A warning to those who think they can do weddings...

[symes]

Folks,

I guess this is just a warning to those who think they can jump into wedding photography.

A friend of mine had mentionned that maybe I might be interested in shooting her wedding. I bluntly told her that I was not ready to take that leap. Nor could I believe that she had found someone to do her wedding for 400Cdn.

I wasn't able to attend her wedding either because I was away at school...but when she got the photos back I couldn't believe the horrific results. The pics are grainy, crooked, dark, and all shot in poor locations... I cannot imagine presenting these to a client...

I can't even find a way to salvage them for her...my PS skills are tapped out...

I know I could have done better than this, but I am glad she has now seen the result of paying next to nothing for important photos...

Take a look....

Cheers,

[symes]

one more...

One of the guests even mentionned to her about the sailboats...she tried to pass the graininess off as a photojournalistic style...

[Tonky]

I've seen a lot worse to be honest - the group isn't badly posed.

I got into wedding photography in my teens and did it semi professionally all my life until a couple of years ago when I packed it in. I still see some horrific examples though which people have paid good money for.

You don't have to be any great and gifted photographer to undertake wedding photography. If you don't have the basic skills then you're a fool to undertake it, but the biggest problem is you'll be called upon to have people skills in organizing, managing, and posing often large groups of people, that you probably don't possess and have no experience of. It can be an extremely high pressure job, and unless you're a pretty outgoing type of person, who can keep it light and chatty while coaxing people into what you want, you'd probably do well to avoid the situation.

[MattyB]

harsh :(

i did a wedding for a LOWWWWW budget wedding a while ago with my 300D, and i'll agree that weddings are A) way to much pressure and expectations B) friggin hard to do! C) not worth doing unless you're a professional with the added wedding gift

[Tonky]

LOL - OMG!

Pics on the skew like that are all too common. Unless your friend has already paid, what she should do is demand a substantial discount. If the photographer doesn't sell these pics to your friend, he wont sell them to anyone else. ;)

I realise your friend will want the pics but there's room to for negotiation there.

Most of that last shot is wide angle distortion btw. The bride and the two ladies on the right are upright while the fellers are all falling over.

[kaitanium]

maybe he wanted the dark feeling =P. spooky if you ask me

[symes]

Sorry should have made it clear that the copyright and all the images are now property of the bride and groom and this is why I was able to post them...

Cheers,

[Tonky]

O.K. Do you have the original images or are these scanned from the prints? They're quite badly under-exposed, so I don't think you'll recover much shadow detail though. Pretty awful really. :rolleyes:

[MJP]

O.K. Do you have the original images or are these scanned from the prints? They're quite badly under-exposed, so I don't think you'll recover much shadow detail though. Pretty awful really. :rolleyes:

I agree with you bro....its under-exposed....i think your friend used auto mode....this is a bad situation..i usually use M mode...take a test shot first...i found most of the time..using large aperature and between shutter 30-60

[symes]

I agree with you bro....its under-exposed....i think your friend used auto mode....this is a bad situation..i usually use M mode...take a test shot first...i found most of the time..using large aperature and between shutter 30-60

My friend didn't take these photos...she was the bride...

it was another photog who took the photos...I know they are unexposed...I can't figure out for the life of me what kind of camera she was using...

the exif data is no existant...but the photo name was P3330033 something like that...

any idea what camera that was?

Cheers,

[symes]

O.K. Do you have the original images or are these scanned from the prints? They're quite badly under-exposed, so I don't think you'll recover much shadow detail though. Pretty awful really. :rolleyes:

These are the digital images...

these are just downisized versions of the originals...

[robertwgross]

The wedding shooters of this forum could tear these shots apart, item by item, if that were necessary. However, on the other hand, I see a few things that were done correctly in each shot.

---Bob Gross---

[symes]

The wedding shooters of this forum could tear these shots apart, item by item, if that were necessary. However, on the other hand, I see a few things that were done correctly in each shot.

---Bob Gross---

The major problem is, even at the size of a 4X6, they are unprintable...they come out with a load of noise and are way too dark...

Cheers,

[RandyMN]

Looks like too much was trying to be done with too little. Large groups with one flash, black background, auto exposure and all dark wardrobes creates a very difficult picture. I feel bad for the photographer facing such a difficult situation but I do agree they could have been done better.

I don't notice any harsh shadows so it appears they used one flash reflected off the ceiling.

I know it's easy to say how much better one could get results looking at the pictures, but I think they tried hard but just had inadequate flash and exposure to get good results.

Probably a poor choice of background also.

[Skip Souza]

...but the photo name was P3330033 something like that...

any idea what camera that was?

Polaroid ???
Unfortunately, she got what she paid for.

[DocFrankenstein]

Are those the pictures before or after you post-processed them?
How would you shoot differently?

Try searching google for the file format! Put the filename and search for images. You should determine the camera from the exif info.

[symes]

Are those the pictures before or after you post-processed them?

These are before I touched them...but nothing I do seems to make them any better...having said that my ps skills are limited.

How would you shoot differently?


As it stands right now, I would not have taken the wedding because I am not at the level I need to be in understanding my gear to execute the pressure shots correctly...

Having said that, I would definitly have taken them outside for the group shots. It was a warm afternoon in September...There must have been a location outside that would have provided better lighting than this...


Please don't get me wrong...I am not suggesting I would have done any better...I am just saying that if you are going to commit and shoot a wedding understaning your equipment and the business is important...This is someone's spcial day and the photographer plays a primary role in ensuring the memory of that day is lasting...for the right reasons...

[symes]

Polaroid ???
Unfortunately, she got what she paid for.

you are correct...

[RandyMN]

Please don't get me wrong...I am not suggesting I would have done any better...I am just saying that if you are going to commit and shoot a wedding understaning your equipment and the business is important...This is someone's spcial day and the photographer plays a primary role in ensuring the memory of that day is lasting...for the right reasons...

Sorry Symes, I'm not trying to be rude but you contradicted yourself.

I know I could have done better than this, but I am glad she has now seen the result of paying next to nothing for important photos...

I think it's a good question about how it should have been done differently.

[sdommin]

the exif data is no existant...but the photo name was P3330033 something like that...

any idea what camera that was?

Some (if not all) Olympus cameras have that kind of file name.

[symes]

Sorry Symes, I'm not trying to be rude but you contradicted yourself.

I know I could have done better than this, but I am glad she has now seen the result of paying next to nothing for important photos...

I think it's a good question about how it should have been done differently.

I really didn't mean to contradit myself...but alas I did...

I guess I just posted this because of the frustrations this poor woman has been having coupled with the many posts I see where people are shooting their first wedding for a friend...

back to the comment...I would have taken the group outside or found more light...somewhere...especially since she was shooting digital she would have seen right away that these were no where near properly exposed...

Cheers,

[Hellashot]

The shots posted looks like they tried to use that one ceiling light and no flash. Ugh.

[PhotosGuy]

These are before I touched them...but nothing I do seems to make them any better...having said that my ps skills are limited. Take a look at Layer Masks for a non-destructive method to make changes:
Layer Masks:
RAitch Tutorial - Burn and Dodge with a Layer
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?p=810581#post810581
Tutorial - Create a layer mask from image detail
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=100077
Masks - Lightening
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?p=977235#post977235
Another example using Masks (http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=108256) is here.

Russell Brown Tips & Techniques: Advanced Masking
http://www.russellbrown.com/tips_tech.html
Scottes: Tutorial: Masking for Noise Reduction (Big!)
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=48929
BLENDING SEAMS IN STITCHED PANORAMAS - PHOTOSHOP TUTORIAL
http://homepage.ntlworld.com/j.houghton/blending.htm

[symes]

Take a look at Layer Masks for a non-destructive method to make changes:
Layer Masks:
RAitch Tutorial - Burn and Dodge with a Layer
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?p=810581#post810581
Tutorial - Create a layer mask from image detail
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=100077
Masks - Lightening
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?p=977235#post977235
Another example using Masks (http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=108256) is here.

Russell Brown Tips & Techniques: Advanced Masking
http://www.russellbrown.com/tips_tech.html
Scottes: Tutorial: Masking for Noise Reduction (Big!)
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=48929
BLENDING SEAMS IN STITCHED PANORAMAS - PHOTOSHOP TUTORIAL
http://homepage.ntlworld.com/j.houghton/blending.htm

Thank you so much...I will try to work on them...

CHeers,

[mgbeach]

I just shot my first wedding, and I can't imaging a more stressful situation. I'd be happy to take a crack at a couple of those shots if you want to send them along. Just PM me and I'll send you my address.

[DocFrankenstein]

I don't know if I could do much better. It doesn't seem to be very warm, the girl has put on a sweater over her arm to warm herself.

And for 400 bucks you can only hire a solo photographer with one flashgun that's gonna be fired either directly or into the ceiling.

The exposure isn't bad either. The dress still has at least some detail in it, and it's all about the bride. The black costumes are underexposed, but that's the surse of digital. I'd be inclined to shoot those posed groups with BW film to deal with that. :lol:

Overall, I think the photographer deserves at least a "passing" mark, all things considered. The documentary evidence of the faces of the participants is there for the future generations... They are posed ok. They aren't too blurry... and it was 400 bucks, which is an OK price for it all.

You love your friend, don'tcha? ;):lol:

The only thing can think of to do differently is use a white card on the flash to put some catchlights in. It does make a difference.

[sharpshootr987]

definatly i time when shooting a RAW is much more beneficial.

[hickory]

I thought I'd post a slight make over of the files symes posted. He suggested I post these here, thanks symes for the comments! I used shadows and higlights to recover some information as well as USM and some warm photo filter:

[hickory]

There are still some details left in the shadows although it leaves them with some grain but still not so dark.

[DocFrankenstein]

Ewww!

nice try though

[hickory]

I guess the point is that there are some details salvageable in the original photos. I didn't spend but a few minutes on the three photos in total but with a little more work the bride could still have some decent photos. Some dodging and burning on some layer masks like PhotosGuy suggested along with the links he posted would help a lot here.

Just my 2 cents.

tom

[antelopeslr5000]

There are still some details left in the shadows although it leaves them with some grain but still not so dark.

The only detail I found left in th shadows was noise... :rolleyes:

Working with the originals would achieve better results.

[hickory]

Working with the originals would achieve better results.


Obviously....but the file size limit kind of prevents that :rolleyes:

[Jon, The Elder]

Hickory - that last one makes the bride look like "Death eating a cookie". Time to move on.

[dgcorner]

Well, as the saying goes: You pay peanuts, you get monkeys... Never scrimp on your wedding photos unless you truly are scraping the barrel... Lighting should have been better... even using the humble Stofen omnibounce would give one better pictures!

[Inspired Photography]

I did some cheap weddings to help a few people out when getting into it all, but geeez.

Even with a single flashgun and limited gear, better knowledge would have told the photog what was going to happen.

Ah well... If you need some help with PP Symes, just PM me.
Would be glad to have a go for you to help your friend out.

Rob

[Citizensmith]

I've also done several bargin price weddings for friends (no agreed fee, pay me what you think its worth) and I'll always show them my previous work so they know what to expect. Not had one complaint yet and I've got more coming up next year. I think my luxury is that I'm not doing it as a career so I can relax and enjoy it.

Better knowledge really helps. I had a coworker who spent close to $6000 on an engagement party and wedding package. The results were mediocre at best. The photographer even complained that it wasn't their fault as the location was horrible for photgraphy. Really dumb thing to say to the bride, and the location was Lake Tahoe which is exceedingly pretty if you avoid washed out backgrounds.

[Longwatcher]

You might try the following, it might help, but might not be worth the effort.
In PS CS or CS2 (not sure if will work in earlier versions)

- First isolate the faces using a circular marquee tool
- set feather to 25 pixels (at least, 50 maybe better - this should be under view or select I think)
- then invert mask so the rest of the photo is highlighted
- then use brightness/contrast or levels to adjust the outfits.
(optional first use a very light shadow/highlight filter like no more the 20%)
- then re-invert the mask (or maybe deselect at this point)
- then use dodge/burn on the faces to bring them out a bit.

I would use the bride and two bridesmaids? shot as the first try. I think it will help.
Without being home I couldn't try it for myself, but the above was used by me to noticeably improve one of my shots that was underexposed when shot in jpeg only mode.

Hope it helps,

[mgbeach]

I took a look at the full size TIFF you sent me, and there's not much to be done. The "photojournalistic" grainy "style" was accomplished by cranking the ISO on the Olympus to 800. It seems that there were probably already some adjustments made to get the image to where it is, and those adjustments further emphasized the noise. Sorry man. The photographer might want to invest in a flash.

[symes]

I took a look at the full size TIFF you sent me, and there's not much to be done. The "photojournalistic" grainy "style" was accomplished by cranking the ISO on the Olympus to 800. It seems that there were probably already some adjustments made to get the image to where it is, and those adjustments further emphasized the noise. Sorry man. The photographer might want to invest in a flash.

That is percisely what I thought...it's just a poor job all around...thanks for taking a look....

Cheers,

[tim]

Oh wow. The posing is mostly average, and the camera obviously cheap. I'm not sure how i'd do lighting quite like that - and obviously with the noise there wasn't enough light. The angles of the mat and background show that they don't understand.... anything really.

I started doing weddings a few months back, it's REALLY TOUGH. You need the right equipment (cameras, lighting, lenses, bracket), a LOT of preparation, and confidence in your ability.

[Wazza]

Ouch, I'm sorry for the troubles your friend has had. I hope all the PS help from members here in the forum can help gain something partly acceptable from these shots.

Just seems like a dimly lit room, without enough light source, so the image has been exposed as a point and shoot would.. No definition, and only partly illuminated. A shame it wasn't with Canon and shot RAW. The recovery process would be a lot easier.

[Merle]

I have been photographing weddings for 33 years. The bride obviouly did not choose to hire an experienced professional, that being said the photographer had good ideas as to what they wanted to accomplish. Photohop and a good noise reduction program will do wonders. There has to be a first wedding for every wedding photographer. If this photographer is willing to study his/her work and hone his/her skills things will improve. I'm glad the bride did not pay more for what she recieved. ;) :) :D

[Tonky]

Indeed there has to be a 'first' wedding for every photographer and it's a little odious ganging up to rip someone's work apart - as I said at the outset, I've seen much worse. Tbe thing I find curious about these shots is they're all crowded into cramped spaces to get the sort of shots I'd normally associate with a nightmare wet day when the shots have to be taken indoors, although it was clearly a sunny day. The outside shot of the bride and bridesmaids is a little crowded in the frame so perhaps the surroundings outside simply weren't suitable, and backgound and surroundings do make a huge difference.

In short we don't really know what problems the photographer had to contend with. ;)

[symes]

ON a positive note, she has learned her lesson...I was speaking with her today , unfortuantely to tell her that there is nothing that can really be done with the photos in photoshop and she wants some nice outdoor portraits done in the fall and she is going to get a proper photographer to do them, and pay what she has to to have them done...

Cheers,

[SWPhotoImaging]

I would never do a wedding shoot, but if I happened to be at a wedding for some reason, I'm sure I'd have better photos than that to show for it.

[saravrose]

just a thought maybe, but perhaps you can take a couple photos of her in the gown. I'm not saying that you should attempt to shoot twenty people. Buy maybe find an afternoon to do a couple of portraits of her in the gown from her wedding. I had friends that had their wedding photos re-taken. not ideal, not romantic but better than what she has.
Sari.

[toddb]

I wouldn't mind doing some apprentice work for a wedding photographer. That would be the only way I would break into doing this. I don't think I'd want to ever be the main photographer for a wedding though, doesnt seem that fun. I got married pretty young...now what I'm much older at 30, I guess I should have gotten a better photographer then the $50 my mother in law paid for our photographer, lol....man I wish I had better pictures of that day now. He did take us outside and put us under a tree to block the harsh light, so he wasn't all too bad. Worth the $50!

I think you have to remember though the price paid and as photographers ourselves, we are pretty critical. Didn't she look at any samples before hiring?

I agree with you all about getting some current photos taken. Maybe she didn't get good pics of her wedding but no reason to not get some great couple photos now.

Anyone ever shoot there own wedding, lol? I think I could do it. :-)

[tim]

Weddings are fun! I really enjoy shooting them, but it is damn hard work, and very physical. You have to be really organised, plan well, and the type of person that can handle the pressure.

[Tonky]

Weddings are fun! I really enjoy shooting them, but it is damn hard work, and very physical. You have to be really organised, plan well, and the type of person that can handle the pressure.

Word! :lol:

You really need to reccy the venues well in advance - that's the church or registrar's office and the reception venue, so that come the big day you have a good idea of how you're going to tackle the job and where you're going to pose your shots, as well as knowing any particular problems the sites pose. Sometimes the church grounds is the better venue for the bulk of your shots and sometimes the reception venue is more suitable, but you don't want to be flying by the seat of your pants on the day.

Don't take the weather for granted, rain can turn the whole thing into a nightmare. People are pretty understanding but they'll still expect you to deliver reasonable results and some venues are wholly unsuited to taking indoor shots and groups, so you just have to do the best you can.

Undestand that when they come out of church there are only really three people who are remotely interested in getting the photos taken - you and the bride and groom. (I'm not sure aout the groom :D) Everyone else just wants to get to the bar, and given half a chance they will if there's one handy. It's at this point that you need all your tact and organizing ability to keep everyone available. I used to grab the long suffering best man and impress upon him that it was part of his duties to assist by keeping everyone together and calling out people as they were required. Some of those best men were awesome! :lol:

[tim]

Yeah you definitely need to know the venue and the layout of things on the day beforehand so you can plan. And you need backup plans and locations for in case of rain. I scout all locations in advance, talk to the minister if I can, and anyone else that's important. I take studio lighting in case I think I need it, mainly in case of rain, but so far i've been lucky and haven't needed it.

Good idea about conscripting the best man, i'll have to do that, I usually use the mother of the bride or someone like that :)

[Tonky]

Weddings can be enjoyable, you just need to try to keep it light and chatty and not a pain for everyone. I've seen even seasoned pros getting hot under the collar and snapping and snarling at people - makes you wonder why they do it. :confused:

[tim]

You definitely have to relax, or at least appear relaxed, happy, carefree, and not stressed. The expression on a brides face (and everyone elses) often mirrors the expression of the photographer. The more experienced you get, the more comfortable you are, the less stressed you are, so you smile, they smile, and the photos get better :)

[Tonky]

You definitely have to relax, or at least appear relaxed, happy, carefree, and not stressed. The expression on a brides face (and everyone elses) often mirrors the expression of the photographer. The more experienced you get, the more comfortable you are, the less stressed you are, so you smile, they smile, and the photos get better :)

You got it. :cool:

[Citizensmith]

I guess I should also share my own wedding story from being on the other end. We had hired a photographer recommended by a friend. Met with him a couple of times, reviewed his work, handed over a deposit. Then, 2 days before the event he calls and says he's not going to show up "Because it doesn't feel right". Now what kind of bullsh1t line is that. Make something up about your dad being in hospital or something that we would have gone for. Then the guy even had the cheak to argue about returning the deposit as they are non-refundable in his contract. Threats of lawyers got that sorted. Our friend who had made the recommendation never did get over the embarassment.

Fortunately one of the bridesmaids was a good photographer and was willing to accept a change in roles for the wedding so we still got some nice photos.

[Thornfield]

It never ceases to amaze me that people will only spend the minumum amount of money possible and then spend an absolute fortune on the catering, wedding gown etc etc. The few things that hopefully last is 1) the marriage itself @) the memories and 3) the photography. For $400 she got what she paid for. Like the old saying goes, you can't make a silk purse out of a sows ear. And if all people are prepared to pay for is a sows ear then they can't complain.

[SuzyView]

I have been doing weddings for about 3 years now and I only do it for friends with very poor children. I take a zillion pictures all over the place and if 1/10 come out reasonable, they are lucky. I use my portrait lenses (85 1.8) and now my 50 1.4 in low light most of the time and those pictures are reasonable good no matter what I do. Tonight I shot in the dark with Christmas lights as the only other light besides my flash. I put my 50 1.4 on my 10D and prayed. About 50% of the time the focus was off because it was dark and I only got 80 pictures all together. But since I did it for free and the wedding party understood that, they were happy to get anything. I think there is too much pressure for photographers when this one event is so important. If you hire me, you know I will "direct" the crowd and make things right through my lens before I snap. I will take as many pictures as I think we need. Then I hand them the disk and leave. I save a lot of money for gifts this way. And I don't like being in the pictures. This is why I go behind the lens. It's a win-win for me. Those pictures you posted, they are really sad. I understand completely. Can't do it over.

SuzyView

[Thornfield]

I think with a bit of time a lot can be salvaged from this image to improve it though. Working with the original would have helped but here's my feeble attempt.

[Thornfield]

here's another. Mind you I did these on my laptop and the calibration is off by a mile

[jukas]

All the "you get what you pay for" aside. I think if you start with the original images (I pray for raw but am guessing jpg) and do a lot of PS work (tons of layers & masks are your friend) you'll end up with an image that in the brides eyes are 10x better than they started.

Remember, a photographer is their own worst critic (I understand the OP didn't take these) and some of the shots I've taken that I consider barely acceptable friends, family and J Q Public have loved.

I think with some time and careful PP work you can present her with an image that she will be pleased with.


P.S. This post makes me miss Bloo Dog.. whatever happened to him?

[SuzyView]

I think the retouched ones are about 10 times better. keep working at it. They look so much better.

SuzyView

[Merle]

Thornfield,
Feeble attempt "MY EYE" If you captured the images off of this thread You did a beautiful and time consuming Job. Most servers reduce the file size by better than half. Again Great Job! I for one know how much work you put into this project. You started out with poor exposure compounded by the server reducing the file size.

[Thornfield]

It realy wasn't a major deal. I enjoy playing with pictures that I think can do with improvement. It's one of the best ways to improve your own photography. I think the person that took the pictures was very brave. There's no way you would catch me doing wedding photography.I prefer to live to a ripe old age rather than taking 20 years of my life because of the stress

[rdenney]

Undestand that when they come out of church there are only really three people who are remotely interested in getting the photos taken - you and the bride and groom.

No. The three people are the bride, her mother, and the groom's mother. You are the hired help. You don't count. The groom just wants to leave the party as soon as possible, and everyone else wants to go to the reception. The mothers also want to go to the reception, but their hurrying is not to be taken as evidence that they will accept the results of hurrying.

Weddings are tough, no doubt. The big problem in these images is the use of available light. There are those who only shoot available light, but I figure if I have a potato-masher flash in my bag, then it's available.

Even a Vivitar 283 point up into a Lumiquest reflector would have been fine for these shots, and at ISO 200 or 400 where noise wouldn't be an issue.

Big groups in small rooms are tough. Experience can't easily overcome geometry. But my biggest beef with these images is that nobody seems happy. Didn't the photographer know how to tell jokes? Frowns at a wedding? That ruins the picture more profoundly than the technical issues.

I'm doing a "wedding" (really an anniversary ceremony for a couple that didn't have a formal wedding when they were married) next year that has 18 people in the wedding party. They are mostly African-American, and that's a significant challenge to the old histogram. I think I'll be using film for that one. Fuji NPH-400 is a little grainy in an absolute sense, but I know I can count on it with a big negative. And it's mighty hard to blow out highlights on negative film, so I can expose for the tuxedos and pull the bride's dress down in the computer after scanning.

(I don't like the photojournalistic style, which in my view is usually based on a distorted view of photojournalism by non-photojournalists. Young moderns want their event recorded "as it happened", but the bride's mother wants a clear picture of Aunt Betty before she died or Uncle Frank when he was happy, and it's usually the parents of the happy couple who will be paying the tab. Never forget who your client really is. So many albums I've seen in the journalistic style could have been anybody's wedding, while even posed shots of people are undeniably those people. Ditto gimmick shots. Does the bride really need a picture of her sharply focused shoes sitting on the floor while she is out of focus in the background dancing with someone she can't recognize? When you aren't highly experienced, keep it simple and get the must-have shots of the people and activities before trying to be arty.)

Rick "still considering a slaved flash on a stick as a second light source" Denney

[Merle]

Like a said in a previous post for a first wedding this photographer did O K
Now as he/she looks at the work they can refine their skills. I agree if the photographer had many weddings and years of experience under their belt then I would be willing to criticize the work. I very much agree with the previous poster that a good flash system is a must. In poor lighting situations available light will let you down a big % of the time. Look at the dead eyes of the Bride along with the mothers or brides maids NO CATCH LIGHT to add life to the eyes. Again the bride was looking for CHEAP, so she hired inexperience. Books, study and seminars will help this photographers career greatly. Again the photographer shows that they have an idea as to what they wish to accomplish. ;) :) :D

Good shooting to ya !!
Merle

[symes]

Again the bride was looking for CHEAP, so she hired inexperience.


This was by no means the first time the photographer had worked on photos, in fact this is what you might call an off day for her...she does have some nice photos, she was simply ill prepared for the event in terms of available light etc...


Like a said in a previous post for a first wedding this photographer did O K


I simply can't agree with this statement...these photos are not even usable at 4 X 6...

Cheers,

Matt

[cdifoto]

I shot my first and only wedding back on November 12th. The results weren't spectacular but she had the entire event in a banquet room. Ceremony was on a stage in the corner and the reception was everything not on the stage. heh. A lot of it was PJ style and she knew that was how I worked...I was referred to her by a friend who knew I was shooting primarily for a local newspaper. I did at least manage to get proper exposures. It was hell...but I'd do it again in a heartbeat...but not at that banquet hall. lol.

[Merle]

Photographing weddings should be approached as a craft. Those of us that are part of the industry need to continually hone our craft and skills. Those of us that think we have arrived will grow stale and we will actually lose some of our skills as time goes by. In these last 34 years of photographing weddings I still take several classes and seminars each year. I subscribe to many professional photography magazines and now with the internet I spend time searching each week. About the time my confidence level was getting sure, along comes digital and boy, now don't I have a lot to learn ! I will say to the photographer who photographed the wedding from which the photographs on this thread came.
If you have a Bride/Groom or a situation you do not feel comfortable in dealing with, than decline to take the assignment. An old saying in the wedding business is "one bad wedding will give you more bad publicity than to ten (10) good weddings will give you good publicity.";) :) :D
Good Shooting to ya !!
Merle

[PIXI_666]

Im just breaking it out into Wedding Photography...
I don't advertise my businesses, i get my work by word of mouth. I don't charge a lot either because i am not a pro at this, id call myself an amateur pro HAHA if that makes sense?
The first wedding i did, i didn't have digital, but to be honest the photo's turned out great!
The ones you have posted...to start with i can't believe they photographed these people inside! Outside light is generally the best light for weddings...in my opinion anyway because i don't have any studio lights to use inside - you can't just point n shoot with a typical flash inside!!!!!
I dont think id ever be ready to photograph a night time wedding....which is what i'd assume this was?
Anyway....i think this friend of yours has the right to complain if they are a professional! If not then unfortunately unless you see their work and really love it before hand then it's very bad advertising if that's how the photo's came out!
Very grainy and dark....not good at all!
I meant he LAYOUT of them are good but the other stuff is crap! lol sorry to put it bluntly! Id be throwing these back to my photographer!!!
Adelle

[Mick Emmett]

As said in a previous post there is detail in the shadows that can be brought out but at what cost, may be some one who wants to please a friend (that's you Symes) has the time to sit down and sort all that noise out; not me though. As you've already said the quality and size of the shot is so small it'll never print out at any usable size, maybe for a locket or wallet picture.
46402

[DocFrankenstein]

may be some one who wants to please a friend (that's you Symes) has the time to sit down and sort all that noise out
You mean like pixel by pixel?

There is no detail in the shadows... just noise. There's no information there except noise and nothing you can do about it.

[Mick Emmett]

Admitedly there isn't much there to be brought out (especially in the one he posted on here; but if you stand well back and squint ;)

[Kristy]

A photographer's worst nightmare..... This looks like much more than a bad day. We all have bad days, but you can't have a bad day on THE most important day of a girls life. How sad.... I'll just stick to my newborn babies and pregnant women... at least I can do a re-shoot if I have a terribly bad day...

[usukshooter]

Like a said in a previous post for a first wedding this photographer did O K


I disagree, even if it were the photographers first wedding, it doesn't matter, no one (except some other photographers) is going to look at the photos and think "well for her first wedding, it's not so bad"... weddings are one of those times when it HAS to be good, period, without taking anything else into consideration except the final results. Which suck in this case.

Again the bride was looking for CHEAP, so she hired inexperience.

Yes, you're right... brides should know that if they hire a cheap photographer, they aren't going to get good results. People bitch about how much some wedding photographers charge but there's a reason they are so expensive, it's because they're good and it's not easy to be a good wedding photographer! Unfortunately, it seems most brides don't understand this concept and wind up paying $300-400 for photos they never want to look at again. It's partially their own fault.

(I don't like the photojournalistic style, which in my view is usually based on a distorted view of photojournalism by non-photojournalists. Young moderns want their event recorded "as it happened", but the bride's mother wants a clear picture of Aunt Betty before she died or Uncle Frank when he was happy, and it's usually the parents of the happy couple who will be paying the tab. Never forget who your client really is. So many albums I've seen in the journalistic style could have been anybody's wedding, while even posed shots of people are undeniably those people. Ditto gimmick shots. Does the bride really need a picture of her sharply focused shoes sitting on the floor while she is out of focus in the background dancing with someone she can't recognize? When you aren't highly experienced, keep it simple and get the must-have shots of the people and activities before trying to be arty.)

Brides today want their wedding album to look like it's come straight out of a bridal magazine. And I don't blame them. I'm a photographer and bride-to-be and I hired a wedding photojournalist (and believe me, he isn't cheap!). The style just looks so professional and artistic, who wouldn't want their wedding to look like that? Sure, you get the typical posed shots in there but you also get geniunely real moments that the photographer is good enough to capture well and you also get some artsy looking stuff that shows off your ring, flowers, and yes, your shoes. Why? Because Christ almightly, we paid enough for all of those things and we want to remember them in our wedding album! Why not put an artistic spin on it by showing me dancing with someone in the background of the shoe pic?

But anyways, I agree if you're inexperienced, stick to the basics. That's one the other reasons we hire wedding photojournalists... we know only good photographers can pull it off and it shows in their portfoilo.

[spencer87]

just curious (i didnt see it mentioned anywhere in the thread but i may have missed it) have you tried running the images through a program like Noise Ninja? I've heard it mentioned on other forums as being quite useful for salvaging photos like these.

[mbze430]

dood...those are AWESOME! TOTALLY

[symes]

just curious (i didnt see it mentioned anywhere in the thread but i may have missed it) have you tried running the images through a program like Noise Ninja? I've heard it mentioned on other forums as being quite useful for salvaging photos like these.

Neat Image and Noise Ninja can't save a photo where there is no detail in the shadows...

Cheers,

[symes]

dood...those are AWESOME! TOTALLY
?

[SezzySue]

The same thing happened at my moms wedding. There is not one single good shot. Everything is yellow, blurred, or way to dark to see whose in the picture. I felt bad for here, but thats what she got letting my stepdads uncle do it for free. In my degree plan there is a dedicated class for wedding photography. I am so excited to start.

[Claire]

A try from me. I also began working on the group photo. That's a bit tougher. Have been doing a lot of cloning. Will post when I'm done. :-)

[Palladium]

a couple of clicks and a couple of seconds...;)

for all photos I - duped image layer and chanded the visibility mode form normal to screen and reduced the opacity of the new layer to about 50% - saved as new jpeg for web. Also for the 1st photo I also reset the light and dark points of the curves using the threshold as a guide

http://img5.imageshack.us/img5/6943/p92356852kr.jpg

http://img5.imageshack.us/img5/2195/p92356870ly.jpg

http://img5.imageshack.us/img5/7762/p92356894rk.jpg

[marcusg6@bigpond.net.au]

I di weddings, but only for non religious ones where we have a celebrant in the park somewhere. They are the best ones. If you are not confident stick to the non religious ones and stay clear of the bitchy brides.

[symes]

I di weddings, but only for non religious ones where we have a celebrant in the park somewhere. They are the best ones. If you are not confident stick to the non religious ones and stay clear of the bitchy brides.

This bride was far from Bi**hy...she in fact understands that she took a risk but really anything remotely decent would have been acceptable...

CHeers,

[richardj7]

The biggest challenge for a wedding photographer is to convince budget-minded brides to understand the difference between seasoned pro wedding photographers, and weekend amateurs. Unfortunately, more and more, wedding photographers are chosen last when most of the budget has been committed to clothing, flowers, limousine, reception, and other costs. They have $300, $400, at most $700 left for photography, and they don't realize nor want to realize that photos are the only enduring investment. They only realize it after the fact, when it's too late.

Funny thing I've noticed, though. Some brides also want videos of their wedding, and are willing to pay close to $1,000.00 for that, while bargaining wedding photographers to the bone for photos. What does this say? Videographers are better salespeople than photographers. They probably say no, if they cannot get their price. I've done both videography and photography. There is more work in processing 400 - 600 photos and album design, than doing a video montage. Yet, the perception is that video is worth more.

Solution? Make the wedding photo sale. Sell value, not price.

[Mick Emmett]

The biggest challenge for a wedding photographer is to convince budget-minded brides to understand the difference between seasoned pro wedding photographers, and weekend amateurs.

We all have to start some where, I'm sure you didn't become a "seasoned pro wedding photographer" over night did you?:confused:

[richardj7]

Nope. However, I took two years at The School of Modern Photography, in Montreal. Took some courses from seasoned pros in wedding photography, and other types of photography. Assisted a few before I took the plunge to make sure I knew what I was doing, that I knew the routines and my equipment, so as not to risk spoiling a bride's wedding by "practicing" on them.

When friends asked me to do their weddings, I was ready. My last seasoned pro seminar was with Yervant, when he came in Montreal on August 2004. I keep learning all the time, however, it's much faster to integrate styles, because I have a strong base. I guess it's a question of integrity and professionalism.

I keep investing in the latest wedding magazines, books, and DVDs to see trends and styles. Last DVD: Masters of Wedding Photography. I go to all the local Wedding Expos in Montreal. I'm a member of the CMPQ, which is the provincial professional photographer's association, and network with other photographers for ideas.

Wedding photography is more than shooting images. You need some psychology with people, need to work fast & effectively, and being able to face a lot of unknowns such as late deliveries of flowers, limousine, tempers, kids, moms, rain, snow, wrong addresses, equipment failures (need to have spares), and the like. AND...you need to take some really nice images that say something to the couple, parents, and friends on top of being technically spot on. Then, you have to know how to design a proper album. That's a lot of skills. Most photographers who start in wedding photography without any training are clueless to what they're facing.

My recommendations:
• Take at least one wedding photography course with a known professional.
• Buy wedding magazines to know how to photograph dresses, couples.
• Buy the lastest wedding photography books so pick ideas.
• Find a wedding photographer to assist at least 3 times, even if it's only to carry bags, stands, reflectors, and tripods. You'll see how he handles it. A lot of assistants decided not to get in the business after seeing typical wedding days. Others, loved it, and started their own business.
• Know your equipment blindfolded, and your flashes
• Have back-ups for everything.
• Do weddings for forgiving friends and family first, in case you ruin it, AFTER you've had some training and experience with other photographers.
• Don't undercut other wedding photographers to get the business. Keeping price levels reasonable helps everyone in the long run. :)

[rklepper]

Everyone, not just photographers, have an ethical responsibility to represent their skills realistically. If you are not up to the task, do not take it on.

[budgetbus]

i am doing a few weddings in the summer for freinds(free jobs) and is an area i would like to move into.......but i am starting a full time 2 year course in sept....i WANT to learn the basics and study before i just turn up with a camera and start shooting......so any of you got any advice .....and more to the point of the thread what would equipment wise the pros recommend for the situation that was posted ....eg lighting and camera settings etc
also as a side what equipment whould you say that a wedding photog needs to get A, started and B, pro setup

;)

[Mick Emmett]

Thank you very much for the hints and tips Richard they are very much appreciated, when I left school I made the decision to go in to engineering; it seemed a good idea at the time and it would appease my father who wanted me to get a trade behind me. As life goes by such a profession starts to take a tole on your body and when you get to my age (47) you begin to look for another job that is a little less strenuous, the main draw back is that you still have financial commitments to meet so going on full time courses to re-train for something else is really out of the question. The only other thing I know anything else about is my hobby, photography. I attend as many Weddings as I can fit in and study the photographers closely. I ask them questions while trying not to get in their way or be an annoyance; some are very helpful and some positively turn their back on you (they're probably just having one of those days). I have done a couple of Weddings for close friends who have been very happy with the results; but said results have shown me that I'm not ready for doing it professionally yet. I am taking a night course at the moment and I have read quite a few books on the subject, the course is only one night a week so the pace is a little slow. I'm not wanting to steal the original posters thread here but I have put a couple of shots on in the hope some of you pro's can give me a few pointers and say how you would perhaps have done them differently, I appreciate that the actual pictures are only a part of the whole that makes up a day in the life of a Wedding Photographer.

P.S. Please ignore the sig, we amateurs like to play at being pro's

53174

53175

[colliewalker1]

"fools Rush In where angels fear to tread"....

I tried processing these photos in PSCS2 Image/Adjustments/Shadow/Highlight and considerable improvement is possible so far as the dark shadows are concerned - this would go a long way to rescuing them.....

[colliewalker1]

This is one of the photos that I tried to improve.


53227

[Steve Parr]

I admire those who can shoot weddings and shoot them well.

I was recently asked to shoot a wedding. The money was good, but I politely declined.

I just don't need that kind of pressure...

Steve

[Mick Emmett]

Well if we can't collectively make the pictures any good how about giving them a nicer background?
53261

Any body got a nice picture of the Taj Mahal LOL! ;)

[richardj7]

Thank you very much for the hints and tips Richard they are very much appreciated...You're welcome. About your two images. Learn how to bounce your flash from a wall behind you, or to one of the sides to have a more flattering light. Depending on how you set the camera you have (either Av, Tv, P) and flash (TTL, eTTL, eTTLII), you will get a nice ambiant light exposure while your flash will provide a nice even fill-in. The fill-in can be adjusted, too on flash to lower it.

You can also use Gary Fong's LightsphereII Photojournalist model that will definately kill the harshness of your flash, or for less money the "Flip-it" that has a lot of possibilities for different situations. The Lumiquest stuff is pretty good, also (I have the Big Bounce), however, when you take vertical portrait stuff, unless you have a bracket to keep the flash at least at near eye-level or - better, above, the results may cast a shadow to the right of the subject if close to a wall. Not so with the Lightsphere and Flip-it, because you are always using the narrow side of the flash for horizontal and vertical shots.

[Mick Emmett]

This is one of the photos that I tried to improve.

Sorry mate but all I see is more noise than in the original.
53393

[colliewalker1]

Sorry mate but all I see is more noise than in the original.
53393

Which one do you think the bride would prefer........?:rolleyes:

[Mick Emmett]

Probably some where in the middle.

[CyberPet]

I'm not sure I'm too found of people trashing another photographer, without the photographer being able to respond and explain the situation themselves. It's bad kharma.

Yes, there's mistakes made, but bashing someone and say that "you get what you pay for" isn't going to help the Bride and Groom either. Instead of making the best of the situation you are giving out bad energy to the Bride and Groom and even if they were somewhat satisfied with the pictures, they will now look at them totally differently, since so many "pro's" have trashed them.

I've seen a heck of a lot worse, honestly so badly that they weren't salvaged at all - these has a chance and you can even convert them to b/w and the grain will add to the feeling. Some careful dodge and burning together with some careful color correction and these images can work.

So my suggestion is - if this photographer will ever have a chance to learn, please tell him/her to join a photography forum such as this, post the images and ask for guidance.

As for adjusting files... it's tough to work with a file that's only 700 pixles at the widest... but there's lots of trickery hidden in Photoshop that could defineatly save these images, a lot better than some of the dreadful things I've seen in the past (or created myself :D )

Below is a very fast b/w conversion... just to show that there's not too bad of a picture here and could work as great memories for the Bride and Groom, regardless if they paid nothing or not for the photographer.

http://the-halls.se/edited/fixedbridebw.jpg

[MALI]

I was speaking with her today , unfortuantely to tell her that there is nothing that can really be done with the photos in photoshop

symes, are you not listening to what people say here? Almost every comment I read so far do mention PS and advise you to do some tricks using the program, some even giving step by step instructions.

Yet, you come up and say you will tell the bride there is nothing that can be done in PS. ????? I do not understand your intention; to be honest, it looks like all you are trying to do is to bash the photographer and nothing else.

Besides, all you did was post only two pictures, probably the worst ones, and I did not read any comment from you that actually aimed at getting the pictures better using some PS skills. How about the other photos? Post at least ten more and original sizes, maybe links will be needed becasue of size issues. And then we will talk.

I am a wedding photographer myself and I do understand that sometimes shots turn out a lot worse than you would like. Yet, not every shot a wedding photog takes is a keeper. I dump so many shots among huhdreds I take during a wedding. You would hang me with those shots I delete, which is what seems to be happenning here.

We did not see anything but two poor images and we already hung the photog hundred times.

Syems, if you are really serious about helping your friend, which I hate to say that I doubt very much, do/say something else.

Put those pictures on the web in their original sizes so that we will see what his/her work looks overall. Then, note down the very valuable suggestion given to you here and finally, let us see you try some of those ideas on the pictures. You have not done/said anything so far that would help your friend. All you did was to reapeat the obvious; the two shots do not look good AND no, there are not horrible at all.

Lynching may feel good but will not help anybody especially the bride in question here.

MALI

[symes]

MALI,

Before you jump to conclusions I would ask very kindly ask that you think about what you are saying and do a little more research than just this thread.

Perhaps asking what I have done so far would be a more appropriate manner of inquiry rather than assuming I somehow get enjoyment from the failures and miseries of others...

I invite you to look at almost all 1470 other posts I have made on this forum they have consisted of nothing other than seeking critique, offering pleasant comments and helping to answer questions when I can...Needless to say I don't feel I should have to defend my character to YOU...but I will for the benefit of this thread.

What is more disturbing is the quote you grabbed was from the 3rd page of now seven pages...and on top of that it was a partial quote. At that time, with my knowledge of PS and with the generous people who tried to lend a hand, the conclusion was fairly unaninmous that there was very little that could be done with the photos...

The Intention of this post was twofold: Primarily it was to ensure other first wedding photogs are careful to make sure they are ready for WHATEVER situation they may encounter...Secondly, it was too see if any of the photoshop guru's could lend a hand or guiding direction. The first result that looked remotely usable came from CyberPet who did an admirable job and I have been in contact with her...

I will address the rest of your message below:

symes, are you not listening to what people say here? Almost every comment I read so far do mention PS and advise you to do some tricks using the program, some even giving step by step instructions.

Yet, you come up and say you will tell the bride there is nothing that can be done in PS. ????? I do not understand your intention; to be honest, it looks like all you are trying to do is to bash the photographer and nothing else.

Besides, all you did was post only two pictures, probably the worst ones, and I did not read any comment from you that actually aimed at getting the pictures better using some PS skills. How about the other photos? Post at least ten more and original sizes, maybe links will be needed becasue of size issues. And then we will talk.

I am a wedding photographer myself and I do understand that sometimes shots turn out a lot worse than you would like. Yet, not every shot a wedding photog takes is a keeper. I dump so many shots among huhdreds I take during a wedding. You would hang me with those shots I delete, which is what seems to be happenning here.

These are not the shots she DUMPED, these are the shots she presented as the final product...And as I said THERE IS NOT A SINGLE PHOTO THAT LOOKS GOOD AT 4x6...I am sure that if you are a wedding photog than your client never sees the mishaps and the pictures you present do not look anything like the posted images...

We did not see anything but two poor images and we already hung the photog hundred times.

Syems, if you are really serious about helping your friend, which I hate to say that I doubt very much, do/say something else.

The above statement is a personal attack on my own character, one that is not warranted and I expect an apology. The amount of work that has been done to these photos by myself and the members on this forum has not showed up in this thread, you are quite correct...but you have taken that to mean that I have done nothing but complain!! There are more avenues than this THREAD...I have been in contact, through email and pm, with many of the fine members from this thread since the day this was first posted!

Put those pictures on the web in their original sizes so that we will see what his/her work looks overall. Then, note down the very valuable suggestion given to you here and finally, let us see you try some of those ideas on the pictures. You have not done/said anything so far that would help your friend. All you did was to reapeat the obvious; the two shots do not look good AND no, there are not horrible at all.

Lynching may feel good but will not help anybody especially the bride in question here.

MALI

Again how do you know what work I have been doing and what type of interaction I have had with the kind members who have helped here? Needless to say there has been a lot of interaction...

You have taken my quotes out of context, challenged my character on the basis of what you have read in this and assumed the worst of me because I have not published the many horrid attempts I have made at salvaging these pictures, and above all you have assumed the worse without first asking a few simple questions that might have clarified this for you!

I await an apology,

[Mick Emmett]

Come on lads lets keep it civil, people can say things on a forum they wouldn't dream of saying if they were face to face with you. I'm sure you're both nice blokes just having an off day (no blame apportioned to either party) for the sake of this forum lets end it here.


Any way here's another attempt by me, sorry; I know it's an over used technique these days but what the hell.

53772

[symes]

Mike,

that's working well...it may be an overused technique but it does well to take the attention away from the problems of the image...good stuff

I think Black and White, as you and CyberPet have shown is the way to go with these...

[Pell]

As per Matt's request, I tried photoshopping one of these images.

First off the Exif shows ISO 800, using an Olympus E-1 @ 22mm F2.8 .

The noise levels are a LOT higher than i've seen on an SLR . No flash was fired.

There is simply to much black. I could not extract a reasonable image because the combo of to much black, and high noise makes it very tough to make anything useable.

Some of the conversion above are decent, but when printed above 5x7, they will not look so great.

I have seen stuff like this before. It is a damned shame for the bride to receive a pile of poor quality images.

I see this thread has turned into a debate, and even people saying Matt is insulting the photographers work. Well, I will back Matt up. Any professional with this caliber work is NO professional.

Every professional I've ever met takes serious pride in their work and take the time and energy to get it done right. It is clear in this case an Olympus E-1 combined with this persons lack of exposure knowledge is a deadly combo.

Just my .02 of course. Its to bad!

[Pekka]

Come on lads lets keep it civil, people can say things on a forum they wouldn't dream of saying if they were face to face with you. I'm sure you're both nice blokes just having an off day (no blame apportioned to either party) for the sake of this forum lets end it here.


Any way here's another attempt by me, sorry; I know it's an over used technique these days but what the hell.

53772


I like this. Suggestion for further improvement: maybe you could clone the odd stuff on the top left away and add some slight hairlight to all?

[tim]

Mike, instead of desaturating the background try one of these:
- Use channel mixer to make nicer B&W images (if you don't already)
- Partially desaturate - perhaps 40-60% not totally.
- Convert to B&W then add a sepia tone.

[CyberPet]

Hey, why not do this bride a favour (I feel for her - having her great day being bashed by som mean photographers around the world... ;) ). I offer my service to fix 2-3 of these images - no charge - so that they will be great enough to print. I want full size images - email me them and I'll send the fixes back.

If we're let say 10-15 good photoshop guru's doing this, the couple will have about 30-40 images that they will love!

[symes]

Hey, why not do this bride a favour (I feel for her - having her great day being bashed by som mean photographers around the world... ;) ). I offer my service to fix 2-3 of these images - no charge - so that they will be great enough to print. I want full size images - email me them and I'll send the fixes back.

If we're let say 10-15 good photoshop guru's doing this, the couple will have about 30-40 images that they will love!

I am sure she would REALLY appreciate this...I have been working away with them but I can't seem to bring out the detail...She would really like to have one picture that she can keep...

Send me a PM with your email address and I will ship it out...maybe we can have some different variations on this one photo..:)

Cheers,

[CyberPet]

PM sent and I challenge you all to make the same offer to help Matt out with the editing of the photo's. I said I'll deal with a few b/w's if that's ok.

[lisa1969]

I would be glad to help with a few too. Will PM my email for full size images.

Lisa

[symes]

WOW...this place has taken on a life of its own like only this forum can do...Thanks Cyber and Lisa...

Cheers,

[themirage]

I'm by no means a skilled Photoshop expert but I'm also willing to give it a try. I'll send you a PM.

[cdifoto]

I'd love to help, but alas I am but a Photoshop Retard...

[mizuno]

I'm just beginning in photography, but I'm a full time graphic designer, and Photoshop is my specialty. I would be more than happy to lend a helping hand.

Shoot me through the full file(s) via email and I'll go to work on them!

[snibbetsj]

symes: I'll take a couple, I'll PM you my e-mail.

[lisa1969]

I am by no means an expert at photoshop but here is one i finished

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v349/lisa1969/W1.jpg

[CyberPet]

Man, you guys are great!! See what happens when you turn something bad into something good. Lisa, looks like you hit the nail with the colors - just a bit too contrasty for my taste, but if you dodge a tad in the brides face, it should be fine.

[lisa1969]

May I ask a question without sounding rude? I am just curious as to what happened to the pictures? The only time I have seen anything with so little information is when you see a cropped pic of when you using digital zoom. All of the available lighting seemed to be from the bottom of the picture, and so much of the skin on all 3 people I actually had to make by cloning to even out color. I am not trying to bash the photographer but rather gain insight to exactly what happened here more so to learn from it than anything else. Petra I made a few versions of this pic so they could choose from contrast variations. Some are softer than others, I am still trying on pic #2. It has been a great challenge for my PS ability.

[CyberPet]

Lisa, great!!! It's fun to have a challenge - you learn at the same time too! Love how you did get the colors right.

Looks like the photographer used available lights only, i.e. probably a ceiling lamp - hence the harsh shadows in their faces and bright floors. To be able to counter the shutter speeds the photographer probably did up the ISO. Not sure if a tripod was used. I think things would have looked better even with the on camera flash to fill - not "blast" out the background of course. Like a dragged shutter with the camera on a tripod. That would have been great for killing the shadows in their faces and also give some catch light in their eyes.

But this is my guesses only.

[lisa1969]

I wish I could have done a better job for you on this one Matt. If you want to send me more feel free, its giving me great practice!

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v349/lisa1969/FIX2WEB.jpg

[symes]

Petra is quite correct...ISO 800 no tripod, available light from ceiling lights in the hotel lobby was the only thing used...

Cheers,

[lisa1969]

Last fix. I probably could do better with the original, this pic is just the one from the forum.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v349/lisa1969/P9235689.jpg

[Mick Emmett]

Mike, instead of desaturating the background try one of these:
- Use channel mixer to make nicer B&W images (if you don't already)
- Partially desaturate - perhaps 40-60% not totally.
- Convert to B&W then add a sepia tone.

No point in me messing about any more with the photo's posted on here if there's originals being passed around, I'll wait for some to arrive then I'll have a go at them. Come on symes you've got my address, shoot a few in my direction :confused:

[snibbetsj]

Well, here's my take on one of the two. I'll work on the other one tomorrow. Good Luck, you've got some pretty decent outcomes here. PM me if you want the full-size ones.

Jeff

54050

54051

[snibbetsj]

Well, that didn't work, try it again:

http://www.pbase.com/image/55594429.jpg

and

http://www.pbase.com/image/55594454.jpg

[CyberPet]

I still haven't gotten the two images I was supposed to play with.... I was told there was set up a yahoo account for me, but there's no images there, as far as I can see. Please tell me how to find these images??!!

[DocFrankenstein]

I don't mean to sound cynical... but if there's noise in the shadows, no amount of PP will bring back info that isn't there.

[elTwitcho]

I don't mean to sound cynical... but if there's noise in the shadows, no amount of PP will bring back info that isn't there.

I don't mean to point out that you really are just being cynical and going "no no no, it can't be improved upon" as other people are improving upon the photos but is lisas version not better than the original?

I think everyone understands what can or can't be done here, but as you keep repeating yourself and saying "nope, can't be done if there's noise" other people are doing exactly what you've cynically written off. The darkets shadows are gone, but people have already demonstrated there is tons that can be salvaged

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v349/lisa1969/P9235689.jpg

[Mick Emmett]

I don't mean to sound cynical... but if there's noise in the shadows, no amount of PP will bring back info that isn't there.

I think you're rather stating the obvious, we all know that already. We're just trying to improve what IS there and if necessary put a little detail in the shadows our selves, hopefully to give the poor Bride some thing resembling a decent picture to remember her big day by.

[CyberPet]

Had to fight a bit with the colors... the light on the guys face is not very flattering either, gives him a very "fat" look. I could have tried to make it more "chiseled" but for now I let it be.

Here's my color version:

http://the-halls.se/edited/P9235636_petrasColor.jpg



And my B/W version:

http://the-halls.se/edited/P9235636_petrasBW.jpg

[Mick Emmett]

Very Nice Pet, got any originals yet?

[symes]

The demand has been crazy to help fix and I thank you very much...If I havbe missed anyone please let me know...

The reason so many got the same image, is after talking to the bride and telling her tha varying versions, she asked that I send the same set of four, now I think only a few have been able to get even one...so if you are still game to help out I would love to be able to get the other two or three to you...

I am impressed folks...hopefully we get something usable...

Cheers,

[lisa1969]

you know where to find me, send away.

[Mick Emmett]

Well here's my attempt, I've thined his face a little but can't get the skin tones right.
54898

[colliewalker1]

You've done a good job there! Presumably you cloned out some of the far edge of the face - how did you do this and leave such a clean edge?

[Mick Emmett]

No I didn't use the clone tool I used Liquify to slowly move in the side of his face.

[DocFrankenstein]

No I didn't use the clone tool I used Liquify to slowly move in the side of his face.
:lol::lol::lol:

[Sajjad Yasin]

It seems to me that the photographer's flash was very weak for group photography. That is why all pics came under exposed !!!!!

[rlhphotos]

The lighting on those was not to good and the choice of locations was very poor. Really the photographer should have chosen different locations. I am new at wedding photography but know that there is a lot that goes into it, I've got a few wedding under my belt that I did as a guest and my first wedding as a photographer was a bit of stresser to make sure I got key shots..I have 7 more to do this year and I cant wait.