first wedding--photos

kdotaylor

I wouldn't have attempted this wedding if they hadn't told me it was to be outdoors, plenty of light. The day, however, was entirely dark and stormy; and I got a quick lesson in low-light photography. Here are some of the shots...would welcome C & C:
#1


#2


#3


#4


#5


#6


#7


#8


#9


#10


#11


#12


#13


#14


#15



#16


#17


#18

Sam

These are very good. Should you decide to peruse wedding photography I think you will be very successful. Your clients will be happy campers.

The only thing I see from a technical standpoint is many image look to be shot at high ISO and have more noise than I like. Sometimes this is unavoidable.

BUT!!! I am noiseaphobic (sp).

Overall fantastic for first wedding and solid images.

Sam

Nicholaskong

can't see the photos

kdotaylor

Sam wrote: »

These are very good. Should you decide to peruse wedding photography I think you will be very successful. Your clients will be happy campers.

The only thing I see from a technical standpoint is many image look to be shot at high ISO and have more noise than I like. Sometimes this is unavoidable.

BUT!!! I am noiseaphobic (sp).

Overall fantastic for first wedding and solid images.

Sam

Thank you, Sam! That means a lot to me coming from you--I admire your work!
I don't know what to do about the noise--it bothers me, too. I had to shoot at high ISO because the light was so poor. The day was dark and stormy. I'm just glad they turned out as well as they did--I was more nervous than the bride! Is there anything I can do about the noise besides what I already tried in Lightroom?

kdotaylor

Nicholaskong wrote: »

can't see the photos

I don't see a reason for the photos not showing. Anyone else having this problem?

Sam

kdotaylor wrote: »

Thank you, Sam! That means a lot to me coming from you--I admire your work!
I don't know what to do about the noise--it bothers me, too. I had to shoot at high ISO because the light was so poor. The day was dark and stormy. I'm just glad they turned out as well as they did--I was more nervous than the bride! Is there anything I can do about the noise besides what I already tried in Lightroom?

I couldn't see all the Exif info and I don't know the capabilities of your Nikon camera.

If you can put a RAW file or three in a drop box I will be happy to see what if anything can be done about the noise, but again the more important issue is that you got some nice shots and the clients will be happy.
The analysis of these images is for future improvement.

Sam

Gaby617

Very good for a first wedding imo. I just shot my 1st official earlier this month and I was also more nervouse then the bride. She was a good friend so that helped.

Matthew Saville

The noise looks fine, I'd say if anything applying less noise reduction, and "embracing the grain", would be preferable to applying even more and making the images look all digital-y and smooth. You're accomplishing something in low light that was completely impossible just a decade or two ago, at least not without horrible amounts of film grain.

If I were you, I'd worry less about the technical limitations of your gear, and focus more on the technical mastery of other things like lighting and stuff, plus general skills for environmental portraiture and whatnot. Practice, practice, practice!

=Matt=

kdotaylor

Matthew Saville wrote: »

The noise looks fine, I'd say if anything applying less noise reduction, and "embracing the grain", would be preferable to applying even more and making the images look all digital-y and smooth. You're accomplishing something in low light that was completely impossible just a decade or two ago, at least not without horrible amounts of film grain.

If I were you, I'd worry less about the technical limitations of your gear, and focus more on the technical mastery of other things like lighting and stuff, plus general skills for environmental portraiture and whatnot. Practice, practice, practice!

=Matt=

Thank you, Matthew....that makes a lot of sense. I'd much rather focus on mastering my photos and getting good shots than on the grain and my gear!
I love your work!

JonaBeth Russell

I've looked at these pics with my speakers at max volume, and can't hear a damn thing...

Great set!

Qarik

Not bad for 1st wedding. There is definite room for improvement though. In general, many shots are too "flashy" (7,11,12, and all the dance shots). The light is very flat, somewhat harsh,and even. Try bouncing your flash next time which can soften the light and give it some directionality.. Also too many processing styles in the set..you want to keep some continuity and coherence in your set of images..stick to say 3 different kinds of processing "normal", maybe BW, and one other stylized type of processing. I count 5-6 different styles in this set.

kdotaylor

Qarik wrote: »

Not bad for 1st wedding. There is definite room for improvement though. In general, many shots are too "flashy" (7,11,12, and all the dance shots). The light is very flat, somewhat harsh,and even. Try bouncing your flash next time which can soften the light and give it some directionality.. Also too many processing styles in the set..you want to keep some continuity and coherence in your set of images..stick to say 3 different kinds of processing "normal", maybe BW, and one other stylized type of processing. I count 5-6 different styles in this set.

Thank you, Qarik. I did use a flash thingy (flash pointing up and bouncing out), but it's still too flashy, I know. I almost cried when I saw the forecast, as I didn't want to use flash at all--it was just so dark!! I am not happy with any of the shots where I used flash; and I definitely will read up on flash photography before I agree to shoot another wedding.
I appreciate your honesty, all your comments are helpful.

Qarik

flash point up and bouncing out is not what you want. Point the flash up maybe 60 degrees and slightly behind you. It's a small change but the difference in light is HUGE. When you point up and slightly out..2 things happen:

1) you lose all directionality in the light and it turns flat and even
2) because your flash is not pointed all the way up, your subject still see some amount of "direct" flash straight from the flash head which results in harsh shadows as your apparent light source is tiny.

The only way you could have done worse with flash is to point it directly at them.

When you point it up and slightly behind (have to figure out where walls are sometimes) 2 things happens:

1) your apparent light source becomes the lit up wall and ceiling. This SOFTENS the light dramatically..no harsh shadows.
2) your apparent light source is coming in from one side. This give the light directionality which is the other 1/2 of the equation..now your subjects have light falling across them instead of just blanketing them. This gives your subjects DIMENSIONALITY.

That is what you want to shoot for in 90% of your images..soft directional light!

examples of up and slightly behind bounced shots:

in a dark club:


in a restaurant reception:

zcrookston

Not bad at all for a first wedding. I bet you are your own worst critic and you will learn more as time goes on.

It helps that the venue was beautiful and bride and groom appear to be somewhat photogenic. The harder weddings for me are when the bride and groom and/or venue are less photogenic.

Good luck to you and your future weddings.

kdotaylor

zcrookston wrote: »

Not bad at all for a first wedding. I bet you are your own worst critic and you will learn more as time goes on.

It helps that the venue was beautiful and bride and groom appear to be somewhat photogenic. The harder weddings for me are when the bride and groom and/or venue are less photogenic.

Good luck to you and your future weddings.

Thank you. Yes, they were awfully cute.

kdotaylor

Qarik wrote: »

flash point up and bouncing out is not what you want. Point the flash up maybe 60 degrees and slightly behind you. It's a small change but the difference in light is HUGE. When you point up and slightly out..2 things happen:

1) you lose all directionality in the light and it turns flat and even
2) because your flash is not pointed all the way up, your subject still see some amount of "direct" flash straight from the flash head which results in harsh shadows as your apparent light source is tiny.

The only way you could have done worse with flash is to point it directly at them.

When you point it up and slightly behind (have to figure out where walls are sometimes) 2 things happens:

1) your apparent light source becomes the lit up wall and ceiling. This SOFTENS the light dramatically..no harsh shadows.
2) your apparent light source is coming in from one side. This give the light directionality which is the other 1/2 of the equation..now your subjects have light falling across them instead of just blanketing them. This gives your subjects DIMENSIONALITY.

That is what you want to shoot for in 90% of your images..soft directional light!

examples of up and slightly behind bounced shots:

in a dark club:


in a restaurant reception:

Qarik, thank you for this. This is why I like dgrin....your comments are extremely helpful! I will certainly take your recommendations and incorporate them into what I'm doing. THANK YOU!!

D3Sshooter

Indeed not bad at all, I love how you play with the DOF, how you capture the moment.

One small issue is the color/wb consistency throughout the shots, that is hard to maintain but in a series important. But besides that a good job.

FlyNavy

Very nice series!

karloznz

Very good first effort you your wedding photography.
There is a couple of comment that I would make but not too sure if its worth while as most has been covered by previous comments already made. Look like you have made a good start keep it up.