Well, while I'm here...

[Jaemie]

I'd politely tell the groom to close his hand in #4, unless of course, the gang ink is an important image the couple wish to convey to viewers.

WHERE does anyone state that the tattoos are gang related? Why are people making such assumptions about tattoos? Apparently the only negative image that would be conveyed only explicitly applies to people who negatively stereotype people with tattoos in the first place. Like I stated before, I have a tattoo. Does that mean I am a member of the Bloods, Crips, or possibly the Latin Kings?

Of course not. Obviously, making such a generalization would be ridiculous.

I've seen a lot of gang hands and the ink looks similar. In this case, I'm probably wrong and I take back my original comment.

Is judging people via photos posted on the internet without any information pertaining to their personal life the "new and cool" thing to do? Did I miss that memo?

:er: I really don't think anyone here is doing any such thing to be "new and cool."

 

[imagemaker46]

Who really cares that he has tats, obviously some people on here. They don't make or break these photos, they can do that on their own.

 

[o hey tyler]

I like tats, but not homemade, i have worked in lots of prisons and those are the sort of tats they have

Have you seen Office Space?

[video=youtube;8riXGpPFD34]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8riXGpPFD34[/url][/video]

 

[gsgary]

No

 

[Jaemie]

Actually, as we process information, we all jump to conclusions all the time. If we had to stop and analyze every bit of information our senses perceive, we would be overwhelmed and unable to function efficiently. This isn't news.

And, just as I did, it's very likely someone in the bride's or groom's network will flip through these photos and make a quick assumption about the tats, or the dress, or the suit, or a facial expression, or something else. That's how our minds work. To expect otherwise, even for all the right reasons, is rather naive. I think if you wear crudely-done cryptic tattoos on your fingers you should be prepared for a variety of public interpretations and not get too upset when gang ink is one of them.

I'm not a pro, so I haven't a clue as to how this matter is approached in real life. As a professional photographer, do you advise your client of such potential issues or say nothing? Do you just passively take photos and let the subjects do whatever they want? Is there any obligation to encourage the subject's artistic expression (e.g., show more tattoos), or to point out wardrobe issues, or facial expressions (say cheese!)?

 

[manaheim]

Whoa... everyone pig pile!


I agree that they're a little dark... consistently so. Maybe your monitor just needs to be calibrated a bit? Other than a tweak, no big deal. Easy fix.

From what I see this is not your "typical storybook couple", and some of their choices reflect that. As long as what you capture reflects who they are and what they are proud of as people, I think you're fine. The thing with the hands being the obvious example. I think it's a fine shot from a content perspective, tatoos and funky nail polish and all. It's good. I would adjust the composition/crop a bit, as some have said.

Watch your emotions. That first shot, Dad (I assume it's Dad) looks positively annoyed, and the picture frames them to me as very standoffish. I assume that's not what you intend/desire, but that's definitely what I saw.

Watch your framing and keep an eye on your backgrounds... ask yourself how those backgrounds contribute, or don't. In some cases you don't have a ton of choices... like if it's a small venue in an urban setting or something.

 

[o hey tyler]

I'm not a pro, so I haven't a clue as to how this matter is approached in real life. As a professional photographer, do you advise your client of such potential issues or say nothing?

It depends on the issue, and the severity of the issue. If it's a tattoo that they knowingly put it on their body, and it is a part of them, I wouldn't say anything. Just because some people may find it to be objectionable doesn't mean that it should be hidden. The wearer of the tattoo surely considered that at some point during the process of the body art being created, and while they were getting their ears gauged. Sure, some people may not find it appealing... But the person who's handing you the check doesn't have an issue with them, and I would have no reason to hide or selectively shoot based on a character judgement that I made. If it were a swastika tattoo, or something that actually goes out of its way to be offensive, I may mention that to the client. But at the end of the day, it's what makes them happy.

Do you just passively take photos and let the subjects do whatever they want? Is there any obligation to encourage the subject's artistic expression (e.g., show more tattoos), or to point out wardrobe issues, or facial expressions (say cheese!)?

No, it's usually a bad idea to "let the subjects do whatever they want." Clients often have no idea what poses look best, or how to act in front of a camera. They need some kind of direction. It's your job, as the photographer to at least gently lead them through the shoot IMO. I do suggest wardrobe selections based on the environment the shoot will be in, that is totally fine. Clothing is a very changeable feature in a photoshoot, much more malleable than tattoos. I often sit down with my clients and ask what type of images they want for their shoot. It gives me a baseline reading of what to shoot for, and what to avoid (if need be).

Hope this clears up your questions. And of course, a lot of this is solely my opinion.

 

[DiskoJoe]

No offense but these do look like Noob photos.

#1 there is someone behind the bride, distracting. And whats up with dad's expression.
#2 perspective is awfully crooked as seen from the posts leaning badly. I would straighten that and crop off the left side where that person is past that post.
#3 decent but lots of extra dead space above the heads.
#4 i would crop in tighter on the hands. Always a good shot.

And as for fearing critiques, embrace them whole hearted. Let them absorb for a while and see if they truly hold merit. If they do the act on that advice. It will make your photography stronger. There are good people here and the advice while it can be harsh at time is usually pretty spot on and truthful. It will only make you stronger.

Not when you have prison tats

You could cut those out pretty easy if you wanted to. But thats who he is.

 

[RichardsTPF]

In my noob eyes:
#1: not interesting, busy background, Don't know what they are doing.
#2: underexposed. Need a off camera flash. The pole and the arm on the right could be cropped.
#3: You can get lower, step back to the left.
#4: the tats on his finger is distracting.