creisinger
TPF Noob!
- Joined
- Oct 19, 2009
- Messages
- 470
- Reaction score
- 2
- Location
- Miami
- Website
- www.stockphoto-images.com
- Can others edit my Photos
- Photos NOT OK to edit
Rachel, I'm sure you had a great wedding and you two seem to be a very happy couple but...
I hope you didn't pay that photographer any money for those shots?
This:
http://i812.photobucket.com/albums/zz47/Ffirecracker68/DPP_0137-1_filtered_filteredcopy.jpg
is the first image in the gallery, which you explained is "unedited" from the photographer. This is not just soft, it's out of focus. He applied a post processing soft filter to distract from the fact that the image is not sharp.
If the photographer did use a somewhat "professional" D-SLR which most likely has more than 6 MP this re-sized image you posted should be even crisp if the original is soft. Downsizing a soft image from 6 MP to like 600 pixels width gives you a good nice crisp look (if you know what you're doing).
Soft filter can do lovely things but judging by the lighting of the two of you which appears to be the sun nailing you guys from the right, almost putting you into darkness while your husband's right half of the face is pretty blown out.
As for the colors or "looks" of the other images that were taken with different cameras - that would be a "normal" thing. Every consumer camera shows different color reproduction especially visible on skin tones. The whole feel of an image is also determined a lot by the sensor type, size, make and quality of the optics, compression, post-processing etc. So there are far too many variables to make those images look "the same".
I really don't want to sound mean in any way but I wouldn't get hired for a job if a potential client would see a shot like this one in my portfolio.
To remotely illustrate I have a shot here that is already awfully soft - but when you downsize it - it should look a whole lot better. Also shot outdoors.
I hope you didn't pay that photographer any money for those shots?
This:
http://i812.photobucket.com/albums/zz47/Ffirecracker68/DPP_0137-1_filtered_filteredcopy.jpg
is the first image in the gallery, which you explained is "unedited" from the photographer. This is not just soft, it's out of focus. He applied a post processing soft filter to distract from the fact that the image is not sharp.
If the photographer did use a somewhat "professional" D-SLR which most likely has more than 6 MP this re-sized image you posted should be even crisp if the original is soft. Downsizing a soft image from 6 MP to like 600 pixels width gives you a good nice crisp look (if you know what you're doing).
Soft filter can do lovely things but judging by the lighting of the two of you which appears to be the sun nailing you guys from the right, almost putting you into darkness while your husband's right half of the face is pretty blown out.
As for the colors or "looks" of the other images that were taken with different cameras - that would be a "normal" thing. Every consumer camera shows different color reproduction especially visible on skin tones. The whole feel of an image is also determined a lot by the sensor type, size, make and quality of the optics, compression, post-processing etc. So there are far too many variables to make those images look "the same".
I really don't want to sound mean in any way but I wouldn't get hired for a job if a potential client would see a shot like this one in my portfolio.
To remotely illustrate I have a shot here that is already awfully soft - but when you downsize it - it should look a whole lot better. Also shot outdoors.
Last edited: