Shari and Will engagement shoot (lots 'o pix for C&C!)
(Comcast finally back!)
C&C - yes please!! :thumb (eta this nearer the top of the post :giggle : particularly, but not limited to, processing - I know there's WAY too many styles, and want feedback so I can pick a couple of specifics and unify the set :thumb)
Things I learned this weekend:
1. Llywellyn is the best assistant anybody could ever hope for. She's not only psychic and seemed to know exactly what I need pretty much as I thought it, she brought the Amazing Light Pole (and her softbox), but also had a knack for noticing when I was getting flustered and/or just doing something dumb and gently nudging me back on course. I hope she'll post her own shots soon - she sent me a gorgeous teaser, even more amazing when you consider she was holding a softbox for me at the time as well as fighting the wind (and I suspect her fingers were dropping off with the cold by then too!). Major, major, MAJOR thanks to her for coming along :lust
2. Check that family members have not moved lightstand from the bag; regardless how good their reasons may have been, this is Not A Good Thing To Discover When You Arrive Onsite.
3. Late afternoon light is awesome, but has its own challenges on a bright day.
4. The built-in commander on the 7d is great, but boy does it slow things down when the battery is at the end of its charge... Finally gave up and switched to the ste2 because it recovers faster!
5. On a plus note, all focusing seemed to be fine with all lenses. Admittedly, I didn't shoot as much shallow dof as I usually do (partly to play it safe just in case), but for the most part it was fine, and where it wasn't fine, it was obvious why, so it seems that was a one-off issue 2 weeks ago.
5. Horizons should not go through heads. Repeat after me: not.through.heads. :rolleyes
All that said, we had so much fun with these two! I'd met Will before and he'd been rather quiet and I wasn't expecting much from him vis-a-vis pictures, but how wrong could I be? They were absolutely adorable, are obviously SO happy and excited about their wedding, and really, all I had to do was point the camera at them and push buttons.
They pretty much posed themselves most of the time (in fact, it was almost always better when I let them get on with it so, except for the occasional strand of hair and clothing adjustment, I just let them!).
I'm still not sure how to process many of these - that's partly because there are lots of options that look good, but I'm just not sure what I *want* yet; consequently, I've wound up with too many variants, and I want to streamline it in the set I post for the couple. So, ALL comments (good bad and indifferent) warmly welcomed. Bring it on!
In any case, the first batch, hot off the processing press.... lots more to go through, but I want to get more processing ideas in order before spending a ton of time on shots only to change to something else later....
1.
2. This isn't technically perfect, but I LOVE the energy in it, and the looks on their faces.
2b: Same here, but I just love it even though it's got motion blur. Does it need to be tossed? Be ruthless with me - I'd rather cull now than regret what I post for them later...
Alternatively, a way of processing it to work with the flaws rather than against them?
3. Something about his hat lent itself to antique-y processing, although I wonder if this might be a bit much.... I know - railings through his head. We actually wanted them on the OTHER side of the railings,b ut due to sand on the ground it wasn't so practical. Are they a dealbreaker here?
4. They started dancing! Unfortunately, they caught me with the wrong lens on the camera and we were totally NOT ready for them, but I still grabbed a couple. Is this overprocessed? The light was pretty contrasty on the wharf, and I kind of liked this treatment, but if it's too much, tell me...
5.
6.
7. Ok, this next batch are what I consider my "Hommage a Jeffreaux2" set :lust
Biggest challenge here was the flippin' earthmover right in shot in the upper left corner - there was just no way to avoid it AND get the shadow framed (believe me, I tried!). I've tried cloning it, but looked ghastly, so I resorted to extreme croppage....
7a. (I cloned some bushes over the wheels to minimize it - cludge-y, but I think it works to disguise it being great big ugly WHEELS)
7b. Different shot in set @ slightly different angle; I think I like this one because of the tippy-toes. Processing too dark?
7c: alternate crop
7-1/2 (sorrry - forgot one!) I love this shot, but really bad CA on the lit side of his face, which is blown. I need to figure out 1. how to minimize the CA and 2. how to get some of the texture on the un-blown side pasted onto the blown side. Needs work, iow, but I like it enough to try (and any suggestions/techniques to do so very welcome!)
8. Is the flare a dealbreaker here? Can't decide. Also not sure about the processing now I see it up here...
9. Down to another part of the water nearer sunset - the water really WAS blue+gold - this shot actually doesn't have that much done to it.
10. I simply can't decide what to do with this shot. I like it, but am just floundering a bit with how to give it the wow factor. Thoughts?
10a. Pretty close to the reality
10 b Warmed way up and twiddled with
Lastly, the Really Really Good Epic Fail. I'm so frustrated with these! Glorious light, I managed to get the flare-stars I wanted mostly WHERE I wanted (boy, it's hard to line that up!) and... the background is distracting (that half white/half black thing really bugs me). If I moved to reframe it against sky I lost the sun entirely, we couldn't move them over (break in the bench) and at this point everybody was cold and tired and I knew if we asked them to move down the pier (with all the stuff) we'd lose the moment - I felt like I just had to make it work in situ. Soo.... this lovely semi-silhouette has a building in just the wrong place. Trash them, or use them anyway?
11a
11b
11c
C&C - yes please!! :thumb (eta this nearer the top of the post :giggle : particularly, but not limited to, processing - I know there's WAY too many styles, and want feedback so I can pick a couple of specifics and unify the set :thumb)
Things I learned this weekend:
1. Llywellyn is the best assistant anybody could ever hope for. She's not only psychic and seemed to know exactly what I need pretty much as I thought it, she brought the Amazing Light Pole (and her softbox), but also had a knack for noticing when I was getting flustered and/or just doing something dumb and gently nudging me back on course. I hope she'll post her own shots soon - she sent me a gorgeous teaser, even more amazing when you consider she was holding a softbox for me at the time as well as fighting the wind (and I suspect her fingers were dropping off with the cold by then too!). Major, major, MAJOR thanks to her for coming along :lust
2. Check that family members have not moved lightstand from the bag; regardless how good their reasons may have been, this is Not A Good Thing To Discover When You Arrive Onsite.
3. Late afternoon light is awesome, but has its own challenges on a bright day.
4. The built-in commander on the 7d is great, but boy does it slow things down when the battery is at the end of its charge... Finally gave up and switched to the ste2 because it recovers faster!
5. On a plus note, all focusing seemed to be fine with all lenses. Admittedly, I didn't shoot as much shallow dof as I usually do (partly to play it safe just in case), but for the most part it was fine, and where it wasn't fine, it was obvious why, so it seems that was a one-off issue 2 weeks ago.
5. Horizons should not go through heads. Repeat after me: not.through.heads. :rolleyes
All that said, we had so much fun with these two! I'd met Will before and he'd been rather quiet and I wasn't expecting much from him vis-a-vis pictures, but how wrong could I be? They were absolutely adorable, are obviously SO happy and excited about their wedding, and really, all I had to do was point the camera at them and push buttons.
They pretty much posed themselves most of the time (in fact, it was almost always better when I let them get on with it so, except for the occasional strand of hair and clothing adjustment, I just let them!).
I'm still not sure how to process many of these - that's partly because there are lots of options that look good, but I'm just not sure what I *want* yet; consequently, I've wound up with too many variants, and I want to streamline it in the set I post for the couple. So, ALL comments (good bad and indifferent) warmly welcomed. Bring it on!
In any case, the first batch, hot off the processing press.... lots more to go through, but I want to get more processing ideas in order before spending a ton of time on shots only to change to something else later....
1.
2. This isn't technically perfect, but I LOVE the energy in it, and the looks on their faces.
2b: Same here, but I just love it even though it's got motion blur. Does it need to be tossed? Be ruthless with me - I'd rather cull now than regret what I post for them later...
Alternatively, a way of processing it to work with the flaws rather than against them?3. Something about his hat lent itself to antique-y processing, although I wonder if this might be a bit much.... I know - railings through his head. We actually wanted them on the OTHER side of the railings,b ut due to sand on the ground it wasn't so practical. Are they a dealbreaker here?
4. They started dancing! Unfortunately, they caught me with the wrong lens on the camera and we were totally NOT ready for them, but I still grabbed a couple. Is this overprocessed? The light was pretty contrasty on the wharf, and I kind of liked this treatment, but if it's too much, tell me...
5.
6.
7. Ok, this next batch are what I consider my "Hommage a Jeffreaux2" set
:lustBiggest challenge here was the flippin' earthmover right in shot in the upper left corner - there was just no way to avoid it AND get the shadow framed (believe me, I tried!). I've tried cloning it, but looked ghastly, so I resorted to extreme croppage....
7a. (I cloned some bushes over the wheels to minimize it - cludge-y, but I think it works to disguise it being great big ugly WHEELS)
7b. Different shot in set @ slightly different angle; I think I like this one because of the tippy-toes. Processing too dark?
7c: alternate crop
7-1/2 (sorrry - forgot one!) I love this shot, but really bad CA on the lit side of his face, which is blown. I need to figure out 1. how to minimize the CA and 2. how to get some of the texture on the un-blown side pasted onto the blown side. Needs work, iow, but I like it enough to try (and any suggestions/techniques to do so very welcome!)
8. Is the flare a dealbreaker here? Can't decide. Also not sure about the processing now I see it up here...
9. Down to another part of the water nearer sunset - the water really WAS blue+gold - this shot actually doesn't have that much done to it.
10. I simply can't decide what to do with this shot. I like it, but am just floundering a bit with how to give it the wow factor. Thoughts?
10a. Pretty close to the reality
10 b Warmed way up and twiddled with
Lastly, the Really Really Good Epic Fail. I'm so frustrated with these! Glorious light, I managed to get the flare-stars I wanted mostly WHERE I wanted (boy, it's hard to line that up!) and... the background is distracting (that half white/half black thing really bugs me). If I moved to reframe it against sky I lost the sun entirely, we couldn't move them over (break in the bench) and at this point everybody was cold and tired and I knew if we asked them to move down the pier (with all the stuff) we'd lose the moment - I felt like I just had to make it work in situ. Soo.... this lovely semi-silhouette has a building in just the wrong place. Trash them, or use them anyway?
11a
11b
11c
facebook | photo site |
0
Comments
#8, if you can tone it down a little with what the processing...
www.tednghiem.com
(Btw, there's a "Ted Shot", I just haven't done anything with it yet....
And what is this Ted Shot??
www.tednghiem.com
"Ted Shots" are the peephole/through gate/through trees/through doors etc ones! Mine's only around a street lamp (and it's not that good), but it made me and Kerry smile when I showed it to her and called by name
Thank you! I love #6 as well. It's actually a deep crop - there was a huge patch of highlight on the water that was distracting - but I think I like it cropped like this just becuz
So I'm not the only one trying to mimic Ted shots... hmmmm.....
The processing on the second one is my favorite, don't know why but it just is. I'd lean more towards doing them all like that if it were me. Just my $.02, though.
They are gorgeous!!! Absolutely gorgeous.
Great, now I wanna go have 'we've been married for 3 years but I still want amazing shots like that' shots done... hmmm...
And I have Jeffreaux2's number.... hmmmm..... wonder if the hubby would go for that...
photography facebook
twitter
Well...you cropped in perfectly in my opinion. You really captured great emotion in that shot and in #8. I think that is one of the most important parts of engagement shoots....well done!
Thanks for the kind words Lauren! Glad you like. I think my favorites of the whole shoot are the Jeff Shadow Shots, #6 and # 8, although I'm actually pretty pleased wiuth the set overall - yep, I need to streamline the processing, but there's some good material to work with which is very gratifying. I really like the processing in #2 as well, but it's a preset (PH) that just doesn't look consistent AT ALL from shot to shot in different light/different exposures! That shot was fairly bright to begin with; in another one in that series, not quite as bright to start with, it just looks dark and grungy instead of warm and clean, even when I bring the blacks down a bit. Weird. I'll play with it, though
I love, love, love the shadow-kissing shots! How very clever and well seen.
The processing of 2, 3, 6, 7a, and 9 seem to fit the mood and ambiance of them best.
You did a FANTASTIC job! They are going to be so thrilled when they see these.
1 This looks a little stiff to me... maybe its her hand on the chest. Better connection in #2
2b The emotion might work better if I knew the couple. As it is, it looks like a snap shot. I also don't think this image works well with a square crop.
3 It's not so much the railings behind his head, but the dissimiliar backgrounds between them. His is busy, hers is plain - with a big vertical divorce between them.
5 Me likey
6 Killer light!
4 Okay, the left corners needs to be de-vignetted. It makes the photo a bit lopsided. Compositionally, there is lots of plain, undetailed sky that doesn't balance well with the dock/water/skyline.
7c is clearly the winner of that set. Compositionally it works much better. With the full shots their heads are lost in the tonality of the background - it looks much better to cut them off. 7c has great leading lines, an abstract version of the couple, and legs to ground the couple. It perfectly leaves the imagination to fill in the rest.
8 works with the flare to me. So long as it's not blocking their faces (and maybe then if might be okay, who knows) I say it plays. This is art right? Make it look good and forget the rules!
9 I like this, but the vignette falls off to quickly - I think it should be more subtle
10 the dock is dsctracting at the top of the frame. Not quite in enough to add to the story. I'd go panoramic and remove the duck.
11 I know the problem... I'd try to have them move. Get them jazzed on the idea in your head and carry the momentum. If you get excited about taking a really cool picture before you even get to the location they will pick up on that and reciprocate.
Aww, thanks Kerry. I can't wait to see yours - I know you grabbed some in places where I failed miserably (like on the wharf, and silhouetted against the sun in the last batch - the one you sent me was framed so much better than mine!) so it will round out the set beautifully
I sent her a teaser (7c and 8) and she was indeed absolutely thriled so I think we did ok. Phew! They said they had so much fun - I know I did, so was glad to hear it from them after-the-fact too!
I have no idea what's up with #4 - processed in LR, I've deselected any "before cropping" vignette and it still comes out lopsided. Weird. I need to rethink those anyway, I think - I want to try and include them because what they were doing was so cute, but the bg feels like it's killing it anyway.
I need to try to settle on shots for a set today and then I can start evening out the processing - I pulled the obvious keepers, but there are plenty in the "maybe" pile to go through still...
Thanks again!
www.tednghiem.com
Thanks for sharing...
Educate yourself like you'll live forever and live like you'll die tomorrow.
Ed
If it's not a vignette that you added in post, then it's a vignette caused by the camera lens and made more visible by the cropping and the bumped contrast. Enable the lens profile correction and play with the vignette amount there - you should be able to remove it pretty easily.
I'll check - I was shooting wide (something I do so rarely that it didnt' even occur to me it was a "real" vignette) so that may well be the case.
Yup - agreed. I needed to stop down to ensure both sets of faces sharp - I got away with it in #2, but plenty from that first set where they aren't, since I was at 2.2 - but we couldn't pull them much further away from the bg because of the wall (and cars) behind me. We weren't very popular as we were, since people were coming back from the hols and loading/unloading etc etc. They were nice about it, thankfully!
Ask and ye shall receive... (it's not very good, but at least I grasp the CONCEPT of Ted-Shottage!)
No make out voyuerism?
www.tednghiem.com
Natural selection is responsible for every living thing that exists.
D3s, D500, D5300, and way more glass than the wife knows about.
Hey, give me time... this is only my 2nd eshoot!
Awww, thanks John.
I did consider cloning, but when a quick experiment suggested it was going to be a brutal job to make it look good. I think I've actually (semi) solved the silhouettes via a different approach: it KILLED me to crop out that gorgeous rim-lighting on her hair, but it does solve the bg issue (and I've done variants of each - I'm solving the "processing issue" by ensuring that if I do any funky processing that I also provide a more naturalistic version - then they can choose which they prefer for themselves)
12 Different shot in series - the sunburst isn't really in the right place, but there's more detail in the silhouetted shape of their faces so it worked better once it was cropped down
13 And yeah, this is WAY OTT, but I kinda like it and will include it - if they like it, great, if not, no harm done. It's such a trendy look that will probably date in 10 years, but I've been completely seduced by it.....
I sure wish I could get our rugged Alaskan guys to wear cute hats like that.
I bet we se lots and lots more of this type of work from you in the future. You are building up a really nice port!
And let me just say how jealous I am of the two of you playing together on this. How fun!
I really really love the very last photo you added. Flair = yum. I don't care if it will be dated later.
www.SaraPiazza.com - Edgartown News - Trad Diary - Facebook
Srsly, Heather, I've learned SO much from the shots in here (yours very much included in that!) - if I have any success, it's thanks to having great role models to emulate.
And yeah, I'm digging the flare thing. I nkow not everybody likes it, but it's really floating my boat at the moment.
(Oh, and if you ever find a bride that wants you to fly assistants up to Alaska, I'm sure Kerry and I would both jump at the chance!!!
"Stand out" in the not-good way, I'm assuming you mean? Yes, I'm rethinking all of those shots
This is excellent advice; I've been sloowwlly moving to this conclusion myself (with other shoots). Trouble with this one was that I overshot even more than usual because of the focusing issues 2 weeks ago - turns out it wasn't necessary, but I figured it was better to re-focus and get a shot multiple times than not have it at all. Of course, this means I have a LOT of shots to go through - even once I got rid of the total tossers and the "nothing wrong, just not that good" shots I only deleted about 20-25%, and I still have about 500 decent shots which could be useable, so am trying to whittle it down to ~100 mage set. That'll teach me to keep my finger down! :giggle
Thanks so much Sara. (And I may have been told that just once or twice before... in all my endeavours
www.SaraPiazza.com - Edgartown News - Trad Diary - Facebook
Im flattered that you would frame something up thinking of me:D....and Ill comment on those three.(7a,b,c)
Of the three I prefer 7a. I think the long shadows taking center stage do it for me.....nothing else there to compete...just a nice little surprise of their real selves at upper left....but not enough of the subjects to take away from those shadows. I really like it!
One nit with these three is that I would have preferred his hand out of the pocket and onto the bride to be. This probably isnt as important in a as it is in b and c.
Good shooting girl!
As an aside....Im not surprised to hear that you slipped the STE2 into the shoe in place of the built in gadgetry. Its pretty foolproof. I shot a night set tonight that would have been impossible without the STE2 as a focus aide. Forget driving a flash....if you aint got light enough to focus...well...yer done for!
Jeff
-Need help with Dgrin?; Wedding Photography Resources
-My Website - Blog - Tips for Senior Portraiture
I wish he'd had his hand on her too - he does in a couple of the others from the series, but they don't frame the shadow as well so I decided to stick with these instead.
I kept thinking of that amazing "puddle" shot that you did (especially since I think that was the same young lady who kept standing on her toes to kiss her boy) - definite inspiration when I saw this shadow!
Yeah, when I got the 7d I expected to sell the STE2, but despite the built-in commander being great (which has the advantage of letting you use the pop-up for a tiny bit of fill from the front), the STE2 is too handy at times to give up. It's staying in the bag!