Wedding from Yesterday - These Are the "Pre-Proofs"

[astrostu]

Wedding yesterday, 1074 photos, down to 55% after weeding out closed eyes and other unusable shots. I gave the couple these "pre-proofs" today to keep them interested until the proofs are finished. Some have effects to give them an idea of some of the digital manipulation. This was my first paid wedding. These are some of my favorites, not all of them ... want to keep some of the best "in the vest" for later. Lemme know what you think -- note that shadows were an issue during the outside stuff ... any advice on how to deal with that in the future (and in processing?) would be appreciated!

1 - Bride in her room. Small Orton Effect applied.

2 - Groom acting up.

3 - Flower girl. Orton Effect applied.

4 - Bride and groom while a family friend was playing the guitar, officiate (Groom's dad) behind them. Vignette.

5 - Flower girl. Inverse vignette.

6 - Man and wife.

7 - Happy about the recent events.

8 - Tossing the bride. A new Olympic sport in the making?

9 - Bridal party formal. Not a fan of what the best man is doing with his hand...

10 - Bride, one of the formals.

11 - Bride and groom during a dance, showing the wedding ring and band.

12 - Rings in the flowers.

 

[bigtwinky]

how many unpaid practice weddings did you have under your belt when you got paid for this one?

 

[astrostu]

Hmm. Not sure that's a promising question, but the answer is 3. I strongly warned the bride and groom of my limited experience, and I had them look at the ones I'd done. I asked them on four separate occasions, several weeks apart, if they were sure.

 

[DC-Photog]

#4 & #7 are your best emotion shots. Emotion is what brides want to see and what photographers should look for. They are look

#12 is well executed, although the idea is a bit dated.

#3 & #5 - Show them to the couple without the actions/vignette.

As for shadows - make them your friend and use them creatively during the ceremony. For portraits, such as #9, go find shade.

 

[tkruf]

I've seen worse. For the setting you had to work with, I think you did ok. You showed them your prior work, and gave them ample time and opportunity to change their mind and go with someone else. You must have set your price lower than other charging photogs in your area, which I would say is wise for photographers starting out. Everyone has to start somewhere.

What matters most is if the couple is happy with the results they get for the amount they pay. That is the bottom line.

You will always (especially on a forum like this) get those with opinions you will not like.

As your skill level increases, then you'll be able to increase your price respectively. There is no "set" number of weddings you must shoot "without charging" before you can charge for your services.

Take any advice you get here constructively and keep on doing what you're doing. I think you are headed in the right direction.

 

[Robin Usagani]

Judging from the wedding party, I am pretty sure this is a pretty small and low budget wedding. The photos are not spectacular but they are not horrible either. Good job on your first wedding! HELLO Colorado!

 

[Big Mike]

note that shadows were an issue during the outside stuff ... any advice on how to deal with that in the future

Flash. In this situation, I'd be using a lot of flash.
If you have a powerful enough flash, you can 'compete' with the bright ambient light...for example, you could underexpose the background, giving you nice deep blue skies and darker foliage, then use the flash to light up the subject. Finding the right balance can sometimes be tricky, but too bad.

Other options are reflectors or diffusers. If you have have someone hold a reflector, you can bounce the daylight back onto your subject. If you're only shooting head smaller/tighter shots, you can have someone hold up a diffusion panel between them & the sun.

 

[IgsEMT]

Flash. In this situation, I'd be using a lot of flash.

:thumbup:
It ain't bad. Keep practicing and USE DA LIGHT (flash). If you don't know how to use one, learn; if you don't have one, buy it and LEARN
good luck

 

[astrostu]

D'oh! I didn't even think of flash in that situation. Actually, I think it may have briefly crossed my mind, but I immediately dismissed it thinking it wouldn't be bright enough. I actually was thinking I should've had a giant reflector and had someone hold it up on the shadow side, off-camera, but I didn't have anything that would work. I guess that's what I get for lack of a lot of experience - not even thinking of flash there. I have some fairly powerful flashes and used them a lot for the reception where the lighting was horrid.

Thanks for the feedback. I'm glad that the consensus is they don't suck ...

 

[bigtwinky]

Hmm. Not sure that's a promising question, but the answer is 3. I strongly warned the bride and groom of my limited experience, and I had them look at the ones I'd done. I asked them on four separate occasions, several weeks apart, if they were sure.

You said the key words in that you showed the B&G your work and they were fine with it. If this is 100% representative of the work they saw and agreed to, then its all good. You delivered on what you said you would.

As for the images, they aren't great. Some are good, some look like a snapshot image, some show some nice emotion, some are just odd.

Here is my CC

1- dont like the red/orange tone given
I dont like the Orton effect in this image. Personally, as you are new (as I am as well), focus on getting a clean, nice, well exposed and interestingly composed image prior to getting into odd processing like this. The pose here is nice, cute moment. But the out of focusness (orton) and the colour throw it off.

2- this is what I referred to as a snapshot thing. It probably greatly captures his personality, which is totally fine and something essential in images. But the composition is what kills this image. He is so small in the frame, it is shot straight on, standing up... when doing fun pictures, look for fun angles as well

3- cute image, nice composition. My eye is somewhat drawn to the tree. I dont like the orton here either (but then, I never liked that in any image). I never understood the want to have an out of focus image (stacked with an in focus one). It throws off my eye

4- very nice candid emotion shot. Would like it with less vignette, but this is the type of image I like to capture.

5- same as 4, nicely done. But again, a bit too heavy on the vignette.

6- Would of loved a much closer in shot of this. the setting looks so nice with the mountain in the back...closer crop of just the couple and the mountain would be nice. Why did you shoot from so far out?

10- Why include so much space on top of the bride's head in the image? Its a decent composition and she has a killer smile... shame you didnt zoom in on it more.

 

[astrostu]

Thanks. On 1, in quickly trying to do some color correction, that was about as good as I could do. For the proofs, it will be significantly better. On 2, it was a snapshot. I was setting up and he started posing for the 20 point and shoot cameras surrounding me. I ripped the camera off the tripod and tried to grab as many of those as I could before he stopped, realizing I was actually taking pictures.

Hmm. Personally, I like the effect in #3, but I think I've been out-voted here and on POTN. #3 is also cropped down from the original, and I played around with what to include in the shot. I could've stuck her on the lower left or lower right, and I chose lower left because otherwise you would see kinda a cheesy tent/awning that she had walked out of a few moments earlier. Perhaps an even tighter crop would be better.

For 6, I have several tighter shots, and I can heavily crop it since I was using my 7D. That was the wide shot I wanted to show at this point (a) because it got the whole group, and (b) to, as I said, reserve a few of the best ones for later so they're not disappointed.

I see your point in 10 and I'll work on cropping that down. I think my thinking at the time was in the last wedding I did, I suffered from the, "If only I had gone a BIT wider this would be a perfect shot" so this time I consciously tried to go a bit wide, thinking I'd crop down later. For example, 9 was significantly wider, and I cropped it down to just the people.