Hello
My name is April. I did my 1st wedding this weekend and we had a blast. WE were treated like family. I wanted to share my favorite picture with you all. I know I am not that experienced but I have found mentor and thislady is going to teach me manual as I shot this wedding in automatic with the bride and grooms permission.I am happy, bride and groom are happy and I made 500 bucks. :). It is nice to meet u all.

April

Well we need to see more than that to form an opinion if your looking for one.

Originally Posted by Lubinski Well we need to see more than that to form an opinion if your looking for one.

Nah not looking for feedback on the picture. Was just saying hello.

April

Originally Posted by AprilHite Nah not looking for feedback on the picture. Was just saying hello. April

Hello and welcome. I might add though that criticism will only make you better. There is a great community of people here, I would look to use that to your advantage and look to learn from them. Otherwise, you might as well just be posting on flickr or facebook.

Originally Posted by Helvegr Hello and welcome. I might add though that criticism will only make you better. There is a great community of people here, I would look to use that to your advantage and look to learn from them. Otherwise, you might as well just be posting on flickr or facebook.

Ok, I'll take feedback but not rude feedback. I was on another forum and got told one of my pictures looked like a cheyrnoble incident. Now to me this was very rude. I know I am not great or a fantastic photographer yet but I just do not want to be discouraged. Now if someone told me things like crop it this way o use this flash and so forth this is fine with me. I do need a BETTER FLASH! big time a better flash. My camra is a canon rebel t3. here are some questions maybe u all can help???

what kind of flash should i buy, i do not mind spending up to 200 or 300 on it.

what zoon lens should i purchase? A good one but a good value one please as i dont have 600 or 800 to spend on one.

I hve a backdtrop system and a strobe light and other lighting. I have a coupole backgrounds and some props as I am slowly building up inventory.

Here is another two pictures from the wedding.

Welcome April, you have hit the motherlode for advice, encouragement and answers to just about any question. Stick with us here, keep shooting and then take a look a year from now at these images compared to where you will be then !

What Trudy said...

1. In response to your flash question...buy as good as you can afford. The flash, in conjunction with your camera is responsible for applying perfect lighting. Unfortunately, the top of the line flash for your camera is expensive...but, you will need to spend the money for your tools...there's no getting around this.

2. Spell check you posts...you have several misspelled words...I would hope that you aren't writing email to your contacts and clients with misspellings.

3. Make sure you are focused on your subjects...the camera that you list is a very good camera...yet, images two and three on your second post are rather soft. And, upon looking closely at your hands image, the brides ring looks to be a little soft.

4. Pay attention to your background. In the third photo that you posted in your second post...there is a very distracting bush right in front of the brides head.

5. Learn how to post process your images. Including, using Photoshop to nip and tuck where appropriate. For instance, in the image that you posted as number three in your second post, I would have used the liquify tool in Photoshop to tuck that arm fat at the top of her arm. One of the things that you don't want to do it fill your portfolio with unattractive images...and you surely don't want to photography brides in awkward, unappealing, or unattractive situations. I might also tuck her belly slightly to enhance her figure. Look at you second image in your last post...you have your very over weight bride looking down...this creates second chins...and jowls...just like she has on the left side of her face. Most women will find this type of image very unappealing.

6. As far as a good wedding zoom lens for under $600...that's a question that I'll leave for others...because as far as I know...there isn't one that I can recommend...I'd be looking at constant aperture lenses...and they cost more than you're willing to spend. Put that $500 away, and another $1000 and then start looking for a good zoom lens.

Your first image is nice. Lots of interest...and cute. I'm sure the bride will want a copy of this one.

I hope you don't get upset. I'm just pointing out some things that you can look at in the future.

Originally Posted by Ed911 What Trudy said... 1. In response to your flash question...buy as good as you can afford. The flash, in conjunction with your camera is responsible for applying perfect lighting. Unfortunately, the top of the line flash for your camera is expensive...but, you will need to spend the money for your tools...there's no getting around this. 2. Spell check you posts...you have several misspelled words...I would hope that you aren't writing email to your contacts and clients with misspellings. 3. Make sure you are focused on your subjects...the camera that you list is a very good camera...yet, images two and three on your second post are rather soft. And, upon looking closely at your hands image, the brides ring looks to be a little soft. 4. Pay attention to your background. In the third photo that you posted in your second post...there is a very distracting bush right in front of the brides head. 5. Learn how to post process your images. Including, using Photoshop to nip and tuck where appropriate. For instance, in the image that you posted as number three in your second post, I would have used the liquify tool in Photoshop to tuck that arm fat at the top of her arm. One of the things that you don't want to do it fill your portfolio with unattractive images...and you surely don't want to photography brides in awkward, unappealing, or unattractive situations. I might also tuck her belly slightly to enhance her figure. Look at you second image in your last post...you have your very over weight bride looking down...this creates second chins...and jowls...just like she has on the left side of her face. Most women will find this type of image very unappealing. 6. As far as a good wedding zoom lens for under $600...that's a question that I'll leave for others...because as far as I know...there isn't one that I can recommend...I'd be looking at constant aperture lenses...and they cost more than you're willing to spend. Put that $500 away, and another $1000 and then start looking for a good zoom lens. Your first image is nice. Lots of interest...and cute. I'm sure the bride will want a copy of this one. I hope you don't get upset. I'm just pointing out some things that you can look at in the future.

Thank you Ed.

I am just really tired. I just got temporary custody of a 6 year old and supervision of her mom so I am so exhausted. Your post was really sweet and nice. I appreciate this so much. I loved your advice and will use it! It is nice to meet you. How long you been taking photographs?

Here is a picture I took , what do you think needs to be corrected on it?

.

I'd say lighten up her face, the white of the background sort of takes over contrast-wise.

Also, there are nice 3rd party 17-50, 18-50, 24-70 and 28-70 zoom lenses that can be gotten under $500 used. I got a tokina ATX pro 28-70 F2.5-2.8 lens for $300 and it beats the IQ of the 24-105 F4L I got rid of. The AF is slower than the $1k lenses, but it is still quicker and has much better IQ than the more generic lenses that don't have a constant aperture. It takes a bit of research, but there are a lot of good ones out there for starters.

Prime F1.4 and F1.8 28mm, 35mm, and 50mm lenses are also fantastic. I suppose it depends whether you really need zoom flexibility or just the best lens that can capture the shot in any light. For these your legs will have to be the zoom but the IQ and low light ability is simply outstanding vs. general zooms.

AprilHite:
Posting your pictures after been mistreated by others, speaks a lot about you.
You have a good eye and the best intentions, so do not get disappointed when critique don't go the way you thought.
What I mean is; accept honest feedback even if it is harsh or makes you feel bad, ask questions when in doubt and do not allow your ego to decide for you. (I know about that).
This is the only forum where I have received the Good, the Bad and the Ugly in very honest and decent ways.
Then, at the end of the year as VayCayMon said, you will be impressed of how much you were able to accomplish with the advice and CC received.
I am no professional, but love photography and I am a lot better today simply because I have paid lots of attention to the feedback received.
I hope you stay with us for a long time.
Y.

Thanks April. I've been a digital photographer for the past 10 years, and a part time professional for the past 6-7 years. And, before that...a film photographer for...well, a long, long time...lol.

One of the hardest things that you will learn, through experience, school, and mentoring is what a good image looks like. I know that sounds kind of spacey, but...it's hard to define, since all images are different. In essence, it's what you know must be done to make it look like it should, using your skill and software. It only comes with time and practice.

I took the liberty of borrowing your image and working on it a little so that you can see the difference rather than me having to tell you.

Original



For what it's worth, I used Photoshop's Liquify filter and pucker tool to adjust the arm in the photo to what I think it should look like... on your original image. I think it's much more appealing and demonstrates issues when you're too close.



I think the original is a bit under exposed. One big problem with under exposing digital images, is artifacts...weird shadow creatures that do not look right...lol...for lack of a better explanation.
My best explanation for some under exposed shadows is that they look like dirt...

To correct this, make sure that your histogram is correct. If you see it stacked to the left, you need more light...either turn up the camera flash, studio strobe, or increase your camera's exposure a stop...shoot again, and check the histogram again. I find it much easier to correct images that are a tad to bright as opposed to ones that are too dark. And, always shoot in RAW...there's way more information to post process with.

Also, I think you were too close to the subject...a common problem that causes the subject's closest body parts to be exaggerated in size...like the girl's elbow in the image above.

There's a good skin tone tutorial here on Dgrin...you might want to check that out.

Some of this, I did in Photoshop, LightRoom, and Portrait Pro.

LightRoom to do most of the post processing first, then
Photoshop to remove dark circles under the eyes...and skin smoothing.
Then Portrait pro for a very light processing...further skin smoothing.

One final thought on this photo. The reason that your subject is under exposed, is most likely due to the bright white prop that she's laying on when you're using other that spot or center weighted metering. What happens is that the camera sees a stronger return pulse from your prop than from your subject...causing your camera to dial down the flash output...and consequently under exposing the subject. It's the same way with snow...which normally requires a stop or two of exposure increase in order to properly expose your subjects...and make the snow look white, if you're shooting an outdoor scene.

Hope this helps.

Originally Posted by Ed911 Thanks April. I've been a digital photographer for the past 10 years, and a part time professional for the past 6-7 years. And, before that...a film photographer for...well, a long, long time...lol. One of the hardest things that you will learn, through experience, school, and mentoring is what a good image looks like. I know that sounds kind of spacey, but...it's hard to define, since all images are different. In essence, it's what you know must be done to make it look like it should, using your skill and software. It only comes with time and practice. I took the liberty of borrowing your image and working on it a little so that you can see the difference rather than me having to tell you. Original I used Photoshop's Liquify filter and pucker tool to adjust the arm in the photo to what I think it should look like...for what it's worth on your original image. I think it's much more appealing and demonstrates issues when you're too close. I think the original is a bit under exposed. One big problem with under exposing digital images, is artifacts...weird shadow creatures that do not look right...lol...for lack of a better explanation. My best explanation for some under exposed shadows is that they look like dirt... To correct this, make sure that your histogram is correct. If you see it stacked to the left, you need more light...either turn up the camera flash, studio strobe, or increase your camera's exposure a stop...shoot again, and check the histogram again. I find it much easier to correct images that are a tad to bright as opposed to ones that are too dark. And, always shoot in RAW...there's way more information to post process with. Also, I think you were too close to the subject...a common problem that causes the subject's closest body parts to be exaggerated in size...like the girl's elbow in the image above. There's a good skin tone tutorial here on Dgrin...you might want to check that out. Some of this, I did in Photoshop, LightRoom, and Portrait Pro. LightRoom to do most of the post processing first, then Photoshop to remove dark circles under the eyes...and skin smoothing. Then Portrait pro for a very light processing...further skin smoothing. One final thought on this photo. The reason that your subject is under exposed, is most likely due to the bright white prop that she's laying on when you're using other that spot or center weighted metering. What happens is that the camera sees a stronger return pulse from your prop than from your subject...causing your camera to dial down the flash output...and consequently under exposing the subject. It's the same way with snow...which normally requires a stop or two of exposure increase in order to properly expose your subjects...and make the snow look white, if you're shooting an outdoor scene. Hope this helps.

Oh my goodness my picture looks awesome that you edited. OH WOW> Thank you.

WTG Ed! Great answer

Thanks Caroline

Welcome to Dgrin. Keep your ears and eyes open here, and that will do you a great deal of good. I also always recommend the book Understanding Exposure, by Bryan Peterson, to new photographers. You really want to grasp the fundamentals soon, in my opinion, if you are going to charge people for a service like this.