WEDDING: Our first one!

[Russinating]

As some of you may know I run a wedding videography business and have been doing so for 7 years almost. In that time we've filmed over 200 weddings so we know them pretty well!

Whilst we do quite a lot of commercial photography work we've never done a wedding, mainly because we get recommended by a lot of photographers. However we thought we were at the right time, place, experience and skillset to branch out, and so shot our first wedding as photographers in Feb this year under a different name. Was a weird feeling!

The couple were lovely but it was a difficult day; rainy and windy so all the group shots were indoors. We did get 5 minutes (literally 5) with the couple outside and in that time I think we did pretty well!

We've learnt quite a lot having worked with over 100 different photographers and we tried to get a good mix of set shots and candids whilst not being obtrusive, nor did we want to take the couple away from their guests for long (even if we could have).

Anyway, enough talk! And apologies for the mass images - still new to this whittling down malarkey! All C&C welcome.

 

[mattyg]

I'm certainly no expert..hey I'm barely a beginner. But there are a few shots that i would clone out some distracting elements

No5 part of the hat covers part of the guys ear in the background


The hedge arch
There is someone over the brides shoulder in the background

Id also maybe crop the light on the RHS of the last one



I'm sure the more experienced guys will come on and tell me I'm sooo wrong and to shut up. Afterall I'm still learning.


I enjoyed them though just being a bit critical.

 

[Hyburnate]

Nice job I think a few are a little bright/over exposed but that's just me

 

[James J]

I'd be happy with those shots if I'd have taken them, baring the odd one. I like the way that most of the shots are completely natural in terms of body language, like you'd simply faded away into the background as another guest instead of having the couple and everyone else posing for you. The flash work on the evening is also very high quality and diffused very well.

 

[danoliver1]

Nice pics, bit too much vinetting on a few for my tastes though.

 

[Russinating]

Really? That's your comment? Have you thought about how your comment might feed back to us were the bride and groom to see it? I can see why people don't bother or delete their wedding posts now.

 

[Stuff]

Great set, I'd be thrilled if that were my wedding

 

[Andy90]

Nice pictures.

However a few thoughts.

Firstly Russinating - you said "All C&C Welcome" in your OP. Danoliver1 gave you some feedback that there was a little too much vignetting for his taste. That's C&C - albeit not in depth. You then say "Really? That's your comment? Have you thought about how your comment might feed back to us were the bride and groom to see it? I can see why people don't bother or delete their wedding posts now"

So either you want C&C or you don't?

Secondly - lose the watermark - it took 2 seconds to find your commercial site - rules are rules as regards promotion of businesses on these forums.

 

[Hyburnate]

Nice pictures.

However a few thoughts.

Firstly Russinating - you said "All C&C Welcome" in your OP. Danoliver1 gave you some feedback that there was a little too much vignetting for his taste. That's C&C - albeit not in depth. You then say "Really? That's your comment? Have you thought about how your comment might feed back to us were the bride and groom to see it? I can see why people don't bother or delete their wedding posts now"

So either you want C&C or you don't?

Secondly - lose the watermark - it took 2 seconds to find your commercial site - rules are rules as regards promotion of businesses on these forums.

His watermark is fine You just can't have the domain etc.

 

[Andy90]

His watermark is fine You just can't have the domain etc.

Ok - I stand corrected - seems odd that you can come in and say "as you know I run business X", have a watermark that is easily googled and not be self promoting a business yet others get hammered.

Does it also include links in a signature as well?

 

[Hyburnate]

Ok - I stand corrected - seems odd that you can come in and say "as you know I run business X", have a watermark that is easily googled and not be self promoting a business and yet others get hammered.

Does it also include links in a signature as well?

I'm not sure, because photo watermarks have a different set of rules

 

[jaybee]

OP posts photos for critique and then cries when someone offers a very tame and constructive piece of criticism? Okaay.

 

[ElDude]

As I've mentioned on other people's stuff, I don't like the washed out/bleached/over exposed look processing style so I can't really comment other than that, but the more architectural shots are really nice. The lines flowing through the images on those work really well, compositionally. The last shot looks odd though, it seems like it's had HDR or tone mapping done on it and looks artificial somehow.

Also the 64 of 482 (bride in lobby) is a nice shot but really spoiled by over exposure/processing.

 

[On Holiday]

I believe post 6 was in response to danoliver1s post which contained a "mole gif" and probably some other comment. Before you all start jumping on his back

 

[King Damager]

One or two I'd probably cut out of the set, BUT, overall, I'd be happy with that.

kd

 

[James J]

As I've mentioned on other people's stuff, I don't like the washed out/bleached/over exposed look processing style so I can't really comment other than that, but the more architectural shots are really nice. The lines flowing through the images on those work really well, compositionally. The last shot looks odd though, it seems like it's had HDR or tone mapping done on it and looks artificial somehow.

Also the 64 of 482 (bride in lobby) is a nice shot but really spoiled by over exposure/processing.

Doesn't look bleached at all on these. Does have the look of being "shot to the right" in terms of exposure compensation though", but thats normal with wedding togs it seems.

 

[ElDude]

No, I was piling all my processing dislikes into one comment These aren't bleached, just the overexposed look or washed out that I don't like. I realise it's a style a lot use at the moment, but personally I don't see why people like it due to it removing detail from the images. As I say, it's all personal taste but to me it seems like a lot of photographers are copying each other for the sake of having that style, rather than using their own. Coincidentally, a friend of mine just posted some shots of her wedding a while ago as she's selling her wedding dress, and they look like this trend/style, but with more contrast.

I prefer the way Ray does his, with a more contrasty look and use of light. Sometimes when the washed out look is used incorrectly it just looks like a light leak on a film shot, and it baffles me why people like it.

 

[Cuchulain]

I'm no professional but as an outsider a lot of the photos are over-exposed, an awful lot of detail has no punch, especially peoples faces.

This one for example:

The dominant feature in that photo is the window and the glare from it rather than the bride & groom.

 

[juno_first]

Brings back memories, I used to assist a wedding photographer 20 years ago. Holding the reflector & taking the odd shot. On medium format Bronicas, where we'd get through only a few rolls of film & a lot less shots than these days with spray & prey digital. Wedding photos seem to be way more candid these days.

Generally, what I noticed & I'm no expert:
faces over bright (is your monitor calibrated?)
wedding dress burnt out lacking detail
a cross curve colour cast with wedding dress as reddish face or red carpet resulted in extra blue to compensate which made the dress a little blue
trying to maintain a constant wedding dress colour throughout the shoot
indoor shots noticeably warmer than outdoors
composition of 4th shot is juxtaposed
composition not formal enough or background is distracting
some vignetting
cracking dance floor shots
would a guest with a good camera have been able take most of these shots?

I've been out the game for a long time, but is this candid way how weddings are shot these days?
No disrespect & please don't be off put, as I'm no expert. Its just what I noticed & maybe some bits will help.

 

[danoliver1]

My first post was a funny gif(to me anyway) it may have caused offence so i deleted it.