My 3rd unpaid wedding

kyeezie · July 1, 2009

Here are a couple pictures from my third unpaid wedding. There was another photographer there, he was more of a pro so I didn't have much pressure. We both volunteered for it because the family had fallen on some hard times. I considered him the main photographer but I got a few shots out of the deal. The couple was so in love and so easy to get shots of them kissing, they couldn't take their hands off each other! I know nearly nothing about photoshop so overall, these images are almost untouched. Let me know what you think! We also had minimal time for pictures, talk about a wedding running late! ..Ok, I messed up uploading those pictures. heres one I will do more when I get home from work, please let me know what you think!

2.

3.

4.

5.

MelMcClain · July 1, 2009

Hey there!

I like where you're going with your shot but a few adjustments in Photoshop could make this a much better photo. I'm a fan of keeping the shots simple so I'd just make a few color adjustments and change exposure settings. Keep up the great work though!! I'd love to see more of what you took:)

kyeezie · July 1, 2009

I'll see what I can try to do in photoshop:-) Thanks for the comments and I added a couple more.

Photosbychuck · July 2, 2009

Nice Shots

I would crop some off the left side of #2.

What lens did you use?

Take Care,
Chuck

Matthew Saville · July 3, 2009

You know for some reason in this forum particularly, I see a lot of advice given along the lines of "the photos are good, but a bit of photoshop could make them great!"

...To be honest, (and no offense) I don't like where this is going. Not a trend you want to keep up, people. Photoshop should almsot NEVER be necessary to make a shot stand out; images really ought to stand on their own two feet right out of the camera. I'm not talking about color or exposure, of course, because yeah we all need a couple clicks in Lightroom, even on our best days.

It's all about the actual subject and composition captured, very little else.

Since you only posted a few pics, Kyeezie, I'll advise: For starters, mind your background. In EVERY single shot you take. This is the number one thing that will set your images apart. Having a clean, un-distracting background will go 100x further than most every other trick you can use to make a picture turn out well. In the first shot, you should have either re-positioned yourself to one side or the other to eliminate that brickwork and go with a clean background, or make the brickwork the entire background. In the 2nd shot, their heads are slightly blended with the wooden thing in the background, her white is super close to blending with the white ground and poles, and his side is hidden behind the railing. I don't know what is in the immediate vicinity of that particular spot, but I might have started over from scratch with that photo, finding a cleaner background altogether. Or at least, take a step to your left and raise the camera a foot or two, to frame them in that open space. In the third shot, his arm is totally blended with the vine in the background. Re-position yourself so that they are properly framed without anything touching them that is the same color. And in the fifth shot, there's a light or something sticking out of her ear. Either open up a little more, or re-position.

=Matt=

kyeezie · July 3, 2009

Thanks everyone for your responses and looking at my shots. I appreciate it and any cc that comes. I do need to be more mindful of backgrounds, I think that's one of my worst issues. This case was even more difficult cause I pretty much worked around the other photographer and since there was no time for picture taking any posing was hardly done. I think only one picture above was actually posed, and he got the better angle on it. Having said that, what do you guys do with unposed shots like this that have the distracting background. the one picture with the light coming out of her ear she was about to throw the bouquet and all she did was smile. So in this case, what do you do. Honestly I didn't notice anyway, but for next time. Thanks again guys, you really keep me thinking and on my toes!

Matthew Saville · July 4, 2009

kyeezie wrote:

Thanks everyone for your responses and looking at my shots. I appreciate it and any cc that comes. I do need to be more mindful of backgrounds, I think that's one of my worst issues. This case was even more difficult cause I pretty much worked around the other photographer and since there was no time for picture taking any posing was hardly done. I think only one picture above was actually posed, and he got the better angle on it. Having said that, what do you guys do with unposed shots like this that have the distracting background. the one picture with the light coming out of her ear she was about to throw the bouquet and all she did was smile. So in this case, what do you do. Honestly I didn't notice anyway, but for next time. Thanks again guys, you really keep me thinking and on my toes!

If you're not the main shooter, then mostly what I do is focus on the "other things" In fact I get giddy when I'm assisting another photographer, because it frees me up. Unless the main photographer gives you a specific task, DO NOT WORRY about getting any of the "key" photos. Play around. Usually for me this means zooming way in, getting an artistic shot that may not encompass the whole scene or portrait that the main photographer NEEDS to capture.

Here are a couple shots I got from weddings I've assisted at in the last year:

Wasn't responsible for getting a "clean" shot of the kiss, so I took a risk and stepped back for this shot. I would have NEVER done this if I were the main shooter, unless I was 100% confident that it would work compositionally:

Same wedding, at the reception. They had someone commissioned to paint a painting during their wedding, so I grabbed my tripod and took the time to do an HDR-type shot. Again, something I probably wouldn't have had the liberty or time to do as the main shooter:

A 2nd-shooter's #1 weapon!!! "The laugh shot"... Instead of worrying about the critical stuff like getting their whole bodies in the photo or making sure a hand / elbow isn't chopped off at the edge; zoom in and wait for a group of people to laugh. Or when the main photographer is setting up a flash or something, do something to MAKE them laugh. Works every time:

The OTHER standard composition- "no heads in the photo" This is the epitome of the zooming in and focusing on the details method. While the main photographer was shooting this shot, the WHOLE shot, I was asking myself "okay, why is this shot powerful, what is MAKING the shot? ...The light and the shadow. That's it." ...Zoom, shoot!

Kyeezie, what I see in your photos is that you may be making an effort to duplicate the main photographer's "required" images. All other things being equal, I believe you'll make the biggest improvement if you let go of that one notion.

Take care!
=Matt=

kpmedia · July 4, 2009

Matthew Saville wrote:

You know for some reason in this forum particularly, I see a lot of advice given along the lines of "the photos are good, but a bit of photoshop could make them great!"

...To be honest, (and no offense) I don't like where this is going. Not a trend you want to keep up, people. Photoshop should almsot NEVER be necessary to make a shot stand out; images really ought to stand on their own two feet right out of the camera. I'm not talking about color or exposure, of course, because yeah we all need a couple clicks in Lightroom, even on our best days.

It's all about the actual subject and composition captured, very little else.

Since you only posted a few pics, Kyeezie, I'll advise: For starters, mind your background. In EVERY single shot you take. This is the number one thing that will set your images apart. Having a clean, un-distracting background will go 100x further than most every other trick you can use to make a picture turn out well. In the first shot, you should have either re-positioned yourself to one side or the other to eliminate that brickwork and go with a clean background, or make the brickwork the entire background. In the 2nd shot, their heads are slightly blended with the wooden thing in the background, her white is super close to blending with the white ground and poles, and his side is hidden behind the railing. I don't know what is in the immediate vicinity of that particular spot, but I might have started over from scratch with that photo, finding a cleaner background altogether. Or at least, take a step to your left and raise the camera a foot or two, to frame them in that open space. In the third shot, his arm is totally blended with the vine in the background. Re-position yourself so that they are properly framed without anything touching them that is the same color. And in the fifth shot, there's a light or something sticking out of her ear. Either open up a little more, or re-position.

=Matt=

I'd like to agree with this in general, but sensors just don't react like film did. The images are BETTER in many ways, but worse in others, in the digital world. What I saw in the viewfinder always turned out the same way on a negative strip or a slide. It's not the same necessarily when the CCD or CMOS grabs the image these days. Sometimes I have to go in and fix it back the way I wanted it to look -- the way it DID LOOK!

I had to spend very little time standing around in the darkroom, as compared to how much I sit clicking in Photoshop.

It's an adjustment.

Matthew Saville · July 4, 2009

kpmedia wrote:

I'd like to agree with this in general, but sensors just don't react like film did. The images are BETTER in many ways, but worse in others, in the digital world. What I saw in the viewfinder always turned out the same way on a negative strip or a slide. It's not the same necessarily when the CCD or CMOS grabs the image these days. Sometimes I have to go in and fix it back the way I wanted it to look -- the way it DID LOOK!

I had to spend very little time standing around in the darkroom, as compared to how much I sit clicking in Photoshop.

It's an adjustment.

You're right kpmedia, the darkroom is definitely a world apart from the digital workflow. And I still love to shoot Velvia 50 in my FM2, Digital just can't come close when it comes to the FEEL of the image.

My point was simply that people on this forum seem to give too much "it could be better if you re-photoshop it" advice, and not enough "it could be better if you moved down and to the left, or if you framed this instead of that, etc." type advice...

I definitely believe that, when you've mastered in-camera capture and have a solid post-production workflow, you should barely have to glance at your images before they are deliverable. This is what I am doing right now for a wedding I shot a couple weeks ago. Here's one of the images that needed zero adjustments from the default RAW settings I had applied. Sure, I would tweak the skin tones and contrast a tiny bit if they ordered a print, but this went straight to the proofs folder, for sure...

=Matt=

My 3rd unpaid wedding

Comments