Had the opportunity to shoot Megan and Blair's E-session last weekend...they are getting married out of state so I won't get a chance to shoot their wedding. For those of you in Georgia, last Sunday was a constant 20 to 30mph wind with 40 mph gusts, I'm thankful for having the wife fight the stand and Westcott Halo all day.
I advised the couple to be very affectionate, and boy were they!!!!! If I had to do it again I would have taken more "normal" shots.
Bodies used: Canon 30d and 20d
Lenses used: Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 and Canon 10-22mm UWA
Triggers: Skyports
Lighting: Qflash T5d-R fired through a Westcott 45" Halo (not bounced off the back), some are a 580EX II fired the same way...but very few.
Please critique on all areas...composition / lighting/ processing, etc!
Mixed feelings about this set. I really loved a few of the shots (11, 12, 17, 18) but some of the others just did not appeal due to wide angle distortion (1, 4, 7, 8 & 9).
Most brides do not like shots that make their arms, legs and waistline look bigger than they are. For instance, in #1 her upper arm looks wider than her husbands head and in #7 where her legs look out of proportion.
overall my fav is #11, very cool colors and just a nice feeling overall...
I agree with what Ken says. Shooting Low + wide angle = People looking heavier then they are. I realize that these are two shooting techniques that are in style right now, but I think you have to balance that with making your subjects look their best.
cecesdada wrote:
I agree with what Ken says. Shooting Low + wide angle = People looking heavier then they are. I realize that these are two shooting techniques that are in style right now, but I think you have to balance that with making your subjects look their best.
I do really like Number 11. Cool processing.
Yeah, I gotta start backing off and using normal zoom lenses instead of the UWA. I guess #11 is my tribute to the "Dave Hill" look......
yea, you weren't kidding about them being ah... affectionate
nice series. i agree with the feedback on some of the wide angle shots. she's not a big gal, and some of these are less than flattering because of the distortion. they're fun, but a bride-to-be might object.
#1 has me a little weirded out most of all - it looks those cards where the animals eyes are bulging and their heads and necks are totally out of proportion with their bodies. if this couple has a sense of humor, they'll love it, but not one i'd put in my portfolio
Yeah I need to leave the 10-22 in the bag except for a couple of fun/novelty shots. I told my wife to slap me if I keep taking shots with it during shoots.
I have more normal shots, and if I did the shoot over I would have done more. If took the bride to be a little time to warm up, but the groom was just a character all day.
11, 12, 14, 22, 24 are really good in my opinion. A lot of the rest suffer from major and unflattering distortion due to the UWA lens. The couple almost seem like they didn't even interact with you for most of the shot...I really like that you were there capturing these intimate moments that they were having. Might have been even better to crank out the longer lenses like 70-200 or a 135 to get more of the "distant observer" feel into the shots.
Inga wrote:
11, 12, 14, 22, 24 are really good in my opinion. A lot of the rest suffer from major and unflattering distortion due to the UWA lens. The couple almost seem like they didn't even interact with you for most of the shot...I really like that you were there capturing these intimate moments that they were having. Might have been even better to crank out the longer lenses like 70-200 or a 135 to get more of the "distant observer" feel into the shots.
Yeah, I'm definately gonna change my approach based on the feedback about the UWA. However, I have to feel that had I not mentioned the UWA I *probably* would not have gotten as much distortion comments as I did..it's kinda a "jedi mind trick" where you are actually looking for it....does that make since? #1 is probably the most obvious with most of the rest playing on the mind based on how much distorted the first image had.
The 10-22 is definately a love/hate lens in some aspects.
I'm suprised that:
- #8 did not get much notice, it's one of my favs! The "cool" color rocked in my opinion.
- powerlines in the shots, gosh I could not get away from them!
- no one really mentioned the "dave hill" look of #11
- the "green" tint to #25, I did this on purpose...I thought it worked well for the image.
- #11, the combined tilt and framing of the wall just "worked" in my opinion. Not many comments.
Thanks to everyone for their comments and critique!!!!!!
VladKenner wrote:
I like these urban shots a lot. Although wide angle does distort I think these are fun and refreshing images.
Having said that I think that # 11 and 14 are a bit overprocessed and #2 lacks details on the bride's face and body due to the blown out highlights
Thanks for the "different" critique Vlad, I kinda feel like the UWA on #1 got everyone tainted about the other images, I really don't think the other ones are that distorted. What I really love about theses images is that fact the no one around my area does anything close to what I'm doing. Everyone around here is just so "blah"....
