Wedding Critique of the Week 7/18/11

[picturesque]

<p>This week's image was taken by Duncan Holmes.<br /><br />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.<br /><strong></strong></p><div></div>

[bobcossar]

<p>I rather like this one...:) The little "Harry Potter" in the background would be better if he wasn't there. And I'm not keen on the big gray tombstoney thing dead center in the background either...and I suppose I do wonder why the groom has the flowers.....and I'd have posed the bride a wee bit higher in the image if possible.....</p>

<p>But, for all that, I <strong>do</strong> like the picture....the general feel is lovely....:) Robert</p>

[duncan_holmes2]

<p>This is one of those capture the moment things, just after a kiss. I'd had the couple kissing over the top of an overgrown sundial and it wasn't quite working, then their son peeked in at the background and I played with that. he's more of a pirate fan than harry Potter though!<br>

With the benefit of hindsight I agree about the other points raised re the composition ie. the flowers, (though anywhere else we tried they fell off). The second sundial in the background could be edited out I supose. I couldn't shoot from the other side due to even more invasive distractions.</p>

<p> </p>

[ruslan]

<p>The photo is not bad, but I would like to see better skin rendition and better lens work - reacher colors, better contrast, sharper. (Like those taken with expensive glass properly). I would rise them and move to the left a little - <em>by 5 mm</em> for this size. As for the photo - it can take its place in the couple's album, for sure. </p>

[MichaelChang]

<p>How about a crop to remove some of the distractions? </p><div></div>

[MichaelChang]

<p>It would be taking a chance, but focusing on the little boy might have made a killer shot. </p>

[duncan_holmes2]

<p>I did try that, but the distance was not quite right to get a decent amount of focus on the couple and it left them a bit too spludgy</p>

<p>Ruslan, can youlet me know what you mean by skin rendition? Are you talking about the lighting of the skin or the colour?</p>

[StuartMoxham]

<p>Maybe something like this.</p><div></div>