Brenna and Don
This is actually a renewal. They were married a few months ago at a private ceremony. It was no different than a regular wedding however. Here are a few of my faves. Ross shot 2nd on this one with me and I'll let him post some of his if he wants. C&C welcomed and appreciated.
01.
02.
03.
04.
05.
06.
07.
08.
09.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
Thanks for looking.
Matt
01.
02.
03.
04.
05.
06.
07.
08.
09.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
Thanks for looking.
Matt
My Smugmug site
Bodies: Canon 5d mkII, 5d, 40d
Lenses: 24-70 f2.8L, 70-200 f4.0L, 135 f2L, 85 f1.8, 50 1.8, 100 f2.8 macro, Tamron 28-105 f2.8
Flash: 2x 580 exII, Canon ST-E2, 2x Pocket Wizard flexTT5, and some lower end studio strobes
Bodies: Canon 5d mkII, 5d, 40d
Lenses: 24-70 f2.8L, 70-200 f4.0L, 135 f2L, 85 f1.8, 50 1.8, 100 f2.8 macro, Tamron 28-105 f2.8
Flash: 2x 580 exII, Canon ST-E2, 2x Pocket Wizard flexTT5, and some lower end studio strobes
0
Comments
I really like the moments captured in #'s 5, 8 (my favorite of the set) and 13. I also like the ring shot #15, good creative use of the cork.
Not crazy about #2, I don't know if its the dated look of the PP or just her not looking very happy that makes the PP not work for me.
The only other minor thing is that I might have switched the PP on 10 & 11. I think 10 would be a great shot in B&W
MILOStudios
www.milophotostudios.com
If you dont mind me asking, what was your settings for #4? Dont get me wrong my church photos turn out, but I really like the mix you got here. I usually find my ap. is usually to large or almost to small but workable and I am looking for that happy medium.
Ross told me about those crazy mirrors, looks like you really worked with them though. The photos are beautiful!
1) Nice catch, but I'd clone out the lines under her eyes
2) She's beautiful, but seems to be a bit in a loss with her hands. No bouquet in sight?
4) Pretty, pretty
6/7) Cute
8) Adorable.
9) Nice detail shot!
10) Beautiful also, but nooo bouquet?? :cry How about the cuddle up a bit more and he putts his hands around her? How a bit of a stronger vignette, esp in the bottom right corner. ....
11) Cute
12) A bit out of focus?
13) Very cute
14) Good eye!
HA! guess I think they're a really cute couple
Jeff,
First off #2. This is not a typical PP style for me but because she looks so distant, uncomfortable and melancholy it seemed to fit. There is a cross coming out of her head, the end of her dress is out of the frame as is the far side of the fireplace mantle. I looked at this one and at first I saw my amateurish side popping up it's head, then suddenly it reminded me of an old wedding photo and I processed it to look that way. I didn't expect it would be everyone's cup of tea but it is one of my faves from the day! As for the b&w pp suggestions, I typically shoot many versions of the same shot and if there are a few that I like I do different forms of processing on them as an excuse to deliver them all without redundancy. There were probably 20 usable shots from that ledge and probably 5 made it to the final gallery. Some of those are b&w.
17.
As for 5 and 8 I agree with you... doing the posed stuff and the archival stuff is great and important, but at the end of the day, the shots that catch unobstructed emotion are the ones I cherish.
Ashley... repeat after me "I'm going to go out and buy a 135 f2L" This was shot with 5d mkii, 135 f2L, f2, 1/200th, iso 1600. The thing that you are probably seeing however is the bounce flash. I am bouncing from a shoe mounted flash to the left wall of the church. there was plenty of light in the church for shooting ambient, but a little kiss of bounced flash gives some direction to the light and melts the light temps together somewhat for more consistent skin tones. I will preach my side wall bounce technique all day if you'll let me!!! Also, fast telephotos have very narro depth of field so if you are filling a frame like this at f2 you need to be sure you are focused right on the face/eye and are perpendicular to the couple... there is maybe an inch of depth that can achieve proper focus. Either use a selected focal point or focus and recompose. f&r at f2 is tough unless you are only moving your camera a tiny bit on the r. I'm pretty sure this was f&r but I often use the outside focal points in these cases too.
Trevor, thanks buddy. I like those as well. 9 is a bread and butter e-shoot snap for me. Almost to the point that I don't want to shoot that shot at all, but everyone loves that shot so I do it a lot! It can't ALL be about me, right?
Ang, I love ya! Thanks for taking the time!!!
I have a problem cloning out facial expressions or things that show emotion. If it was a zit I would take it out, but I feel the lines under her eyes show her nervousness and proof that she was stressing hard the night before. There are plenty of shots where she looks pretty, but this one is showing her emotion and condition before she took the walk. Not offended that you would suggest that, but some insight as to why I didn't consider it.
2 was a quick last minute request by the bride. I love that she looks uncomfortable and improperly posed. I'm going with a happy accident on that one!!! 10 I agree about his hands... actually I was broken hearted when I looked at them and never caught the fact that his hand was at his side. Stupid stupid me!! I would have LOVED that series if not for that. I like but don't love. Not sure I agree with the vignette but I may try both ways to see if I can understand what you are looking for there... most likely a good suggestion. In my defense on #10, this was about 2 minutes after I smashed my 24-70 f2.8L. I set my camera down with my external flash batt attached to both the flash and my belt and then walked a few feet away and draged it all down a concrete step. Busted the mount off the lens and scratched the rear element! AAAAAHHHHGGGGG! My backup is a Tamron that I don't care for so I just left that in the bag and shot the rest of the shoot with the 70-200. I'm claiming distraught!!
Thanks so much for all the comments and kind words folks... I really appreciate it!!!
Matt
Bodies: Canon 5d mkII, 5d, 40d
Lenses: 24-70 f2.8L, 70-200 f4.0L, 135 f2L, 85 f1.8, 50 1.8, 100 f2.8 macro, Tamron 28-105 f2.8
Flash: 2x 580 exII, Canon ST-E2, 2x Pocket Wizard flexTT5, and some lower end studio strobes
=Matt=
My SmugMug Portfolio • My Astro-Landscape Photo Blog • Dgrin Weddings Forum
(If it did, I might have one of my own!) However, I'd gladly take the new Nikon 85 f/1.4 instead!
I can totally vouch for this. I couldn't help but feel awful too - and not just because I shoot Nikon!
Matt, you need a picture of that lens - when the "Peripheral Damage" topic is comes up for WCC, you'd be a lock to win!
http://www.arkreations.com
Nikon D700 | D300 | D80 | SB-800(x2) | SB-600(x2)
Nikkor Lenses: 14-24 f/2.8 | 24-70 f/2.8 | 50 f/1.8 | 85 f/1.4 | 70-200 f/2.8 VR II | 70-300 VR
Alright Mr. Ambient giving out flash advice
As for the lens it is fine and perfect again. I sent to Canon in NJ that Monday and they had it back to me the following Monday like new. The serial number is different so I think they just replaced it. Lens is 4 years old. $185 shipped. Gotta love Canon. I never took a busted picture though Ross. Maybe you did on site? Or the terror on my face? ha!
I also sent my 4 yr old 5d classic in for the mirror recall and they reinforced the mirror per the recall but also replaced the focus screen, repaired the hotshoe, adjusted exposure and focus, cleaned the c-mos, and checked all factory specs. Plus did a shutter count for me. Cost to me including shipping to them and overnight fededx back to me was $0. I asked for the recall repair, shutter count, and to double check the auto focus which I thought was a tiny bit off, but they went the extra mile for me!! I LOVE Canon service!!!
Thanks guys!
Matt
Bodies: Canon 5d mkII, 5d, 40d
Lenses: 24-70 f2.8L, 70-200 f4.0L, 135 f2L, 85 f1.8, 50 1.8, 100 f2.8 macro, Tamron 28-105 f2.8
Flash: 2x 580 exII, Canon ST-E2, 2x Pocket Wizard flexTT5, and some lower end studio strobes
Wow - that is impressive service. For all they did for you, it might be worth busting up a lens every couple of years just for cleaning and preventative maintenance!
I never thought of taking a shot of the damage. I figure that would just be too cruel - much like laughing at a little kid who just dropped his ice cream cone in the dirt.
Glad to hear your back clicking on all cylinders again.
http://www.arkreations.com
Nikon D700 | D300 | D80 | SB-800(x2) | SB-600(x2)
Nikkor Lenses: 14-24 f/2.8 | 24-70 f/2.8 | 50 f/1.8 | 85 f/1.4 | 70-200 f/2.8 VR II | 70-300 VR
Love the ring shot... and the ceremony shot... and the dancing shot... and... and... and... Nice work.
#8 is really nice! Love the scrunched up nose...
That was a close one, huh!
Thanks Heather
Matt
Bodies: Canon 5d mkII, 5d, 40d
Lenses: 24-70 f2.8L, 70-200 f4.0L, 135 f2L, 85 f1.8, 50 1.8, 100 f2.8 macro, Tamron 28-105 f2.8
Flash: 2x 580 exII, Canon ST-E2, 2x Pocket Wizard flexTT5, and some lower end studio strobes
Wow! can't get much better compliment than that! Thanks so much! The branch in 7 was meant to be foreground blur. I agree it isn't as good as leaves or any semitransparent/thin objects that I normally use. Keep in mind the 24-70 was smashed and in my pocket at this time and my feet were in the garden with my butt against the church trying to get as wide of a shot as I could at 70mm.
matt
Bodies: Canon 5d mkII, 5d, 40d
Lenses: 24-70 f2.8L, 70-200 f4.0L, 135 f2L, 85 f1.8, 50 1.8, 100 f2.8 macro, Tamron 28-105 f2.8
Flash: 2x 580 exII, Canon ST-E2, 2x Pocket Wizard flexTT5, and some lower end studio strobes