One single image from last week wedding...

Critique please!

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/png'

Very good!

It's crazy, but it works!

Congratulations!

I wish the bride was looking up and laughing (or smiling, it would be nice to see the brides' face).

Also, the tea packets (or sugar or whatever is on that silver serving pedestal (in between the 2 tea pots)) kinda ruins the mood for me (regardless of how neatly they are arranged), now it feels like they are at some type of self-serve catered affair.

I would also clone out the tiny bit of gold railing showing at the center-bottom.

Otherwise, the colors and lighting are nice; but I can definitely tell where the flash is coming from (there is a hot spot on the floor under the table; I would clone that out). I would try to control the shadows (from the teapots, the pedestal, & the table) with some type of diffusion next time.

Good overall composition.

I like the shot very much. The centered subjects don't effect the beauty of the shot for me. I wouldn't think twice about adding it to the portfolio.

It I felt like this was staged (it may have been) some of the elements that Matt mentions would bother me more. But it feels like a candid, and a wonderful one at that.

Did they buy it? (always the most important question)

Thank you Matt for showing me some things that I did not realized until reading your post...

nw85887 wrote in post #6095603
I wish the bride was looking up and laughing (or smiling, it would be nice to see the brides' face).

Also, the tea packets (or sugar or whatever is on that silver serving pedestal (in between the 2 tea pots)) kinda ruins the mood for me (regardless of how neatly they are arranged), now it feels like they are at some type of self-serve catered affair.

I would also clone out the tiny bit of gold railing showing at the center-bottom.

Otherwise, the colors and lighting are nice; but I can definitely tell where the flash is coming from (there is a hot spot on the floor under the table; I would clone that out). I would try to control the shadows (from the teapots, the pedestal, & the table) with some type of diffusion next time.

Good overall composition.

John_998 wrote in post #6096234
Thank you Matt for showing me some things that I did not realized until reading your post...

No problem, you'd have done the same for me.

nice, is it just me or does the WB seem off? Too warm?

Would have to agree with the wb issue and the bride not looking toward the camera, that would have worked really well. Aside from that, it really works. Good stuff!

Hate to be a descenting voice but I think it looks better if the bride is not looking at the camera, its like the couple where having a quiet moment in a corner and it was captured as a candid, if she was looking at the camera it would look staged. Same with the tea stuff.

I see it as a candid not as a portrait, so I don't know why people are criticising it like a portrait. As a portrait its all wrong, as a candid its pretty decent.

"Portrait photography is the capture by means of photography of the likeness of a person or a small group of people, in which the face and its expression is predominant. The objective is to display the likeness, personality, and even the mood of the person. Like other types of portraiture, the focus of the photograph is the person's face, although the entire body and the background may be included. A portrait is generally not a snapshot, but a composed image of a person in a still position. A portrait often shows a person looking directly at the camera." - wikipedia

"Candid photography is photography that focuses on spontaneity rather than technique, on the immersion of a camera within events rather than focusing on setting up a staged situation or on preparing a lengthy camera setup." - wikipedia

KarlosDaJackal wrote in post #6098446
Hate to be a descenting voice but I think it looks better if the bride is not looking at the camera, its like the couple where having a quiet moment in a corner and it was captured as a candid, if she was looking at the camera it would look staged. Same with the tea stuff.

I see it as a candid not as a portrait, so I don't know why people are criticising it like a portrait. As a portrait its all wrong, as a candid its pretty decent.

"Portrait photography is the capture by means of photography of the likeness of a person or a small group of people, in which the face and its expression is predominant. The objective is to display the likeness, personality, and even the mood of the person. Like other types of portraiture, the focus of the photograph is the person's face, although the entire body and the background may be included. A portrait is generally not a snapshot, but a composed image of a person in a still position. A portrait often shows a person looking directly at the camera." - wikipedia

"Candid photography is photography that focuses on spontaneity rather than technique, on the immersion of a camera within events rather than focusing on setting up a staged situation or on preparing a lengthy camera setup." - wikipedia

Heres a thought though. Say if the photog just made some sort of noise and caught their attention to make them look up; it would be a candid shot but the look of surprise/we've been caught would really work. Not that there's anything at all wrong with the original shot, it works perfectly. Its just had the bride naturally (as in not staged) looked up, the shot could tell a completely different story. One that I think would work great. Thats what I was thinking, I wasnt considering it as a portrait at all.

But that's the difference, if you do something to make them look at you, then you have to capture them, if you take it without distracting them you capture the moment as much as the people.

Both could work but I reckon it depends on what kind of mix of portrait/candid you want from the wedding shots. I just think with a "moment" like that the photog shouldn't disturb it just to make a different image, especially when you can't create a moment later if you find you've too many portraits. But you can always create a portrait.

Depends on the couples attitude to the photos also, they may not want to be disturbed or distracted every 2 minutes to get another portrait, they might just want to enjoy the day

But back on topic as far as CC goes >> I like it

I said looking up and laughing/smiling, not look at the camera.

You would have to see what I see in my head to really get the gist of what I was going for.

I was going for more of the husband just tickled the neck or whispered something to her to make her smile; and she looks up and smiles or laughs (a little, not a super open mouth), preferably with her eyes closed and not directly at the camera.

I mean he took the time to setup a remote strobe, he might as well went for the candid-esque posing direction.

But a good pic nonetheless, lets all hug-it-out

KarlosDaJackal wrote in post #6098628
But that's the difference, if you do something to make them look at you, then you have to capture them, if you take it without distracting them you capture the moment as much as the people.

Both could work but I reckon it depends on what kind of mix of portrait/candid you want from the wedding shots. I just think with a "moment" like that the photog shouldn't disturb it just to make a different image, especially when you can't create a moment later if you find you've too many portraits. But you can always create a portrait.

Depends on the couples attitude to the photos also, they may not want to be disturbed or distracted every 2 minutes to get another portrait, they might just want to enjoy the day

But back on topic as far as CC goes >> I like it

I'm of the same notion as KarlosDaJackal about this topic.

I would have been thrilled if our photographer had caught a moment like this at my wedding last year... and I don't think I'd be saying "why didn't you catch me looking up for pete's sake??"

I agree that in a perfect world, she would have laughed and looked upward - but really in a candid, you take what you can get. And in this case I think you took something beautiful.