Would love some outside opinions on these. It was done at an engagement session this weekend. The couple was great, very affectionate and I think I got more hand butt shots then non hand butt.

I'll come back with information on how it was shot if the masses like it.

i love the first one-i don't think the sky is necessary in this one, though (i might just crop it out)-love the composition and IR look-was the IR done in camera or in post?

not a fan of #2-i prefer all color or all b&w for an image-their faces are also a bit OOF

daniel

Hi Daniel,

It's a converted D70s. I was noticing their faces are a little OOF in #2 as well. In all honesty, I forgot to sharpen it up like the first.

I just uploaded a sharpened one.

I like the infared trees in the first one, but the coloring and treatment starts to look gimmicky for me pretty quick.

Bear in mind the higher the fartsy vote -the more they will probably love it!

I like them .. a different and tasteful treatment.

A more important question is does the couple like them? And do you? Those are the REAL important opinions.

I like #1, except for the tip of the trees that's purple/darker.

but, either way, great shot!

I love 1, in fact I absolutely adore it, but the couple just look like they've been trapped in a freezer for hours in 2.

Chris

I like them a lot.

Apparently I'm in the minority, but I like them.

I have found IR converted cameras to be more or less a "one trick pony", but when you get it right that "one trick" can be really cool.

I think they work. I would clean the tips of the trees up a little bit more though. Hopefully you still have your layers intact.

You might want to experiment with a slight desaturation of the sky and playing with the tone (of the sky) as well.

Tad

I like #1. Not a fan of #2.

Italo Campilii wrote:
I like #1. Not a fan of #2.

+1

Italo Campilii wrote:
I like #1. Not a fan of #2.

+2

And I'll tell you why. In 2, his expression just kills it. Their outfits don't work at all here either. If he was in a sport coat and jeans and a old world hat then maybe. The scene calls for magic all around and the fact that they are in street clothes kills it. Fish out of water. In 1, their outfits/expressions are less noticeable and that's why it works.

I say do this shot again and get outfits that work better with the scene.

~Sam

I like #1 but I don't like the sky. It sorta creeps me out in a way. I'd like it better if it fit more uniform into the picture... JMHO

radioblurs wrote:
i love the first one-i don't think the sky is necessary in this one, though (i might just crop it out)-love the composition and IR look-was the IR done in camera or in post?

not a fan of #2-i prefer all color or all b&w for an image-their faces are also a bit OOF

daniel

+1

Thanks for all the comments everyone.

As I said above, this was taken with a converted Nikon D70s with an 18-70 3.5-4.5 kit lens. It's a color infrared camera and by swapping the blue & red channels you can get blue sky back in.

For both of the shots I converted to black and white then masked the sky back in (which is where the tops of the trees got come coloration back). My biggest concern was that it felt "gimmicky" but as there aren't a whole lot of folks currently doing this for weddings, I thought it may be good to start experimenting a bit and see how I liked it.

It definitely leaves something to be desired on the skin tones. Converting to B&W helps but they can still appear a bit sickly if you don't process it correctly.

Again, thanks for the input! Looks like its close enough to 50/50 of the vote that I'll offer it up to the couple (after reprocessing it a bit).

Brian Mullins wrote:
Looks like its close enough to 50/50 of the vote that I'll offer it up to the couple (after reprocessing it a bit).


An update of their answer is expected

I really like the first one

1 is a great landscape shot with two people messing it up

2 = The Fartsy.

IR isn't good for closeups. 1 would be great without the tinted sky.

2 doesn't do anything for me.

+1 on what trillium said.

The tinted sky is not working for me.

Italo Campilii wrote:
I like #1. Not a fan of #2.

Same here. And for the record, I like IR.