Those are some amazing shots and the detail collage has perfect white balance. Which is something I struggle with Whats even more amazing is your pricing. If you were doing Chicago weddings, you could charge triple.
is it really the standard to list the bride first? I've seen both on the site and never gave it too much thought. I always chose the groom first since that's usually how you'd write a legal name. But, using the bride's makes sense...its her day, and her name goes first on the invitations.
bridow - thank you. 7-8 months ago we said the same thing...we were struggling to get good white balance too...but eventually it starts coming together. First, finding out how to get it good out of LR, then finally figuring out how to get it right out of the camera.
believe it or not, all of our weddings were from an even cheaper price since we ran a 'summer special' to build our client list, hoping that for next year we'd be able to work off of the referrals from these brides. So far...the plan has been working Hopefully someday soon we'll be up to the normal pricing of most FMers.
Fantastic set. I have a really stupid question. The layout... These look wonderful, but I can't figure out what they are formatted for. At first I thought album, but the aspect ratio isn't consistant.
these are formatted for our blog, hence the white framing. We used to have them set up to where it was one picture, followed by another picture but you end up scrolling forever. I now prefer setting them up like this on our blog. For certain pictures you can also really play the colors off of one another.
Congratulations on your advancement! It’s a nice feeling to know when you’re moving forward in your qualities as a photographer.
A few observations that might help to keep you moving in that direction: overall, I like your processing... it’s very bright and the colours really pop. But keep your eye on the whites: in #7 and #8 your high values have blown out too much.
The flash in a few of these looks too hard: the groom and his mom in #2, #3, the mom in #5 and #10. Try dialing down a bit for the ambient fill and use more bounce with indoor situations.
#9 is very noisy... it looks like you may have missed your metering and then pull it back in post. Back lighting is tough to meter but if you take the time and do it manually it will look great.
Was your intended focus in #3 her earring?
You’ve got great shots and obviously a really good eye... I look forward to seeing your work in the future!
I agree some of our whites are probably a bit too hot, but we've found ourselves pushing that more and more lately. In certain images, we'll even paint it in if we'd rather draw focus to that particular spot.
Lighting, and using our flashes appropriately, I certainly agree is our next big step...and a big spot where we need to improve. I have a flash question though...for example in #5 where you can see the back of the mom's head, the wb is set to the sanctuary and shows correctly, but the back of the head is too blue because the flash has cast that color onto her. How do you shoot for situations like that? How can you get an accurate wb when there are two different temperatures in the same exact shot?
For #9, yes, it was an unintentional...yet fortunate accident. For their engagement session, we had a very similar shot and nearly identical exposure issue. Pulling it back together in post makes it grainy, but to be honest, it gives a texture and effect that my wife and I both really like. I'd really like to become better at doing that intentionally when needed.
My wife took all of the photos of the bride, but I believe #3 was on purpose. I vaguely remember seeing an 'in-focus' shot of the ear-ring, as well as the curls in her hair, but artistically (since we try to be as different as possible) we liked this one better I don't know if it works as a stand-alone, but I think it passes ok when placed in a series with ones that are crisp.
Numbers added 
Hopefully someday soon we'll be up to the normal pricing of most FMers.