Wedding #2 as 2nd shooter - C&C appreciated
Well, it's more of portraits and a reception. They were actually married a month ago because they wanted to be married on a cultural "lucky" day. They couldn't get a reception location booked on the same day so they split it up.
All of the outside shots I am using the 70-200 vr I that I rented for the first time. It's a nice piece of glass, but I was not used to composing with such a long lens. The bulkiness of it made it a little difficult as well.
I feel I learned a lot during this reception because the rooms(one for dining and one for dancing) were small and fairly dark. I was having inconsistent exposures bouncing flash and trying to quickly compensate. I think because of the small rooms, being closer or further away from a wall changed the flash strength a lot.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
All of the outside shots I am using the 70-200 vr I that I rented for the first time. It's a nice piece of glass, but I was not used to composing with such a long lens. The bulkiness of it made it a little difficult as well.
I feel I learned a lot during this reception because the rooms(one for dining and one for dancing) were small and fairly dark. I was having inconsistent exposures bouncing flash and trying to quickly compensate. I think because of the small rooms, being closer or further away from a wall changed the flash strength a lot.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
0
Comments
#1,9, and 14 ftw!
www.tednghiem.com
14-24 24-70 70-200mm (vr2)
85 and 50 1.4
45 PC and sb910 x2
http://www.danielkimphotography.com
Complete Gear List Here
Thanks! I think it was a little after 5pm when we started, good thing the sun is setting sooner now.
Yup, it's your Princeton Ted!
Thanks Qarik, I appreciate it! Anything in particular you don't like about #4? Pose, background, light, etc...
ok, whats wrong with #4 so I can not do that in the future? I may be blind from looking at these too long.
If it wasnt in line with all of your other fabulous shots I think I could give it a bit more credit but judging from every other shot you took, it is out of place.
Complete Gear List Here
btw, you are blind cause you are hogging all the pumpkin beer.
www.tednghiem.com
14-24 24-70 70-200mm (vr2)
85 and 50 1.4
45 PC and sb910 x2
http://www.danielkimphotography.com
And Ted, I have no idea what you're talking about
......:patch
One of these days...
www.tednghiem.com
I'm here to learn so please feel free to give me constructive criticism to help me become the photographer I desire to be.
The 70-200 was a good choice, I would do it again but I'd also like to try Matt Saville's advice and check out the Sigma 50-150 on dx. Thanks for C&C!
Educate yourself like you'll live forever and live like you'll die tomorrow.
Ed
Of course they are not technically perfect, some appear a little soft, but who cares? They will think that's a special romantic effect anyway.
The couple, the people that are hiring/ paying for the shooter, will love them and that's what counts.
The technicals are not distracting or patently wrong like cut off heads ( and geez, with wedding work you could crop them tighter still, call it art, and they'd think you were a genius!) and that's what you get with real world wedding work.
What I like about them and what I think is really important is that you have captured emotions. I smiled when I was looking through the pics and if everyone else does that when they look, then then the photos are big winners.
If you went out tomorrow and delivered a whole album of pics of this standard, you would have happy clients that were referring their friends to you. That's as good as it gets.
You don't need to be super creative with off the wall wacky ideas or flash album covers made of Mongolian Snow leopard and Dodo hide, you just need to produce a set of competent pics that capture the emotion of the day and your there.
And, you ARE there.
Well done.