc a bit more down at the bottom so that they match her face skin tones better.<br>

If you are doing posed shots with people, don't be afraid to pose them. For example in 25, the shot would have been perfect if her chin was down just a bit more, so we were not looking up her nose, and that her hand wasn't tucked in at an odd angle behind the other arm. As you continue to do these, you'll gain confidence and it'll be easier for you to coach people into the right positions that feel more natural. You can see the difference of how much better chin down looks in 26.<br>

31 is fabulous! Really creative posing. Good job! Her eyes look AMAZING!<br>

For an outdoors shoot, as you go along, with a girl, she doesn't have a mirror any more to check if hairs are out of place, you are her mirror. One thing that helps put hair into a more lively position is for them to flip over and run fingers through the hair and then flip back. That would have helped 32.<br>

Whoa, you got gutsy with 34! interesting concept, but I feel like it didn't quite play out. It mostly makes me go, oh my gosh, they got in the water. The posing of the hands is a bit awkward to<br>

Love 36 and 37.<br>

40 just kinda look like a finger monster to me. The composition of the other ring shot is just so much better.<br>

41, good idea of picking her up, but you have to be careful with angles when you shoot these. If the girl is wearing pants and you are shooting from below the butt can look bigger and more prominent than most any girl would want. What I would do is definitely make a second copy of it, and crop down on the loving look between the two. That is wonderful. You can see the perspective difference with the butt in 43. Looks much better there. And 44 well, makes her look like she has some junk in her trunk. Amazing what camera angles can do, eh?<br>

GREAT ring shot That type of focusing is not easy, and it looks fabu on 45.<br>

46 the focus looks soft, I'd take it out.<br>

Keep 49 in, take out 47. For kiss shots, it's good to give the couple a primer. The best shots of kisses are usually just right as the lips are touching at the beginning of the kiss and then at the end as they are pulling away. Smushed kissing faces don't make for very pretty photos. So you tell the couple to go in for kisses slowly. I reminded the couple I was shooting the other day, and they did go slowly, but I forgot the other important part, soft sweet kisses, not a french kiss make out session. Again, for a photo, not very pretty. Also, you got lucky, they both have nice profiles. But if a couple doesn't have such a nice profile, you'd want to shoot them at more of an angle instead of perpendicular to them.</p>

<p>50 is an example of someone losing their neck. Believe it or not but I picked that up from watching america's next top model. You want to be sure that your people still have necks. Here her head is growing out of her shoulder. A gentle reminder to relax her shoulders would have given her a neck back.<br>

55 if she was looking at him a little more, since he's kinda engaging with her, she's look a bit less kinda dead behind the eyes. But gutsy posing and I like that you tried so many different things.<br>

Like the perspective on 57, it seems like an intimate moment we just happen to be catching. Same with 59.<br>

62 is beautiful, I'd end it with that shot.</p>

<p>Much of what I'm espousing here are things I've picked up along the way, things I know because I'm a girl, or things I've read in books. Picking up a few books from amazon on posing and lighting could probably help you a great deal like they did me. Before reading about how to light people outside, I had many a shot like you did in direct sun. ;)<br>

Good luck with future shoots, hope this helped!</p>

<p> </p>

[francie_baltazar]

<p>first congratulations on your first e-shoot... I see some major issue with lighting - you really needed to use a fill flash for many of your photos and you need a translucent reflector so that there is not glare off his head and fill flash - the eyes are really dark.<br>

The second issue is posing - you really need to do some research on posing because your posing is make your photos look like snap shots and not real portraits. If you are going to have people sit or pose you have to direct them. Hands are the hardest -- I just too a 5 day 40 hour course on posing - and 35 hours was on hands... so they are really important - there are plenty of books on posing and hands. Rick Ferro has some good books on traditional posing which really helps. Your ring shots with the hands do not work as they look bulky and not nice.<br>

The best exposed in the lot is 34 - however the arms are all tangled... so it's distracting in the photo..<br>

I think your ring shots are soft focused.<br>

I think the woman's teeth are challenging - however, if she didn't like them she wouldn't smile so I don't mind those... in many of those if you would have had fill flash her teeth would jump out so much because you would have focused to the eyes - but with the eyes dark they just jump right out.<br>

I hope this wasn't too harsh - just trying to give you some constructive feedback.</p>

<p> </p>

[richardsnow]

<p>Brian --</p>

<p>Congrats on your first engagement shoot. Its a big step and it looks like you've got the right ideas.</p>

<p>I didn't make it through Vail's entire post...just couldn't do it... :-p If I post similar comments I apologize in advance. I'll also try to make this clear and concise.</p>

<p>First, 11:00am - 2:00pm is not the best time to shoot...especially without shade. The light is harsh and causes sharp, dark shadows. My tip: Shoot early in the morning or into the late afternoon/early evening hours. If you don't have a choice on the time, shoot in the shade and learn to use fill flash. A nice sturdy bounce card can make all the difference with fill, but it's not necessary and takes some practice to learn how to use. You can also choose to use a reflector, but you may need an assistant to get the light just right.</p>

<p>Second: Cull your images to the best of the best. More is not always better. Also keep in mind that the best are not always the "most perfectly exposed" or "most perfectly composed" images, but the most creative and the ones that show the couple interacting the most naturally with each other. #8, #13, #43/44, #48/49, are my favorites. Take what you captured with these images and perfect them in post if needed.</p>

<p>Thats pretty much it. It's not a failure and you seem to be willing to learn from your mistakes so I give this advise freely. Remember that practice makes perfect and once you see your mistakes you will be more likely to know how to correct them. </p>

<p>One final suggestion:<br>

Take your camera out and take pictures of interesting shadows. I thought this was a stupid idea when an old-time pro told me it would help me, (15 years ago), and I couldn't have been more wrong. I won't tell you how it helps because I think you should discover it for yourself. It's much easier cheaper to do it now than it was when I did this exercise...hopefully it will help you as much as it did for me.</p>

<p>RS</p>

[fuccisphotos]

<p>For those who suggest using a reflector, unless you have an assistant there with you, how do you go about using it? Shoot with the right hand and reflect with the left? I've yet to use a reflector so this is a genuine question.</p>

[richardsnow]

<p>Vail -- you can use a reflector on a light stand if need be. </p>

<p>An assistant is much easier though, (as I mentioned). You can direct an assistant to move while you're framing the shot. If you use a light stand you have to walk over, adjust the reflector, and walk back. On top of that, a reflector is easily moved by a breeze, so all your work may be of no use if the wind is blowing.<br>

RS</p>

[hfd4177]

<p>Wow. Thank you so much to everyone. This was exactly what I was looking for. Vail your post was awesome...I don't think Ive ever seen someone take more time to critique a set of images. <br>

There wedding is in August outside@12 noon so hopefully I can pick up enough between now and then, but I will have an assistant to help with off camera flashes and reflectors. On the plus side the couple was extremely happy with the images. I have shot a bunch of weddings as a second a few years back so this is really the first time I'm out on my own.<br>

As far as posing and lighting I recently read David Zisers "Captured by the Light" and thought it was by far the best wedding/portrait book I have ever read. I just recently signed up for his Digital Master Class workshop in October. I cant wait for that hopefully I will pick up a lot from that as well.<br>

Again thank you to everyone here for taking the time to help me out I truly appreciate it.</p>

[mark_ridout1]

<p>As far as using a reflector (my favourite way to light) an assistant would be the best way to go. I have shot without an assistant while using a reflector. It can be tricky but can be done. Because of the size of the reflector I use it's quite easy to prop up against a bush or tree and walk away. I sometimes lean it against myself and shoot over it. I use the California SunBounce that measures about 4' x 6'</p>

[fuccisphotos]

<p>Brian, glad you liked the critique. I figure by doing stuff like that it helps me hone my own skills, solidifying those general rules of composition into my brain, so you are helping me as well. Being that you know the wedding is supposed to be at noon, I'd suggest two things. <br>

1) Talk to them in advance about where they are having the set up. A spot that is likely to have direct sun is not ideal (for anyone really, not just you as a photographer, they will all be sweating, that doesn't make for very pretty photos or a very comfy situation in a hot wedding dress or tux). They may really appreciate that you've thought ahead to suggest types of locations. <br>

2) Make sure they have a rain plan as well. At the most recent wedding I did it was supposed to be outside, but it was pouring (that was also the case for my own wedding). Someone at B&H once told me that each raindrop on your wedding is a blessing on the marriage though, so at least they are well blessed ;) But if you can, check out the lighting for the rain situation as well. Super dark poorly lit rooms for indoor shots when you are expecting to be doing an outdoor shot at noon can be very difficult as well.</p>

[ianivey]

<p>On engagement shoots in particular (this is harder to do at a wedding because people are busy), I find it easy to get free assistance by recommending that the couple choose one friend to join us on the shoot. Very often, this person can serve as a friendly heckler, voice-activated light-stand, and pack mule. Of course, I emphasize that the couple must choose this person carefully and explain his role clearly, so that the assistant shares the expectation that he will carry some gear (e.g., reflector, light stand(s), maybe a step-ladder or prop). Most of the time, the couple has a friend who would be honored to join them for the shoot.</p>

<p>This gives me an extra pair of eyes (good for keeping track of gear), and an extra pair of hands (for holding and moving light modifiers). Just as important, it means the couple have a bit of moral support from a friend, which can improve the mood and gives them someone to share the memory with.</p>

<p>Also doesn't hurt to let someone who isn't yet my client see how the shoot goes. </p>

[o_brian]

<p>I think for a first effort you did pretty well. That said, I'd listen to everything Mark Ridout has to say on the topic. If you bother to go to his website I think you'll find he has some idea of what he's talking about - he's got some really sensational stuff. I've only bookmarked a few photographer websites and his is one of them, and 'no' I'm not plugging him. Never met or talked to the man. Naturally he has a helluva lot more experience than you do and also has the luxury of showing his best efforts from probably hundreds of shoots. You're showing a lot of shots from only one shoot, so it goes without saying that some clunkers make their way onto your website. Getting good exposures is always a good starting point, some consistency in that regard should always be a priority and may need some attention. But the real kicker has to do with what Mr. Ridout highlights regarding composition and the inclusion of background information. When/If you look at his stuff you'll see it immediately. There's more to his photo's than just the couple. There's context which adds so much visual depth. It should also be mentioned that he enjoys a skill level with photoshop that you probably don't and shouldn't be under-appreciated.</p>

<p>In a nutshell, looking at 65 shots from the same shoot takes away from the one or two winners that would survive an experienced pro's editing. Mr. Ridout gives you a 5 out of 10, thankfully the couple you photographed is framing a picture and not a rating. In that regard I think the couple has a nice picture to frame. Scour these forums for aspiring pro's and self- proclaimed pro's and it's easy to find some real garbage. Yours don't fall into that category. And even when you look critically at some of the real pro's like Mr. Ridout you might be able to make the occasional 'observation'. Keeping in mind that I love his stuff, I find it difficult to find any pictures of actual wedding ceremonies or receptions on his website. There's a link to an area I can't access so I can't say they don't exist, but I find it interesting when wedding photographer's only show posed shots (mostly natural light). Makes me wonder if shoe-mounted flash is their achilles heal or if their artistic integrity simply keeps them outdoors. Being that most weddings and receptions are indoors, and shot to a certain degree on-the-fly, I wouldn't hire a 'wedding day' photog that couldn't demonstrate a degree of proficiency with the 'flash'. Just one mans opinion naturally.</p>

<p>Harsh as the sun,<br>

O Brian </p>