Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Photography Talk by Genre Weddings & Other Family Events Talk 
Thread started 23 Jun 2017 (Friday) 13:57
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Does my bride look 70? advice needed.

 
Colin ­ Glover
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
1,251 posts
Gallery: 16 photos
Likes: 101
Joined Aug 2012
Location: Southport nr Liverpool United Kingdom
Post edited 11 months ago by Colin Glover.
     
Jul 26, 2017 18:08 |  #46

And they posted over 40 on Facebook.


HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.

No complaints, but no thankyou either.


HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.


Canon EOS 70D, Canon EOS 600D, EF-S 18-55 ii, EF 55-200 USM ii, EF-S 75-300 iii, Tamron 28-80, Sigma 70-210. Pentax 50mm, Pentax 135mm, EF-S 55-250, Raynox Macro adapter, Neewer filters (CPL, UV, FLD & ND4), Fuji HS20 EXR (30X zoom ) & cable release, Yongnuo 560 iii & Luxon 9800A manual flashguns for the Fuji, Hama Star 63 tripod, Hongdek RC-6 remote control, Velbon DF 40 www.point-n-shoot.co.uk website.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
DaviSto
... sorry. I got carried away!
Avatar
1,927 posts
Gallery: 56 photos
Likes: 883
Joined Nov 2016
Location: Abuja Nigeria
     
Jul 26, 2017 18:15 |  #47

Colin Glover wrote in post #18412028 (external link)
Well, I delivered the finished images. Big thanks to Louise for her help.
thumbnail
Hosted photo: posted by Colin Glover in
./showthread.php?p=184​12028&i=i79488168
forum: Weddings & Other Family Events Talk

She did a great job.
thumbnail
Hosted photo: posted by Colin Glover in
./showthread.php?p=184​12028&i=i244560940
forum: Weddings & Other Family Events Talk

I wondered if we would find out how this saga finally played out, so many thanks for the update. Nice to see the bride nowhere looks anything approaching 70! Nor does she look plasticized or artificial so you (and your volunteer retoucher) did a good job in PP. And, for your modest fee, the couple have got some good memories of a happy occasion.

Hey ... it would not be a photography forum if there wasn't a "but". In this case it's "but might you try to do something about the groom's teeth in no. 2". They shouldn't be Colgate bright ... but just some quite subtle lightening would be a real improvement.


David.
Comment and (constructive) criticism always welcome.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Colin ­ Glover
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
1,251 posts
Gallery: 16 photos
Likes: 101
Joined Aug 2012
Location: Southport nr Liverpool United Kingdom
     
Jul 27, 2017 05:47 as a reply to  @ DaviSto's post |  #48

Thanks for that. It's good to know I hadn't screwed up, it was just the PP I used to use to bring out detail brought out a little too much.
Lesson learned. I'm now PPing like this. Roll on the next wedding.


Canon EOS 70D, Canon EOS 600D, EF-S 18-55 ii, EF 55-200 USM ii, EF-S 75-300 iii, Tamron 28-80, Sigma 70-210. Pentax 50mm, Pentax 135mm, EF-S 55-250, Raynox Macro adapter, Neewer filters (CPL, UV, FLD & ND4), Fuji HS20 EXR (30X zoom ) & cable release, Yongnuo 560 iii & Luxon 9800A manual flashguns for the Fuji, Hama Star 63 tripod, Hongdek RC-6 remote control, Velbon DF 40 www.point-n-shoot.co.uk website.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
TeamSpeed
01010100 01010011
Avatar
33,284 posts
Gallery: 72 photos
Best ofs: 2
Likes: 3543
Joined May 2002
Location: Northern Indiana
     
Jul 27, 2017 05:51 |  #49

This is where sometimes sharpness can actually hurt the results. Doing portraits, i hit this situation from time to time. The free Nik tools are useful here.


Past Equipment | My Gallery (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Colin ­ Glover
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
1,251 posts
Gallery: 16 photos
Likes: 101
Joined Aug 2012
Location: Southport nr Liverpool United Kingdom
     
Jul 27, 2017 05:53 as a reply to  @ TeamSpeed's post |  #50

Which tools come in handy in Nik?


Canon EOS 70D, Canon EOS 600D, EF-S 18-55 ii, EF 55-200 USM ii, EF-S 75-300 iii, Tamron 28-80, Sigma 70-210. Pentax 50mm, Pentax 135mm, EF-S 55-250, Raynox Macro adapter, Neewer filters (CPL, UV, FLD & ND4), Fuji HS20 EXR (30X zoom ) & cable release, Yongnuo 560 iii & Luxon 9800A manual flashguns for the Fuji, Hama Star 63 tripod, Hongdek RC-6 remote control, Velbon DF 40 www.point-n-shoot.co.uk website.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
TeamSpeed
01010100 01010011
Avatar
33,284 posts
Gallery: 72 photos
Best ofs: 2
Likes: 3543
Joined May 2002
Location: Northern Indiana
     
Jul 27, 2017 12:56 |  #51

Color Efex Pro, there are a number of prepopulated filters, and you can tweak each one. I will use the glamour and softener effects, but work on the sliders to not overdue it.

I have a lady each year I photograph where the Florida sun was not kind to her. I have to tread a fine line on how far I take the post processing. The wrinkles are quite bad, and some deep. :(

This lady here has the same problem I do when we laugh. I habitually put my head back as I laugh which brings out the extra chins, and increases pressure on the face enhancing wrinkles. That is more on her than you, but you seemed to handle it well this 2nd time around.


Past Equipment | My Gallery (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Colin ­ Glover
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
1,251 posts
Gallery: 16 photos
Likes: 101
Joined Aug 2012
Location: Southport nr Liverpool United Kingdom
     
Jul 28, 2017 06:10 |  #52

Thanks.


Canon EOS 70D, Canon EOS 600D, EF-S 18-55 ii, EF 55-200 USM ii, EF-S 75-300 iii, Tamron 28-80, Sigma 70-210. Pentax 50mm, Pentax 135mm, EF-S 55-250, Raynox Macro adapter, Neewer filters (CPL, UV, FLD & ND4), Fuji HS20 EXR (30X zoom ) & cable release, Yongnuo 560 iii & Luxon 9800A manual flashguns for the Fuji, Hama Star 63 tripod, Hongdek RC-6 remote control, Velbon DF 40 www.point-n-shoot.co.uk website.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sourcehill
Senior Member
Avatar
477 posts
Gallery: 19 photos
Likes: 80
Joined Aug 2013
Location: Boston
     
Aug 08, 2017 14:10 |  #53

An 85mm @f2 would help =)

Most of these shots have everything in focus which to most people looks like a high-resolution iPhone photo.


I like gear and I have too much.
Check out my current work on Instagram @immichaelcarmen
redwoodandrye.com

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Colin ­ Glover
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
1,251 posts
Gallery: 16 photos
Likes: 101
Joined Aug 2012
Location: Southport nr Liverpool United Kingdom
     
Aug 08, 2017 18:26 as a reply to  @ sourcehill's post |  #54

The shots in the venue, I take at F8 or narrower. This is because I find shooting wider can give you too shallow DOF. I've had a couple of instances in the past where one person is in focus, whilst the other is out of focus. F8 helps remove that problem. As I use a crop body, then my Pentax 50mm F2 would come in handy (I use a Pentax lens to EOS body adapter). :-)


Canon EOS 70D, Canon EOS 600D, EF-S 18-55 ii, EF 55-200 USM ii, EF-S 75-300 iii, Tamron 28-80, Sigma 70-210. Pentax 50mm, Pentax 135mm, EF-S 55-250, Raynox Macro adapter, Neewer filters (CPL, UV, FLD & ND4), Fuji HS20 EXR (30X zoom ) & cable release, Yongnuo 560 iii & Luxon 9800A manual flashguns for the Fuji, Hama Star 63 tripod, Hongdek RC-6 remote control, Velbon DF 40 www.point-n-shoot.co.uk website.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
RDKirk
Adorama says I'm "packed."
Avatar
12,727 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Likes: 395
Joined May 2004
Location: USA
     
Aug 09, 2017 10:15 |  #55

OhLook wrote in post #18385876 (external link)
It's common for one's body image to fall behind the actual appearance of one's body as aging occurs. Your bride may well think she looks 10 years younger than she does.

tim wrote in post #18386818 (external link)
Don't do skin smoothing without it being requested. That's mildly offensive to the person. Don't even call it skin smoothing, call it "gentle processing" or something.

In my experience, practically everyone looks better to themselves in a mirror than they do to a camera.

Part of that is optical: Flattening a three-dimensional subject to a 2-D plane always introduces distortion. That's where "the camera adds 10 pounds" comes from. The photographer must correct for that with intelligent choices of distance and focal length, camera angle, and posing.

Another part is not optical, but also caused by the photographer: Unflattering lighting, other aspects of posing and costume, not paying attention to details that become glaring in an image as opposed to what is noticed while "peerin' through a tiny 'ole."

A third part is psychological: When we experience a person in real life, the face is constantly moving, the light is constantly shifting as the face moves, we experience the person in toto--voice, character, et ceter--and we seldom focus on minute facial details. When the image is fixed, those details become much more significant.

The job of the photographer, if he's hired to do a person's portrait, is to make that person look as good in the image as he does to himself in the mirror (this is excepting highly artistic portraits--which has other considerations noted below).

Correcting faults created by the camera or the photographer certainly don't need the client's permission. If you did it, clean up after yourself.

De-emphasizing faults that the camera emphasizes doesn't require permission.

Getting to know the person well enough to understand what needs to be expressed in a portrait doesn't require permission.

I entered portrait photography from painting. As a painter, my goal was to capture my experience of the individual. A painter starts with a blank canvas and adds to the canvas all the elements making up his experience of the individual. What was not part of that experience does not get to the canvas.

As a portrait photographer, it's still my goal to present my experience of the person. To a great degree, I'm fighting the mechanical limitations of the camera, because it knows nothing about "experiencing" a person.

One of my earliest failures in photographic portraiture was a photograph I made of my old Latin teacher, Mrs Shutz. She was a "teacher emeritus"--a woman still teaching long after retirement age. She was gray-haired and heavily wrinkled, but she was one of the most clever, whimsical, witty, and lively people you'd ever meet. She was sharp, but always smiling, with the clearest crystal-blue eyes.

My portrait of her was a miserable failure. It was a picture of an old, wrinkled woman. It was photographically accurate--the camera did its job--but there was nothing of the experience of being in the company of that vibrant woman.

I'd do that much, much better today, and I would not ask permission to do so.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Make ­ it ­ snappy
Mostly Lurking
Avatar
18 posts
Gallery: 8 photos
Likes: 51
Joined Aug 2017
Location: Southend on Sea
     
Aug 27, 2017 13:50 |  #56

Hi ( my first post)
(Dabbled in a few family wedding - no expert).

Glad this all worked out in the end but I'm sure a few sleepless night were had.
Just my 0.2p's worth - most of the issues i the shots, i believe , were about posing and detail.
Yes...we had the age v reality v expectation piece but if you look at most of the shots taken there was very little thought to how
they would look in print.
Just as an example, the shot of the signing of the register. Brides hands v Grooms hands. Head heights, body angles........it's just a snap of a moment in time.
That's ok............. if that's what was required but as a record of the moment i feel ( and that counts for nothing) it falls short.

Regardless off maybe feeling it's a reportage style....there has to be structure in the photos ..no?
This is where us amateurs really difer from the pro's in all disciplines.

If one was to reorganise either the photographer or those being photographed moments before the shutter press. apart from the PP dificulties, a good percentage o the issues would have been resolved..........mayb​e?

Best


Ronnie

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Phil ­ V
Goldmember
1,973 posts
Likes: 71
Joined Jan 2005
Location: S Yorks UK
     
Oct 31, 2017 07:44 |  #57

Colin
Glad you've got it sorted, but I'll offer a few words of 'wisdom'.

Your initial complaints seem to have been caused by your (no longer) 'trendy' over use of the clarity slider.

It quickly fell out of favour for a good reason, it's not very flattering (as you've found). Your bride grew up surrounded by over softened 'romantic' wedding photos, which were much more suitable for the older bride, I can imagine her 'culture shock' when she first saw your shots.

It's a gentle reminder that 'style' has to match 'subject'


Gear List
website: South Yorkshire Wedding photographer in Doncaster (external link)
Twitter (external link)Facebook (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Colin ­ Glover
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
1,251 posts
Gallery: 16 photos
Likes: 101
Joined Aug 2012
Location: Southport nr Liverpool United Kingdom
     
Oct 31, 2017 12:12 |  #58

I agree completely Phil. Now would it be a good throwback to start doing the "Couple in the Brandy Glass" edit lol? :p


Canon EOS 70D, Canon EOS 600D, EF-S 18-55 ii, EF 55-200 USM ii, EF-S 75-300 iii, Tamron 28-80, Sigma 70-210. Pentax 50mm, Pentax 135mm, EF-S 55-250, Raynox Macro adapter, Neewer filters (CPL, UV, FLD & ND4), Fuji HS20 EXR (30X zoom ) & cable release, Yongnuo 560 iii & Luxon 9800A manual flashguns for the Fuji, Hama Star 63 tripod, Hongdek RC-6 remote control, Velbon DF 40 www.point-n-shoot.co.uk website.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
david.g.photo84
Member
60 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Sep 2017
     
Dec 21, 2017 17:52 |  #59

I feel that some people are used to the images they get out of a cell phone that they don't realize a DSLR is going to pick up way more detail. My wife prefers taking pictures with her phone for this fact.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
RDKirk
Adorama says I'm "packed."
Avatar
12,727 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Likes: 395
Joined May 2004
Location: USA
     
Dec 21, 2017 19:48 |  #60

Phil V wrote in post #18485318 (external link)
Colin
Glad you've got it sorted, but I'll offer a few words of 'wisdom'.

Your initial complaints seem to have been caused by your (no longer) 'trendy' over use of the clarity slider.

It quickly fell out of favour for a good reason, it's not very flattering (as you've found). Your bride grew up surrounded by over softened 'romantic' wedding photos, which were much more suitable for the older bride, I can imagine her 'culture shock' when she first saw your shots.

It's a gentle reminder that 'style' has to match 'subject'

I was just talking about this to a younger photographer today.

Up until the mid-to-latter 60s, weddings and portraits were still mostly monochrome--which ma and pa photo-grapher could retouch themselves. When color became predominant for retail photography in the latter 60s,

The problem was that color transparencies and prints were exceedingly difficult to retouch. So soft lights and soft focus became the rage. Larson invented the soft box. The 70s were "the decade no lenses were sharp."




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

16,990 views & 28 likes for this thread
Does my bride look 70? advice needed.
FORUMS Photography Talk by Genre Weddings & Other Family Events Talk 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is jeroe
447 guests, 306 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 6430, that happened on Dec 03, 2017

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.