just shot my second wedding...fun time

[phatkid77]

well, my friends day was a gong show...so there was zero stress.....

heres some pics..

http://i51.photobucket.com/albums/f364/phatkid77/006resized.jpg
http://i51.photobucket.com/albums/f364/phatkid77/226resized.jpg
http://i51.photobucket.com/albums/f364/phatkid77/205resized.jpg
http://i51.photobucket.com/albums/f364/phatkid77/196resized.jpg
http://i51.photobucket.com/albums/f364/phatkid77/099resized.jpg
http://i51.photobucket.com/albums/f364/phatkid77/153resized.jpg
http://i51.photobucket.com/albums/f364/phatkid77/147resized.jpg
http://i51.photobucket.com/albums/f364/phatkid77/120resized.jpg
http://i51.photobucket.com/albums/f364/phatkid77/117resized.jpg
http://i51.photobucket.com/albums/f364/phatkid77/057resized.jpg

[phatkid77]

http://i51.photobucket.com/albums/f364/phatkid77/054resized.jpg
http://i51.photobucket.com/albums/f364/phatkid77/029resized.jpg
http://i51.photobucket.com/albums/f364/phatkid77/016resized.jpg

[ryan112ryan]

i wanted to offer up some contructive crit, im not a pro or anything but here it goes

the photo of the cake and the table:

http://i51.photobucket.com/albums/f364/phatkid77/029resized.jpg
http://i51.photobucket.com/albums/f364/phatkid77/016resized.jpg
http://i51.photobucket.com/albums/f364/phatkid77/006resized.jpg

the lighting is off, not bright enough. people love pictures of the cake. its inanimate, so take your time setting up the shot to get a well lit shot, you can also do it ahead of time.

you may have done this but i would in addition to this shot, have a whole bunch of different poses of them alot closer/touching, this seems distant
http://i51.photobucket.com/albums/f364/phatkid77/205resized.jpg

they are all decent shots, but we all can improve, including me, keep up the good work and check out using/getinng a flash

[jamison55]

I think the bride and groom will definitely be happy (and that's he most important thing), but there's a bit too much direct flash for my liking. Try experimenting with bouncing your flash a bit more for more natural lighting.

[phatkid77]

well the sky was too high to bounce.....lmao

thanks for the advice... and i gave them a sneek peek and they were very happy.... even liked a couple i thought i would be "creative" with.,..

they got what they paid for ;)

[Vich]

Congrads on the shoot!

I just bumped into this (http://www.aljacobs.com/NEW%20WEDDING.pdf)reference posted on another forum. Fun but serious read - includes a wedding photographer's contract at the end, but has all sorts of other advice too. Just in case you're planning to pursue this.

If you do, one suggestion would be a sharper short-zoom - possibly with IS. Many of these look a tad soft. Soft works on several, but perhaps USM or another sharpening tool would help the others.

Shot 5 is my fav. Good skin tones, emotional capture, nice angle and crop.

If you can find a reference on fill-flash it should help on a grey day like this. One of the plastic diffusers or the like would be ideal where you can't bounce.

On the cake shot, the flash shadow is very evident. Don't know if you can PS that somehow, but prevention is the ideal cure. Using side-mounted direct flash (ie: camera held sideways) on anything near a wall will, of course, produce one of these. Perhaps bouncing or diffusing will help, or better, reposition so the wall isn't there. Jamison? What's best solution for flash shadows?

Overall, I think you captured the spirit of it very well. I'm sure they're really happy with the results. Always room to improve, but always room to appreciate what you've done too. :)

[phatkid77]

yes i want a nice sharp midrange... this was my friends 28-107 tamron...

im gunna get the 28-75 f2.8 tamron as i hear its sharp!! ??

wasnt sure if it was lens or not... i took your advice and shot default...no incamera sharpen or the like....

im getting a flash bracket...sick of the side bounce... was thinking gary fongs lightsphere....... but 100% a bracket will limit the side shadow...

thanks again

[Vich]

yes i want a nice sharp midrange... this was my friends 28-107 tamron...

im gunna get the 28-75 f2.8 tamron as i hear its sharp!! ??

wasnt sure if it was lens or not... i took your advice and shot default...no incamera sharpen or the like....

im getting a flash bracket...sick of the side bounce... was thinking gary fongs lightsphere....... but 100% a bracket will limit the side shadow...

thanks again I don't know much about flash brackets. Do they help?

Portriats and poses: I ran across this (http://www.portranet.com/images/2003-samples/)portriat site. Not much weddng stuff here, but it's a lot of Ron Kramer and his students' work - he's considered by many the best. His site is here (http://www.portranet.com/pnet-home.shtml). You can sign up for personal instruction for a mere $1800 per year, but he also lets you browse their forum for free. There's a lot of links to various samples to study.

Another handy site is here (http://www.photography.ca/otherartists/karsh.html#). It has links for sample work by all the greats like Yousuf Karsh, as well as a lot of tips.

Just sharing my excitemet for finally learning a thing or two about portriat photography.

[jamison55]

well the sky was too high to bounce.....lmao


Too funny! I was referring more to the indoor shots.

But since you mention it...on outdoor shots, the trick is to get just a kiss of flash to lift the problem shadow areas around the eyes and nose. Canon, by default, designed the ETTL system to fill the heck out of the scene when a flash is used in program modes. To get a more natural look with your outdoor direct flash fill, set your EV Comp to +2/3 and your FEC to -2/3. In most shady portrait situations this will give just enough fill.

Be careful starting to shoot weddings, though - it's addictive!

[Vich]

Too funny! I was referring more to the indoor shots.

But since you mention it...on outdoor shots, the trick is to get just a kiss of flash to lift the problem shadow areas around the eyes and nose. Canon, by default, designed the ETTL system to fill the heck out of the scene when a flash is used in program modes. To get a more natural look with your outdoor direct flash fill, set your EV Comp to +2/3 and your FEC to -2/3. In most shady portrait situations this will give just enough fill.

Be careful starting to shoot weddings, though - it's addictive!
Nice tip Jamison! Thanks! What mode?

I always shoot Aperture Priorty or Manual to control DOF. For fill flash thoough not sure about that. It's dumb luck if that's correct since I can't remember exactly, but sort of recall that CANON, in Av or M, if it senses enough ambient light, will automatically set the flash to "fill flash" (don't remember the EV cutoff). Here's (http://FLASHME.smugmug.com/photos/74904177-M.jpg) a sample of a result where I shouldn't have pointed the flash straight ahead (had Steno attached), but otherwise the exposure seemed correct (excuse the poor composition - just a sample I had handy).

In short, we got your EV and FEV, but what mode? Also; do you stick with ISO 100 or crank it up any on a gray day to get the background?

[jamison55]

Important ommission! The mode is AV or TV. I usually shoot in AV mode for portraits. If shooting in M mode, you don't have to move your EV comp up, just your FEC down (potentially). That's because in AV and TV the camera automatically goes into "fill flash" mode and reduces the non-flash exposure by 1 stop. I didn't notice until someone pointed it out to me, but if you meter a scene in AV with the flash off (and get 1/100 @ f4) when you turn the flash on it will under expose the scene to allow the flash to fill (i.e. the SS will change to 1/200).

Your sample is a perfect example of the effect. The background is underexposed, but the people are properly exposed because of the flash fill. That technique has some merit with backlit subjects (where you want to sky to stay blue), but in this scene the technique I just described would have given you a more natural photograph. You still should have pointed the flash straight ahead, just brought the ambient and flash exposure a little closer.