Royal Engagement Photos

studio1972

Is it just me or are the royal engagement photos a bit bellow par.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/royal-wedding/8196838/Prince-William-and-Kate-Middleton-brimming-with-happiness-in-engagement-pictures-Mario-Testino.html

The formal one is quite a boring composition and William has a slightly goofy expression, on the 'casual' one Kate isn't even looking at the camera and the background is blown out. Considering that these will no doubt be iconic images that people will remember for many decades, I thought the photographer should have done a lot better TBH. :scratch

Darren Troy C

In this case, I would have to believe that it's not the photographer's doing. It's a pretty safe guarantee there was a drove of security, press, etc., joining in the "party". Getting a "chic" lifestyle session (frolicking in the vineyards, strolling the back alleys of century old structures, roaming the countryside, etc.) from these two right now would be tough, I would think. Regardless though, yep, these particular pics are boring to say the least.

studio1972

Darren Troy C wrote: »

In this case, I would have to believe that it's not the photographer's doing. It's a pretty safe guarantee there was a drove of security, press, etc., joining in the "party". Getting a "chic" lifestyle session (frolicking in the vineyards, strolling the back alleys of century old structures, roaming the countryside, etc.) from these two right now would be tough, I would think. Regardless though, yep, these particular pics are boring to say the least.

I totally understand what you are saying and I'm sure it's a factor, but they do live in a palace after all, so it's not like they need to actually go anywhere. I wonder if he used a medium format film camera and only took a few shots, later realising that they weren't very good, but it was too late to do anything by then?

Obviously he's not a terrible photographer as he's had numerous magazine covers etc., but maybe not very good under time pressure with limited equipment?

Seems petty maybe, but Charles & Diana's engagement photographs are probably the most well known world wide, and these could be similarly famous. I imagine the mug & tea towel printers are already busy

Moogle Pepper

Interesting.

WillCAD

The article says he's a fashion photographer, so maybe he's just not good at that type of ordinary engagement shooting. Fashion photography always seems to be more avant garde and less classical.

I'm not a royal-o-phile, so I haven't been paying a lot of attention, but this is the first time I noticed that the ring Kate is wearing in these photos is the same ring Diana is wearing in her engagement photo. I guess it's a royal family heirloom.

Blurmore

I'm sure these aren't the only images from the shoot but those that put forth the best image that the couple wants to portray...The shot in the apartment setting is the hawtness, very few people who make money at photography could reproduce this deceptively simple quality of light.

Gary Peterson Photography

Good Morning America is raving about the two images this morning, and getting ready to tell the world "The secrets behind them" so that we can take better holiday photos....can't wait...lol.

divamum

Testino has been photographing Charles for a long time - this is just one more in his line of Royal portraits.

I'd hazard a guess that their goal wasn't necessarily to get super-fashionable or artsy shots for these, which will wind up in papers, magazines and books for years to come as just one in a long line of royal engagement shots. Come to think of it, royal "life event" pictures are very seldom anything other than super-traditional often = boring. The "famous" Di+Charles engagement shot isn't any more "creative" than these, IMO, but because it was from a while ago perhaps we accept the formality and "old-fashioned" quality more? Dunno.

Seems to me that the more casual shot of these two was as much about a good shot of the (very famous) ring as the couple - given that will be what a lot of Royal-Watchers are interested in, no surprise there. The one at the palace is photographically pretty cool - makes me wonder how it was lit to get that background ambient so even and balanced just right in that huge space (+1 Blurmore )

Blurmore

divamum wrote: »

makes me wonder how it was lit to get that background ambient so even and balanced just right in that huge space (+1 Blurmore )

I know how it was done...as I'd venture that a few other photogs know as well.

r3t1awr3yd

Blurmore wrote: »

I know how it was done...as I'd venture that a few other photogs know as well.

If I had to guess... first shot is just a reflector pointed back in their faces.

The second shot could be done with a single light/umbrella guessing by their shadow on the ground and faces, light spots on his dome and her cheek, and lightfall off on the walls in the back of the room. Bump the shutter speed up (open longer) to raise the ambient...

Blurmore

r3t1awr3yd wrote: »

If I had to guess... first shot is just a reflector pointed back in their faces.

The second shot could be done with a single light/umbrella guessing by their shadow on the ground and faces, light spots on his dome and her cheek, and lightfall off on the walls in the back of the room. Bump the shutter speed up (open longer) to raise the ambient...

I think it is simpler than that....a LOT simpler.

aj986s

Blurmore wrote: »

I think it is simpler than that....a LOT simpler.

Proper time of day with the windows open and the light pouring in? Maybe sheers closed to help diffuse some light?

divamum

Probably lots of windows behind the photographer/camera right, if the room in the palace is the one I'm thinking of that I've seen shots of before. That said it's still nicely done!

urbanaries

At least William has his mom's good looks, and not his dad's.

Blurmore

Yeah my vote is for windowlight, the tip off for me is how soft the shadow is, how BIG the light source seems, and how her white outfit is a little hot...1 to 1.5 stop over exposure is easily fixed in printing, even digital RAWs with great overhead can't compare to film so far as making slight over exposure look REALLY good.

Moogle Pepper

urbanaries wrote: »

at least william has his mom's good looks, and not his dad's.

+1

WillCAD

urbanaries wrote: »

At least William has his mom's good looks, and not his dad's.

My mother, who was far more interested in the British royal family than I, always said that William looks more like Diana's brother, the Earl Spencer, than his own father. I remember seeing the Earl on TV when Diana was killed, and thinking, "Mom's right, Will does look like his uncle."