[tonyjayice]

Personally, I find the modern reportage style of wedding photography to be juvenile attempts at being clever by holding the camera crooked.
Don't take this too much the wrong way, and take it for what it's worth, coming from someone who shot reportage style weddings for almost 4 decades, but you need to learn how to compose pictures.
I'd be pretty pissed with what you have shown here as well, though I also wouldn't have hired you if this is representative of your work.

We here seem to be on the same page about this,
and please don't take this the wrong way, look at this as maybe a creative criticism;
I friendly but strongly suggest that you reconsider your framing and composition methods,
since photography is an art form and framing and composition has a huge effect on how a picture feels and interacts with the viewer,
I'm not saying that composition "rules" are not to be bent or even broken,
but the general purpose of wedding photography is to make the bride and groom and the day look wonderful and feel happy and beautiful.
harsh "bending" of the "rules" of composition does not apply to these situation like they might do in journalism or "paparazzi-ism"
cropping and cutting an image so that the grooms' head is seared half off and skewing the framing in a way that the subject might as well be falling is something I would consider repulsive for the moments that are being captured.
I understand the bride perfectly.
oh and you should check this guy out, an Icelandic photographer working weddings and more:http://www.audunn.com/
please consider this unhappy couple as a reminder on how important your work is to the customer.

---

Last edited by tonyjayice; 04-22-2010 at 02:37 AM.

[Eigengrau]

So, what is your opinion of these pictures?

In both cases (middle left on the first image), it seems to me that there is 'unnecessary cropping' going on, and in both cases, these are photographs that I think are excellent.

Again, since we've begun talking about what makes good wedding shots, I'd love to see examples so we can look at specifics rather than talk about what good pictures look like.

Also, I think the purpose of the wedding photography is the choice of the bride and groom - if I were to hire a photographer again for my wedding, I wouldn't necessarily choose someone that would make me look epically awesome, but someone that would capture the feel of the day so it comes right back 20 years later. Not that either is bad, but that I think photographers and clients tend to prioritize one or the other.

[aleonx3]

You can choose your framing style for creativity as long as it is not too excessive. I once looked at someone's portfolio and they are all taken with fisheye lens. If those samples you have shown represent a majority of the shots, then I think I would not be too thrill either.

[einstrigger]

I havent seen many wedding photography, but whenever i see the offer of 100-500 pictures on CD, i started wondering. Do people really re-touch wedding photography? How do you balance what is model looking good and what the bride/groom may want to show, the reality and gravity of their love? Or do we as photographers just do judgement calls on which picture to retouch?
How does it work out?
I am really curious, because a friend of mine has been dying to get into the business, but i dont even know where to tell her where to start. LoL.

Well, I'm not a wedding photographer, but when I got married the photogs took about 500 pictures. Out of the 500, they retouched about 100. My wife and I were then given a choice of buying the CD with 100 retouched photos, or the CD with 500 of the originals. I can't imagine retouching 500 photos, let alone the 100 they did.

Also, I think the purpose of the wedding photography is the choice of the bride and groom - if I were to hire a photographer again for my wedding, I wouldn't necessarily choose someone that would make me look epically awesome, but someone that would capture the feel of the day so it comes right back 20 years later. Not that either is bad, but that I think photographers and clients tend to prioritize one or the other.

I agree that it is the choice of the bride and groom in choosing a photographer, but I don't think we should discount the expectation of the customer in wanting to look great in their photos. I feel that's part of the reason why people decide to hire a "professional" versus just letting a friend or family member shoot their wedding. Of course, as a customer myself, price is always a major consideration. If I feel I didn't get my money's worth, then I'd be upset as well, but of course, expectations should be set clearly at the very beginning.

Anyhow, I'm very curious about the whole wedding photography industry in itself, since I'm not a wedding photog (far from it). Thanks for sharing the experience.

[Frogfish]

There is merit in both styles of wedding photography but it is up to the family to decide which they prefer and there could well be differences of opinion therein. I think it would have been prudent to have included some traditional wedding shots in the package as well as the fun element.

However as far as re-touching goes : I feel any bride would be aghast if the photos didn't show her to be as beautiful as she felt.

To this end eliminating the crow's feet, stretched skin on her neck etc. etc. may turn a shot she likes for it's creativity, but not for her looks, into a keeper for her. My daughter is a PS wizard and I am constantly amazed at how she can transform a photo and turn someone into a virtual beauty queen for very little dinero (if anyone is interested I can get before/after shots from her as examples of what can be achieved).

Later when the family / couple look back at the photos it will matter not a jot that they are not exactly representative of what was the reality. It is (cough cough) a once in a life time experience that they want to remember as being near perfect or at the very least that they looked totally spectacular on that day.

[krypticide]

Here are some B&W film shots that have blown me away (originally discovered via TOP):

Black & White (88 Images) - FM Forums

[SpecialK]

So, what is your opinion of these pictures?

I like the landscape one a bit, though it is a little tight on the crop as the people go right to the edge. Leveling the horizon would only cut off more people, unfortunately. I'm assuming you could not back up or go wider, however, which I think would have placed them a bit better in the scene. It might be most useful as the base image of a collage.

The wedding announcement card is OK for informational purposes, but not very inspirational. I'd have put it on the table with some gifts or cake or...something.

The cropped heads don't do it for me, and the purple flower thing is lost in the busy background and twigs.

I've only shot a few weddings, and would never consider doing them again. Good luck with yours :-)

[Pentaxie]

There is merit in both styles of wedding photography but it is up to the family to decide which they prefer and there could well be differences of opinion therein. I think it would have been prudent to have included some traditional wedding shots in the package as well as the fun element.

However as far as re-touching goes : I feel any bride would be aghast if the photos didn't show her to be as beautiful as she felt.
.

So true. I concur with frogfish that both wedding style photography has its merits.
At the end of it, it is the star of the day (Bride & Groom) to decide which style best suit their taste.

On the retouching part, every wedding photos went through some sort of retouching. This has been in sxistence since film era where the retouching was done in the photo labs. With digital, it is easier using a PC to do it.

Cheers.

[opfor]

If the bride originally liked the photos only to change her mind later, my first thought would be that one of the mothers got involved and didn't like your style. Mothers can be the bane of all wedding photogs.
One good work-a-round is to have a mixture of your favorite style of working mixed with some traditional shots. With the emphasis being that they are called traditional for a reason....

[yucatanPentax]

Here are some B&W film shots that have blown me away (originally discovered via TOP):

Black & White (88 Images) - FM Forums

The "journalistic style" shown in these B&W shots is wonderful. And here's why I feel that way:

1) Depth of field is controlled to create attention on the subject of the photos.

2) The photographer obviously understands how to work with light from many angles to fine effect.

3) While some shots are "akimbo" or paparazzi style, the angles are not excessive, nor are wild angles used for non-action shots, generally speaking. In fact, there are no "wild angles." Those with some tilt are limited and add to the action shot.

4) I think I saw only one chopped off head - on the father of the bride perhaps - as his flower was being pinned on.

5) In every shot, I could instantly identify and PLACE the subject in his/her / its / their surroundings.

6) There was breathing space around the subjects in almost every example.

7) These shots look like art work -- which is how a bride wants to remember her day - the one perfect day that she was able to orchestrate out of all the 20 to 40,000 days that she's likely to live. Even the "candid" "photojournalism" style shots are well composed.

Well, those are just my observations. I did weddings once upon a time and never wanted to be involved with it again. Everyone was happy (with the results of the photography), but it was not the kind of work I enjoyed doing. And I didn't have the personality-type to deal with the pathologies existent in many families (oh, the fighting, the screaming, the tears of joy, anger, who knows what else, etc)....

I don't find the OP's example photos to be very personal or "touching." No matter what any bride says, she wants personal and touching. Saying it is "photojournalism style" isn't an excuse for chopping off body parts or people tumbling out of the frame or less than strong composition, IMHO.

So, I wanted to compare some that I found to be very touching - the B&W examples (thank you Krypticide!) - to show the difference. I hope that helps.

[yucatanPentax]

Just an extra point I forgot:

It appears the photographer of the B&W examples scouted the location in advance and made sure he/she had the appropriate lenses on hand (or carries a nice assortment of gear).

Compare this:



or this:



to this one:




While the mountainside site is beautiful and the view absolutely breathtaking, the people fall off both sides in the color shot. There should be at least one shot fixing "location" (IMHO) that sets the stage as in the B&W comparisons. That's just my opinion. No one has to agree with it. I just don't find the people falling off the sides to be such an attractive foreground to the tremendous view of the mountain range.

[HGMonaro]

but who built those buildings with such leans on the walls?

2nd one has lens flare, a blown out sky with ugly midtones (trying too hard to retain shadow detail I reckon) and people about to fall over...

got any other examples?

But you see, no matter what style or how lame or how not so fundamental, the informed consent had been reached, or so it appears. The clients also take risks too.


Part of the problem may be that in professional photography, perhaps it is a bit easier than it should be to be able to call yourself professional. I mean there is no rigorous examination and competent skill demonstration process to obtain some kind of a credential that is universal?? Then the definition of what is considered "standard" can vary rather wildly.

Good luck dealing with that.

[yucatanPentax]

but who built those buildings with such leans on the walls?

2nd one has lens flare, a blown out sky with ugly midtones (trying too hard to retain shadow detail I reckon) and people about to fall over...

got any other examples?

Just picked those as representative of "encompassing shots". I'm not defending the technical aspects of every wedding photo. The topic was (or I thought) helping the OP with examples of various things. That's all those are.

And the B&W's are both obviously taken with an extreme wide angle or fish-eye lens - the example being given was "having the necessary equipment on hand" in comparison to the people not all in the frame in the mountain shot.

Just curious if you went to the link and compared the rest of the B&W shots with the tilted people shots of the OP?

Or do you have advice or encouragement for the OP?

[yucatanPentax]

Then the definition of what is considered "standard" can vary rather wildly.

Good luck dealing with that.

Truer words have never been spoken.