[PIC_THREAD] Weddings

Agree with Raymond I think. The Timpson sign in particular is quite distracting. Even if you just pull down the red vibrance a bit it might bring focus back into the b/g..

kd
 
AbbieJonmnm.jpg
 
Think it might be IQ (size of web, rather than IQ from camera), but how sharp was the dress there? Looks like slightly smaller aperture might have been nicer...

It's a fantastic shot though. Was that like a post-wedding shoot where they walked around town and stuff?

Also, another Oxford shoot?

kd
 
Pretty sharp, it's not really a shot to show the dress so don't really care about that, I'd rather blur out the people in the background. In the morning I shoot the dress in allot of detail anyway.
As for the shot, it was just after the ceremony of their wedding I shot yesterday. The ceremony was at the town hall, so basically the centre of Oxford.

AbbieJonmnm-2.jpg
 
_D3_3640.jpg


Excuse the text, normally I don't have this but these were for the b/g friends/fam social networks.
 
Nah, 12.8k (effective), was shooting at 2.8 so used a splash of flash but probably didn't need to.
'Pop' isn't really my style, I'm more of a low contrast fan personally, I find something about it a little nostalgic.

flowr-2.jpg
 
I think it works fine^^

5D3_3428-Edit.jpg


5D3_3433.jpg


5D3_3534.jpg


5D3_3960.jpg


I'm still finding myself using 2 styles of processing, "pop" and muted, I find for a certain room one works better than the other but I leave 2 versions where one is strictly used so b/g can pick what version they prefer. My presets are pretty much final now so it's a simple 3 second job to change upon request.
 
Last edited:
An Exception said:
Nah, 12.8k (effective), was shooting at 2.8 so used a splash of flash but probably didn't need to.
'Pop' isn't really my style, I'm more of a low contrast fan personally, I find something about it a little nostalgic.]
Click to expand...

I understand the feel you're going for and i like it. The shadow overcasting the great expression is what i mean though. Just lighten it up a bit.

In the second shot it's much better. No shadows across the face. Just enough to bring the viewers focus to her.
 
@mrk
When I started out with weddings I was torn between 'Pop' and 'Muted', I like both tbh. One thing I did want was a 'consistent' look though, so had to choose one or the other and my love for muted just won over.

The processing on No. 2 of your wedding dresses appeals the most to me, but the next post may say the opposite. I find it funny how we all have different taste.

Below is a couple of dress shots from yesterday.
flowr-4.jpg


flowr-5.jpg
 
Logsi said:
I understand the feel you're going for and i like it. The shadow overcasting the great expression is what i mean though. Just lighten it up a bit.

In the second shot it's much better. No shadows across the face. Just enough to bring the viewers focus to her.
Click to expand...

Ah ok, I see what you mean, the plain of her face is slightly darker.
Normally when someone mentions 'Pop' to me, it's to do with adding contrast and making sure the black's are black.
 
^ yup it's all down to the room/scene itself as it works well with those two above!
 
Yeah, didn't mean pop with contrast and vibrancy to the whole image but just the face as it's such a great capture! :)

Can imagine this style of editing on some egg shell paper.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom