16 is awesome, it took me awhile to figure out how it was done. Very creative and perfectly executed. The whole set flows nicely. 11 and 14 are also really great. I think 5 is the only one that doesn't seem like it fits. Both in style and processing.
For those confused... 16. Reflective surface foreground. Low depth of field. Bride's image flipped. Nice use of reflection. Great presentation.
I really like the processing on these. The reception images and shooting style really capture the action well. PJ shooting in the prep is really nice as well.
I think there is great attention to detail in your shooting.
You've got a distinct and consistent style. I don't know who you second-shot for, and don't know what your primary asked of you. If my own second delivered this set, I'd be irritated, but that's because it doesn't mesh with my own style (especially the cut-off body parts and the shutter-dragging and light streaking), and so would stand apart awkwardly. But we'd work that out ahead of time so I don't imagine this is a problem for you or your primary. I assume your primary chose you at least in part precisely for your style, so that's good.
My wife (not a photographer) was standing over my shoulder while I looked through this set. She noted the frequency with which you cut people off at the waist, I assume deliberately. Number 13 caught her eye, and she commented that everyone looks melancholy. Having just seen that image, she said of #16, "This is when part of my soul left my body after getting married." I thought that observation was funny enough to post. (She predicted that at least one of these images might show up on Awkward Family Photos in ten years.)
When we got to number 10, she also mentioned a sense of a bit of ADD in this set (1: car!; 4: random flower!; 10: clock!). I began to anticipate a squirrel photo, and I suppose I'll have to cope with my disappointment. I provide her casual, over-the-shoulder commentary only for the non-photographer's perspective we don't often get, here. Take it for whatever it's worth to you.
Mostly, these are stylistic criticisms, and as such are not weighty -- they're mere opinion and gut reaction. I realize, also, that some of the composition and stylistic factors may be a result of you being upside down relative to me, as a result of your geography. That is, your nationality helps explain why the set feels "foreign" to me.
I do appreciate your consistency in post, and though that's a short phrase, it's no small matter.
I have only posted here once before in the wedding section, The last post was a wedding I shot on my own. This set from a 2nd shooting gig with Rachael Muller Photography here is a link to the set she posted of both our images http://rachaelmuller.com/bronwen-scott-married/
This was the first time we had shot together. She was in fact the 2nd shooter at my own wedding, but that is a whole other story.
Thanks Ian for your time to respond, and yes as a whole set it does sit better. And yes we may think a little different down here!!! better or worse that is someones opinion.
sgtbueno wrote:
I like 13, that's about it. I don't think too many customers will be please if a set like this is delivery to them.
Really? I see a set that is not to my taste processing wise, but technically is good. The compositions are just fine, the lighting is good, and there are some captured moments.
Aside from the complete arrogance of the title, don't forget this was a second shooter, and for that, these shots are great.
(She predicted that at least one of these images might show up on Awkward Family Photos in ten years.)
I hope that's a joke. 