critique please

[shaun_carter]

<p>i was wondering if i could get critiques on my most recent wedding. say whatever comes to mind! <br /> this wedding was a late starter and i haven't had a wedding start this late in a while (1-1/2 late!) but things eventually got back on track. fyi, i shoot with two cameras, a 40D w/17-55, and a 5D w/70-200 or 17-40. during the reception i would switch between the 17-40 (ex. garter and bouquet toss) and 70-200 (ex. candids) on the 5D...thanks!<br /> http://dscphotography.smugmug.com/Weddings/Shalonda-Tyree-8-29-10/13580989_wgFjK#1010838089_WZgso</p>

<p> </p>

[omar_martinez]

<p>I will write my critique as I see it:<br>

On the church dress pictures, the white balance is off and the shots of the dress aren't very interesting.<br>

As people are getting ready for the ceremony, you seem to flash them and it shows harshly. Consider defusing the flash to produce soften the flash light.<br>

If you're as much into shoes as any other woman, consider getting more creative when photographing the shoes. Try different angles - something unique - and not just shoestore-looking shots. Also try to use other decorations to compliment these shots such as the bouquet or jewelry or other garments.<br>

I really like how you take the time to photograph the kids. Many 'traditional' photographers don't even consider this.<br>

I'm glad to see that when taking pictures of the guests in the ceremony, you focused on important family members.<br>

The ceremony seems to be good. This culture is a little different for me (since i shoot mostly catholic or jewish weddings) so the rites weren't what I'm used to. It's a shame that the window produced shadow on the bride's face during the first kiss. Unless you got uncomfortably close and flashed, there's no way to prevent that :(<br>

In the venue your white balance is off, unless your intention was to produce the same color of light that was visible during the hall (both are ok - it's a matter of taste).<br>

In the venue: are you bouncing your light on the ceiling? The shadows look ackward. What kind of post editing did you do?<br>

Finally! Someone who shoots the food! Since I started as a food advertisement photographer, I always get a high quality shot and gift it to the caterer. It's good publicity.<br>

Gj on the ring shots. They seem focused.<br>

I noticed that you left as soon as the dancing started. If you really want to give your photography an edge, consider staying longer and trying to get some photos of people dancing (especially fast, potentially-funny-looking songs or romantic songs). You get some beautiful expressions of the guests.<br>

In summry, you got your basics set. There isn't that 'touch of magic' that will set you apart from the rest. You need a lot more experience in what my mentor once called 'capturing the moment.' The best way to do this is through the emotion portrayed by facial expressions. Provided below is an example of the benefit of searching for these facial expressions and staying just a little longer.</p><div></div>

[dave_wilson1]

<p>Just in general, I would be a lot more careful how I used my wide angle lenses and how I controlled the backgrounds and what's in them. Example, you obviously took good time setting up more formal poses of the bridal party girls at the hall or wherever and then you go and shoot way wide and include big doors and basically make the shot much less appealing. A few others have all kinds of fire extinguishers and wires plus copious floor and ceiling to deal with. The wide angle lens is a great friend when you get some control over it, but more and more I see these types of shots and wonder exactly what the thought process was in deciding to go that route. So, I'm not going to tell you how to shoot anything, you have to follow your style but I think a good move would be to stay around the middle focal ranges and be very careful and conscious of better controlling the background when zooming wide.</p>

[omar_martinez]

<p><img src="http://i364.photobucket.com/albums/oo85/LeonLeon123/RubyLorenzoMorningW-103.jpg" alt="" /><img src="http://i364.photobucket.com/albums/oo85/LeonLeon123/RubyLorenzoMorningW-97.jpg" alt="" /><br>

Here's examples of what I meant about getting a little more creative with the shoes. The rings can be done wonderfully as well.</p>

[danzel_c]

<p>Omar thanks for taking the time to critique and posting samples shots. all flash shots were either taken with an omnibounce or no diffuser but bounced off a wall or ceiling. i agree the shoe shots look "shoe store ish". the bride shoed up an hour late and they only gave me about two 2 minute moments in the dressing room. i had to get what i could quick and guess the creative juices weren't flowing. great point though. even if i only have 30 seconds next time i won't take shoe shots like that again! did you use a macro lens for those shots? nice! during the ceremony i make it a point to get shots of the b&g family, and guest as well if i found them looking at me with a nice smile or with some special emotion on their face. as long as no guest are in front of me i make it a point to not be in the b&g's face. that's what the 70-200 is for! so with the kiss shot yeah i saw that shadow but i figured i just wouldn't fill the frame as tight. i did play around with the white balance post processing, mostly at the reception. and food shots are always on my mental shot list. thanks for the suggestion of more "capturing the moment" shots.<br /> dave, there was indeed some "house keeping" issues in the dressing room shots which made leaving out distracting elements a challenge. i did a lot of post cropping, but sometimes that still didn't seem enough. as far as formals of the girls at the venue, i purposely shot those wide for potential 8x10, 11x14 crops. it would have been nice if those doors wasn't there :-) that seemed to be the best spot for a group shot at the time. thanks too for the critique.</p>

[david_schilling___chicago_]

<p>I looked at the first 10 pages of the site. Really liked the kids in shots 50 & 51. The shots of the groom on the steps could have really been nice if you could have gotten higher and placed him down one step. Be careful about which shots of the female guests that you post, a couple didn't look very flattering (reconsider posting #12 & 58). The first shot of the flower girls seems OOF. The church was cramped and difficult to shoot in but you got several good angles despite a wicked sun for that time of day coming through the windows. Liked the jumping the broom sequence but it looks like you missed the person placing the broom. All in all, I'll bet the B/G are happy.</p>

[danzel_c]

<p>good eye and good point dave. thanks for the critique. i actually debated those two but put them up anyway. the bride said she wants a few down and i bet it's at least those two!</p>

[left_ayyones]

<p>Definitely got the basics down, but there are many places for improvement. I agree, good work with the kids, and most of the pictures are pretty good overall. Here are my thoughts.</p>

<p>Work could be done on catching people *smiling* (it's hard, but smile yourself - smiles are contagious). Avoid posting unflattering pictures - I agree, #12 has got to go!!! Also consider a different picture for #1 - what is that thing in the box? It is the first picture that greets people when they look at the album. How about #2 for the first picture - good smiles, casual, sets the mood.</p>

<p>Shot #10 of the church... the off kilter thing emphasizes the distortion and perspective issues with the lens. Could also have people in it. If not, you could also shoot the church with a tripod early in the morning on the wedding day for better lighting. Or late in the evening. Good architectural photography requires a bit of time and can't be done just on the fly as you're walking up to the joint.</p>

<p>For a lot of shots, they seem either over-cropped (19, 21, 48 etc.) or under-cropped (11, 13, 22, and a lot of the 'coming up the aisle' shots, and a lot of the group shots). Part of this is the lens - wide angles often show too much floor and ceiling - but a lot of pictures are shot with the people at dead center in the frame with a lot of space around them. Maybe this is nice if you're somewhere with beautiful scenery that you want to capture, but most of the time it's distracting (as others have said rafters, exit signs, fire extinguishers, speakers). Weddings are about people foremost, and if there's good scenery to capture, then that comes second.</p>

<p>Since you're shooting with zooms, I think it would really pay off to practice your framing and composition with moving objects so you can be fast fast fast at composition. Go to the park/downtown/little league sports games with that 17-55 and 70-200 and shoot some birds or people or whatever and really work on mastering framing with your zooms. A lot of the photos in this album could really be improved or saved with some careful cropping in Lightroom/Photoshop/whatever.</p>

<p>The other thing to be wary of is that wide-angle distortion! Check out #48 and look at the kid's face on the right. That shot could have been made standing farther away and at a longer focal length for MUCH less distortion. Again, this speaks to learning how to use your zooms and where their strengths and weaknesses are.</p>

<p>Finally, as others mentioned there is the flash issue. There are quite a few shots with too much flash. Taking these same shots with just the power of the flash turned down could definitely improve things. One of my favorite flash photography sites is http://www.strobist.blogspot.com/</p>

<p>Overall, good work! Practice makes perfect.</p>

[david_schilling___chicago_]

<p>OK, I moved to pages 11 & 12. Need to watch the expressions, slow down, watch your background, and edit-out/cull some of the bad expressions. The image below: they both looked peeved about being there, watch for the raised chin (especially in black males) as it tends to look angry/distrustful/aggressive and is pretty much the opposite of "happy, happy, joy, joy". This pose has stiff, flat-footed bodies....he's angled too much while she isn't angled enough(have her drop the weight on the far hip). Having them connected with the bouquet is a good idea but move it more between them, here it's centered on her body. Watch for merges in the background and distracting features....with careful placement, his head could block the microphone, in some other shots it peeks over his ear. I'm betting this is one of the shots that the bride isn't happy with. I also did a quick tweak to adjust the contrast/curves/saturation....give me a call and I'd be happy to share it with you.</p><div></div>

[fuccisphotos]

<p>When doing the dress shot, TAKE AWAY THE DRESS BAG! Then take the time to straighten it out, make sure it's hanging just right. If you don't have the time to do that, only take a detail dress shot. Showing the dress looking lumpy with the bag around it is worse than not having that shot. And be mindful of the surroundings. Having it next to a fire extinguisher doesn't look very nice or luxe. Ask if you can move the dress to a better spot with nicer light, etc. If not, do something like use a fast lens and do a more artsy shot from the side and blur out the background elements that aren't flattering.</p>

<p>For the shoe shot, just having a picture of the shoes in a pose you've seen other shoes look good in doesn't mean your shot will come out well. The weight of the rhinestones are bringing it down, making it look sad. Try it from another angle. like back to back of the shoes (look at the best shoe shots post for a few other ideas), but having the shoe pads on display isn't good. Also, I try to mix it with other elements from that day, be it the bouquet, a rose, the garter, the rings, something to give it added interest.</p>

<p>For taking pictures of shoes on a person, a foot coming straight at you front on gives lots of confusing foreshortening. Have it turned slightly to the side. Looking up on this forum basics on posing could be helpful.</p>

<p>Pictures of her getting ready in a place with the door in frame pipes exposed, and bags all over the place makes this look like a shot her bridesmaids could take. Take the time to clear the background a bit, unless it's comically messy. Or shoot with a wider aperture so the focus is on her. See if there are ANY other spots that are more flattering as a background. Even just different corners of the room.</p>

[danzel_c]

<p>thanks again for more feedback! i'm telling you guys, i'm listening to ya! i got rid of #10 which was the unflattering facial expression of a guest arriving, cropped #48 to get rid of the distorted kid who really wasn't the subject of the photo in the first place, cropped the dress shots to eliminate the fire extinguisher and dress bag from the photo!, rearranged the first few photos so the cologne in the box shot isn't the first thing people see, and will definitely do better with the shoes even if i have only a few seconds to get it. when you think about it there's always more opportunities for shoe shots. they usually come off anyway after the ceremony. dave, nice "snap" added to the photo! and there actually is one like that with them smiling (the bride was very self conscience and didn't want to smile) so i probably could have deleted that one. thanks again everyone!</p>

[left_ayyones]

<p>Good work! As they say, it's good that you want to get better. Going back over old photos and really picking them apart is the best thing you can do to improve your shots next time.</p>

<p>Take a look at photos 88-92. These are good composition, but they all noticed you! You're going to have to be 'quicker on the draw' and possibly shooting with a longer lens to catch people un-posed (if that's a direction you want to go). Compare those photos to 95 and 96, which, while they are pretty candid, they need better composition. Shooting down lower to include more people and less wall (and less air conditioner) would have made for better shots.</p>

<p>Moving on to page 9. Compare photos 103 and 104. 103 is like, 'nuh uh', and 104 is the money shot. In 103, the couple is too far away, there is too much ceiling fan/rafters etc. showing, and their facial expressions aren't great. In 104 though, you've got good expressions, much better body language from the guy, and his shoulder is blocking the distracting exit sign. A shot taken a step later would also have blocked out the black electronic thing on the wall, and made the subjects fill the frame even better. You can apply this to all of the shots and see how they could have been improved. So I guess the lesson here is always check out your backgrounds on the 'going down the aisle' shots and plan out what the best composition is going to be. Notice also that your 'going down the aisle' shots have much less distracting backgrounds when taken at an angle. There, you only have the air conditioners, and not the doors, clock, electronic gizmo, and exit sign. You did a good job with 121 and 122 (the kids) though, and they're easier since they are not as tall! :-)</p>

<p>124-126 - flower closeups are really nice, good work!</p>

<p>Moving on to shots 127-130. I'm assuming this is the pastor of the church? Really, only the last one is a good shot. 127, missed focus (focus is at the depth of about his ear, instead of his eye). 128, sharp, but he is looking dead into the camera, 129, sharp, but unflattering facial expression. 130 is the shot to keep - even with the plant or whatever that is intruding on the right. The focus is spot on, and the face is soulful. However, I'm wondering, given the background behind him, why there isn't also a vertical-orientation shot of him speaking showing the last supper painting and so forth, as this seems like one of the better decorated backgrounds in the church and it sets the viewer's expectations of who this person is. That is to say, he would look more like a pastor if he had a pastor-type background.</p>

<p>133, 134 - you really have a knack for kids. nice. 135, crop this in from the upper left corner, framing just the groom and the boy, getting rid of the flowers, for a much more intimate shot. compare the two and see what I mean. 147-150, interesting work, focusing on one face and blurring out the others. It works. 151 is a nice, thoughtful image.</p>

<p>160 (as well as 190-193) is a great use of your wide angle - that is the time to use it, when you've got a good backdrop to work with. 161-165 - that arbor. Tough to shoot around, I'm not sure what I would have done short of move to a different angle, which you did. 169 is a tender moment - this is what weddings are all about. A little cropping on the right to remove the cameraman could help lessen background distractions. It's a shame this wasn't captured with the frame over to the left a little, for a little more pastor and a little less videocamera.</p>

<p>Moving along. 187 - ahh! if only this were zoomed in on just the couple and the pastor, this would be a top-notch shot! if your megapixels allow you, see if you can crop it and still have it look nice. They have such great smiles when they're smiling! 194-211, in some of these, there is a little too much wall above the people - see that black speaker keep popping in?. If the walls are not interesting, leave them out. 201 does it right, 212 and 213 are good use of including the walls and other stuff.</p>

<p>Other have commented on the formals (214-239) and I agree. Personally, I would have no problem using photoshop's clone stamp (or content-aware fill if you have CS5) to get rid of that microphone. Next time, just take it down by hand before the formals - easy enough.</p>

<p>249-253... here's where that flash issue rears it's ugly head, especially with satiny fabrics, which reflect light. Just turning down the flash a bit, a more diffuse diffuser, etc. would help here, or getting a f/1.4 lens and shooting with available light if that's possible. I'm not familiar with Canon's lineup and high ISO performance, so maybe flash is simply a must here, I don't know.</p>

<p>Some of the later formals, starting at 264, could definitely be posed better. Imagine 264 with the two girls on the far left swapped. The current layout is not exactly flattering to the girl on the far left. Avoid those profile shots if that is how it will look. Just turning her a bit toward the camera would have helped too - compare against 255. 266-270, white balance may be a bit too yellow. Hard to tell if it's that or my monitor.</p>

<p>As far as the dance floor scenes - what others have said, a bit too much floor and ceiling. Beware the wide angle! ;-) A lot of the couple's portraits at the tables are solid. But get them to smile if you can - like I said, smiles are contagious. 307 could be cropped on the left to get rid of that elbow. 308 is nice, 309 could be closer in. 313 is great. Most of the rest of the reception is solid, but you could definitely work on white balance in a few of them - it is challenging to be sure, and something that no one ever really fully masters. Thankfully, WB can be fixed later in lightroom/photoshop/etc.</p>

<p>386 - interesting portrait of the DJ. I have those same headphones. Not a lot of people catch him. The composition though - Imagine it standing to the far left of where you were, and shooting him with the wall in the background instead of the door and the fire alarm. Assuming that wall was solid white, this could have been a great shot of him and his gear.</p>

<p>395! woah, you may want to pull this one. For the garter toss (starting at 403) get in closer with that zoom lens! There are a lot of great expressions in there that are being 'crowded' by the large amounts of background. Try cropping a few to see what I mean.</p>

<p>420 is a nice shot. 422, 432 - why the mirror? 433-435 could have had a better background. 436 and 437 really show you the difference in white balance and what it can do. 438-442 is another spot to work on the flash issue. Flash units off to one side instead of straight on could probably have improved these. 444 is nice. What's with 448? Why is this shot in there? 450 and 451, why the different levels of saturation? 450 has the better composition I think, but why is it semi-black-and-white?</p>

<p>Keep it up, and kudos for having the courage to ask for critiques.</p>

[danzel_c]

<p>Hey Left thanks again! i can definitely learn and improve my work from your comments. The guy in 130 was actually just a family member of the bride who was singing a song. The lady in black is the pastor. 448 is actually the bride's son and mother.</p>