First Bridal Shoot (AMATEUR ALART!)

...Again, I am VERY much an amateur with a fairly low level camera.
Just hoping to learn a few things to maybe get to the next level.
I used a nifty fifty for all, only because I was trying to get as shallow DOF as possible and it is my only lens that will stop to f1.8

The lady was kind enough the let me practice on her, to which I would give her any shots that happen to turn out decent! I thought it was a pretty good deal... for me anyway!!

Anywho... I will state what I don't like about them and welcome any and all C&C, even harsh criticism is fine as long as I can learn from the Pros!

1. I know it is slightly OOF, which is an automatic trash can (for anyone else !) But how is composition, DOF and lighting?

IMAGE LINK: http://s383.photobucke​t.com …73-2_zps1c00e203.jpg.html

IMAGE LINK: http://s383.photobucke​t.com …-2bw_zps7c270bbb.jpg.ht​ml

IMAGE LINK: http://s383.photobucke​t.com …60-2_zpsbae7a626.jpg.html

Here are my thoughts/suggestion:

#1 - The chair has to go. It blocks half the dress and really does nothing for the shot. I would tone down the highlights towards the bottom of the dress to bring out some details. That's always a challenge in shooting weddings. You could have moved her so that there wasn't a tree splitting down her head. She does have some rim light which separates her from the tree, which is good.

#2 - Her head kind of gets lost with the leaves. I would have brought her left hand up with her right hand also. It looks weird with one cut off. There are weird black specks around her right eye. I'm assuming it's cause her face wasn't lit on that side.

#3 - You're correct in the fact that rim light needs to be powered down. She's too centered and has a weird expression on her face, which makes this look like a snap shot more than a well thought out portrait. The double yellow lines from the road in the bottom right corner is distracting and can be removed.

Hope that helps!

Selective color on the reclining one screams amateur. Novice photographers are usually fascinated by the effect. However, it's a giveaway that the photographer was not confident enough in composition and lighting to create an image where he/she didn't have to tell the viewers "This is what's important. Look here."

HiepBuiPhotography wrote in post #16281622
Here are my thoughts/suggestion:

#1 - The chair has to go. It blocks half the dress and really does nothing for the shot. I would tone down the highlights towards the bottom of the dress to bring out some details. That's always a challenge in shooting weddings. You could have moved her so that there wasn't a tree splitting down her head. She does have some rim light which separates her from the tree, which is good.

#2 - Her head kind of gets lost with the leaves. I would have brought her left hand up with her right hand also. It looks weird with one cut off. There are weird black specks around her right eye. I'm assuming it's cause her face wasn't lit on that side.

#3 - You're correct in the fact that rim light needs to be powered down. She's too centered and has a weird expression on her face, which makes this look like a snap shot more than a well thought out portrait. The double yellow lines from the road in the bottom right corner is distracting and can be removed.

Hope that helps!

Hey thanks for your comments! I checked out your website, I believe I would do well to heed your advice. you have some great skills!!!

mojo_plasma wrote in post #16281765
Hey thanks for your comments! I checked out your website, I believe I would do well to heed your advice. you have some great skills!!!

No problem!

Thanks for the kind words

joedlh wrote in post #16281668
Selective color on the reclining one screams amateur. Novice photographers are usually fascinated by the effect. However, it's a giveaway that the photographer was not confident enough in composition and lighting to create an image where he/she didn't have to tell the viewers "This is what's important. Look here."

Hey Joe, thanks for taking the time to look and comment! I expect you are right!
I also think selective color is kinda over done, I did a straight B&W at first and did this as an after though thinking this was a pretty good place where it might work.
Perhaps not
Thanks again for your help.

HiepBuiPhotography wrote in post #16281622
Here are my thoughts/suggestion:

#1 - The chair has to go. It blocks half the dress and really does nothing for the shot. I would tone down the highlights towards the bottom of the dress to bring out some details. That's always a challenge in shooting weddings. You could have moved her so that there wasn't a tree splitting down her head. She does have some rim light which separates her from the tree, which is good.

#2 - Her head kind of gets lost with the leaves. I would have brought her left hand up with her right hand also. It looks weird with one cut off. There are weird black specks around her right eye. I'm assuming it's cause her face wasn't lit on that side.

#3 - You're correct in the fact that rim light needs to be powered down. She's too centered and has a weird expression on her face, which makes this look like a snap shot more than a well thought out portrait. The double yellow lines from the road in the bottom right corner is distracting and can be removed.

Hope that helps!

If you don't mind me asking...
you have a shot in your engagement sets of a couple holding hands across a RR track...
what is the lighting set up here?
And once again... GREAT shots on your site!

mojo_plasma wrote in post #16281819
If you don't mind me asking...
you have a shot in your engagement sets of a couple holding hands across a RR track...
what is the lighting set up here?
And once again... GREAT shots on your site!

That shot was just with natural lighting right around sunset. It was actually getting pretty dark around that time.

#1: She doesn't appear to be in focus. Looks like the focus landed on the chair, which I agree with the above comment that it has to go. It's takes away from the photo the way it is. Maybe if you had used it differently, like having her sit in it, it may have worked better. DOF looks good to me if the focus landed on her and not the chair.

#2: There are few photos where selective color works well to enchance the photo, but I don't feel this is one of those. i really believe that as skill increases a photographer will know when selective color will work...and more importantly when it won't.

#3: You could stand to power down the flash a lot actually and maybe raise it up a bit. The pose isn't flattering IMO. Square her up a bit more to the camera.

Overall, you need to work on your composition as well. In each photos she's dead center in the frame. Learn the Rule of Thirds and apply it to give a little more interest to your photos. Having your subject dead center like this makes them look snapshoty.

rivas8409 wrote in post #16281877
#1: She doesn't appear to be in focus. Looks like the focus landed on the chair, which I agree with the above comment that it has to go. It's takes away from the photo the way it is. Maybe if you had used it differently, like having her sit in it, it may have worked better. DOF looks good to me if the focus landed on her and not the chair.

#2: There are few photos where selective color works well to enchance the photo, but I don't feel this is one of those. i really believe that as skill increases a photographer will know when selective color will work...and more importantly when it won't.

#3: You could stand to power down the flash a lot actually and maybe raise it up a bit. The pose isn't flattering IMO. Square her up a bit more to the camera.

Overall, you need to work on your composition as well. In each photos she's dead center in the frame. Learn the Rule of Thirds and apply it to give a little more interest to your photos. Having your subject dead center like this makes them look snapshoty.

Hey thanks for your comments. I have seen some of your postings on here... excellent work man!
on 1. I knew the focusing was a flop luckily I did get several shots of here sitting in the chair also.

on 2. well that's 2 votes against! that good to know tho, thanks

on 3. Yea, that flash is brutal! It is a super cheap manual with a wireless trigger. I need to get some sort of damper for it.
I figured that my compositions were pretty bad, It just seems the natural thing to center the subject
I will google "rule of thirds" and begin to try to get a grasp on this!
Very much appreciate all the help so far

mojo_plasma wrote in post #16281995
Hey thanks for your comments. I have seen some of your postings on here... excellent work man!
on 1. I knew the focusing was a flop luckily I did get several shots of here sitting in the chair also.

on 2. well that's 2 votes against! that good to know tho, thanks

on 3. Yea, that flash is brutal! It is a super cheap manual with a wireless trigger. I need to get some sort of damper for it.I figured that my compositions were pretty bad, It just seems the natural thing to center the subject
I will google "rule of thirds" and begin to try to get a grasp on this!
Very much appreciate all the help so far

Does the flash not have power output controls?

No sir. It has an on/off switch and a distance/aperture guide...and thats about it I wish it did tho.
But if I recall I got it for 3 bucks at a thrift store... so i was happy it worked at all!
It's a second flash that was just for some goofy experimental stuff anyway.
I will pick up some kind of diffuser for it soon.

Mojo, the distance/aperture guide should allow you to tone down the power. I have an old Vititar manual flash I used in my film days and the closer your have the distance, the less power is actually used in the flash. So think of it as a way to tell the flash (manually) that you are close to the subject so it turns the power down, versus saying it is further from the subject so it turns up the power.
You are on your way to a life long journey and don't worry if you don't get better right away. Photography takes years to develop the skills to do a great job.

Using a nifty fifty wide open can be appropriate at times but: wide open that lens is soft and the resulting very shallow DOF should be functional.... Not just because you can create a shallow DOF you have to use that all the time.
Shallow DOF is mainly functional to blur the background or draw attention to some very distinct features in a scene. Especially for "event shooting" like a wedding, using a 50mm wide open is like playing a round of golf with only a "seven iron". It can be done be you are more likely to get a good score with a full bag of clubs.

sirquack wrote in post #16283593
Mojo, the distance/aperture guide should allow you to tone down the power. I have an old Vititar manual flash I used in my film days and the closer your have the distance, the less power is actually used in the flash. So think of it as a way to tell the flash (manually) that you are close to the subject so it turns the power down, versus saying it is further from the subject so it turns up the power.
You are on your way to a life long journey and don't worry if you don't get better right away. Photography takes years to develop the skills to do a great job.

Hey man, thanks for the encouragement. the flash I have is a Vivatar also. Full manual. I THINK it fires full power all the time and you have to set the appropriate f-stop vs distance from subject to get proper exposure, but I will try to google it later and find out how exactly it does work. thanks for the tips
BTW, did you get any guitar shots? Last we talked I think you were gonna shoot your sons guitars. lemme know if you posted any
later man!