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

[Brinr]

Timor ol Pal! I challenge thee, grace us with some of your photography that we may be awe-struck and that we finally understand these images of which you speak!

 

[Majeed Badizadegan]

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.

Oh, so every engagement you see needs to be a groundbreaking revelation to photography? Even if the photos are technically sound, they aren't adequate for your ambiguous standards of what is imaginative and what is a bore?

What's not pretty about the settings chosen here? The beautiful tree, the golden dusk sunset colors, the open wheat fields? All golden standards for engagement photos. Nothing out of the normal here.

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".

Perhaps not everyone is as photogenic as you'd like them to be. I read both of their non-verbals as very calm and in-love, exactly what you want to convey in engagement photos. There are plenty of shots here that show this romance that you say is missing.

And no, James, I don't do photography for money so I have plenty of time to recognize soulless HQ pics.

I'm not going to question your credibility. I am going to say you're extremely harsh on a much-better-than-average set. If you have a better engagement set you've shot, lead by example. Otherwise, you're just making a lot of noise.

 

[timor]

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.

I am not angry and where I am nasty ? I am saying nothing about the people in the pictures, all I am saying is that the photographer didn't display much of an initiative or imagination and the pictures, like for professional work, are weak.
Manahim, sorry for my spelling, feel free to correct me every time. It's a work in progress.

 

[timor]

Oh, so every engagement you see needs to be a groundbreaking revelation to photography?

For the people photographer is working for - yes, they should get much better, then average p&s shots.

 

[unpopular]

^^ that is a ridiculous exaggeration.

 

[Majeed Badizadegan]

Oh, so every engagement you see needs to be a groundbreaking revelation to photography?

For the people photographer is working for - yes, they should get much better, then average p&s shots.

Wow, now you're just being unreasonable. Please go out and reproduce a set like this with any point and shoot. I dare you to try.

 

[timor]

^^ that is a ridiculous exaggeration.

I don't know, I just typed in Google "engagement photography" (images) and I see a bunch of very romantic, sweet and very personal photos shot with imagination.
Then it is once in a life, (well, here I might be wrong) so why not to exaggerate a bit.

 

[unpopular]

I realize that my DSLR isn't close to high end, but I'm pretty sure it doesn't have a 'romantic, sweet and very personal' button.

Maybe this is a pro feature.

 

[timor]

I realize that my DSLR isn't close to high end, but I'm pretty sure it doesn't have a 'romantic, sweet and very personal' button.

Maybe this is a pro feature.

Well, upgrade. I am pretty sure I read somewhere that D800 has incredible ability to think for the photographer.

 

[Derrel]

Nothing more cool then being an ass on the internet.

I think that should have read, "There is nothing cooler than being an ass on the internet."

 

[unpopular]

<<<<<<<<<< ass on the internet.

 

[timor]

<<<<<<<<<< ass on the internet.

I've got to have your avatar then.

 

[TheoGraphics]

Wow, this thread blew up! Thanks for your comments, everyone.

To address a few:

Timor:

To me, photography is subjective. The reason that photography exists is because someone wanted to be able to capture a moment or scene so that they could have a physical representation of a feeling or a memory. In my mind, memories are not always perfectly sharp or "properly exposed" (as it has been called in this thread), which is why my photography tends to change based upon the subjects, mood or time of day. As the sun set on this engagement set, surrounding the couple in a soft, dreamy pink light, I strove to create with my camera what I saw with both my eyes and in my head. It may not be professional-grade photography suited to your more conservative tastes, but I, and the couple, think they turned out beautifully.

In my humble opinion, to pigeonhole photography into a specific set of guidelines as you have listed here not only limits what photography CAN be, but also limits yourself as a photographer. I am perfectly capable of the shots you speak of as true photography, and you can have a look at the links in my signature or my numerous threads on TPF if you'd like proof. I looked for examples of your work here so that I could have a basis for your harsh critique, but was only to find one example of your work. I would like to see more of your portfolio, since you have such a strong opinion on what photography really is. I always respect critiques from others, but even more so if they have an impressive portfolio from which I can take and apply inspiration.

Lastly, could you please direct me towards said point-and-shoot? It would save me a TON of money on camera body & lens expenses, lol.

Thanks to Unpopular, JamesBJenkins, Scuba, Rotanimod and everyone else for offering support, meaningful criticism and thoughtful explanations in my absence this weekend. I was busy out swindling clients for their money on my "professional" shoots!

 

[mwild]

I think these shots are gorgeous! Some people need to remember that there isn't simply ONE style of photography to compare all work to, and clients will choose certain styles over others.

Photography is an artform, and with any artform, it becomes difficult to determine and judge what is "perfect" and what is not. Everyone has different taste and I personally think there is a lot of talent and technique behind these photos.

My favourite is #5 with the blades of foliage in the foreground. I generally am pulled more toward contrast in photos, but I quite enjoy the whimsical and dreamy look as well.

 

[manaheim]

As much as I've defended OP, photography is only subjective to a point. Under exposure, focus issues, etc are GENERALLY not artistic choices... They are mistakes (or excuses).

As is discussed here ad nauseum there are certain "guidelines" that are firmly rooted in how the human mind functions and reacts to things visual. These have been around and understood since at LEAST ancient Greece. You don't have to follow them all the time but you can't just blow them off either.