My final wedding

As others have said, it seems impossible that the hosting company would pick one image to compress and make soft, and not others; it just doesn't make sense.

Why not simply post an original for us on flickr?

kurt_cobain wrote in post #11618626
As others have said, it seems impossible that the hosting company would pick one image to compress and make soft, and not others; it just doesn't make sense.

Why not simply post an original for us on flickr?

I already stated that the hand ring shot t is also not as sharp as the original. You can really see it around the ring and again I know sharp from soft.

So... do you want us to critique your pictures or not? Well... I'm going to try and look past the "PB issue"

1) This would be a great picture if you'd gone down on a knee and shot more at their level. As it is now it looks like a picture a guest took from their seat and the B&G will probably get a dozen of these if their guests give them the pics they took. Maybe bump up some of the colors a bit and sharpen up the image and it'll be nice.

2) I like this one! Maybe bump it up a bit but otherwise I like it. Best of the bunch, IMO.

3) Would've been cute if you'd focused on the little girl and not the "Reserved" sign behind the man.

4) If this is a posed shot it would've been a million times better if she were peaking over her shoulder. It shows how beautiful her dress is, but not much else.

5) I am a little too distracted but the veins on the grooms hands. Clone those out, smooth up their skin a bit and it's a nice shot.

6) I really like this shot! I would sharpen up his eyes a bit (even if PB did degrade it a bit I can tell that his face would be in focus and I think pulling out his eyes a bit more would really make the pic pop). But if that's not your style it's still a great shot!

7) Nice shot.

8) Too blurry. I can tell it's an action shot and I get that it'll be blurry in most places because of that, but the bride's arm is in focus so clearly the shutter was fast enough to focus clearly on something. If it were the bride's face or the groom's face it would've been great.

But I don't think it's OK to blame PB. I use PB all the time for my personal pics and I've never had this problem of PB suddenly making my otherwise sharp pictures looking blurry. I decided to try it out myself to see how big of a difference it makes so I loaded a picture from a recent wedding to see and I CAN see how it degrades a pictures a little bit, but really not enough to change the focusing and feel of the picture. http://i187.photobucke​t.com …llwedding/cerem​ony023.jpg

Thanks for putting the issue aside and the crit though in the shot of the little girl in the pew her eyes are tack sharp in the original files and if you read I wasn't blaming PB I just clearly stated that that its almost impossible to judge sharpness when an image is turned into a compressed JPG and then further compressed by a host site. Not blaming it is just a fact. More my fault as mentioned by Frank for not going in a changing the settings in PB before uploading.

I do agree about the shot of the bride on the grooms shoulders (last one) but I think the brides expression and the overall feel of the image overcome the movement problems. I was shooting some motion dance stuff just before that and I actually think this might have been better with maybe even a bit more motion.

#4 thats the point of this shot is showing the back of the dress. I have a travelite 750 with and umbrella straight out to her left 90 degrees straight in line with her gaze and that was set at f/9 and a fill 750 with umbrella over camera two stops down at 4.5 to give great detail in the back of the dress but to keep the shadows from getting to dark. I wish her flowers were just a bit more to the right and I maybe should have done one where she looked down at them.

#6 the grooms eyes on the final are very sharp.

Thanks again for the comments.

I agree with every single point PeaceFire made regarding your photos. Most of them could definitely use better composition and processing. #2 is the winner for me, I don't care for the rest, sorry. To me honestly it looks like someone's first wedding, not last.

Out of curiosity was there any PP done on these images? To me they look SOOC without even basic corrections done. I would love to see how they look once you do some PP!

PeaceFire wrote in post #11620219
Out of curiosity was there any PP done on these images? To me they look SOOC without even basic corrections done. I would love to see how they look once you do some PP!

Not a lot-these were very quick edits. I wanted a bit of feed back on some of the images I was on the fence about so I didn't do a lot to them though I do really like the champagne glass shot in context of the toasts and the little girl in the pew in this group.

Svetlana wrote in post #11620161
I agree with every single point PeaceFire made regarding your photos. Most of them could definitely use better composition and processing. #2 is the winner for me, I don't care for the rest, sorry. To me honestly it looks like someone's first wedding, not last.

Don't be sorry were all different and can like and dislike whatever.

OK, that makes more sense! I think that's why a lot of these don't look that "clean". I would love to see more of this wedding with PP done.

I hate to be harsh but I wouldn't pay for these kind of shots.

Sorry.

I guess then its good that I now shoot what I do and no longer shoot weddings.

Allen, did you upload these without resizing first? That might explain the apparent softness. I always resize mine to 1024xwhatever, sharpen (sometimes), and then save at 10/12 compression in Photoshop before letting photobucket have its way with my photos. Doing that keeps the problems to a minimum.

cdifoto wrote in post #11621929
Allen, did you upload these without resizing first? That might explain the apparent softness. I always resize mine to 1024xwhatever, sharpen (sometimes), and then save at 10/12 compression in Photoshop before letting photobucket have its way with my photos. Doing that keeps the problems to a minimum.

No I didn't. Its cool though. I just wanted to get a little constructive feedback on some of these. Thanks to PeaceFire I got some. I always forget to increase the file size and its just not that big of a deal to me to go back and redo'm. Thanks Don for your suggestions.


Quick B&W edit and resized when uploaded. The large size seems to have helped a bit. Clearly shows now the focus was on the flowergirls eyes and not the reserved sign

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Byte size: ZERO | PHOTOBUCKET ERROR IMAGE

Yeah that's MUCH better. Now you look competent.

Strictly for hosting a resized file, photobucket is fine but their resizing algorithm is garbage, IMHO.

Lets not get carried away. That has always been debatable.