Our first attempts at some wedding portraits

[lylabloom]

Our friends let us take some wedding photos of them. Here are a couple of our favorites...

[_Jo_]

Great poses...but

1) looks noisy - or is that the PP?
2) lovely
3) Image blur - bad
4) Nice

[Valjoy]

I love these pics....great captures. Except for 1 and especially 3 being out of focus is hurting my eyes. Other than that I find these pics very appealing.
cheers Val

[SuzyView]

The shutter speed is way too slow. #3 is bugging me since it's OOF, but I like the first one.

[_Jo_]

actually - on second looking at #4 - he's too happy! lol...she has a nostalgic serious look and he's laughing at her...hehe

[picturecrazy]

these photos are extremely soft and muddy. They are either out of focus, motion blurred or both. Your shutter speeds are too slow. They lack any kind of clarity, though 2 is my favourite of the bunch and has more clarity than the others. 1 is a fun moment but the composition is lacking as there is too much dead space above their heads. They'll probably like it though. 3 is just blurred all over the place. I'm confused as to why you chose 1/25 in Tv mode when you were using a 50mm lens? 4 is also blurred out and you've cut off the brides feet, yet left a huge amount of uninteresting space above her head. Crouch down and get the whole body in, or get closer and fill them up in the frame more. thanks for sharing!

[Ziffle]

these photos are extremely soft and muddy. They are either out of focus, motion blurred or both. Your shutter speeds are too slow. They lack any kind of clarity, though 2 is my favourite of the bunch and has more clarity than the others. 1 is a fun moment but the composition is lacking as there is too much dead space above their heads. They'll probably like it though. 3 is just blurred all over the place. I'm confused as to why you chose 1/25 in Tv mode when you were using a 50mm lens? 4 is also blurred out and you've cut off the brides feet, yet left a huge amount of uninteresting space above her head. Crouch down and get the whole body in, or get closer and fill them up in the frame more. thanks for sharing!


Yo ...... PictureCrazy: :cool:

Why don't you lay out some of your gray matter and explain your 'confusion' in choosing TV and 1/25 when using the Nifty?

Thank you sir.....

-Mark

[picturecrazy]

Yo ...... PictureCrazy: :cool:

Why don't you lay out some of your gray matter and explain your 'confusion' in choosing TV and 1/25 when using the Nifty?

Thank you sir.....

-Mark

Because one of the basic rules of thumb for handheld shots is to use a shutter speed of 1/focal length to reduce/eliminate motion blur caused by camera shake. So 1/50 would be the lowest shutter speed you'd want if you were following this basic rule... which most do unless you are specifically TRYING to blur the photo. In a shot like this, I don't know why you WOULD. I could understand it happening in Av mode where the camera selects the shutter speed for you, but in Tv mode, you EXPLICITLY set your shutter speed... so it must have been a conscious decision to do that.

[Ziffle]

Because one of the basic rules of thumb for handheld shots is to use a shutter speed of 1/focal length to reduce/eliminate motion blur caused by camera shake. So 1/50 would be the lowest shutter speed you'd want if you were following this basic rule... which most do unless you are specifically TRYING to blur the photo. In a shot like this, I don't know why you WOULD. I could understand it happening in Av mode where the camera selects the shutter speed for you, but in Tv mode, you EXPLICITLY set your shutter speed... so it must have been a conscious decision to do that.

Class dismissed - now go shoot some pictures. :cool:

Thank you PictureCrazy.

[e.omega]

Number 2 is pretty sad. Not appropriate for the occasion.

I thought so too. #1 is my fave, the expressions were well captured.

[lylabloom]

these photos are extremely soft and muddy. They are either out of focus, motion blurred or both. Your shutter speeds are too slow. They lack any kind of clarity, though 2 is my favourite of the bunch and has more clarity than the others. 1 is a fun moment but the composition is lacking as there is too much dead space above their heads. They'll probably like it though. 3 is just blurred all over the place. I'm confused as to why you chose 1/25 in Tv mode when you were using a 50mm lens? 4 is also blurred out and you've cut off the brides feet, yet left a huge amount of uninteresting space above her head. Crouch down and get the whole body in, or get closer and fill them up in the frame more. thanks for sharing!
The reason we did such a slow shutter speed was because of the very very low light. The couple didn't arrive until the sun was below the horizon so we did most of these in the near dark and even complete dark using lighting from the building we were by. It was unfortunate that the timing wasn't right. Thanks for the comments though.

[lylabloom]

Great poses...but

1) looks noisy - or is that the PP?
2) lovely
3) Image blur - bad
4) Nice
I was asked to delete my second post by the moderator but thanks for the comments. I agree about the image blur. The lighting just wasn't right for us. #1 was processed to be really noisy. The old school style. :)

[lylabloom]

The shutter speed is way too slow. #3 is bugging me since it's OOF, but I like the first one.
Thanks for the comments. Oddly enough the couple chose #3 as their favorite. i couldn't figure it out either :)

[lylabloom]

Here's the pics #3 and 4 back and then I added a #5 which I thought was kind of cool.http://i44.photobucket.com/albums/f32/sweel/veil.jpg


<>

http://i44.photobucket.com/albums/f32/sweel/distance.jpg<>



http://i44.photobucket.com/albums/f32/sweel/silhouette_signcrop.jpg

[SuzyView]

I do like that last one. Which temple is that?

I shoot weddings at the temple here in DC. I don't know how many weddings you want to do, but there are various websites that can really help you if you are in the UT area. There are a lot of really wonderful photographers. I'll give you a PM so you can see if you can tag along and shoot with them as a second. I think that will help you a lot with composition and lighting. Take the advice of people here because that's how many of us have learned. For instance, the equipment part is important. A fast lens is important, but there is a reason why many of us here use the 17-55 or the 24-70 as our main lenses for weddings. They give sharp images. Following someone around is even better. You can learn a lot about camera settings that are best for a bride in white and a temple in the background that is white as well.

[HQP]

I really like #3. Too bad it wasn't crisp.

[lylabloom]

I do like that last one. Which temple is that?

I shoot weddings at the temple here in DC. I don't know how many weddings you want to do, but there are various websites that can really help you if you are in the UT area. There are a lot of really wonderful photographers. I'll give you a PM so you can see if you can tag along and shoot with them as a second. I think that will help you a lot with composition and lighting. Take the advice of people here because that's how many of us have learned. For instance, the equipment part is important. A fast lens is important, but there is a reason why many of us here use the 17-55 or the 24-70 as our main lenses for weddings. They give sharp images. Following someone around is even better. You can learn a lot about camera settings that are best for a bride in white and a temple in the background that is white as well. Thanks for the message. I love the advice given here and shooting as a second is a great idea. Thanks again.

[hillierluke]

LDS represent :p Nice series - love #3 (for it's capture not it's technicality) & #5. I hope you don't mind but I did a quick edit on the third. It didn't help much unfortunately, but I did a smart sharpen and a bit of noise reduction.

Next time I would suggest an ISO of 400 and an aperture of 2.2+ using Av Mode for that lens given the lighting - The higher ISO would have been able to give you a faster shutter speed while the aperture could keep a bit more detail in focus. Keep it up!

http://lh5.ggpht.com/_Vhs_PVpIpEo/SWZ_GV_59uI/AAAAAAAADW4/ZaHeQD0PkLI/s800/veil.jpg

[HQP]

Which temple is that?

So which temple is this? I'm thinking somewhere in California but?...just curious.