First Engagement Session

[ChelsJanePhotography]

This Was my first engagement session! Please tell me what you think!

 

[412 Burgh]

Most of them would benefit from a fill flash.

 

[Light Guru]

Your water mark is WAY to big. So big in fact that its almost like you want your logo to be the subject of the photo instead of the people you are photographing.

I didnt look at them all closely but number 1 has some distracting shadows on the faces.

 

[cgipson1]

Beautiful couple! But Fll flash is badly needed... or at least good reflector use! Their faces are dappled in #1... not good!

And please calm down that watermark... lol!

 

[DiskoJoe]

Most of them would benefit from a fill flash.

My thoughts exactly. Dude is pretty red too. It happens with white folks but you want to minimize that. Framing could be a bit better in some too. You clipped his arm in that last few. Your water mark is very distracting and looks cheap to be honest. You need to have a vector image for a watermark so it can change with the photo size and not get the jagged edges.

 

[pixmedic1]

not a bad set overall, but they definitely could have benefited from some flash.
#1 is not a keeper in my opinion. It is underexposed, and the uneven shadows across the face are very distracting. It would have been a great shot with flash.
I like the idea behind #4, but I think they either should have both been looking at each other, or both looking at the camera.
in #3 and #4 I think I would have cropped a bit off the top, down to that white line (a road?) and cropped it out of the image.
I would tone down that watermark a bit. it is too big a presence in these photos.

 

[Robin_Usagani]

All the pics except #1, you can adjust the exposure higher. I dont think flash is needed.

 

[Heitz]

are you doing some smoothing? i.e., turning 'clarity' down in LR? #5 & 6 seem to have something going on like that. I think you missed focus in #4. Also fill flash. I do really like your settings, however.

 

[ktan7]

They are all very dark. You'll need either a flash or an assistant holding a reflector to bounce back the light onto their faces.

 

[JustJazzie]

What a great looking couple!
Here is what I would have changed:
On the last two, I probably would have scooted them down a foot or two if it was an option. I find the wooden board sticking out from the others distracting.
On the second one with the pretty trees, I would have opted for a shallower depth of field.
Scrap number one, their faces are too dark and there are too many shadows.

 

[ChelsJanePhotography]

new watermark design! What do you think?!

 

[412 Burgh]

what do butterflies and flowers have to do with your photography?

 

[Sw1tchFX]

Looks like more time has been spent on the watermark than the photos..

 

[Vtec44]

Skin tone looks a bit off to me.
The photographs all look under exposed on my calibrated monitor.
The poses look repetitive and staged/unatural.
The background is busy, especially in #1.
Some of these were shot at unnecessarily small aperture. I'm not sure what's the reason.

I like the redesigned logo.
The couple is very cute.

 

[Robin_Usagani]

Your water mark is WAY to big. So big in fact that its almost like you want your logo to be the subject of the photo instead of the people you are photographing.

And please calm down that watermark... lol!

Your water mark is very distracting and looks cheap to be honest. You need to have a vector image for a watermark so it can change with the photo size and not get the jagged edges.

I would tone down that watermark a bit. it is too big a presence in these photos.

new watermark design! What do you think?!

Give her a break. She was actually listening to the comments?