- This topic is empty.
Honest Critique needed.
-
Hi all this is my first post and also is the first wedding I have shot by Myself. I have edited 3 images so far.
Please tell me honestly what you think. And what I could do to improve them.
Cheers
John
Please feel free to modify and repost
John
In my opinion all these images can be criticised for various reasons.
No1. I dont know why you chose to frame this in the way you did? The verticals are far from straight, there is part of an umbrella covering heads/faces; there is part of a hand showing at the right hand side; expressions are not particularly flattering.
When I look at the photograph, I keep thinking, what was he trying to capture here? Whatever it was, I dont think it has worked.No2. I think you should have applied more thought to the background and where you were placing the subjects. Lighting on the stairs seems to be poor, and you dont seem to have the flash equipment to be able to deal with the situation. Try closer to windows where there is more light. The adult being on a higher step not only places her in more shadow, but it also makes her tower even more over the child. The flowers are being held too high. The image has excessive noise.
To improve it, I would think of placing the subjects in a closer, more imtimate fashion, in better overall lighting. There is no bond between them here at all.No3. The composition again needs more thought – there are unwanted distractions at the top of the image, and also at the left side and bottom. The subject’s expression is not flattering.
My summary has to be that you failed to take control over these shots and therefore they look like candid snaps rather than wedding photographs.
I think that one of the best forms of critique, is self critique.
Take a look at all of your images and forgetting about the content always look for the “obvious” technical things. Is the shot in focus or is it soft? Is it exposed correctly? Is it too dark or too bright? Are there areas of blown highlights where there really should be some detail or are there large areas of pure black? I think, in the majority of the cases you can learn a lot from having this little check list yourself and reviewing each image. After the technical element it then gets a little more subjective and you get into things like composition, framing, what’s included in the shot, what isn’t included? Is there too much clutter, do people see what you want them to see? Try and forget the fact that you took the shot and be as objective as you can (and this is no easy ask.. it’s very hard for anyone to be subjective about their own shots, particularly if they like them). I admire your desire to learn John and your willingness to ask for honest critique.
For the first shot, taking the technical elements first.. the shot is soft (out of focus), especially the main subject. Exposure wise, the white dress is also dangerously close to being blown, although there is some detail. “Artistically” I think the shot is too busy. We’re meant to be looking at the little girls reaction but there’s so much other content in the shot that fights for our attention. I know it’s difficult at times especially for quickly grabbed shots, but try and look through the viewfinder to see what you’re including in the frame and not including. If you don’t want the stuff in the shot.. don’t included it. If you can’t exclude it, perhaps the shot isn’t worth taking because it just won’t work? I find that too often, people give reasons for why they had to take a shot a particular way or at a particular moment. I can of course relate to that, but at the end of the day, if the elements in the shot all take away from it’s effectiveness, was there really much point taking it? The shot also suffers from the crooked door frame (camera at an angle) and the fact you chopped off the head of the bride and mother of the bride??
Second shot is much better exposure wise and framing wise too. My guess is the shot was posed by the wedding photographer and you grabbed a shot? It’s still not pin sharp in terms of focus and a flash could have helped by lifting the bride out of the shadow a little. But in terms of what’s included and not included, the framing is much better than the first.
The last shot has a much nicer feel to it than the others. I’m not overly keen on your sepia processing as it’s a little too strong for my liking and it’s washed across the highlights and shadows. But apart from that, it’s in sharp focus, well exposed, not too cluttered and has a nice “feel” about it. I hope you find some of these comments constructive?
ciaran wrote:
Try and forget the fact that you took the shot and be as objective as you can (and this is no easy ask.. it’s very hard for anyone to be subjective about their own shots, particularly if they like them).
This is an excellent point that many people forget. One method I use to increase objectivity is to put the shots away for a while – just forget about them! Don’t look at them or do any work on them for as long a period after the shoot as possible. That might be a day, a week, a month or longer. Every little bit helps to detach your emotions from the image. Over time, you will forget about all of the other sensory stimulation that was there when you took the shots and you will be left with just the images. If they are strong images, they will invoke the memory of the senses again when you next view them but if they are weak, their effect will not be as strong. Once you’ve done that and picked out the shots that really stand out, ask yourself if you could live withthat image hanging on the wall of your living room where you have to look at it day in day out. If you can’t imagine that, then actually do it! If you find the image begins to annoy you as you look at it day after day, then it’s time to chuck it and you know you’ve not got a very strong image.
Sounds rather extreme but it does work. If you’ve been doing photography as long as I have you’ll look on some of you’re earlier work and end up asking yourself why you even bothered to take certain shots, never mind getting them enlarged!
Thats pretty much my thoughts on it too – its just a pity that its not always possible (depending on what the shots are for). The longer you leave them (at least a week) I think the more objective you are about them and the easier it is to notice the flaws.
Thanks Guy’s
The critiques were very helpfull.
It is honesty like this that will make this a great forum, rather than just another pat on the back place.I think I will go back to my landscapes and flowers. At least I don’t have to try and get a rock to pose for me.
But the honesty was greatly appreciated.
Cheers
JohnJohn wrote:
At least I don’t have to try and get a rock to pose for me.
You’d be surprised how much of a difference it can make to your landscapes when you do eventually succeed in getting a rock to pose for you :wink:
John.
I agree with all the comments made but one or two questions. What camera gear did you use and are these pics scanned?
I certainly wouldn’t give up on snapping people. It’s amazing how the more you do it the more aware you become of composition but more importantly how you learn to communicate with people. Being able to communicate a sense of calmness and assurance reflects back into the camera. It is difficult to master and now and again there will be times when the chemistry wont work but that will be rare. I did weddings for years (one of the reasons you wont see many people in my pictures these days!) and found that my best friend was a tripod. It gives you a chance to have a raport with your subject and once the picture is framed you can snap away without losing that eye contact by looking through the viwefinder. I realise that in the shots you have put up here that would have been impractical but it is possible a lot of the time.
There will be shots. like the umbrella one above, when you can crop, or blur out interfering detail. The two posed shots show a tension in the faces of the subject which is often caused by nervousness. Natural enough in people who are not used to being photographed. Getting their trust is difficult but worth the patience and effort.
Please post some of your landscapes if you get a chance ;-)
Valentia The gear I use is a Minolta Dynax 5 camera. I have a 75-300 zoom and a wide angle 19-35.
I was also using my daughters minolta camera.
The images were done in Fujifilm in Dunlaoghaire. It is the first time I have asked for digital prints off this camera, and I have to say the result was not the most pleasing. Saying that they do very well for my prints. Oh well live and learn.
I have put up 3 shots in landscapes for you.
:DJohn wrote:
I think I will go back to my landscapes and flowers. At least I don’t have to try and get a rock to pose for me.
I wouldn’t give up that easily John. The only way people get better at anything is to keep practicing and photography in general, let alone shooting people, is no different. Obviously weddings don’t come about every day, but I’d encourage you to keep trying.
As for not needing a rock to pose for you, when I look at some of the TOP landscape work out there, their pictures give you exactly that feeling. They’ve made the landscape pose for the photo. I think REALLY good landscape work is much more of a challenge than REALLY good portraiture/people photography.
John wrote:
Thanks Guy’s
The critiques were very helpfull.
I think I will go back to my landscapes and flowers. At least I don’t have to try and get a rock to pose for me.John
The critiques cannot have been that helpful, if you are going to abandon people photography! lol On a more serious note, I would encourage you to stick at it and seek to improve – photography is very much a learning curve, very few people have a natural gift for it, and it is something that can be taught/learnt to a large degree.
I know – because I still have a lot to learn, but I can see progress from the images I was taking even from last year. Hopefully there is more progress to come……. :lol:So the pictures were scanned in the Fuji lab.
I have seen so many people become frustrated and question their photographic ability because the quality of stuff from the lab was atrocious. They blamed themselves! I can see that these scans are very poor. I’d imagine that when you get used to digital and learn some simple adjustments like levels and curves you will see a vast improvement in your work. Have a look at “Photoshop CS2 for Photographers” by Scott Kelby. Simple, effective and to the point tutorials thet can be performed in a couple of minutes. You’ll be amazed hoy your output looks. Most, nay all, shots need some work afterwards, a bit like in the darkroom.
John wrote:
I think I will go back to my landscapes and flowers.
Less defeatist, please John…! A lot of people wouldn’t even dare take pics at a wedding, let alone post them for critique! Not to mention that getting emotion from a rock or a tree is a little tougher (in most cases)!
John wrote:
Valentia The gear I use is a Minolta Dynax 5 camera. I have a 75-300 zoom and a wide angle 19-35.
I was also using my daughters minolta camera.
The images were done in Fujifilm in Dunlaoghaire. It is the first time I have asked for digital prints off this camera, and I have to say the result was not the most pleasing. Saying that they do very well for my prints. Oh well live and learn.
I have put up 3 shots in landscapes for you.
:DYikes … I have that minolta.. and I never use the 75-300mm lens for anything indoors … (I’m assuming it’s the standard zoom rather than an f4 or something). But I do love that camera And I know you can get some fantastic shots with it, even just using it’s pop-up flash.
I now have the digicam version of it with the same old lenses.
I’m not convinced by the film-to-digital processing done by the standard labs. They tend to want to do it as quick as possible so they often produce images at a much lower resolution than is possible. I’d advise investing in a scanner of your own, and getting normal prints. Then you can just scan the prints you see potential in, and you can scan them at a much higher quality.John,
what I found great for practising my portrait & people shots were my kids. A little bit of bribery goes a long way, and this can help with lighting techniques etc. My son is a bit of a write-off as he is ‘too cool’ at this stage, but my two girls still like dressing up and boy, do they enjoy posing !!
This way there is no pressure if the shots don’t work out, and it also gives you a chance to take notes of each shot & set up, and you learn what works and what doesn’t.
Rgds
Kevin
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
