Engagement Set at Brazos Bend Park, Texas. Ridiculous natural light!

[ronlane]

Looked again, yep pretty sure that it is photography that the OP posted. BTW, what happened you "I'm out of here"?

 

[unpopular]

My thoughts are that these appear flat, overexposed and could use some serious adjustment to the levels of contrast. The colors appear washed out and the lighting, to me, is not well done. But again, tell me I am wrong and show me why because I'd see this as a learning experience...

By very definition, 'flatness' is a lack of near absolute black and near absolute white. If you look at the histogram of the lowest contrast images, this isn't the case - at least in the color images. They are certainly not over exposed, as there is plenty of hilight detail and no clipping.

These images are "neutral contrast" and "high key". In today's attraction to overt and dramatic style, this isn't very popular. But really, it's more of a taste issue, than anything technically wrong.

One must ask, though, what would be gained by higher contrast and more dramatic light? You'd loose a sense of intimacy, they'd have a more commercial appearance - like a fashion shoot. But these are engagement photos. They aren't meant to be dramatic, intense or overt. They should be intimate, soft and personal. So I don't think adding drama would do much good.

 

[fotomumma09]

Beautiful set! I would be very happy with these if they were my engagement photos.

 

[timor]

It's not only "professional" it's also extremely good with excellent attention to shadow detail and natural color.

I take your word for it. Do you mean extremely based on capabilities of digital photography or abilities of using it by normal people ? I don't even have a beef with technical aspects of this "shoot", however I think the highlights went to the moon. I "have" problem with random, sometimes not pretty settings and, the big one, with totally unimaginative work of the photographer. I don't care, that I can see every single grass in the shadows, but if those are engagement photos, there should be some feel of romance. Instead the girl is smiling to camera in repetitive pose over the shoulder, the face of the man is clearly unwilling, stiff and photographer didn't do much to change this. Just let them walk around and do "something".
And yes James, I can see, she does not have a white wedding dress. No matter, wedding, engagement or party, all is an event photography, all the same pot. The difference is romance for engagement, glamour for wedding and fun for party. And no, James, I don't do photography for money so I have plenty of time to recognize soulless HQ pics.

 

[timor]

I'm willing to listen and learn here because I am not a pro and I have been wrong (or at least in the minority opinion) on too many occasions to feel superior to the opinions of others.

My thoughts are that these appear flat, overexposed and could use some serious adjustment to the levels of contrast. The colors appear washed out and the lighting, to me, is not well done. But again, tell me I am wrong and show me why because I'd see this as a learning experience...

Here you go man, same feelings here.

 

[unpopular]

Oh, IDK. I see a big brute of a man who clearly loves his fiancé, but may not always know how to show it. I see who he is, not how he *should* be. I see a traditional, meat and potatoes kind of guy.

If that's totally inaccurate, then it's a complete failure. If it's pretty spot on, then it's a huge success.

As far as "flatness" and "overexposed", that's just not technically correct. And I'm sorry you don't like the inland South Eastern Texas landscape.

 

[timor]

Oh, IDK. I see a big brute of a man who clearly loves his fiancé, but may not always know how to show it. I see who he is, not how he *should* be. I see a traditional, meat and potatoes kind of guy.

Is the task of the photographer to leave his clients with something different then just snapshots, something what in 20 years will bring smile and rekindle the feelings of that days. Is the task of the photographer to relax and make comfortable his subjects of the shoot. I know, it's not easy, I used to be a "social" photographer in school and I can tell you, that after years only the "crazy" pictures survived, most of the rest, stiffly posed, unemotional, indifferent pics got lost. And yes, I think for many there is something to learn from shiny magazines . Not because pros have better equipment then D3000 with kit lens, but because beside the technicality of the camera they study also composition, ways of expression of emotions and use it at work.

 

[unpopular]

A good photographer documents the subject, not an idealized version of what the subject "ought" to be. If this guy were a gregarious teddybear, I'm willing to agree with you.

But not everyone is that person.

I really don't see a lot of tension or discomfort in the subject.

 

[timor]

A good photographer documents the subject, not an idealized version of what the subject "ought" to be.

Love is idealistic. And the subjects "ought" to be in one. Show me it.

 

[jwbryson1]

As far as "flatness" and "overexposed", that's just not technically correct. And I'm sorry you don't like the inland South Eastern Texas landscape.

These are not properly exposed, sorry, and I grew up and lived in South Texas for 30+ years and still consider it my "home country" even though I am currently living abroad in Washington DC.

 

[jwbryson1]

I could be wrong, but has that groom to be ever "experimented" with weights?

 

[unpopular]

The idea of "proper exposure" is a myth propagated by people who don't know what exposure is.

 

[Tee]

Theo- I'm sure the couple will be thrilled with your work. Your processing style is very popular and "in". Nice natural light.

With regards to commenting on the people being photographed- it's a golden rule to never bash on the model/ people themselves. It's just not cool. Or maybe it's just my golden rule. Either way, the subjects don't deserve criticism based on their looks.

 

[manaheim]

Oh, IDK. I see a big brute of a man who clearly loves his fiancé, but may not always know how to show it. I see who he is, not how he *should* be. I see a traditional, meat and potatoes kind of guy.

Is the task of the photographer to leave his clients with something different then just snapshots, something what in 20 years will bring smile and rekindle the feelings of that days. Is the task of the photographer to relax and make comfortable his subjects of the shoot. I know, it's not easy, I used to be a "social" photographer in school and I can tell you, that after years only the "crazy" pictures survived, most of the rest, stiffly posed, unemotional, indifferent pics got lost. And yes, I think for many there is something to learn from shiny magazines . Not because pros have better equipment then D3000 with kit lens, but because beside the technicality of the camera they study also composition, ways of expression of emotions and use it at work.

With every post by you, I am more and more convinced that you are really and truly qualified to judge other people's photos...

...and spelling...

...and reading for comprehension...

...and life choices...

...and... oh... just about everything.

To the OP- I saw some in there I loved. A few odd poses here and there and a couple I might have passed on, but as a set they looked pretty nice. Too many to comment on individually.

 

[Scuba]

Timor are you just an angry person or what? It is one thing to not like something and another to just be a nasty about it. Give some constructive comments if you have something to say.

I think this is a good set overall. I agree a few could use some fill flash and that the guy is kinda boring. However, just because I see him as emotionless or boring has nothing to do with it as I am not the client and I also don't know the person. Some people have different personalities and don't express them visually. The girl looks very happy and I see the emotions between them in the images. The boot shot is pretty weird to me though.