Kathy's Bridals!

twocolor

No longer a newbie, moving up!
Joined
Feb 26, 2008
Messages
1,044
Reaction score
227
Location
Utah
Website
www.twocolorphotography.com
Can others edit my Photos
Photos NOT OK to edit
Kathy's bridals. Some taken at a mountain resort location, and one taken on hole 5 at the same resort's golf course! (had to wait until all the golfers had played through!)

1.
2715131763_67e078dcf7.jpg


2.
2715131569_0ce0ecdcef.jpg


3.
Here's the golf course shot!
2715945460_f1eb150749.jpg


4.
2715945224_b9fa575aae.jpg


5.
2715130761_807c04872c.jpg


6.
2715130565_b3bde87ece.jpg


7.
2715130339_d61c3eb67c.jpg


8.
2715130101_42669d43d3.jpg


9.
2715129835_0c74cf8427.jpg


I'm up for any C&C!
 
C&C per req:

1. Love the pose and expression, but at least 2/3 stop over-exposed; her skin tones are very washed out.

2, 3, 4. Again good pose and composition, but over-exposed, with almost no detail visibile in the dress. Not fond of the angle, but that's a personal things.

5. This is a great pose, perfect exposure, but I'm seeing a green caste to her skin; may just be my monitor however.

6. Very nice.

7. Seems a little over-processed; too-high contrast & saturation?

8, 9. As per 2,3, and 4. Great poses, but the lost detail in the dress really bothers me. I do think 8 might benefit from a tighter crop as well.

Just my $00.02 worth - your milage may vary.

~John
 
Tirediron,

Thanks for the constructive critique! #1 and #7 have both been processed for that exact look. I was going for an extreme almost glow on #1, and #7 was more just playing around. I figured since you couldn't actually see the bride on #7, I could get away with some different post processing on it. (Don't worry, on both of these I kept the original and processed them normally just in case they weren't the bride's cup of tea)

I actually set up #8 for a loose crop. I do have more of that shot with tighter crops. I was going for WOW with the contrast from the green trees and the white dress.

So, here's the forever question. If I meter for the dress, her face and the background is WAY too dark. But, if I meter for her face, I get the tones I want in the background and her face but lose the dress detail. What is the way around this?
 
So, here's the forever question. If I meter for the dress, her face and the background is WAY too dark. But, if I meter for her face, I get the tones I want in the background and her face but lose the dress detail. What is the way around this?

The "rule" (Guideline) with digital photography is to expose for the highlights and process for the shadow. My recommendation would be to make sure that you have a good incident meter, and take your readings at her dress, and let the shadows fall where they may. Given the nature of wedding photography (There's no going back - hey, when I mess up a shot of a tree, it doesn't complain! ;) ) I would always, always, always bracket every stop by either 1/3 or 1/2 on each side. Yes, you'll chew threw a little more memory, but you'll have a lot more to work with, and, if you shoot from a tripod, you might be able to come up with some nice HDRs.
 
I've never seen HDR in wedding photography. I can imagine, though, given the right location you could get some STUNNING images.

But, yeah, that makes a lot of sense. I bracket for landscapes, never thought about metering for the dress and then bracketing for more tonal range everywhere else on portraiture, Thanks!
 
Hi TwoColor,
I'm really liking the composition on #3 and #7. I'm liking the funky saturated look of #7, but I wonder what it might look like if you erased back the bride a little.
It's already been mentioned, but I think overall the biggest concern for me is the blow out of her white dress in all of these. (It's so hard to photograph wedding dresses!)
But, I do what Tirediron suggested. I always underexpose so that the dress still has detail and then in PS I work in layers and get the face and environment back to where I want it and erase back the dress if needed.
 

Most reactions

Back
Top