1. Welcome to NikonCafe.com—a friendly Nikon camera & photography discussion forum!

    If you are thinking of buying a camera or need help with your photos, you will find our forum members full of advice! Click here to join for free!

Wedding Day Details - Inspired by Keith

Discussion in 'Formal Portraits and Weddings' started by Jim Strathearn, Sep 21, 2008.

  1. After seeing Keith's latest details thread, I was inspired to go out and capture some more intimate details of my next wedding, which was this past Saturday. Let me know if I'm heading in the right direction...

    376524331_dS4bD-L.

    376634281_qYYFP-L.

    376650069_YbM2L-L.

    376524398_LFnMj-L.

    376538327_T3nu7-L.

    377162763_ALDtW-L.

    377143073_H3PoH-L.

    376537966_YTHfu-L.

    [​IMG]

    All were S3 Pro and SB-800 on a bracket, with either the 35-70 f/2.8 or 105 f/2.8.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Sep 22, 2008
  2. Looking good Jim!! Glad I could be a source of inspiration. For the close up flower shots and ring shots, you may want to invest in one of the 60mm micro lenses, either AF-S or non AF-S version will work just great!! The only think I would have done differently would be the dress shot - great setup and great background choice - I would have shot it without the flash... Other than that I think you did a great job!!
     
  3. Thanks Keith!

    I have been thinking about that 60mm Micro lately... These close-ups were with the 105 Micro. While taking the cake shots I was thinking that the extra length gave me some room for the flash... (I think the dress shots may have been 105 shots as well... I know some were...) BTW, those ring shots are not cropped...

    OK - the next wedding gets some natural light! :wink:
     
  4. Phillip Ino

    Phillip Ino

    Nov 26, 2007
    Austin
    Very clean shots, Keith. Only suggestion I'd make is maybe use less DoF in some of the images.
     
  5. Thanks, but Jim shot these, not me. :biggrin:
     
  6. Thanks. Yeah, I shot them at f/5.6 and expected a bit less DOF then I got... I did do some at f/2.8 so I guess I need to get back and see what they look like!

    Thanks for looking.
     
  7. Phillip Ino

    Phillip Ino

    Nov 26, 2007
    Austin
    Oops! Got confused there :tongue:
     
  8. Hi Jim,

    You did very well on taking wedding details tho' I didn't see a photo of the wedding cake but I'm sure you took a shot of it.

    Well, I too just started taking weddings this year. I've done three since March and have another one coming up in December. It's not easy doing it but I enjoy doing it.
    I hope you do, too.

    Cheers,

    Tony
    http://tonyad.smugmug.com/gallery/6046551_JeVXM/1/378803370_LgTY5/Original
     
  9. DanWhite

    DanWhite

    Jul 10, 2005
    Lansdale PA
    Jim I think you did well here, but some of the shots look a little underexposed and lack some pop. I took one of the shots and played a little to show ytou waht I mean. I will remove it at you request.
    retouched
    p1060761507-3.

    Original
    View attachment 255874
     
  10. dutchtrumpet

    dutchtrumpet

    493
    May 2, 2007
    Dallas
    These are nice enough but my criticism would be the on camera flash.

    I must say I don't like the lighting on these. They are too "point and shooty" for me.

    #1 has harsh shadows due to flash
    #3 foe me the dress is too bright relative to the underexposed BG
    #4 victim of the inverse square law. the light fall of is severe and the pew is very bright
    #5 is nice
    #6 same P&S lighting
    #7 I like this one
    #8 Harsh shadows.

    I hope I don't seem mean. Just my honest take.

    As always take this anonymous guys take with a grain of salt.
     

  11. Thanks Tony! Image #5 actually is the cake - or at the very least - a small portion of it...

    I do enjoy doing weddings. Frankly, I like it a lot. Good luck with yours.
     
  12. Thanks Dan!

    I didn't realize how much flash reflection I'd get off the shoes until I reviewed the images on the computer. To me, even in my original image, the glare off the shoes is distracting, which is why I left the levels where they are. But I like how you brightened up the flowers and blurred the background. Maybe I need to do a dupe layer and leave the shoes as they are and give the flowers some pop...

    Thanks for looking and chiming in buddy!
     
  13. Thanks for the critique. And no, I do not see you as being mean... If I didn't want honest critiques, I wouldn't post any pics... :rolleyes: 

    I used the SB-800 on a bracket with a Demb diffuser... My bracket does not have a quick release to remove the flash and after this wedding, I ordered one and it will be here today. :wink: Frankly, all these shots were taken with the same flash setup. (Maybe I should use my Fong ball for the close-up shots...)

    I do find it interesting that you thought the dress was too bright. I thought the dress stood out from the background and put the emphasis on the dress. It's interesting to get other people's take on stuff though so I appreciate your comments.

     
  14. I agree with dutchtrumpet. What's wrong with available light? Break your habit and challenge yourself to try something different for your next wedding. Leave the speedlight in the bag, don't even touch it. Look and see where your available light sources are coming from, either a window, or lights on the ceiling or wherever. I am sure not every shot requires a pop of flash. Then again, it could be a style/preference thing. I'm not a fan of the flash look.
     
  15. Thanks for the comments Johnny. The church shots were all shot in the sanctuary early in the morning. We were the only people in the church at the time and all the lights were off. This meant that the "available" light was all from the stained glass windows. When all the lights were on for the ceremony, I was shooting off a tripod at 800 ISO at f/2.8 and was lucky to get 1/45s. With no lights, I was in worse shape and I just cannot handhold a camera steady enough to get sharp images at slow shutter speeds. I guess I could have setup a tripod but it was still dark. I think at times cameras are like computer's; garbage in = garbage out. Or in photographic terms, dark subjects = dark photos... :rolleyes: 

    Having said all that, I do agree that I need to get my images to have less of a flashed look and I certainly appreciate all the critiques. I will try some natural light shots when possible going forward but there has to be natural light in order to do that... :wink: Of course, it could be that I just need to be able to see the light better as well... :rolleyes: 
     
  16. So Dan - how did you get it so bright???

     
  17. DanWhite

    DanWhite

    Jul 10, 2005
    Lansdale PA
    Slight levels adjustment, saturation bump and an action called mindnight sepia (at action central). I use the midnight sepia quite a bit for my infant portraits.

    Dan
     
  18. Phillip Ino

    Phillip Ino

    Nov 26, 2007
    Austin
    Interesting, that midnight sepia. Do you run the action and then lower the opacity at all?
     
  19. DanWhite

    DanWhite

    Jul 10, 2005
    Lansdale PA
    Actually the last step of the action, is a doge and burn layer. thats where I lightened the roses and burned in some shadowing

    Dan
     
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.