My First Wedding Shoot

sactown024 · Oct 9, 2012

Hey everyone I have been off the forum for a long time and just thought I would come back to share my first wedding. I would like to point out to anyone thinking about doing this, its a lot of work! I was sweating my arse off, almost passed out from hunger but the expeirence was well worth it and I would absolutley so it again. Here are a few shots, I wish I took more portrait instead of all landscapes but I guess those are the things you learn. Almost every shot was done with a Nifty Fifty (50mm 1.8), my next wedding or any shoot for that matter I will be renting a L lens just to try it out and to have a better focal range.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

MLeeK · Oct 9, 2012

For a first wedding you did a pretty good job.
The sharpness and clarity are not there for the nifty fifty. Is this because you haven't sharpened in raw processing properly?
Your white balance is all over the place-which also looks to be processing problems, more than camera. It's not all that easy to learn to see the consistent colors. You'll get there.
1&3 are killed by the tilt.
1 may even be a missed focus. I am just not getting why that one is so soft. It should be sharp. Your color isn't BAD on that one, but it's cooler and a bit to the greener, whereas the third one is pushed toward the warm side.
2 is a good use of dynamic/dramatic look to keep the ring shot from being boring, but definitely looks like missed focus on her ring.
3 isn't a photo of the groom and groomsman, one is getting pushed out of the photo with a huge negative space and no purpose on the other side. It may crop better in the 8x10 format, but I have a feeling it's just a toss. The groom has heavy shadows around the eyes.
4 I'm just going to skip because I don't see anything in it. If her shoes were peeking or something. As it is it just doesn't hold anything for me. THe exposure on it is great holding on to detail in the dress as well as most of his black pants.
5 It was nice of the minister to get her book in there for you. It really ruins the shot. Not a good choice of angles to shoot the most important shot of the wedding from. NEVER leave that shot to chance. The color is very nice and warm. Exposure is good. FOcus seems slightly short, but it could very well be that you use photobucket. Use flickr for uploading. Make sure you resize your images if you do not have a paid flickr account to under about 2000 pixels or flickr does it for you and it does change your image. Photobucket isn't color managed and it changes your images no matter what you do. I am pretty sure that if you look at the image on your computer compared to that in Photobucket they aren't the same.
6 is pushing the limits of warm. I am guessing that the moment held some special meaning for the bride, but as a shot without explanation it kind of flops for us. Probably great to the bride.
7 You've reverted back to the green/cool side of things and on this one it's a bit too green. Again the focus is softer than it should be and I am not sure why. It doesn't really look like missed focus that I can pick out. Maybe shutter too slow?
8's totally useless to an outside viewer. Perhaps it has meaning if it were explained. Backs are sometimes great subjects, but there has to be meaning derived from it. Focus is soft again, but I can't pinpoint the problem. At times I think the bouquet is sharp, then I think no... Then maybe it's the arm and the flat back of the train... I THINK it's short, but it could just be photobucket!

sactown024 · Oct 9, 2012

After typing this i did realize that some were shot with a 55-250mm at pretty far range, maybe this is why they are soft but mainly because I have not perfected focusing. Also I should mention all of these photos were uploaded to facebook at 960px and then uploaded again on photobucket so that may have a impact on the sharpness/focus, idk. thoughts?

I will work on the WB some more, thanks for pointing that out. Overall I am not super satisfied with the photos but you pointed out a lot of things I did not notice so thank you for that. After I got home and went through about 600 photos I did notice that i was using the angle tilt shot wayyy to much, same with landscape.

thanks

pixmedic · Oct 9, 2012

not a big fan of the tilt..especially in #3 where you have the woodshed at that odd angle..i would have cropped a little higher on that one where it looks like there is the top of a car in the bottom of the frame. the tilt in #1 makes them look like they are falling off of the bridge.
what are the white spots floating in #7? dust? the squinting in #6 killed that shot for me. Maybe shoot burst for one like that and try to catch her smiling with her eyes open. could have been a really nice candid shot.

sactown024 · Oct 9, 2012

yeah I think number 7 there is dust, I thought it was a cool effect which is why i chose to post that one but maybe it doesnt work....

def know for next time not to use the tilt method!

sactown024 · Oct 9, 2012

here is a link to one of the originals, let me know if the focus is better.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/v9gfyn42n7btho7/IMG_4909.jpg

Here is one for pixmedic without the sqinting

https://www.dropbox.com/s/j0q0kue616qrhe2/IMG_4883.jpg

and one without the dust

https://www.dropbox.com/s/kzx1glpad1afwne/IMG_4917.jpg

MLeeK · Oct 9, 2012

It is the 55-250, but you are one lucky SOB. That is shot at 1/30 of a second. It's a wonder that it's even this clear!!! You have got to watch what you are doing because that could have ruined every shot you took. You were in aperture priority, which is fine, but you have GOT to watch that shutter speed like a hawk when you do it. I'd have never chanced those shots below 1/125 of they were super super still. 1/250 if they were even so much as laughing.

Your 55-250 tack sharp, but that doesn't mean don't use it by any means! You may find you are much like me and MANY of us who use the 70-200 as our everything lens, portraits, weddings, you name it. It prevents distortion issues on bodies and faces which is a HUGE, GIANT, STUPENDOUS bonus when you are shooting a wedding. Let's face it, you're shooting fast and under great pressure and having one less thing to worry about is worth it's weight in gold.

Did you shoot these in jpeg?

sactown024 · Oct 9, 2012

Wow i didnt even notice that is was shot that slow omg, It wasnt even that dark so I am not sure why the camera would drop down to 1/30th but thansk for pointing that out.

These were all shot in RAW

MLeeK · Oct 9, 2012

It wasn't dark, but you are limiting a LOT of light at f/5.6. Your ISO was at 200. I actually start out at about 1/400 in the full light of day because of the need to control that shutter speed.
It looks like you had a perfect, slightly overcast day with some pops of sun thru it. In which case if it was a darker overcast I'd have started maybe at even ISO 800.
You had THE. PERFECT. DAY for shooting outdoors without flash. But, be mindful that if these were in direct sun they would have had a horribly different outcome-similar to the 6th shot with harsh shadows and even worse than that one. Just something to put in mind to start working and practicing with now.

MLeeK · Oct 9, 2012

sactown024 said:
Wow i didnt even notice that is was shot that slow omg, It wasnt even that dark so I am not sure why the camera would drop down to 1/30th but thansk for pointing that out.

These were all shot in RAW

What are you processing your raw's with? Lightroom, I think?
What are your settings in the sharpening panel?
In that panel if you zoom to 100% on your image and then hold down the ALT key while moving the sliders it changes the image to show you what effect you are having on the image.
For an image under ISO 1600 I use a standard sharpening settings of about 50, 1.5, 25, 85.
With your camera you may need a light noise reduction in there if you are using ISO's above about 400. Maybe even less depending on the exposure. It will also smooth a bit of skin for you-bonus. Maybe 10's. If you are at 100% you can see accurately what that is doing also.

Designer · Oct 9, 2012

#7 is composed well.

sactown024 · Oct 9, 2012

yeah i use lightroom 4 and I do use the slider method for sharpening but ill give your settings a whirl. I do not add any sharpening during export and on some of the photos i used slight noise reduction.

sactown024 · Oct 9, 2012

MLeeK said:
It wasn't dark, but you are limiting a LOT of light at f/5.6. Your ISO was at 200.

touche

MLeeK · Oct 9, 2012

sactown024 said:
yeah i use lightroom 4 and I do use the slider method for sharpening but ill give your settings a whirl. I do not add any sharpening during export and on some of the photos i used slight noise reduction.

My settings may well not be right for you, they just give you something to go on. Use that 100% view and see what happens when you do it on each slider and you will find your "happy place."