Recent wedding shots....(6 images)

dancinkate

.

Bakat

Kate,
Love the wedding pictures. Your clients should be VERY happy.

I know what you mean about these guys (and gals) helping to give directions on equipment. I can't believe what I've learned here.

Would it be an inconvenience to ask you to post 2 photos; 1 from last year and one from this year. Everyone talks about what a difference buying good lenses makes (and I do believe them) but I am a very visual person and would love to do a side by side comparison.

Thanks for sharing the great photos. I like the one with the guys in the empty church especially. Also I went to your page and really LOVED the one with the groom looking thru the wedding band. Very creative!

Kat

dancinkate

.

saurora

Beautiful shots, Kate, and you're right about the quality lenses. Wonderful to know you are so busy you can hardly find the time to come on the forum!!! Hope you will post from time to time so us noobs can see the possibilities that might lie in our own futures if we keep working at it!!!

ellepixels

saurora wrote:

Beautiful shots, Kate, and you're right about the quality lenses. Wonderful to know you are so busy you can hardly find the time to come on the forum!!! Hope you will post from time to time so us noobs can see the possibilities that might lie in our own futures if we keep working at it!!!

The wedding pictures are just beautiful!
congrats....
did you use some effects on them? because the colors are
simply great...

dancinkate

.

saurora

dancinkate wrote:

As far as effects, I'm a photoshop whore. Actions/programs that I've purchased and Optikverve are my best friends. I always crank up the saturation in every shot too.

Optikverve is fast becoming a favorite with me! I find it saves me lots of time in PS and usually gets me where I was trying to go in the first place in a lot less steps.

Awais Yaqub

Very creative clear shots ! and nice couple :

Bakat

Kate,
Wow, I see the difference. It inspired me to go do the same with the mucho el cheapo Tamrons that I got with my camera and my nice Sigma DG lens that has a price of about 2x what the Tamrons sell for. Took the same shot with maybe a minute apart (while I changed lenses) and the shots with the cheapies look Blah, washed out, and... well, just not sharp. The better lens has nicer colors and is so much sharper.

Now the question for those people with more money than I have....

There's a profound difference between a $100 lens and a $250 lens. Does that mean that if I spend $500 on a similar lens it wil actually be that much better?

Thanks for posting those comparisons Kate!

Kat

PeterGar

Great job. I'm pretty new to photography also and am just begining to get serious about shooting weddings. This inspires me.

What Sigma lens was your old lens? I'm currently shooting a Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 and love it, but will replace with L eventually.

dancinkate

.

saurora

dancinkate wrote:

I really love it for certain shots and it DOES save me a lot of time. For B&W's, though, I still shell out the time to do what I learned in the "Making B&W's POP" tutorial. I haven't found a B&W action in Optikverve that I like yet. Have you?

No, not for traditional black and whites. But I love the toned ones I get using the "Reminiscing". I can always adjust the sliders to my own tastes as well. I agree that it is best for certain shots, but I'm always experimenting when I find myself having difficulty reaching that look I am trying to achieve. Sometimes I think I don't make "bold" enough adjustments in my processing with CS, and probably my exposures are not as on target as they should be. So when I can't quite get there, I try a Optikverve filter, and because they are more over-the-top, I can usually find something that works.

System

Bakat wrote:

Kate,
Wow, I see the difference. It inspired me to go do the same with the mucho el cheapo Tamrons that I got with my camera and my nice Sigma DG lens that has a price of about 2x what the Tamrons sell for. Took the same shot with maybe a minute apart (while I changed lenses) and the shots with the cheapies look Blah, washed out, and... well, just not sharp. The better lens has nicer colors and is so much sharper.

Now the question for those people with more money than I have....

There's a profound difference between a $100 lens and a $250 lens. Does that mean that if I spend $500 on a similar lens it wil actually be that much better?

Thanks for posting those comparisons Kate!

Kat

kat-

not one word, kat, but one letter-

L

System

kate-

loved the pics-

really liked the comp and focus of the last one-

george

dancinkate

George, I actually shot the wedding last weekend at Whitestone Inn. Its a B&B in your neck of the woods. Ever been? It's really beautiful.....

DavidS

Nice shots. I really like the second one and I love the house.

System

kate-

no, I haven't been-

but just a small part of beautiful east tennessee-

thanks for posting it-

george

System

saurora wrote:

No, not for traditional black and whites. But I love the toned ones I get using the "Reminiscing". I can always adjust the sliders to my own tastes as well. I agree that it is best for certain shots, but I'm always experimenting when I find myself having difficulty reaching that look I am trying to achieve. Sometimes I think I don't make "bold" enough adjustments in my processing with CS, and probably my exposures are not as on target as they should be. So when I can't quite get there, I try a Optikverve filter, and because they are more over-the-top, I can usually find something that works.

optikverve helped me move from


to



I find that it can really help salvage a photo-

the above was a jpeg from a walgreen cd of ilford sp2 bw film-

george

ps reminiscing is probably the best of the bw actions-