Wedding number 3 - Jon & Nic

  • Thread starter Deleted member 21335
  • Start date
D

Deleted member 21335

Guest
Well, I was extra specially nervous about this one as I know Jon and Nic and see Jon pretty much everyday as he co-owns and runs my Crossfit gym! The bridal prep stuff was really dark and in quite a small room so I struggled with that more than the last couple of times. Same with the Church for the lighting. Why do they light them so horribly? Was a WB nightmare! Yellow lights, blue lights, brown roof, white walls. I tried to make sure the people looked as 'right' as possible but still don't think I am happy with it. Anyway, I delivered the photos last night and they love them, but it was a massive learning curve for me and I still refuse to use whether they are happy as a measuring stick for my stuff.
Anyway, here are a few of my favourites then a link to the entire blog post which, I have tried to post less images in this time.

1.
Jon+%26+Nic-32.jpg

2.
Jon+%26+Nic-47.jpg

3.
Jon+%26+Nic-74.jpg


Thanks for looking as always. Here's the rest if you want to look....CLICKY
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Why do they light them so horribly?
In order to vex videographers (and rightly so, IMO).

Was a WB nightmare! Yellow lights, blue lights, brown roof, white walls.
What, no quartz heaters facing away from the altar so the bride's face gets pinker and pinker the nearer she gets?

Whatever. More when I'm not so pushed for time, but on the strength of a 30-second flick through your blog post, that looks to be a very competent job. I reserve the right to change my mind when I've had a proper look, but on the face of it I detect definite signs of a transition from photographer to wedding photographer ...
 
They look great and everyone seems to be enjoying themselves, not sure about purple/grey outfits, but B&W fixes that one ;)
 
OK, here we go ...

Calendar - good subject to include, but it's a record shot so why photograph it so the viewer can't read it?

Girls on sofa and bottle opening in kitchen would both benefit from some cropping.

Brushes - dead boring. From the punter's POV this shot is a "so what?" picture. Nothing says "my wedding". Needs context as well as better composition to work, but ATEOTD it's still just a picture of some slap artist's brushes.

Girls watching m/u - I'd have taken that picture then another one when the hand had moved to block a bit less face. The grouping and their expressions wouldn't have changed in that time. It's always worth taking a couple of shots in quick succession where you have a hand moving over a face.

B/w bride in front of fireplace - well seen but why all the spare space? Half the picture consisting of a door doesn't equal context.

Shoes shot - before you're stuck for a background again, get a pair of bridal shoes from a charity shop and practice different arrangements so you have say three to fall back on, including one which works with very strappy heels and one with flats. Check out what the experts do - especially the female wedding snappers

That four glasses shot is a cracker. I've never done that picture better.

B/w bloke in kitchen - it's either a missed moment or the moment hadn't happened.yet.

Doing up the dress - very well caught in those circumstances.

Bride meeting dad/on stairs - again, very well done.

Blue gates shot - some people will say that's a snapshot but the bride and her dad will treasure that shot, and in my book it's a well-composed, well caught documentary picture.

Second one of her putting his ring on - the black dots over the heads are distracting, so zap those two candle-holders on the wall, otherwise it's a good 'un despite being framed a bit high. Did you miss him putting hers on?

That exit shot's a cracker.

Venue and detail shots are fine (and there aren't too many of them either!), as are the formals/couple shots apart from that one in front of the house with the tent thing in the b/g which was never going to work. I'd bin it. It detracts from the rest.

Meal/speech pictures are excellent and dance shots are fine.

Overall it's very good and certainly the best I've seen of yours. You captured the feel of the wedding and the personalities, you got some first class documentary shots and your formals/posed are fine (apart from the one mentioned above). This one conveys the impression that you had more confidence in what you were doing.

And I really don't know what you're on about regarding the light, in the church or anywhere else for that matter. The end result is fine, and it's all good practice for when you have to shoot in really crap light ...
 
Last edited:
Looks good to me and some of the object shots can come in usefull in a digital album. I think you are using the lens with too big an aperture ..the two girls at the door are not both in focus. although photogrphers love this differential focus thing the public sees it as a fault if used too much . I shoot everthing at F8 even if its a 13th century church with 5watt low energy bulbs....
 
Fab stuff Gareth. I'd be chuffed to bits with these images, and the ones on your website!
 
They look great and everyone seems to be enjoying themselves, not sure about purple/grey outfits, but B&W fixes that one ;)

Thanks. Not a lot I can do about the colours they choose for their wedding though. :)

OK, here we go ...

Calendar - good subject to include, but it's a record shot so why photograph it so the viewer can't read it?

Girls on sofa and bottle opening in kitchen would both benefit from some cropping.

Brushes - dead boring. From the punter's POV this shot is a "so what?" picture. Nothing says "my wedding". Needs context as well as better composition to work, but ATEOTD it's still just a picture of some slap artist's brushes.

Girls watching m/u - I'd have taken that picture then another one when the hand had moved to block a bit less face. The grouping and their expressions wouldn't have changed in that time. It's always worth taking a couple of shots in quick succession where you have a hand moving over a face.

B/w bride in front of fireplace - well seen but why all the spare space? Half the picture consisting of a door doesn't equal context.

Shoes shot - before you're stuck for a background again, get a pair of bridal shoes from a charity shop and practice different arrangements so you have say three to fall back on, including one which works with very strappy heels and one with flats. Check out what the experts do - especially the female wedding snappers

That four glasses shot is a cracker. I've never done that picture better.

B/w bloke in kitchen - it's either a missed moment or the moment hadn't happened.yet.

Doing up the dress - very well caught in those circumstances.

Bride meeting dad/on stairs - again, very well done.

Blue gates shot - some people will say that's a snapshot but the bride and her dad will treasure that shot, and in my book it's a well-composed, well caught documentary picture.

Second one of her putting his ring on - the black dots over the heads are distracting, so zap those two candle-holders on the wall, otherwise it's a good 'un despite being framed a bit high. Did you miss him putting hers on?

That exit shot's a cracker.

Venue and detail shots are fine (and there aren't too many of them either!), as are the formals/couple shots apart from that one in front of the house with the tent thing in the b/g which was never going to work. I'd bin it. It detracts from the rest.

Meal/speech pictures are excellent and dance shots are fine.

Overall it's very good and certainly the best I've seen of yours. You captured the feel of the wedding and the personalities, you got some first class documentary shots and your formals/posed are fine (apart from the one mentioned above). This one conveys the impression that you had more confidence in what you were doing.

And I really don't know what you're on about regarding the light, in the church or anywhere else for that matter. The end result is fine, and it's all good practice for when you have to shoot in really crap light ...

As always Dan, thank you for the details. The shoes shot. Yes, I hate that one. I am sure there were other places I could have shot them too but on the day, I guess my mind just went blank!!
Same with that Gazebo thingy. I could probably take it out of the blog post but they still have it now. Yes, I wasn't a great fan really. That building would look so much better without it there.

Looks good to me and some of the object shots can come in usefull in a digital album. I think you are using the lens with too big an aperture ..the two girls at the door are not both in focus. although photogrphers love this differential focus thing the public sees it as a fault if used too much . I shoot everthing at F8 even if its a 13th century church with 5watt low energy bulbs....

Thanks. I don't think I will be shooting everything at F8, but I do think I should go a little narrower now and then.

Fab stuff Gareth. I'd be chuffed to bits with these images, and the ones on your website!

Thanks Bethy and thanks for taking a look on the site. :)
 
when you get your first complaint and demand for money back ....try explaining to a judge why the dad on the stairs is out of focus.....
But dont get upset do what you think is right for you . I am happy with what I do at F8
 
Top work mate, enjoyed the blog and you did a very good job IMO. The w/b is tricky in venues sometimes so get used to that, good practice to be experiencing it now, not much you can do other than correct it as much as possible... It'll never look 100%, it's just not possible sometimes :)

I enjoyed the evening shots, looks like you got to grips with using flash and it really benefitted these later on in the day photos.

Looks like you've got a very promising future ahead!
 
I know that church and preist very well, Salford? I

Yes it's in Salford. :)

when you get your first complaint and demand for money back ....try explaining to a judge why the dad on the stairs is out of focus.....
But dont get upset do what you think is right for you . I am happy with what I do at F8

Hopefully it won't come to that but, as I said, your point is valid in regard to some of my shots. I admit myself that I should have stopped down for some. But I also don't think that F8, pretty much everything in focus all the time is the answer either. I'm guessing at F8 all the time, you must use a lot of on camera flash? But as you say, whatever works for you.

Top work mate, enjoyed the blog and you did a very good job IMO. The w/b is tricky in venues sometimes so get used to that, good practice to be experiencing it now, not much you can do other than correct it as much as possible... It'll never look 100%, it's just not possible sometimes :)

I enjoyed the evening shots, looks like you got to grips with using flash and it really benefitted these later on in the day photos.

Looks like you've got a very promising future ahead!

Thanks Andy. I appreciate your comments. There's a lot (again) that I know I can do better and will strive to do next time, then the time after that.
 
Use flash for speeches and the wife does for preps ...we tend to conciously turn the flash off rather than conciously turn it on.
F8 in the church registry office no problem without flash ( I would not use flash even if allowed as they would realize I take maybe 150 photos) . If you pull out to 140mm even at f8 you can still get bokeh as the depth of field is only 6 inches @10 ft ( DX).
I have analysed the focal lengths used at weddings and most are around 40mm (groups etc) which at f8 is 40ft of DOF.
Depth of field calculator here

http://www.dofmaster.com/dofjs.html
 
Use flash for speeches and the wife does for preps ...we tend to conciously turn the flash off rather than conciously turn it on.
F8 in the church registry office no problem without flash ( I would not use flash even if allowed as they would realize I take maybe 150 photos) . If you pull out to 140mm even at f8 you can still get bokeh as the depth of field is only 6 inches @10 ft ( DX).
I have analysed the focal lengths used at weddings and most are around 40mm (groups etc) which at f8 is 40ft of DOF.
Depth of field calculator here

http://www.dofmaster.com/dofjs.html

What's the point in analysing it vs other focal lengths? If doing do would it not make more sense to get in closer and shoot with a wider aperture to give you a much lower ISO? Aperture isn't just about bokeh after all. I really see no benefit to being further away and using a narrower aperture in dark venues, it really doesn't make any sense
 
First things first, Gareth, great set. You obviously are setting your own standards very high to be worried that this is a set to be worried about and Dan as always has nailed the in depth critique and I cannot add anything else. Dare I ask what sharpening technique you use? Your images are sharp and vibrant,love it! Keep shooting fella, I envy your work!

Pistnbroke - There are times to use F8 and blast flash at people and times not to, formal shots, groups etc, absolutely yes, a deep depth of field is king with lighting to fill, doing smaller groups where people are generally in line maybe hover at a slightly lower F stop, but part of the creative process to produce stunning sets like this is to create a sense of style and art by using that slim depth of field with perhaps selective bounce flash, both of which can add 'pop' to the focal point of the shot. One of the first things I was taught regarding wedding, conference, networking, etc, photography is that even though you need to use flash to produce or enhance the shot, the ideal as a professional is to make it look like you didn't use flash, as any old monkey with a DSLR and flashgun can set it on auto and just blast away. Shooting at F8 unselectively means you either end up with really grainy images due to high ISO and/or sledgehammer flash images anyone could produce.
 
I dont want to get into an argument but I know what works for me. I think ajax misunderstood the focal length analysis ...that was to see if you really needed an 18-300 zoom and I found few shots taken over about 140mm (DX) so this guided my zoom lens choice when the sigma lenses failed to work on the D7100.
I dont quite follow the get closer open the aperture and use lower iso....you cannot get closer if you are standing by the organ.and if you open up the aperture you dont get the people in focus as they are at 45 deg to you. (look at your girls on the doorstep shot) When doing groups arty shots etc positon is determined by perspctive.
What I am saying is dont over do the minimal depth of field if there is more than one in the shot .(like the dad on the staircase .).The judge will say I could do better with my mobile phone...dont ever argue with a judge just make sure you dont have to .
Having said that your work is excellent way beyond the 3rd wedding experience and if you can charge £2000 carry a bag of primes and have couples who will give you the time to change lenses and fiddle with settings fine , but I dont.
 
Last edited:
Ignoring the twaddle, there's some great stuff on there, Dan has summed it up better than I could so I'll save my breath. You're well on your way with these Gareth.
 
First things first, Gareth, great set. You obviously are setting your own standards very high to be worried that this is a set to be worried about and Dan as always has nailed the in depth critique and I cannot add anything else. Dare I ask what sharpening technique you use? Your images are sharp and vibrant,love it! Keep shooting fella, I envy your work!

Hey Marcus. Thank you for your comments. Yes, Dan is thorough isn't he? I agree with his points and will definitely take his, and other people's advice forwards in the future as I always do! I'm not sure that you have call to be 'envious' with the stuff you turn out, however, as for the sharpening, I only use Lightroom. I'll check the settings later and get back to you. I have it saved now to save me time in the future but it seems to be where I am happy with it.

I dont want to get into an argument but I know what works for me. I think ajax misunderstood the focal length analysis ...that was to see if you really needed an 18-300 zoom and I found few shots taken over about 140mm (DX) so this guided my zoom lens choice when the sigma lenses failed to work on the D7100.
I dont quite follow the get closer open the aperture and use lower iso....you cannot get closer if you are standing by the organ.and if you open up the aperture you dont get the people in focus as they are at 45 deg to you. (look at your girls on the doorstep shot) When doing groups arty shots etc positon is determined by perspctive.
What I am saying is dont over do the minimal depth of field if there is more than one in the shot .(like the dad on the staircase .).The judge will say I could do better with my mobile phone...dont ever argue with a judge just make sure you dont have to .
Having said that your work is excellent way beyond the 3rd wedding experience and if you can charge £2000 carry a bag of primes and have couples who will give you the time to change lenses and fiddle with settings fine , but I dont.

As I said in my previous reply, I agree with your point that on a couple of occasions I could have closed the aperture a little more. I don't agree with the image you mentioned with the bride on the stairs. I am happy that she is the main focus of the image and that dad is also obviously there but not in focus.

As for arguing with the judge? Suddenly I am finding myself in court for shooting at F2.0?

Thank you, although I charge nowhere near £2000. In fact my current package is around a quarter of that, give or take. I have two bodies, 2 primes and what I hope is a good approach. If you can't find the time during the day to rotate a wheel to change aperture, your weddings are a darn sight busier than the ones I have shot so far!

Ignoring the twaddle, there's some great stuff on there, Dan has summed it up better than I could so I'll save my breath. You're well on your way with these Gareth.

Thank you Phil. Yes, as I said in reply to Marcus. Dan has been very thorough. I am sure other people can add their thoughts if they are different, all of which I value.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
...
Having said that your work is excellent way beyond the 3rd wedding experience and if you can charge £2000 carry a bag of primes and have couples who will give you the time to change lenses and fiddle with settings fine , but I dont.

Not ignoring the twaddle.
You know if you know what you're doing, you can switch lenses without 'fiddling'. And if your work is good enough, you can find plenty of customers prepared to give you £2000 for carrying a bag of lenses that's actually lighter than the bag of zooms most wedding photographers carry.
For clarity - I don't shoot primarily with primes or charge over £2000, but it's not difficult to find people who do and are making it work (it's not where I'm headed, I don't have the business or photographic acumen). We are all aware of why it wouldn't work for you. ;)
 
Great set Gareth..I'll join you in court for shooting at f2 also... ;)

Your clients will book you for the look you give so can't imagine clients ever being unhappy.
 
Well now the wedding clique have arrived I will leave you to it ...standby for the moose to join in.
 
Well now the wedding clique have arrived I will leave you to it ...standby for the moose to join in.
o_O
Why make ludicrous statements if you're not prepared to back them up. You could stick to the facts and no-one would bother contradicting you. But if you're going to talk b011ox don't expect us all to ignore you and let people be seriously misled.
 
Well now the wedding clique have arrived I will leave you to it ...standby for the moose to join in.

Why all the talk about court and judges? What's provoked all of that?

I think blasting with flash at high iso using consumer level superzooms is more likely to provoke a negative reaction from a bride than producing natural looking images where the dof focusses on the bride/groom/subject matter.
 
Well now the wedding clique have arrived I will leave you to it ...standby for the moose to join in.

Nowt to do with any cliques mate... I've had a quick gander at your website and I haven't found any examples that would convince me shooting at f/8 for a the ceremony is a better way of doing things than what Gareth has done here. Also from a technical point of view you don't need f/8 to get 2 people in focus... if your argument had be say f/4 I'd have given your argument more credence, but technically your argument doesn't stand up.
 
great stuff. Im not qualified to give crit yet, but if it was my 3rd gig i would be well pleased.
 
3rd wedding? Yeah, you're going to be ok Gareth.

when you get your first complaint and demand for money back ....try explaining to a judge why the dad on the stairs is out of focus.....
But dont get upset do what you think is right for you . I am happy with what I do at F8

Are you on crack?

Reading your posts you seem to like positioning yourself as an expert and a REALLY good wedding photographer. Sadly your forum activity is writing cheques your portfolio can't cash.
 
Last edited:
Super work Gareth. You've either got it or you haven't... I believe you clearly have it.

:clap:

Thanks for the kind words. :)

great stuff. Im not qualified to give crit yet, but if it was my 3rd gig i would be well pleased.

Your more than qualified to offer crit, as is everyone. Thank you. :)

3rd wedding? Yeah, you're going to be ok

Thanks Guy. :)

Great set Gareth, very high quality for just your 3rd wedding.

Thank you. :)
 
3rd wedding? Yeah, you're going to be ok Gareth.



Are you on crack?

Reading your posts you seem to like positioning yourself as an expert and a REALLY good wedding photographer. Sadly your forum activity is writing cheques your portfolio can't cash.

lol...one of the best responses i have read in a while...:D
 
Hi Gareth, checked the wedding set out and you've done a great job. I wouldn't think that this is only the 3rd wedding you've covered.

I won't repeat a few of the good observational comments above just for the sake of it. Wanted to say you got the mood and emotion of the day well. Sometimes as photographers we go straight into the technical detail, which is course is important. But storytelling and emotions are up right there especially for our clients. I enjoyed going through the images. I'd maybe look at shots 3 to 7 for your online set. The couple will of course love them but maybe removing those or a few of them may quicken the story better. Sometimes less is more.

Great job :)
 
. Sadly your forum activity is writing cheques your portfolio can't cash.

gotta love a top gun quote

were you tempted to follow up with

"and lets face it son, your name aint the best in this forum... you gotta be doing it better and cleaner than the other guy"

or

"you're everybody's problem, every time you go to a wedding you're unsafe " :ROFLMAO:
 
on topic ive not looked at the blog (on a very slow connection here) , but good work on the three pictures showing on the forum - its a shame about the burn out on the dress in #3 (on her chest) but thats minor - my guess is that only another photographer will notice.

for your third wedding these are exceptional (y)
 
on topic ive not looked at the blog (on a very slow connection here) , but good work on the three pictures showing on the forum - its a shame about the burn out on the dress in #3 (on her chest) but thats minor - my guess is that only another photographer will notice.

for your third wedding these are exceptional (y)
Judging by the 'feel' of that shot, my guess is the PP burnt the frock.
 
Judging by the 'feel' of that shot, my guess is the PP burnt the frock.

yep i'd concur - it could probably be avoided , but like i said i doubt the bride will notice or care if she did
 
Hi Gareth, checked the wedding set out and you've done a great job. I wouldn't think that this is only the 3rd wedding you've covered.

I won't repeat a few of the good observational comments above just for the sake of it. Wanted to say you got the mood and emotion of the day well. Sometimes as photographers we go straight into the technical detail, which is course is important. But storytelling and emotions are up right there especially for our clients. I enjoyed going through the images. I'd maybe look at shots 3 to 7 for your online set. The couple will of course love them but maybe removing those or a few of them may quicken the story better. Sometimes less is more.

Great job :)

Thanks for your comments, Rajesh. I'll have a look at the blog images you mentioned. :)

on topic ive not looked at the blog (on a very slow connection here) , but good work on the three pictures showing on the forum - its a shame about the burn out on the dress in #3 (on her chest) but thats minor - my guess is that only another photographer will notice.

for your third wedding these are exceptional (y)

Thank you for the nice words. I see no burnt bits in the dress and LR would agree. Not being argumentative by the way incase it comes across that way. Do you mean her chest above the dress? I can see that is a bit brighter perhaps.
 
Great work Gareth, especially for a 3rd outing. There's always going to be elements you want to improve, which is part of the process, but overall there's good variety and consistent output even from the awkward lighting conditions you mention.
 
Back
Top