p.1 #2 · NC Bridals for Critique......What do you think
Technically, they are really good. But they are all center composed with a lot of the same poses, so I found myself a little bored. Traditional shots aren't bad, but I like composition and lighting that spice it up a bit.
p.1 #6 · NC Bridals for Critique......What do you think
solid shots, since she has a veil I would've liked to more shots involving the veil maybe have her hold it and fan it out, or have her back to you, hold the veil and look back at you, etc
p.1 #7 · NC Bridals for Critique......What do you think
What did you use for fill? It's too on axis and too hard for my taste. It makes her look greasy. Some corrective post work would take care of the greasy look.
Watch the head tilt. Some are a little too much.
The right arm in #5 is straight. Remember that no joints should be straight. In addition, she looks like she's got a stump since we can't see her hand.
The right hand posing in #10 and #11 is awkward. #11 would have been nice if both hands were on the bouquet. Also, I burn down the hot spot on the wall, it competes with her.
Lastly, when she looked down, she pulled her head in. That accentuates her weak chin.
The problem with traditional formals is that everything has to be perfect. PPofA competition would ding you for the above.
p.1 #8 · NC Bridals for Critique......What do you think
Alright, there's a lot to like here, but I'm going to seem like I'm tearing in because shots like these are all about craftsmanship... so if they're going to be good, you need to nail the details.
1. Effective use of depth-of field. Body angle is solid, and bust-up looks well-flattered. The accent light across her decollete is nice. I would suggest working more on the pose from the ground up. She is very straight up-and-down here. A particular issue is both the fact that her arms are hanging straight down and her hands are amputated by the hand-rail. I would suggest either building the pose from starting with her weight more on her back foot, introduce more of an S-curve into the pose, and then find an excuse to bend her arms (IE hold bouquet, hand on hip, playing with dress, etc) or else have her interact with the railing by placing her hand(s) on it, leaning into it, etc. The lighting is also only ok here... it looks like on-camera fill, and I feel like it can't make up its mind in most of these whether you want your flash as key or fill. She's got a lot of shine on the face, and I would push harder for better makeup or else work softer lighting.
2. Same as above. Straight as a board up and down. The dress is also a bit limp in back... maybe some more care with arranging it.
3. Better, but look at the hyper-extension of her hand on the rail. Fingers look claw-like. Again, her body is far too straight up and down in the pose. Women are curvy, and good poses accentuate this most of the time.
4. Better still. The hand is better, the head is rocked back counter-axis in a classic feminine orientation. Still a good angle. Getting good separation with the rim light. The back hand is still hanging limply and being bisected by the railing.
5. Shots like this can be tough to make "artsy," so I'll limit my comments to two: 1: I have a hard time identifying the object that she's leaning on, although I know its probably a FD coat. I'd like it arranged so that I can see what it is at least. its also a non-sequitur in the environment... I'd almost rather a shot like this be done at the station. For nit picks on the pose, the back wrist is amputated.
6. Again, her body is straight up and down. Face is shiny from lighting/makeup combo. Weird shadow on the right of her nose (camera left).
7. Same, except the change in head orientation removes that shadow. Feels very pensive here.
8. She feels much looser here and cheerful. She's very square to the camera (shoulders appear wide). Crop around head feels tight.
9. Body is straight up and down again, but the hand/arm pose is better. I feel like the comp doesn't make sense because you've got empty space right, she's centered, and the bouquet is cut off on the left. I'd pan left.
10. There is a lot about this pose that's better than most of the others. Arms are bent, and it looks like you've got some bend in her front leg with the weight on the back. The angle of her shoulders is good. My biggest gripe is that the hand feels awkward coming up so high and with the elbow bent at such an acute angle. Shiny face from the lighting/makeup combination.
11. Looks like a full-length crop of 10. See that knee bump, be it ever so slight? That's good. I like that... but she's still very straight up and down. I also want more attention given to the arrangement of her train.
p.1 #9 · NC Bridals for Critique......What do you think
As a portrait photographer getting into more weddings lately, i like to see all body parts. Her hands are missing in the first couple. in the 3rd, her left hand is showing, but her elbow is too straight. Her right hand is missing. She should have also not been posed to the side so much. You could have had her twist her hips towards the camera and bend her front leg at the knee. That would have given that "S" curve. There is alot of repetitiveness in the rest of the set. you probably shot too much. I find that if i take more time to set up a pose like this and really double check details, I come out with fewer, but better shots, which is better than more so, so shots.
p.1 #11 · NC Bridals for Critique......What do you think
First of all, thank you to everyone that has replied so far. I read each comment with compassion to learn.
I do realize that these shots are centered. The client requested these for the 16x20 canvass that she wants to display at her wedding. I do have several that are not centered using the rule of thirds. She will use some of those in her album.
I'm still working on the posing part of my business and know I really need to work on it. It will come with practice as will any career.
dmacmillan - All I used for lighting at this shoot was a 580ex II mounted on a stand with a 24" softbox.
Evan - thanks for critiquing each photo. That lets me go back an analyze each one gathering information to work on next time.
Teppy1 - You are correct, I need to spend more time setting the shot up and take fewer photos. I did indeed probably take too many shots during this shoot. I find myself doing this regular in an attempt to pick the right photo for the client.
p.1 #12 · NC Bridals for Critique......What do you think
firebiz16 wrote:
dmacmillan - All I used for lighting at this shoot was a 580ex II mounted on a stand with a 24" softbox.
How far away? That's a fairly small softbox. If placed back too far, it acts more like a point source. I suggest you do some experimentation placing it at different distances from the subject. Start with a head and shoulders as close to the subject as you can get, then keep moving back. Compare results.
We were pretty direct in our critique. I was because I see potential. There's a couple of things to iron out and you'll be producing lovely work,
p.1 #13 · NC Bridals for Critique......What do you think
he could experiment or learn to use a light meter.
dmacmillan wrote:
How far away? That's a fairly small softbox. If placed back too far, it acts more like a point source. I suggest you do some experimentation placing it at different distances from the subject. Start with a head and shoulders as close to the subject as you can get, then keep moving back. Compare results.
We were pretty direct in our critique. I was because I see potential. There's a couple of things to iron out and you'll be producing lovely work,
