sutan.siagian

<p>Hi,<br>

I'm still use film along with digital. I understand that each method has their own advantage. Digital is so convinient, film has 'soul' (IMHO). The feeling of waiting the actual image after processing is so thrilling.<br>

In my wedding gigs, digital is used for documentary purpose, where responses is critical. No brides will ever tolerate to lose any single moment of their ceremony. Sometimes they dont really care whether its technically correct or not. One person is responsible to it. Then, the other is person (which is me) is pulling my 35mm camera and take some artistic work. Something that add 'spices' to the overall wedding album.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Agree with William.. The girl should not be included in this photo.<br>

However, this is a good wedding candid. I believe the client will take it as one good 'funny' memory in their album. It not just an ordinary 'romantic pose' wedding picture, but leaves some story to tell..<br>

50mm with 1/30? Looks like you have good breathing technique huh.. LOLS.. :)</p>

<p>Hi,<br>

My comments are :<br>

1. I prefer the bride to be in focus, the chance BG will take this shot will be increased.<br>

2. Since the one who hold the flower is not the Groom, or family, I think you can take him out of this photo, Bob Bernardo and John Deerfield shown it well on their comment.<br>

3. Are u using 1.4? My suggestion is not to use it in this documentary shots. Better 2.8 or more. If the light is not good enough, put the flash on to be safe.<br>

Regards</p>

<p> </p>

<p>The idea is unique. Understand that the photographer would like to put the shadow as POI. In this case I prefer the first image. Since you are playing with shadows, it means you are playing with light. Then, you should avoid any color or object that distracting the viewer from POI.<br>

<br />The blue color on the lamp and the door is moving the eyes from POI which is the bride and the her shadows.<br>

<br />I would prefer a BW version on this photo, and added a bit contrast.</p>

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

<p><strong><em>David :</em></strong><br>

<strong><em>"a young shooter might be inspired by this image and decide to shoot their next processional sans flash which would likely be a risky approach"</em></strong><br>

<em>Agreed.. Thats why a 2nd shooter w flash is a leverage.</em><br>

<strong>Mark</strong><br>

<strong><em>My only suggestion would be to rotate the camera ever so slightly to the left; in so doing you would leave more room beside the girl's outstretched hand, include more of the onlookers faces (camera left) and crop out the slightly distracting flowers behind the bridesmaid's head.</em></strong><br>

<em>Yes they are quite annoying for me, I recall i didnt see them on my viewfinder.Perhaps its because FM2's viewfinder only cover about 90% of the actual image.</em><br>

<strong><em>Ron:</em></strong><br>

<strong><em>First, I notice that one of the pink-dressed flower-holding ladies is in focus and the other is not--why should one be in and the other out-of-focus? They're similarly-dressed, fulfilling similar roles, and they're both watching the girls (the main focal interest).</em></strong><br>

<em>As per Williams say with 50mm non flash shoot, ISO200 and av60, having the second BM to be focused is impossible. The other thing, It is by intention to focus the shoot to the flower girl, If I extend the DOF (using flash maybe), There will be to many objects distracting POI.</em><br>

<strong><em>Second, by stepping left and panning right, you could've eliminated the two partial heads and gotten a better vantage point--</em></strong><br>

<em>Agree..</em><br>

<em><strong>Gene:</strong></em><br>

<strong><em>I</em></strong><strong><em>s this a crop or is there nothing left on that side? There seems to be a little more room on the right, which adds nothing, that can be eliminated so you could move it to the left to provide a little more balance</em></strong><br>

<em>No cropping on the post. Left side is BG and the audiences.. I prefer not include them on the shot.. </em><br>

<em>@ William.. thanks for explaining it technically..</em><br>

<em></em><br>

<strong><em></em></strong></p>

<p>In response to William's comment:<br>

Luck involved regarding the direction of the Girls' faces?: Agreed... <em>me too.. :)</em><br>

This being one from a sequence within series of shots specifically of these two Girls?: <em>I took 3 shots on the girls and satisfied with 2 shots. I will attached the other shots that I am satisfied with</em><br>

.. Without flash.. My guess is it was the Photographer’s choice. <em>Yes.. I would prefer to have good AL all the time, but its not always the case, so I think a survey on the venue is really important before the wedding.</em><br>

My view is: I love leverage and I am / was in business. In business leverage is very important; being safe and sure is very important; having all the bases covered is very important; because one only gets “one go” at the Wedding Photos.<br>

<em>Agree.. thats why I would not dare shooting the wedding alone.. Good luck not always happen all the time..</em><br>

From the commentary recently supplied by the Photographer, <strong><em>as much as there was luck there was precise premeditation also. </em></strong><br>

<em>premeditation... If i did it to much, would it not reduce my creativity?</em><br>

<em></em><br>

<em></em></p><div></div>

<p>@ David<br>

I agree with you, if i was the only photographers in this wedding a flash will be a mandatory. Moreover, I would not dare using 35mm camera.<br>

In this case I am the photographer who simply responsible to the artistic shot of the wedding. There is another photographer to capture the processional minute by minute and to get the formal shot.</p>

<p>I would like to say thanks for all the flattering comments.. I really did not expecting such comments.. since I am relatively new into the photography. Moreover I would also like to thanks to all the critiques and explanation why this photo being good or bad...<br>

<em><strong>"You turned a normally dangerous image into a work of art"...</strong> ah.. thats to much for me..</em><br>

I was inspired by Jeff Ascough regarding his style in available light. I like to use available light as much as possible since IMO, the photo will a bit tell the condition of the wedding. I was lucky, the quality of light in this wedding was superb. Even shooting using PS camera looks nice. Perhaps its something that all photographers would like to have..<br>

I also learn from the a photo critique few weeks ago from William W (thanks a lot..) where he emphasize the importance of technical preparation before the shoots.. Jeff Ascoguh in his interview also said it. On my previous job I always walking around 'chasing' the objects, and sucess percentage is very low, since i using a full manual analog camera, so i always miss the moment.<br>

This time I tried to be a 'sniper', I think about the composition, choose my position, adjust my setting, wait the moment to come and snap.. Well of course not many shots I took, and perhaps I also lose a bit of the moment, but I can make sure this is the composition that i really want to get (consider I only have 36 shot to get before film changing).<br>

About the tilting.. I did it by intention. The purpose is to nail the flower girl to the bottom left of the photo.. ( a little bit experiment i think ;) )<br>

Once more thanks for all the critique.. Cant wait for another snap :)</p>

<p> </p>

<p>I shot using Nikon FM2 50mm/1.4 f4.0 1/60 kodak colorplus iso 200</p>

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