Options

I can't decide if I like this or not

joshhuntnmjoshhuntnm Registered Users Posts: 1,924 Major grins
edited January 8, 2010 in Weddings
What do you think. . .

759668266_x6AGR-L.jpg
Josh
Las Cruces Photographer / Las Cruces Wedding Photographer
Other site

Comments

  • Options
    cj99sicj99si Registered Users Posts: 880 Major grins
    edited January 7, 2010
    i might have a dirty mindne_nau.gif maybe a portrait crop getting rid of the other leg?
  • Options
    PhotometricPhotometric Registered Users Posts: 309 Major grins
    edited January 7, 2010
    I think that the idea of a frame from the tree is usually a good idea, however for a wedding, the bride wants to see her dress so I'm not sure if I like it for that reason. Also the tree is so much in the foreground it really takes away from the couple. jmho.
    http://www.djdimages.com/

    "Don't worry when you are not recognized, but strive to be worthy of recognition."
    -- Abraham Lincoln
  • Options
    Moogle PepperMoogle Pepper Registered Users Posts: 2,950 Major grins
    edited January 7, 2010
    I like the framing idea, but, I don't think it is working here because the tree looks like someone "flashing" them...
    Food & Culture.
    www.tednghiem.com
  • Options
    tenoverthenosetenoverthenose Registered Users Posts: 815 Major grins
    edited January 7, 2010
    negative
    www.patrickpike.com | twitter | facebook
  • Options
    SventekozSventekoz Registered Users Posts: 500 Major grins
    edited January 7, 2010
    As others have said, excellent idea - but it looks as though a flasher with a skin disease has photobombed you. I think some cropping would help a lot.
    John
  • Options
    lindaj448lindaj448 Registered Users Posts: 6 Beginner grinner
    edited January 7, 2010
    cj99si wrote:
    i might have a dirty mindne_nau.gif maybe a portrait crop getting rid of the other leg?

    That was kind of the first thing I saw as well............
    Regardless, I think there is too much of the tree in the shot and it detracts from the couple themselves. Maybe a little artistic cropping...? The shot of the couple is great though! :D

    Cheers
    Linda
  • Options
    l.k.madisonl.k.madison Registered Users Posts: 542 Major grins
    edited January 7, 2010
    cj99si wrote:
    i might have a dirty mindne_nau.gif maybe a portrait crop getting rid of the other leg?

    I usually don't have a dirty mind but it was the first thing I noticed, too.

    Great concept/idea, but I don't think it was executed as well as it should have been.

    I agree with the Bride not being able to see her dress in that shot,
    personal facebook
    photography facebook
    twitter
  • Options
    zoomerzoomer Registered Users Posts: 3,688 Major grins
    edited January 8, 2010
    Tree is way to dominant in the scene.
    Needs more people less tree.
    http://www.flickr.com/photos/21695902@N06/
    http://500px.com/Shockey
    alloutdoor.smugmug.com
    http://aoboudoirboise.smugmug.com/
  • Options
    The_Fat_ZebraThe_Fat_Zebra Registered Users Posts: 120 Major grins
    edited January 8, 2010
    Aside from all the lewd minds on this forum:D I would have two comments: you can see a little piece of the bride bottom left, and I have the impression there is a spot of light on the groom's head which distracts me a bit.

    Just my 0.2 noob-cents.
    Street & Portrait because of the people. Landscape because it's pretty.
    Disappointed with AF of Tamron 28-75 2.8, me less happy.
  • Options
    PhotometricPhotometric Registered Users Posts: 309 Major grins
    edited January 8, 2010
    The_Fat_Zebra wrote:
    Aside from all the lewd minds on this forum:D I would have two comments: you can see a little piece of the bride bottom left, and I have the impression there is a spot of light on the groom's head which distracts me a bit.

    Just my 0.2 noob-cents.
    It always looked like a tree to me, unless (as said before) it was a female flasher who had a very advanced skin disease who was doing a handstand. I agree with the spot of light from which looks like reflected from the camera's flash over the grooms face. You have 2 no-no's in wedding photography.
    1. You can't see the bride's dress
    2. You don't have a perfect image of the couple's face.

    When you frame, you need to be a certain distance away from the framing object to better define it and to prevent things like flash spoilage (is that a real term?)

    The reason I know it's from the flash is because the background is too bright and being under the tree, you can only come to that level of balance in light while using another source to fill/match the surrounding light. Since the camera is so close to the tree, some of the flash is bouncing back to the camera causing that slight flare in the top right corner of the groom's face.

    Of course, being an armchair quarterback is way too easy. I probably would've tried something similar as well....but that's the great thing about digital photography, an oops is not nearly as costly as film and there is the opportunity for recovery.

    However, the couple's faces are almost perfect. Potentially a crop and feathering to do a high key treatment could be done to use the photo for either the wedding album cover or maybe thank you cards photos. Just replace the tree with a feathered white and crop the bottom at the base of the groom's tie knot and go up the side by the groom's ear. jmho
    http://www.djdimages.com/

    "Don't worry when you are not recognized, but strive to be worthy of recognition."
    -- Abraham Lincoln
Sign In or Register to comment.