Do most of your clients prefer a 'processed' look? I'm contemplating how to process this set from a wedding I shot. I think a 'processed' look as long as it's not overcooked, makes the photo look more unique and less sooc/point and shoot-ish? I have a feeling clients prefer this also. What are your thoughts? Some processing tips?
Please tell me you didn't just shoot a wedding for the first time, with no idea of how you're going to edit the images.
Most everyone here has a style that they are either striving for, or have achieved. Clients hire you expecting photos similar to your blog and website, so if you deviate too much you run the risk of disappointing them.
My advice would be to spend a ton of time looking at other people's work, find what you're drawn to, try to do it in your own way, and hope to God other's like it too.
Or, go very clean and "timeless", and just bump saturation, contrast, and sharpness to your liking.
jneilosu wrote:
Please tell me you didn't just shoot a wedding for the first time, with no idea of how you're going to edit the images.
I my opinion - it's not about whether he just shot his first wedding and struckling with post-processing or how he wants the end result.
They're not going to be disappointed if they have sat down beforehand and talked about expectations and not overselling his/ones ability.
I think it's great if he just shot his first wedding. You probably also remember where you were as a photographer, when you did your fist wedding and where you are now (and just assuming)
IF you're new to wedding photography it's just all about making it very clear for them, that it is in fact your first wedding. Be upfront and honest, then you can't go wrong.
Oh I have a good grip on post processing. I'm not a professional, but I think I did a decent job =D. I was working on the images when I processed one with a 'look' vs 'a clean' look and was thinking clients probably prefer them that way.
What is an unprocessed picture (look)? It's like delivering unprocessed reel back in the old days. Processing is a must- the end result might be different- natural, desaturated, b&w etc. And we can call it style of photography- it's not easy to find your own, takes time and practice if you ask me. Processing tip- lightroom and a lightroom workshop to start with.
Talking about wedding photos post processing, i wanted to know if it would be a good idea to outsource to any post processing company, any encouraging experiences so far anyone. Currently i am taking free trials from many different vendors, suggestions welcome.
Everyone has their own unique post processing style. The way they achieve that is to open up each image in photoshop then open levels and drag the two arrows in at the end of the output levels bar to flatten the image.
I'm kidding about the uniqueness part but that is what everyone seems to be doing. The look sucks but clients must love it with so many shooters doing it.
D. Diggler wrote:
Just curious to know your thoughts as to why it is a must?
i'm not sure if desaturated or b&w is a MUST, unless that's what's in your portfolio that they booked you because of...but at the minimum, some tweaks are necessary.....tweaking exposures, white balance are a REQUIREMENT (i feel, and i'm sure most others would agree), and contrast/vibrancy/saturation adjustments aren't far behind....that's all at a minimum...
nailing exposures is good, but we all know in the heat of battle that doesn't always work....someone posted the other day a situation where they were shooting outside with the bride and groom at like iso 100 or 200, then came inside and captured an AWESOME moment, but was underexposed 4 or 5 stops...so they pushed the exposure, and it looked pretty good....i mean that's kind of an extreme example, that doesn't always happen, but little variances DO happen, but still need to be tweaked...
also white balance is key...again (i feel), skin tones MUST be accurate...i generally shoot auto white balance if i'm shooting natural light (in raw), then i tweak it in post....maybe you set your color temp and white balance shift before EVERY shot....but are you REALLLLLY that accurate? On top of that, it's not really feasible to change white balance that often, b/c you're prob missing shots as a result...
i PERSONALLY could never shoot a wedding and NOT tweak something in post....i do everything in aperture (same as lightroom), and i RARELY open anything in photoshop to do edits....fixing blinks, removing offending objects, that's about it...
it's simply about reproducing the day accurately, and i dont know of anyone that can do that without even minor tweaks to their work...
I think that there is a fundamental disconnect here on terms.
To some, "processing" means that files will be examined and culled, and technical corrections will be made to ensure appropriate color, contrast, and brightness.
To others, "processing" means doing something to change the look of the photograph from what came out of the camera to something observably different. Many in this school feel that a photograph is not "artistic" unless something has been done to it, and they are the modern inheritors of the pictoralist tradition.
The original poster seems to have been asking about the latter option.
Like others have suggested, you should expose and shoot with a given PP look in mind. Shooting now and asking PP questions later isn't ideal. As it seems that's the situation you're in, I would advise you first of all to apply a consistent look. If you're doing color, make sure your color shots (under the same lighting conditions) have consistent WB and edits. Ditto for B&W. Things like VSCO presets in LR give you a good foundation from which to develop your own look. I use them, along with some presets I have devised on my own for certain lighting conditions. There's no answer here, unfortunately, except the one you find for yourself.
