Wedding with OM-D

Started Apr 30, 2013 | Discussions thread
Loga
Contributing MemberPosts: 843Gear list
Like?
Re: Oke
In reply to Loga, Apr 30, 2013

Oh dear, WHAT THE HELL HAS HAPPENED HERE?!!! My complete reply went gone! I answered every point you raised carefully, but after posting it it disappeared and only your original post appeared without my responses Unfortunatelly I don't have the time to retype it again

In (very-very) summary: I agree with some of your aspects, I don't with a few But it is very disappointing to work on an answer that much and being unable to send it in the end

Loga wrote:

Jorginho wrote:

I am not a wedding photgrapher and it am not saying I would be doing it any better. I could in fact easily do worse and shooting weddings, like any other specific type of shooting demands some skills you do not get wihthout practice I think.

The first shot is a very good one I feel. B&W gives a classy look, I see the subject and I see where the subject is.

But from that onwards I have to say I it seems like some of the guest just snapped around with a cam. Because rarely can I tell you used a good camera with some of the best lenses for it.The Leica has such a lovely bokeh but I see it virtually nowhere.

I do not see well thought out shots bar a few, but I guess you were not THE wedding photographer so I understand it is not always possible (or not possible at all).

Some things I would advise you to do, from a total rookey here to another (I surmise)

Think about what you want to capture. In weedings, I can think of this:

- People having fun and partying (you did that al right)
- Weddings of courser are a strange mix of an exubarant party AND intimacy if not tears. I miss intimacy a lot here.
- How is the light? May be you can look at points that would give beautiful shots, beautiful framing and wait until the right subjects come by instead of only following the subjects to wherever they go.
- Be very critical of your framing and what IS the subject and what is clearly not. I see way too much in many pics, so to me, it becomes mess.
- Less is more not vie versa. Do not try to get to much information for us in the pic.

To me more specific, a lot of comments on quite a few pics:

Pic 2: overexposed, I see the car and then, oh wait...I see two people waving. I also see some guy not dressed appropriate for the party (;-)) walking by...The thought is good, the execution not and this pic to me has no place in a nice series of a wedding.

Pic3. I would focus much more on the girl, zoom in (come closer in the case of primes). The light is too harsh and contrasty with the dark background for my taste. You could have made a lot more of that scene I think

Pic4: get lots closer and fill this with a flash. The subject is too far away and completely overrun by the light outside. Better to try to be at a 90 degree angle from the light I think. The thought is a good one, an exciting moment entering the church.

Pic5: What is the subject here? keep the horizon straight or straighten it in PP. Looking at peoples back that are prominent is not very helpful in general. You do this in a pci with dancers too: the main subject is theback. It is like taking a macro of a fly and focussing on its rear end rather than the eyes...

Pic6: Both should be in focus to be perfect. Other wise a great moment and a good enough pic. Would have liked to see it with a 30 degree angel or so. But this is okey.

Pic 7: No expert as I said, but a fill flash would do great. The light behind them is too distracting for me.

Pic8: close up! We only need to see the eyebrows, to the chin I think. Otherwise fine. Again. I see them kissing and I see others kissing. I understand that some pics need to get the atmosphere but it is not these kind of pics I think.

Pic9: Background spoils this one. I would have focussed on her and the three women eager to get married themselves. Her in focus and the rest blurred is really good though. If I only look at those and single them out form the other information in that pic, I actually love it.I miss her legs though.

Pic10: no purpose for this one. I understand that you picture this to see how others shot them etc. A situation. But it is not compelling.

Pic11: flowers  at the back are nice, the kids e  cbehind them again blow this shot for me. But it is difficult. You were at f2 so f1.8 would not have helped a whole lot. I can't say another angle would have been better. Also I am not sure getting closer would have helped with the composition, because the composition of the two is good. It would have made the back ground blurrier. I would have tried to get them in such a way that I could get them and a background of somewhat blurred flowers. But you were not THE photgrapher, so you'll have to take it as it comes I guess.

Pic12: Nothing wrong with this shot that you can help I think. Background is unromantic to me. Again there may have been little choice. A FF cam with a fast lens would have blurred it more I think. The light is not very nice either.

Pic13: get in closer I'd say, mainly because I hate the that background. A steal bridge?? Use f1.4 in these situations so there is some background but we cannot tell it is some awful looking bridge (for a wedding). Again: it seems like the place was not too romantic? More green and trees and flowers in a nice garden would have been nicer and were not helpful to you I think.

Even though I am not feeling to well today hence I can spend some time on this I'll stop here.

Again: correct me if I am wrong, because i am no expert!!

 Loga's gear list:Loga's gear list
Canon EOS 5D Panasonic Lumix DMC-GF2 Canon EF 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM Panasonic Lumix G 14mm F2.5 ASPH Panasonic Leica Summilux DG 25mm F1.4 +2 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
OkeNew
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow