Options

C&C on my first Bridal....

cleighcleigh Registered Users Posts: 8 Beginner grinner
edited April 21, 2008 in Weddings
Hey guys!
I'm fairly new to dgrin (and hopefully these picts show up since this is my first time doing this!), and would welcome some C&C - I have been working with some other photographers for a few years and just did my first bridal by myself. I am still learning photoshop, so let me know if the picts need more work!
1.
281019461_NLp7P-M-1.jpg
2.
281019476_GRKKe-M-2.jpg
3.
281019501_M2rQu-M-2.jpg

Thanks!!!

Comments

  • Options
    Shane422Shane422 Registered Users Posts: 460 Major grins
    edited April 17, 2008
    I'm a sucker for a good B&W. So I like #1. But I the pose on #3 is the best.
  • Options
    IcebearIcebear Registered Users Posts: 4,015 Major grins
    edited April 17, 2008
    Very "classy." I guess classic is a better word. Anyway, I like them.
    John :
    Natural selection is responsible for every living thing that exists.
    D3s, D500, D5300, and way more glass than the wife knows about.
  • Options
    MarkWMarkW Registered Users Posts: 72 Big grins
    edited April 17, 2008
    I think the first shot is definately a keeper but be careful with the highlights! It's very easy to blowout white dresses. I know brides love to see their dresses with all the little details.
    Mark Warren
    EOS 50D, 30D, Sigma 50-150 f/2.8, Tamron 28-75 f/2.8, MF Pentax 50 f/1.4, MF 70-200 f/4.0, and a MF 200 f/4 adapted for Canon, Canon 580EXII and 430EX, 2 Vivitar 285HV's and many various modifiers.
    http://www.markwphoto.com
    http://www.flickr.com/photos/markwphoto/
  • Options
    SwartzySwartzy Registered Users Posts: 3,293 Major grins
    edited April 17, 2008
    These are nice. The first (and again, it's simply my opinion) almost has "it"....if she had her head turned just a bit more towards camera would be great. I think the image begs for a bit richer conversion for depth and clarity with less noise as the pose and setting speak "elegant"....not grainy.

    In any case, she should be happy thumb.gif
    Swartzy:
    NAPP Member | Canon Shooter
    Weddings/Portraits and anything else that catches my eye.
    www.daveswartz.com
    Model Mayhem site http://www.modelmayhem.com/686552
  • Options
    cleighcleigh Registered Users Posts: 8 Beginner grinner
    edited April 17, 2008
    MarkW wrote:
    I think the first shot is definately a keeper but be careful with the highlights! It's very easy to blowout white dresses. I know brides love to see their dresses with all the little details.

    That's my downfall with Photoshop (ie: not knowing it very well) - I have a hard time lighting up her skin and not blowing out the dress. There are several other picts that I love but I just feel like she is a little dark and the dress loses it's detail....should have cranked up my flash....

    Thanks for the feedback!!!!! I need all I can get!!
  • Options
    ShudderzShudderz Registered Users Posts: 346 Major grins
    edited April 18, 2008
    cleigh wrote:
    That's my downfall with Photoshop (ie: not knowing it very well) - I have a hard time lighting up her skin and not blowing out the dress. There are several other picts that I love but I just feel like she is a little dark and the dress loses it's detail....should have cranked up my flash....

    Thanks for the feedback!!!!! I need all I can get!!

    This is not a photoshop issue. Getting a good exposure in camera is the answer. I love my light meter. If you have a good, right on exposure, the dress will not be blown, the skin will look just fine.

    Just my $.02, but, people would be better off to master a light meter rather than photoshop. I'm not saying that I don't use photoshop, because I do...I use it a ton, but it should be used more for "enhancing" photos instead of "fixing" photos.
    Heather
    www.heatherdunnphotography.com
    My Blog My Facebook Page
    GIVING BACK - How will you give?
    "I look at life outside of the lens and capture the world through it." -Thomas Robinson
  • Options
    Scott_QuierScott_Quier Registered Users Posts: 6,524 Major grins
    edited April 18, 2008
    Shudderz wrote:
    This is not a photoshop issue. Getting a good exposure in camera is the answer. I love my light meter. If you have a good, right on exposure, the dress will not be blown, the skin will look just fine.

    Just my $.02, but, people would be better off to master a light meter rather than photoshop. I'm not saying that I don't use photoshop, because I do...I use it a ton, but it should be used more for "enhancing" photos instead of "fixing" photos.
    15524779-Ti.gif - on all counts.
    Scott
    My Photos
    Thoughts on photographing a wedding, How to post a picture, AF Microadjustments?, Light Scoop
    Equipment List - Check my profile
  • Options
    cleighcleigh Registered Users Posts: 8 Beginner grinner
    edited April 18, 2008
    Shudderz wrote:
    This is not a photoshop issue. Getting a good exposure in camera is the answer. I love my light meter. If you have a good, right on exposure, the dress will not be blown, the skin will look just fine.

    Just my $.02, but, people would be better off to master a light meter rather than photoshop. I'm not saying that I don't use photoshop, because I do...I use it a ton, but it should be used more for "enhancing" photos instead of "fixing" photos.

    Yes, that's one more thing I need to invest in - I can definitely see how that would help!! Thanks for the input!!!
  • Options
    RhinotheruntRhinotherunt Registered Users Posts: 363 Major grins
    edited April 18, 2008
    I really like the 1st, but the 2nd and 3rd seem to be missing detail in the shadows. AKA: Blacks are clipped.
    Ryan McGill

    My Gear
  • Options
    joshhuntnmjoshhuntnm Registered Users Posts: 1,924 Major grins
    edited April 21, 2008
    Shudderz wrote:
    This is not a photoshop issue. Getting a good exposure in camera is the answer. I love my light meter. If you have a good, right on exposure, the dress will not be blown, the skin will look just fine.

    Just my $.02, but, people would be better off to master a light meter rather than photoshop. I'm not saying that I don't use photoshop, because I do...I use it a ton, but it should be used more for "enhancing" photos instead of "fixing" photos.

    I guess I need to add "light meter" to my list. My list is getting long. Do you recomment any particular one?
    Josh
    Las Cruces Photographer / Las Cruces Wedding Photographer
    Other site
  • Options
    Scott_QuierScott_Quier Registered Users Posts: 6,524 Major grins
    edited April 21, 2008
    joshhuntnm wrote:
    I guess I need to add "light meter" to my list. My list is getting long. Do you recomment any particular one?
    I really like my Sekonic 358 (link)
    Scott
    My Photos
    Thoughts on photographing a wedding, How to post a picture, AF Microadjustments?, Light Scoop
    Equipment List - Check my profile
  • Options
    MarkWMarkW Registered Users Posts: 72 Big grins
    edited April 21, 2008
    One of the most popular meters is the Sekonic L-358 for portrait photographers/wedding photographers. I use this one myself. It has a lot of great features for working indoors and outdoors, with and without flash (light balancing flash and ambient light).
    Mark Warren
    EOS 50D, 30D, Sigma 50-150 f/2.8, Tamron 28-75 f/2.8, MF Pentax 50 f/1.4, MF 70-200 f/4.0, and a MF 200 f/4 adapted for Canon, Canon 580EXII and 430EX, 2 Vivitar 285HV's and many various modifiers.
    http://www.markwphoto.com
    http://www.flickr.com/photos/markwphoto/
  • Options
    ShudderzShudderz Registered Users Posts: 346 Major grins
    edited April 21, 2008
    A light meter should be at the top of anyone's needed equipment list that is serious about their photography, especially if you plan on marketing your images.

    I had the privilege of taking a class from Claude Jodoinbowdown.gif at WPPI this past month. It was a two day lighting boot camp. We spent two days using our light meters in almost every type of lighting situation possible.

    Clause has some educational materials out as well. They are a great resource for those that need help learning to use a light meter. They can be found HERE

    Truly, to get the shot right in camera, get a light meter, calibrate it to your camera, and learn how to use it. Even better, MASTER how to use it. It will cut down your post production time and give you more time to be creative with the images rather than trying to repair them.
    Heather
    www.heatherdunnphotography.com
    My Blog My Facebook Page
    GIVING BACK - How will you give?
    "I look at life outside of the lens and capture the world through it." -Thomas Robinson
  • Options
    MarkWMarkW Registered Users Posts: 72 Big grins
    edited April 21, 2008
    You know it's funny how us photographers will spend a $1000's on a lens, $800 - $5000 for a camera, $400-500 on the top of the line flash, but yet having a hard time parting with about $250 for a good light meter... something that will help your photography more than you'll ever know. lol
    Mark Warren
    EOS 50D, 30D, Sigma 50-150 f/2.8, Tamron 28-75 f/2.8, MF Pentax 50 f/1.4, MF 70-200 f/4.0, and a MF 200 f/4 adapted for Canon, Canon 580EXII and 430EX, 2 Vivitar 285HV's and many various modifiers.
    http://www.markwphoto.com
    http://www.flickr.com/photos/markwphoto/
  • Options
    RhinotheruntRhinotherunt Registered Users Posts: 363 Major grins
    edited April 21, 2008
    MarkW wrote:
    You know it's funny how us photographers will spend a $1000's on a lens, $800 - $5000 for a camera, $400-500 on the top of the line flash, but yet having a hard time parting with about $250 for a good light meter... something that will help your photography more than you'll ever know. lol
    Looks like my next purchase... In a few months...
    Ryan McGill

    My Gear
Sign In or Register to comment.