Wedding Photos first try

Hey mate, great set of shots you got, especially for your first go!, nice job. My only thought is the bride's pose in the first shot, not quite right for a wedding photo having the bride's legs spread and a bit of a slump over. That pose is a good shot but better suited to a model shoot.. Anyhoo, well done again, I'd like to see other is you have them perhaps?? :)

Hey what camera are you running??
 
Last edited:
I disagree with slink, that first shot is amazing and has has oodles of character. It's real. A straight back and closed legs would be posed. She's clearly in her own moment, and that's perfect.

Gorgeous shots my friend, keep it up!


www.zampanophoto.com
 
Hehe, well actually I do agree with alveraz as that shot looks more natural than posed just a less common style for weddings.. Let me just pull the old man stick out of my arse and get with the modern times....
 
These are top notch. For a first time, you might want to consider making this your primary source of income. People who shoot at this level can make bukobux.
 
I think these look great. #1 is my fav by far. Might have tried shooting #2 so we didn't see so much of the wadded up part of the back of her vial. All in all looks like you have a good technical eye for wedding portraiture.
 
The first picture looks very nice. Typically you would see shot #1 as a studio model shot, but if you can make a real bride look like a model without it looking ackward then more power to you.
 
I'm going to be honest, I really like them; but If I had a photographer that took pictures of my wedding like that, I'd be pissed. Don't get me wrong they're not bad, they're really good actually, but wedding photos shouldn't look like that. The one where the bride is facing the away from the groom you can see the cracks and shipped paint on the wall, that's the type of shoot you do for more modeling or fake weddings where you want to do a grunge thing.

It just doesn't look clean and I think the average client would hate them, especially the brides. As photographers we appreciate them because you're doing a distinct style, and they would look great in a gallery, but to me they just don't seem real or clean, like they mentioned before her legs spread open like that and she's slouched over just doesn't seem lady like, knowing how crazy women are they want this to be very elegant and princess like. unless your shooting Marylyn Mansons wedding or some other crazy celebrity who wants more attention this doesn't work.

But they're good though, I just really hope you don't think I'm criticizing them in a bad way I truly like them, but they seem more for you then for them.
 
I disagree with pest. I would be very proud of these if you were my wedding photographer. Maybe she's not "lady like" did anyone criticizing her posture ever consider that? Maybe this is her character. I see a strong woman who might also be a tomboy, maybe that's not only who she is but why the groom married her (for all we know).

Catching character and intimate moments regardless of "chipped paint" is what it's all about, in fact, the chipped paint you refer too looks like a quaint brick wall from Tuscany or a De Sica film, perfect texture for the shot. The lighting, mood and composition in all three of these images are spot-on, imho. For pest to say "weddings shouldn't look like that" is a clear subjective projection that most people see in boring wedding albums, which to be honest, I'm tired of looking at. In fact, when I got married my wife and I had to search high and low to find someone who understood how to shoot with class without compromising originality or artistic expression.

Much like these photos, we chose character and substance over posed garbage that looks like everyone else's wedding. We wanted a session that reflected US, as individuals but united in marriage. I think the photographer here has done that, perfectly. All you need to do is google "wedding photographer", you'll instantly notice that one after the other look exactly the same, as if it were the same photographer for each business. But every ten or so websites you visit, you'll find someone like this, who not only has an original flaire, but has higher rates. Guess why those photographers have higher rates? Because people are bored with Aunt Sally's cookie-cutter Wedding book from the 80's. The market always demands fresh perspectives, even in Wedding Photography.

Again, just another humble opinion.
 
Last edited:
I like the HDR photos, how many stops of exposure did you use? Did you use photmatix to compose the shots? I would definitely consider all views in this thread, most brides will love the shots you offer and appreciate your distinct style, but you're definitely going to want your traditional angles and poses to please everyone.
 
Thanks Greek for the comments. Ya I also get the tradition "boring" shots for their families to buy. But would u really want me to post them? lol

Anyways about the HDR photos, i used different exposures for each and kind of played it by eye. For post processing i did you photomatix 2.5 and 2.4. For some reason 2.5 handles raw really well and 2.3 handles jpeg really well. Honestly you dont need to shoot raw at all. The one thing you do want is a camera like the D200 that has 9 levels of auto exposure bracketing. The camera is also fast so you can get all 9 in about 2 seconds, then move on to your next shot. All my hdr was actually with the pentax k110d, which only had 3 levels of bracketing, so i had to do everything manually.

Anyways i havent done any HDR for about a year now, maybe i should try it out again.
 
I tried reading up on HDR I just still don't get it, HDR for wedding photos that might be kinda of intresting.

And By the way, to reply to Alvarez's comment, I wasn't trying to be an @ss I said I really did like them, but personally I would prefer more traditional style of photographs for my wedding. I hope I did'nt come across ass some type of Di(k, because I really like them.
 
Last edited:
I know it is kind of weird to do. I think it might be possible to do HDR at a wedding, but if you shot people you would need them to be extremely still. But your images would not be sharp. If you look at my flickr page i did a 3 exposure of a girls face and it turned out ok.

http://flickr.com/photos/13647884@N03/
 
What kind of lighting did you have set up for the indoor shots? I took a look at your flicker page I loved all your wedding photos there top notch work! I love the post on them as well!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top