First time as a second shooter yesterday..

A forum member gave me the opportunity to go and shoot his brother's wedding with him. Here are a few pictures I got - what do you guys think?

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Redirected to error image by FLICKR

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Redirected to error image by FLICKR

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Redirected to error image by FLICKR

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Redirected to error image by FLICKR

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Redirected to error image by FLICKR

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Redirected to error image by FLICKR

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Redirected to error image by FLICKR

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Redirected to error image by FLICKR

while it's not bad, there's something about these pictures that attracts me as the audience in a good way, it looks clean, nice processing, but still inconsistent. i would say you did a very good job being that it was your first time doing this!
#2 would've been way so much better hadn't the champagne glass got in the way of the groom's face. #3, not really sure what's going on there, it seems all over the place and unnecessary.
i think it's best if you can avoid group shots, unless if you can get them to look at your camera or use a wide angle.

I really like the last one. Not keen on the 6th one, too dim for my liking, id much prefer to see it with color clarity similar to 1st/4th image. White balance off on that one eh?

Thanks, I appreciate the criticisms.

Autonomous wrote in post #13494977
while it's not bad, there's something about these pictures that attracts me as the audience in a good way, it looks clean, nice processing, but still inconsistent. i would say you did a very good job being that it was your first time doing this!
#2 would've been way so much better hadn't the champagne glass got in the way of the groom's face. #3, not really sure what's going on there, it seems all over the place and unnecessary.
i think it's best if you can avoid group shots, unless if you can get them to look at your camera or use a wide angle.

Yeah, I agree. The WB is off a bit. I'll work on that one a bit. I processed these at like 1:30 in the morning after the wedding. I really wanted to see what I had.

All in all, I thought it went pretty well. I definitely need to work on my indoor strobe and on camera flash skills. But, for a guy who has been shooting a DSLR for a month - I'm happy!

MesserschmittMan wrote in post #13495281
I really like the last one. Not keen on the 6th one, too dim for my liking, id much prefer to see it with color clarity similar to 1st/4th image. White balance off on that one eh?

I like 7 and 8

2 is too busy, glass blocking grooms face and picture is crooked
6 part of no parking sign is a distraction

5 is really nice too

the exposure on all look a tad off. the colours do not seem vibrant...washed out a bit

must have been a blast to go shoot eh>
very cool of the forum member inviting you.

how'd you fell doing it?

You-by-Lou wrote in post #13497249
I like 7 and 8

2 is too busy, glass blocking grooms face and picture is crooked
6 part of no parking sign is a distraction

5 is really nice too

the exposure on all look a tad off. the colours do not seem vibrant...washed out a bit

I like a low contrast, slightly washed aesthetic. My exposures for the most part were pretty spot on all day. I'm just not a huge fan right now of big, vibrant colors and high contrast. I was definitely going for this look in post.

It was a lot of fun. I learned a lot too. It was slightly nerve wracking, but that feeling kind of disappeared after a while. Reception shooting (indoors at least) is pretty tricky. The rest of the day was a blast. The wedding party was great - really fun people.

We both attended the same art school a couple years apart. I'm new to serious photography, but I was well schooled in composition, color theory and everything else that you would expect to be part of a top art school education. Its mostly getting used to the fundamentals and equipment familiarity, and the art of post processing.

You-by-Lou wrote in post #13497252
must have been a blast to go shoot eh>
very cool of the forum member inviting you.

how'd you fell doing it?

These are all a little blue/cyan, which makes them terribly unflattering. I know that there is a big push right now for faded / washed out look and that's fine.

However, my advice for someone just starting out is to simply learn to shoot and post process with REAL colors. Not overly saturated, or faded/washed out. Just learn your medium first. Real contrast, real color. Then after you've gotten the hang of a lot of the other stuff, you can begin to play with your post. Otherwise, you post images like these and you get all kinds of comments about your post processing when what you need to be working on are the images themselves. Yes, I know, post is a part of the process, but you've got to get it IN CAMERA first, or you don't have much. If everyone would learn to shoot, and not think: "Oh, I'll just fix that later" we'd have a lot more talented/trained photographers. <sorry, stepping off the soapbox>

You may be well 'schooled', but I think you'll find actual shooting a far greater school than ANY you have attended. You learn to swim rather well in the shark tank, don't you?

I'm not really sure that I follow you here. You're saying that I don't understand color?

Its a little like making an argument that modern or abstract artists should learn the basics, like figure drawing or color theory. Well, in most cases, they have, and they make choices based on what they want their work to look like, feel like, and express.

Which is exactly what I chose to do. I developed them exactly as I wanted to see them. You can express a desire to see them differently, but the bottom line is that I chose to apply that sort of processing. It doesn't mean that I don't understand color and it doesn't mean that I decided to 'fix it in post'. That's really a big assumption.

I appreciate you taking the time to post.

collierportraits wrote in post #13513216
These are all a little blue/cyan, which makes them terribly unflattering. I know that there is a big push right now for faded / washed out look and that's fine.

However, my advice for someone just starting out is to simply learn to shoot and post process with REAL colors. Not overly saturated, or faded/washed out. Just learn your medium first. Real contrast, real color. Then after you've gotten the hang of a lot of the other stuff, you can begin to play with your post. Otherwise, you post images like these and you get all kinds of comments about your post processing when what you need to be working on are the images themselves. Yes, I know, post is a part of the process, but you've got to get it IN CAMERA first, or you don't have much. If everyone would learn to shoot, and not think: "Oh, I'll just fix that later" we'd have a lot more talented/trained photographers. <sorry, stepping off the soapbox>

You may be well 'schooled', but I think you'll find actual shooting a far greater school than ANY you have attended. You learn to swim rather well in the shark tank, don't you?

Here is an example of my SOOC raw file vs. my processed file to achieve a look that I wanted. Subjective? Yes.

My processed photo:

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Redirected to error image by FLICKR

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Redirected to error image by FLICKR

I'm not really sure why you asked "what do you guys think?"

You may see or wish to interpret your images a certain way, however your processing makes the bridal gown appear blue. That's not an opinion, it's a fact. Pretty sure if the bride wanted a blue dress she would have bought one.

You-by-Lou wrote in post #13513318
I'm not really sure why you asked "what do you guys think?"

I appreciate criticism and it makes me think and evaluate my choices. But I don't necessarily need to be accused of something like not understanding color or waiting around to get things right in post. That's not a criticism, its an accusation. And an unfair one at that.

People have given me some valuable things to think about, like that annoying red light in the limo, for one. Or watching my horizon lines, or my crop choices, etc.

I think people don't understand what criticism is and how it should be applied: the act or art of analyzing and evaluating or judging the quality of a literary or artistic work, musical performance, art exhibit, dramatic production, etc.

Your job as a critic is to judge the work based on what you're presented, and not to question whether or not the artist knows how to use the medium or understand the tools. There's just no point in doing that.