Wedding Numba Three

[NegativeGround]

Hey everyone. Thought I'd post some of my latest wedding pictures. The location was on an amazing beach in Carmel, CA... but unfortunately it was really overcast, which led to some less that spectacular photos. Anywho, this was my first solo production, and it was a lot of fun....

http://i.pbase.com/o4/85/684685/1/66596805.F1NnhcuJ.wedding20.jpg

[NegativeGround]

http://i.pbase.com/o4/85/684685/1/66596814.QVg4x9CO.wedding28.jpg

http://i.pbase.com/o4/85/684685/1/66596812.JnjSCecS.wedding27.jpg

[NegativeGround]

http://i.pbase.com/o4/85/684685/1/66596822.3HZwP0ip.wedding40.jpg

[NegativeGround]

http://i.pbase.com/o4/85/684685/1/66596803.m7kcPZex.wedding15.jpg

[NegativeGround]

http://i.pbase.com/o4/85/684685/1/66596835.f86qjbfW.wedding53.jpg

[NegativeGround]

http://i.pbase.com/o4/85/684685/1/66596826.MYvjlb6y.wedding44.jpg

...and all the rest can be found here: http://www.pbase.com/evancohan/locke

-Evan

[rawpaw18]

I like the shot of the B&G together with the rocks in the background.

O.K. this is the second wedding you have done that shows a woman who appears to be topless/naked,
is this your trademark shot?;)

[24Peter]

Evan - once again, nice job. You got some good shots and it looks like it was a fun time.
I do have a suggestion or two regarding your framing/composition. I don't know if you have studied the work of other wedding photographers or of portrait photographers, but I notice many of your shots have what I affectionately call (b/c I do it all the time) "Max Headroom" syndrome; that is, an individual or couple's face is in the center of a portrait orientation shot instead of the top third. The top third is a more conventional composition and to me at least, more asthetically pleasing than leaving a lot of empty space above your subject's head (even if there is a nice landscape behind them). The other thing I notice is you seem to be standing above your subjects in several shots (perhaps you're just really tall) but that combined with a wide angle lens gives (to me) an unflattering perspective of your subjects.

Finally, while obviously you can't control the weather, a second, off camera flash would have done wonders I think to bring a little more dimension to otherwise very flat lighting conditions.

But hey, like I said you got some really good shots (esp. indoors) and you're out there doing it. (I, on the other hand, have been too chicken to even attempt a wedding. :o ) I'm sure you'll get better and better with each event.:)

[cwphoto]

=NegativeGround]The location was on an amazing beach in Carmel, CA... but unfortunately it was really overcast, which led to some less that spectacular photos

Don't curse 'overcast'. It's the wedding photographer's best friend.;)

[Nickcanada]

Don't curse 'overcast'. It's the wedding photographer's best friend.;)


Why is that?:o

[cwphoto]

Why is that?:o

The sky becomes one giant soft-box, so it's more flattering for photographing people. Also, you can position your subject from any direction without having to worry about the sun beating into their eyes.;)

[NegativeGround]

O.K. this is the second wedding you have done that shows a woman who appears to be topless/naked,
is this your trademark shot?;)

Haha, yeah, I was actually thinking about that when I took the picture. Guess I'll have to do one at every wedding from now on. :)

-Evan

[NegativeGround]

...but I notice many of your shots have what I affectionately call (b/c I do it all the time) "Max Headroom" syndrome; that is, an individual or couple's face is in the center of a portrait orientation shot instead of the top third. The top third is a more conventional composition and to me at least, more asthetically pleasing than leaving a lot of empty space above your subject's head (even if there is a nice landscape behind them). The other thing I notice is you seem to be standing above your subjects in several shots (perhaps you're just really tall) but that combined with a wide angle lens gives (to me) an unflattering perspective of your subjects.

Thanks for the tip Peter. I honestly am just making things up as I go along. I've never heard of that phrase before, but yeah, it does make sense after looking through some of my group pictures again. Question: What is the best way to photograph a large group (say 4-8 people)? Since I have a wide lens, should I try to include their entire bodies in the frame? Or just zoom in and focus on the upper half (chest and heads)?

PS... not very tall (only 5'8"), I was just standing up-slope on the beach. Thanks again,

-Evan

[24Peter]

Thanks for the tip Peter. I honestly am just making things up as I go along. I've never heard of that phrase before, but yeah, it does make sense after looking through some of my group pictures again. Question: What is the best way to photograph a large group (say 4-8 people)? Since I have a wide lens, should I try to include their entire bodies in the frame? Or just zoom in and focus on the upper half (chest and heads)?

PS... not very tall (only 5'8"), I was just standing up-slope on the beach. Thanks again,

-Evan
It's just a matter of working out the right perspective. (Your groups photos didn't have a lot of headroom by the way - it's more vertical portrait shots). For group shots in landscape orientation, which focal length you use depends on what lenses you have and how much room you have to work with. For me, anything less than 35mm (about 50mm on a 1.6X sensor) looks distorted and 50mm or above (about 80mm on an XT/30D) looks better. But you'll need a lot of space between you and your subjects to fit 4-8 people full body in the frame with a 50mm lens. Half body shots might be better with a group like that. Also shooting from waist level rather than eye level or above with a wider angle lens helps (you'll need to sit or kneel to get that perspective.)