My second wedding - some piccies to critique
I've started several threads in recent weeks in preperation for the wedding of my friends who I photographed last weekend. Several of you asked to see the pics when I had them.
I got the 6x4" proofs back from the lab today and I must say I am delighted with the results. The advice many of you gave, especially regarding the use of fill flash, has really helped me out. I bought the book "Nikon Creative Lighting System - using SB-600, SB800 and SB900 Speedlights" and read it cover to cover just two weeks ago, so I was nervous about using flash with film as I was worried I'd screw it up. Thankfully, not so.
I have attached some as a sample in the zip file HERE for anyone who's interested. It's a 7mb download.
I realise I'm requesting critiques, but being my own worst critic, here are the things I know I've done wrong, before you mention it. If you spot anything in addition, do please let me know, of if you know how I may have avoided the following fitfalls:
Cropped too tightly in some shots and I forgot to ensure the flash went off in a couple of shots. Due to the rain, the initial shots at the brides house had to be taken indoors, in her lounge, which is not that big. As a result, there are some unavoidable background distractions, which also contributed to some of the cropping. A couple of shots are not dead-on-level either, especially in the church. Also, a few of the shots have their children in the background - ordinarily, I'd have tried to avoid this, but the couple are good friends of mine and their kids are everything to them (they were going to take them honeymoon with them even!) so I know they'll love the inclusion of their kids in the pictures.
Also, the priest refused the use of flash in the church.
How they were done :
Fuji Pro 800Z rated mostly at EI800 due to low, overcast, light.
Fuji Pro 400H rated at EI200
Fuji Acros 100 rated at EI64 with a yellow polyester Lee filter
Almost every shot using TTL rear-sync fill flash using -1 to -1.7.
These are quick scans of 6"x4" prints - not from the negatives - using a bog-standard flat bed scanner (cost £100 8 years ago). As such, the real prints look about 5 times better than the JPEG's you're seeing. I'm delighted with the quality of the Fuji Pro 800Z and 400H films and I can't wait to show them to my friends when they get back.
Please let me know your thoughts.
Nice job! You have a good eye.
The Zip file worked perfect!
Like the group photos!
Looks like On Camera Flash with some.
Look for good light - example: try to turn the body away from the light and the face toward the light. Make photograph from the shadow side of face!
I don't do proofs as I provide hi-res files on DVD.
Good job! Keep up the good work!
Making beautiful pictures of people is an art!
Thanks for showing us!
I'm here to help.
Looks good overall!
You've already noted the issues with tight compositions, so I'll just note that I agree. When you're covering ongoing action over which you've little direct control, background distractions and non-ideal compositions are inevitable so in the end it's about choosing your compromises. You might consider being more forgiving of some backgrounds rather than cutting them out. It's a bit strange when the top of the frame is nicking at people's heads in group shots.
Scan #4 looks like one of your flash failures. The bride's skin is rather darker than all the other shots and I personally don't feel it's the most flattering poise for her.
Some of the group shots are, aside from tight crops, a little awkwardly arranged, but again, that's going to happen with events.
I'm going to mourn the passing of 800z now.
Very nice for your 1st REAL gig !!
Good job mate !!
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG have the option to remove this ad.)
Mark Barendt, Beaverton, OR
"We do not see things the way they are. We see things the way we are." Anaïs Nin
Ted I am no expert and maybe there was nothing that could have been done about it but while the "whites" as in the dresses are have nice detail in them the blacks seem to be lacking detail a bit.
It may of course have been that the black material was genuinely so black that even texture and the usual folds, turns etc were not visible anyway. The dullness of the day wouldn't have helped.
Only you will know this.
Overall they all look pretty good . I especially like the one where the lad is peeping around the groom's legs and the little bridesmaid has what appears to be a dummy in her mouth. Kids can often make the pictures at weddings. This one will brings laughs when the album is brought out for years to come.
I would be pleased with them. Again, you've noted the tight framing issue. I always left generous room around the subjects when I could. Easier to crop a little later than not have a usable shot. When I was doing weddings in the late 60's through the early 90's, I was always a nervous wreck until I saw my negatives. Otherwise it was a lot of fun!
pentaxuser - I second your point about the blacks. You are also right - it was very dark and considering I had such a small gap in the rain, I was pleased to get any useable shots. The suit was black but I agree - I would have liked a little more detail.
I must admit to being a little panicked overall on the day because at the start of the day I wasn't sure what I was going to do about the rain because the priest would not allow group shots in the church, or flash, and the reception was not at a venue that lends itself to high photographic opportunities. If it weren't for the one hour rain gap, I don't know what I would have done quite frankly - driven them to a more suitable location I guess?
The South of France say? If it is really dark and dismal as only it can be in the U.K. even in the better seasons and you are inside with flash prohibited then there is always the standby of D3200 and big aperture lenses. At weddings the couple commissioning the prints are usually interested in the people aspect so small depth of field with large apertures may not matter for most shots.
Originally Posted by ted_smith