Wedding Photo Critique Please

[samuel_young]

<p>Hello and thankyou for taking the time to have a look at my post. </p>

<p>I joined this page a couple of years ago and absolutely love pouring over the pages and photographs that can be found here. <br>

<br />A little about me, I am a police officer and photography is purely a hobby. I do not have crazy illusions of thinking I can be a wedding photographer simply due to having a couple of L lenses and a 5dii. I love photography and I get heaps of enjoyment from taking pictures no matter what the occasion. <br>

In the past 6-12 months I have been asked by a few friends to snap photographs at their weddings. I am quick to accept their request and always reinforce the fact that I am no pro and what they get is what they get. . . The cost to them - completely proportional - Free. Being all good mates and only small, not "over the top " weddings, they were completely fine with that idea. <br>

<br />Anyway, enough rambling on. I would appreciate any criticism, advice, and direction in relation to two particular weddings that I photographed. <br>

<a href="https://skydrive.live.com/?cid=4891A727320DF3AB#cid=4891A727320DF3AB&id=4891A727320DF3AB!338">Nathan + Tanya</a><br>

<a href="https://skydrive.live.com/?cid=4891A727320DF3AB#cid=4891A727320DF3AB&id=4891A727320DF3AB!107">Aaron + Sarah</a><br>

Nathan + Tanya: Was shot using a 450D. . . The couple had a pro photographer on the day and I was purely video'ing their day however I just couldn't resist snapping plenty of shots throughout the day seeing as I had my camera with me.</p>

<p>Aaron + Sarah: Shot with my 5dii. Also had a 70-200 2.8 IS II , 17-40mm L lens, and a 50mm 1.4. I was the only photographer for the day. It was a tiny wedding at the bride's parent's farm. Very few places with nice backgrounds but I did my best to work with what we had. </p>

<p>Any comments - positive and negative - would be greatly appreciated!</p>

[stephen_mcpherson]

<p>Samuel, you should be proud of your efforts for Nathan and Tanya. While I did not give all your shots a close look, the one thing that did stand out for me were the shots taken on and near the railway tracks. The standout thing for me was that some of the shots would have been better served with a deeper depth of field - putting all the groomsmen in focus. The other issue I had was with the poses on the tracks - given that the light source was from camera left perhaps a different set of poses would have taken better advantage of the light. I really liked several of your shots of the bride and groom after the ceremony, especially the one of them sitting on the grass with the sun light filtering through the trees - a keeper for sure! Good shooting!<br>

Steve</p>

[green_photog]

<p>Overall a good effrt. Just wanted to point out that some of the photos, like the following two, have too much distortion. You should keep your distance from the subject with a medium FL lens. The second shot was done at 17mm which will inevitably introduce distortion especially if you are close to the subjects.</p>

<p><a href="https://skydrive.live.com/?cid=4891A727320DF3AB&id=4891A727320DF3AB%21107#cid=4891A727320DF3AB&id=4891A727320DF3AB%21179">https://skydrive.live.com/?cid=4891A727320DF3AB&id=4891A727320DF3AB%21107#cid=4891A727320DF3AB&id=4891A727320DF3AB%21179</a></p>

<p><a href="https://skydrive.live.com/?cid=4891A727320DF3AB&id=4891A727320DF3AB%21107#cid=4891A727320DF3AB&id=4891A727320DF3AB%21173">https://skydrive.live.com/?cid=4891A727320DF3AB&id=4891A727320DF3AB%21107#cid=4891A727320DF3AB&id=4891A727320DF3AB%21173</a></p>

[Mattman944]

<p>Yes, a good effort. Besides what was already mentioned, in some of the shots you are shooting down on your subjects. When shooting a full length portrait, especially if you are taller than your subjects, you may need to bend or squat a little to keep your camera level. Unless you are trying for a special effect, it is best to keep the camera level left/right and up/down. Then the doors and room corners won't be angled.</p>

[samuel_young]

<p>Thanks Matthew, I'm 6'2 and was definitely shooting down with that couple. Something to keep in mind.<br>

Thanks</p>

[memex]

<p>For a police officer you're really good :) ...hihih that's just a joke....We'll I can definitely see that thay had a pro photographer on Tanya and Nathan's wedding...why you ask...well you can see it from the first 3 pics that you were much more relaxed while shooting and the results are much better than on Sarah and Aaron's wedding. I don know why you shot all these portraits on 20-30mm using f16....I suppose the reason was not to miss something or not to have some1 blured... On your next free wedding I would like you to go 1 step further, except for the formals try to be more documentary oriented. Put your 50mm lens open lens up to f 2.2 or 2.5 and try to steal some private moments without having people allways look at you while shooting. That way you can capture some real emotions come from the heart without people noticeing you shooting...<br />So now, I gave you advice can you fix some parking tickets? just a joke :)<br />Best regards from beautiful Croatia :)</p>

[gregoryl]

<p>Hello Samuel<br>

Weddings are hard. I did four back in the days of film and that was enough for me, too much stress. At least now you can check to see if the flash was firing properly, exposure was OK, the eyes were open etc etc etc. If you enjoy doing it and it's for free you aren't likely to get flak. On Aaron and Sarah's wedding you have a variety of shots. There are lots of sources for poses, ideas and such depending how much you get into it. For a small wedding like this you got some nice moments. As noted the wide angle distortion is being aggravated by your being tall and pointing the lens downwards. Crouching down will help with some of it and require less work in pp to correct it. There is so much going on at weddings and people are distracted and details are often noticed only after the fact when things calm down. One thing I noticed was the cuffs on the grooms shirt sticking out which I find very distracting. Nit picking. Like any photo some things will bother some people and not others. Photographing people is hard as most people don't like how they look in photos, multiply it by dozens and it's hard to get it to come out to everyone's satisfaction. In the digital age some things can be corrected or mitigated in pp if you have the time and inclination. A few key shots might be worth the extra time and effort. The bride with the parents is one. I did a quick edit to show what I mean. I tried to correct the distortion, reduced the flash shadows, and suggested a tighter crop. Offer it for your consideration, just my 2 cents.<br>

Regards<br>

Greg</p><div></div>

[samuel_young]

<p>Thanks Greg. I appreciate your response and for taking the time to edit that pic. I have learned alot from posting these albums here and hopefully I won't be making the same mistakes again.</p>

 

[gustavo_duenas1]

<p>On Nathan + Tanya <br>

I've liked the bride picture... great composition</p>

<p>Gus<br></p>

<br>

<p><strong><i> MODERATOR NOTE: Link to business's web page deleted.<br> Please do link to your business in your sign off.</i></strong></p>

[William Michael]

<p>I looked only at “Aaron and Sarah”, as this was shot exclusively by you.<br />The two main technical issues I’d suggest you address, are:</p>

<ol>

<li>(already mentioned) using a Wide Angle Lens at an High Camera Elevation is very dangerous as it creates: Foreshortening - (already described).</li>

<li>Use of Flash as Fill outdoors (<a href="https://public.dm1.livefilestore.com/y1p72iK7xXQUIpes38JAt10d3YERuf4KDOH3Pn4rohtNTUBaVV3HZjB54DbAmbEhSrqyYp_FcXtPbOXmH0IXk-sLw/Aaron%20%2B%20Sarah-215.jpg?psid=1">note as one example the Bridal Portraiture, set under the tree</a>)</li>

</ol>

<p>A bit about Flash as Fill, Outdoors:<br />The EXIF indicates Flash was fired, but there’s no evidence of Flash, to fill the faces: simply the Flash was not powerful enough to fill. The overriding factor in this shotting scenario is the EFFECTIVE WORKING DISTANCE of the Flash.<br />You pulled that particular shot: F/14 @ 1/200s @ ISO400, and it occurs to me, that areas of the sky are blown. Arguably the correct exposure for the background in that shot, would be something like:<br />F/16~F/20 @ 1/200s @ ISO400 ≡ F/8~F/10 @ 1/200s @ ISO100.<br />Assuming that you had a Flash Camera Mounted; and that image is a Full Frame Crop; and the man is about 6ft tall: then, with the 17 to 40/4 zoom set at FL = 29mm, your shooting distance was about 12ft (3.7m).<br />I note the EXIF confirms the Shooting Distance (SD) was recorded as SD = 3.72m.</p>

<p>Let’s say you were using a 580MkII Flash – that unit has a Guide Number (GN):<br />GN (ISO100 /FL @ 28mm) = 30(metres).<br />So, therefore: 30/8 = 3.75 (metres).<br />Therefore, even assuming the larger aperture, (F/8) will give the correct exposure to the Background Sky, you are just at or just over the limit of available power of your Flash to make any appreciable fill – simply the Flash Head is too far away from the Subjects, to be effective.<br />And this is certainly how it appears in that (and other) images: you <em><strong>always</strong></em> have to be aware of the SD when using Flash as Fill outdoors - you <strong><em>have</em></strong> to know the SD limits.</p>

<p>***</p>

<p>Also another point: I suggest you be careful about the Wedding Certificate Photograph.<br />Whilst I believe it is still OK to make an image of the Wedding Certificate issued by the Church (that’s the Document the Bride and Groom keep - the top document in your image), I understand it is still an offence to make copies of the official (Government) Wedding Register – (that’s the Book, which is underneath both documents, and the one page document which is partly obscured on the right hand side of the frame, but still revealing some details).<br />I’d advise that you to check the law regarding this: I do believe that action has been taken in the past, resulting in fines and the mandatory destruction of the images: this action was in respect of the “Register Extract” being photographed, as the frame, and thus revealing the whole page and document - so you might not be too worried about your image at that particular Wedding. But, as I noticed the particular photograph, then it was best to warn you.</p>

<p>***</p>

<p>The last shots, with the setting sun are good. </p>

<p>WW</p>