Ok, at least tell me to photoshop out the bug bite on 8
Seriously, I stayed up late last night after taking care of baby twins to post these. Tell me they are boring, safe. Dull.This was my first time using my 5D I bought off the B/S forum. Besides the thousands of baby pictures...
On this laptop they look rather colorless, on my monitor they looked vibrant. Neither is calibrated. That's one more thing I have to do that I don't have a clue how to go about.
In #2 the concentration is on his (class?) ring, not hers. #12 seems to be the one where they are the most natural.
Colour wise, about half of them seen a little cold to me, and the B/W is a little bright. It might just be that my eyes haven't completely adjusted to the dim light in here after being outside so I won't be more specific than that.
She should have been shot straight on. She is in a profile in just about all the shots. I don't think they flatter her. The shots look flat, color wise and lighting wise. They seem genuinely in love but these still they lack emotion, granted some folks just aren't as emotional/exciting as others. Can't put my finger on it. 4 and 12 need depth. They really get lost in the frame with everything in focus. If you were certain on location choice, then I would have requested a different set of clothes altogether. something more contrasting. Reds, dark browns perhaps. Hope it helps Suzi and it wasn't too harsh.
Marianne and Sam, thank you for your thoughts. I really appreciate them and it does help.
Sam, I thought about avoiding profile shots, but I wasn't sure if a dislike for this profile is that universal. To me, that's just how she looks, I like it, it reminds me of the daughter in Fiddler on the Roof. And she just lights up when she's looking at her fiance. I'll post one of the shots that are straight on. I think she might look a little better if I shoot up at her, but I don't think he will.
For the wedding I'll keep in mind looking for more flattering angles.
I never know what to tell couples for engagement shoots on what to wear, beyond no fussy clothes or prints. Reds and browns for green scenery? I'll try that.
Harsh, No. Harsh is saying nothing at all.
Thanks again.
57suzi wrote:
Jim I look forward to being able to see your comparison. Thanks for the input, it is appreciated. The lens was the 70-200 2.8 IS.
Here is the couple straight on.
Please,everybody, go ahead and give suggestions I can use for their wedding. And weigh in on the profile issue. It reminds me of threads where we discuss the issue of flattering a woman's size, and I'm one who knows every woman will first and foremost care about how thin or fat a picture makes her look.
I'm just not as sure about a profile like this. To me is not as much as a bad thing as just her, but if I'm wrong, I want to know it so I can make her as happy as I can.
Thanks everybody....Show more →
Best one of the bunch!! Like this a lot. Contrast, color, bokeh, pose all came together here. Should have posted this one earlier!!
