Michael & Claire - Pre Wedding

[Deleted member 21335]

This is Michael and Claire. I shot the Baptism of their daughter back in December and they booked me to shoot their wedding in just over three weeks time. This was around the time I didn't think I was going to be up to wedding stuff and was going to pack it all in. Mike said that unless I was terminally in, I had to shoot his wedding! I am happier with my processing now. It has been identical the last two shoots and tweaked marginally from the one before it. I like the higher contrast and hope I will settle for a while aside from minor tweaks.

The light was harsh in some of them and there are one or two hot spots but, truth be told, I don't mind them. I rarely do in anyones photos unless it's something critical or massive blown areas. I do appreciate C&C, I need to learn, right?

This set are more posed than the last one. It's partly due to the way the couple were and the shoot should reflect their personalities I guess as well as the photographers 'style'?





Of course, if anyone wants to view the full set, they are here....CLICKY (I don't link for "hits", I link to save posting 20 shots in the thread)

 

[Jango]

Another nice set, my favourite is the last one with the blossom in the air

 

[PatrickO]

I'm generally an admirer of your work Gareth, but I would say these are not as good as others you've posted recently. Perhaps the harsh lighting was giving problems. I agree that hotspots don't bother me much unless very distracting which they are not in this set.

However, by no means a bad set and there are some lovely images in the blog. I actually think you have not put the best ones here.

 

[Deleted member 21335]

Another nice set, my favourite is the last one with the bossom in the air

Thank you.

I'm generally an admirer of your work Gareth, but I would say these are not as good as others you've posted recently. Perhaps the harsh lighting was giving problems. I agree that hotspots don't bother me much unless very distracting which they are not in this set.

However, by no means a bad set and there are some lovely images in the blog. I actually think you have not put the best ones here.

Thanks for commenting Patrick. What do you feel it is about them that isn't as good as, for example, the last set? I would be curious to hear. I am on a massive learning curve here!

 

[PatrickO]

Thanks for commenting Patrick. What do you feel it is about them that isn't as good as, for example, the last set? I would be curious to hear. I am on a massive learning curve here!

You have identified two of the problems yourself. The harsh lighting and the lack of connection between the couple. The Barrie and Vickie set was much better on those scores.
I also feel there is much less variety and creativity in this set. It does all look a bit posed. It might have been better if there were some sitting or lying shots. Or maybe if you took a step back and let them interact. But, perhaps more formal images were what the couple wanted.

Not setting myself up as any sort of expert, but that's my 2p worth.

 

[Deleted member 21335]

You have identified two of the problems yourself. The harsh lighting and the lack of connection between the couple. The Barrie and Vickie set was much better on those scores.
I also feel there is much less variety and creativity in this set. It does all look a bit posed. It might have been better if there were some sitting or lying shots. Or maybe if you took a step back and let them interact. But, perhaps more formal images were what the couple wanted.

Not setting myself up as any sort of expert, but that's my 2p worth.

Thanks for clarifying. I appreciate you taking the time to tell me your thoughts.

It's funny as Barry and Vickie were much more difficult to get to interact than these two. Today's location wasn't as diverse as the last one either. That's not to try and make excuses mind you, but lots of distractions knocking about to try and keep out of the frame. As I say, massive learning curve going on here so happy to hear your opinions. I am trying to not take it personal which is quite a challenge for me, as I do that naturally, even if it;s not intended (which I know it isn't).

 

[Serendipitous Sid]

Well, FWIW I'd have binned that first one on the grounds that it simply doesn't work for me, but I'd be happy enough with the second. Having said that, you've got some far better stuff in the full set, so, if I may, I'll comment on those ...

#1 and #2 I too would have taken those shots, but only to feel myself into the situation and see how they inter-reacted with a camera pointed at them. Then I've have edited them out.

#3 Bog standard shot, ticks all the boxes, and I bet they'll like that far more than #4 (the one at the top of this thread)

#5 and #6 as for #1 and #2 All four dilute the impact of the whole set.

#7 and #8 Again, bog standard but no harm in that for an engagement shoot, and well executed. They'll love #7 but she'll wish she'd pulled her stomach in for it.

#9 Doesn't work for me in b/w on the grounds that the couple become somewhat lost in the mass of masonry. It'd be a good 'un in colour though.

#10 Nice one, and works well in b/w because the subjects are stronger than the surroundings

#11 Nice one again. Well caught.

#12 The jury's out here on that one. I'm not sure it's not a missed moment.

#13 and #14 IMO they need to be a pair, in colour. Apart from the fact they'd just work well together, it won't then matter that he's looking down in #13

#15 It's a lovely shot. First class. Ticks every box there is.

#16 and #17 They're weak, and I'd bin them.

#18 I'm not entirely sold on her expression, but who knows? A touch more sunlight would have been nice, but wtf.

#19 The only thing that lets this one down is the way she's standing with her feet together (as they tend to, especially when wearing clingy skirts), and the only thing I ever found that helps is to make a joke about never standing with your feet together when there's a camera pointed at you, and get the shot when they laugh and she moves her feet. It's still a good 'un though.

#20 and #21 Nothing wrong with either of them (unless you're a nit-picking photographer)

#22 It's an absolute cracker AFAIC and the only thing I'd do with it is zap the splotches of sunlight on her dress. Bog standard, but very well executed indeed.

#23 Another goody. Try zapping that white blob out and see if you agree that improves it.

#24 OK it's a dead boring shot, but it's really well done, and I reckon they'll love it. The more I look at it, the more I like it despite what many photographers would have to say about it.

#25 Works for me - and no doubt for them too.

And having said that lot, the only reason why I've taken the liberty of commenting at length on the full set is because you're turning out a better product than you perhaps think. You can get the shots, and AFAIC your processing's excellent. With more practice at more gigs, I can guarantee that it'll all fall into place for you just as fast as you want it to, but I'm going to stick my neck out and identify one area that you might need to work at specifically. That's making the transition from looking at your pictures as a photographer to looking at them as a client or a potential client. My comments above are actually made with that head on, and if you don't find that the ability to switch heads comes naturally to you as you get more experience, that's something you're going to need to work on. Trust me ...

 

[Deleted member 21335]

*snip*

And having said that lot, the only reason why I've taken the liberty of commenting at length on the full set is because you're turning out a better product than you perhaps think. You can get the shots, and AFAIC your processing's excellent. With more practice at more gigs, I can guarantee that it'll all fall into place for you just as fast as you want it to, but I'm going to stick my neck out and identify one area that you might need to work at specifically. That's making the transition from looking at your pictures as a photographer to looking at them as a client or a potential client. My comments above are actually made with that head on, and if you don't find that the ability to switch heads comes naturally to you as you get more experience, that's something you're going to need to work on. Trust me ...

Shortened your quote to avoid making a massive post!

Sid, thank you for your detailed critique. Obviously not going to address each one individually, but I appreciate you taking the time to do so and have taken on board what you have said. Lots of things I need to work on for sure, but I know it will take time and I am prepared for that. I have set my self specific goals, of which I will not disclose here, but I think they are realistic so will try to remain positive!

I'm not sure I am turning out better than I think, but it would take something pretty special to convince me otherwise. Some people say, "as long as the client is happy". And whilst I agree with that to a degree, I also feel it can lead to complacency and a failure to progress personally. I do not have the ability to, as you say, "put a different head on" just yet. I will definitely try to look at it that way.

 

[Serendipitous Sid]

...Some people say, "as long as the client is happy". And whilst I agree with that to a degree, I also feel it can lead to complacency and a failure to progress personally.

Amen to that. Glad you take my comments in the spirit I make them. As always, though, my opinion's worth just as much as you pay for it

 

[ryanyboy]

I think these are pretty good Gareth. There's a good variety and you've made the most of the surroundings - especially the falling blossom. I think I see a bin in the background on a couple of shots which I'm never keen on. The dappled lighting has been managed fairly well but be careful of hotspots. I'd tend to disagree with Patrick on the lack of connection. I think they seem pretty 'connected' and I've seen much worse (far too often) before.

I would like to know why Serendipitous Sid dislikes the first image you posted in the OP. I'm 99% sure I know the answer but I'd like to hear it 'Sid' if you will.....

 

[gpc1]

I like em. They look like they are having fun, natural, colourful....

I think any couple looking for a light, enjoyable couples / engagement shoot would look at these and like them.

Sure, technically (again i repeat im no expert and have hot spots etc) they may not be perfect, but the overall feel is great.

It interesting that as a photographer we look for technical perfection, but if you look at some of the best out there technically they may not be perfect ie blurred, hot spots etc etc...but they capture the 'feeling', the 'fun', the 'emotion' etc.

The more i learn technically, the less i obsess over it (to an extent).....If I see a moment about to happen then grab it....so what if the dress is blown slightly. A technically obsessed photographer may miss the moment but get perfect exposure......(I suppose a great phtograohger will get both right, maybe ill get both right one day lol) but utlimately emotion and feeling trumps technical perfection i think (not every time though)....but hey, im a novice and by no means in a position to crit or spark a debate so all in all i think they are great.

all the best

ps please dont think im knocking others crit. They have far more experience than me, and i read these threads and make mental notes to remember to apply such lessons / advice too.

 

[Serendipitous Sid]

I would like to know why Serendipitous Sid dislikes the first image you posted in the OP. I'm 99% sure I know the answer but I'd like to hear it 'Sid' if you will.....

As I said, it simply doesn't work for me. Gut reaction, that's all, but IMO the odds were stacked against it working by that background being so busy. I'm not even convinced that's the best crop.

But whatever. I have no problem at all with the concept, and good for Gareth for trying it (as I have done myself on many occasions), but ATEOTD this one just doesn't work for me.

So ... why do you like it? And would you crop it any differently?

 

[Serendipitous Sid]

... but utlimately emotion and feeling trumps technical perfection i think (not every time though) ...

Without thinking too hard about it, I reckon the only time that's not true where weddings are concerned is with the group shots.

 

[big soft moose]

I'm with sid on this, the first shot doesn't work for me either principally because its so dominated by the oof blossom tree , but also because the waist up framing doesn't work imo - Claire has a cracking figure, so imo I'd have shown this to best effect by framing lower to include a full length shot and slightly less tree

 

[ryanyboy]

As I said, it simply doesn't work for me. Gut reaction, that's all, but IMO the odds were stacked against it working by that background being so busy. I'm not even convinced that's the best crop.

But whatever. I have no problem at all with the concept, and good for Gareth for trying it (as I have done myself on many occasions), but ATEOTD this one just doesn't work for me.

So ... why do you like it? And would you crop it any differently?

I don't.

 

[Serendipitous Sid]

I don't.

Why not?

 

[Deleted member 21335]

I think these are pretty good Gareth. There's a good variety and you've made the most of the surroundings - especially the falling blossom. I think I see a bin in the background on a couple of shots which I'm never keen on. The dappled lighting has been managed fairly well but be careful of hotspots. I'd tend to disagree with Patrick on the lack of connection. I think they seem pretty 'connected' and I've seen much worse (far too often) before.

I would like to know why Serendipitous Sid dislikes the first image you posted in the OP. I'm 99% sure I know the answer but I'd like to hear it 'Sid' if you will.....

Thanks for commenting Ryan. Yes, there is some 'park furniture' in some of them. Was tricky to completely avoid it all in the park and I am still going back and forth mentally about whether to remove them or not. As I say, the odd hotspot doesn't always bother me, depending on where it is, how big etc. But I appreciate not everyone feels the same. I appreciate you taking the time.

I like em. They look like they are having fun, natural, colourful....

I think any couple looking for a light, enjoyable couples / engagement shoot would look at these and like them.

Sure, technically (again i repeat im no expert and have hot spots etc) they may not be perfect, but the overall feel is great.

It interesting that as a photographer we look for technical perfection, but if you look at some of the best out there technically they may not be perfect ie blurred, hot spots etc etc...but they capture the 'feeling', the 'fun', the 'emotion' etc.

The more i learn technically, the less i obsess over it (to an extent).....If I see a moment about to happen then grab it....so what if the dress is blown slightly. A technically obsessed photographer may miss the moment but get perfect exposure......(I suppose a great phtograohger will get both right, maybe ill get both right one day lol) but utlimately emotion and feeling trumps technical perfection i think (not every time though)....but hey, im a novice and by no means in a position to crit or spark a debate so all in all i think they are great.

all the best

ps please dont think im knocking others crit. They have far more experience than me, and i read these threads and make mental notes to remember to apply such lessons / advice too.

Thank you for commenting. A similar train of thought to myself it seems with regards to me regarding moment over perfect technically. I used to obsess far too much over the teeniest technicality and my images suffered because of it. Hopefully now they are mostly less boring than they used to be. That's not to say I disregard everything entirely.

I'm with sid on this, the first shot doesn't work for me either principally because its so dominated by the oof blossom tree , but also because the waist up framing doesn't work imo - Claire has a cracking figure, so imo I'd have shown this to best effect by framing lower to include a full length shot and slightly less tree

Thank you. I guess that first shot doesn't seem to work for most who have commented. There are more full length shots on the full blog post though so not sure if you have clicked it. In fact, it's the image directly above the one posted here in the blog.

I don't.

Another thumbs down for that one then. Not to worry, it's good feedback I can take on to the next one.

 

[ajax_andy]

Nice work Gareth, like the processing too which I think is starting to come along nicely and showing a bit of 'yours' to it now over it being a preset you've tweaked.

Number 1 I feel the tree is a little dominant with them being cropped small in the frame and at waist height... However in the set you also have one where they are fully framed so I don't see it as being a bad thing, you have 2 different shots with the same backdrop which works nicely as part of a set IMO

Number 2 is a lovely shot with the blossom and her expression.

The set overall looks really good to me, maybe a few too many of them looking at the camera and not each other but it's a strong set of images that I'm sure they will love.

 

[Deleted member 21335]

Nice work Gareth, like the processing too which I think is starting to come along nicely and showing a bit of 'yours' to it now over it being a preset you've tweaked.

Number 1 I feel the tree is a little dominant with them being cropped small in the frame and at waist height... However in the set you also have one where they are fully framed so I don't see it as being a bad thing, you have 2 different shots with the same backdrop which works nicely as part of a set IMO

Number 2 is a lovely shot with the blossom and her expression.

The set overall looks really good to me, maybe a few too many of them looking at the camera and not each other but it's a strong set of images that I'm sure they will love.

Thanks Andy for commenting. Yes, I feel I am getting to where I am happier with the processing and it's getting more consistent. Perhaps I could have posted a different shot instead of that first and left it just as part of the set. I can see why it wouldn't work alone for a lot of people but I do think in the context of a set it works a little better. Could be wrong though

Yes, they are more engaged with the camera than previous shoot and a little more than I would have liked. That's just how the shoot seemed to go though. But some good pointers being made and it's somewhere to progress from for sure.

 

[ajax_andy]

Thanks Andy for commenting. Yes, I feel I am getting to where I am happier with the processing and it's getting more consistent. Perhaps I could have posted a different shot instead of that first and left it just as part of the set. I can see why it wouldn't work alone for a lot of people but I do think in the context of a set it works a little better. Could be wrong though

Yes, they are more engaged with the camera than previous shoot and a little more than I would have liked. That's just how the shoot seemed to go though. But some good pointers being made and it's somewhere to progress from for sure.

One thing to possibly try if they keep looking at the camera is a longer lens and be further away, tell them to interact, laugh etc, walk away and hopefully be far enough away to make them not feel like they need to look at you. Just a suggestion though but occasionally I do this

 

[cargo]

Hi Gareth. I have read quite a few of your posts in the past and my heart goes out to you when you feel frustrated and doubt yourself (am of a similiar disposition myself)_ That said I have had a look at your set and they look great you got what it takes as far as I can see.
I have read SSid's cc__actually I played a game with myself and looked at the set first then looked at his crit and blow me I liked what he liked so I guess I am learning or is it a case as when an image works it just works and gut feeling says so ?
Anyways well done and good luck fella.

Gaz

ps: Totally agree with comment regarding capturing a moment over perfect exsposure

 

[Serendipitous Sid]

One thing to possibly try if they keep looking at the camera is a longer lens and be further away, tell them to interact, laugh etc, walk away and hopefully be far enough away to make them not feel like they need to look at you. Just a suggestion though but occasionally I do this

That's certainly worth a try, but always be prepared for the occasional couple who just haven't a clue how to interact in any "normal" way, presumably because they tend not to do that anyhow. Sometimes it's just like getting blood out of a stone, particularly with couple who are inherently shy or where there's a big height difference. It is after all a weird thing to stand there in fancy dress while somebody ponces about with a bloody big camera pointed at you ...

 

[Deleted member 21335]

Hi Gareth. I have read quite a few of your posts in the past and my heart goes out to you when you feel frustrated and doubt yourself (am of a similiar disposition myself)_ That said I have had a look at your set and they look great you got what it takes as far as I can see.
I have read SSid's cc__actually I played a game with myself and looked at the set first then looked at his crit and blow me I liked what he liked so I guess I am learning or is it a case as when an image works it just works and gut feeling says so ?
Anyways well done and good luck fella.

Gaz

ps: Totally agree with comment regarding capturing a moment over perfect exsposure

Thanks gary.