# wedding rings with christmas bokeh



## willis_927 (Dec 20, 2012)

One ring shot from my latest wedding. Let me know your thoughts (hopefully you can get past the watermark  )


----------



## SamiJoSchwirtz (Dec 20, 2012)

Love it.


----------



## kundalini (Dec 20, 2012)

Why is your watermark dominating the subject?


----------



## willis_927 (Dec 20, 2012)

I batch edit all of my photos to low res for web viewing, and in the action it places the watermark in the same spot. Yes I could have done this photo separately and placed it in a different spot, but for all intensive purpose I figured it wasn't necessary.


----------



## nycphotography (Dec 20, 2012)

willis_927 said:


> I batch edit all of my photos to low res for web viewing, and in the action it places the watermark in the same spot. Yes I could have done this photo separately and placed it in a different spot, but for all intensive purpose I figured it wasn't necessary.



But you're uploading this one specifically for c&c. The first thing I noticed was that I couldn't really process the image as the watermark was across the most important part.

 I figure you figured wrong.


----------



## willis_927 (Dec 20, 2012)

Alright you guys win.


----------



## Bitter Jeweler (Dec 20, 2012)

Its funny how the watermark in the first image actually helps balance the image.


----------



## kundalini (Dec 20, 2012)

Bitter Jeweler said:


> Its funny how the watermark in the first image actually helps balance the image.



'Splain please, because I don't see it that way, in fact, quite the opposite.  The subject is in a good power point (RoT), but the extra lights in the background already weigh that side of the frame.  The addition of the watermark only adds that much more weight.  What am I missing?


----------



## fotomumma09 (Dec 20, 2012)

willis_927 said:
			
		

> Alright you guys win.



Meh, the WM doesn't bother me at all, I can get over it. Either way, great image!


----------



## Bitter Jeweler (Dec 20, 2012)

You are missing that our opinions differ. That's all.
Perhaps your visual scale needs calibrated. Or mine. Who's to say?


----------



## kundalini (Dec 20, 2012)

Bitter Jeweler said:


> You are missing that our opinions differ. That's all.
> Perhaps your visual scale needs calibrated. Or mine. Who's to say?



Dude, you can do better than that.  I certainly expected more.  Don't let the renaissance of Visual Echo cloud your thoughts.


----------



## kathyt (Dec 20, 2012)

Very pretty. I could care less if your WM is on there or not.


----------



## Mully (Dec 20, 2012)

The watermark got more attention than the shot ... Nice shot.   You guys could argue the t.ts off a brass monkey


----------



## e.rose (Dec 20, 2012)

The day you learn to ignore all the cries about watermarks, the better off you'll be.  

As for the SHOT... I really like it.  I recently attempted something similar, but I think yours came out much better than mine.


----------



## texkam (Dec 20, 2012)

IMHO the bg dominates the subject.


----------



## thetrue (Dec 20, 2012)

texkam said:


> IMHO the bg dominates the subject.


In this instance, I prefer it that way...........


----------



## Lmphotos (Dec 20, 2012)

I like it! could care less about watermarks but noticed it really bugs some people on here


----------



## Derrel (Dec 20, 2012)

I am not a big fan of sharp-side bokeh with dark circles that ring the outer perimeter of each bokeh ball...just...not...that...pretty...a...bokeh...shape...

I dunno...it was interesting to see how the watermark was almost a visual element in the original shot--it sort of "anchored" my eye, down on the rings. When the watermark was removed, the rings seemed to be less-important visually, and just less of a "factor". In a way, it felt like the rings almost (but not quite) disappeared with the watermark removed. Odd...


----------



## nycphotography (Dec 20, 2012)

w/o the watermark, I like it.

I might work on it some more in layers... darken and reduce the contrast, and maybe even the saturation of the background...
brighten the rings... but work to keep the highlights from blowing on the top right.

Something like this.  Maybe.  Except with more care and a gentler hand.. I just whacked the layers quickly to show whats possible.


----------



## camz (Dec 20, 2012)

Derrel said:


> I am not a big fan of sharp-side bokeh with dark circles that ring the outer perimeter of each bokeh ball...just...not...that...pretty...a...bokeh...shape...
> 
> I dunno...it was interesting to see how the watermark was almost a visual element in the original shot--it sort of "anchored" my eye, down on the rings. When the watermark was removed, the rings seemed to be less-important visually, and just less of a "factor". In a way, it felt like the rings almost (but not quite) disappeared with the watermark removed. Odd...



That's quite true in many images.  Watermarks add that branding or commercial feel to it and sometimes makes the content more significant - performed conciously at times by us and many others.  Bet if we slap it a Tiffany brand there it would even catch more attention.  lol

Willis regarding your photo I personally think it's a great shot, watermarks don't bother me at all.  Good Job! The watermark is part of the brand your selling, I actually think it's a good thing.


----------



## jowensphoto (Dec 21, 2012)

I was going to post the same thing as camz. The placement of the watermark made this seem very commercial. Not a bad thing. I like the shot a lot


----------



## curtyoungblood (Dec 21, 2012)

***My critique is something COMPLETELY out of your control, but may be important anyway***

This images reads really strange to me because the rings don't really look like they go together. I see the man's ring, and her engagement ring, and I'm guessing the third ring is her wedding ring. It looks a whole lot like a man's ring, that, imo, doesn't really go with her engagement ring. There's nothing wrong with this for the couple, and it is a great shot for them to have. However, if I were looking at your portfolio and considering hiring you, this image would leave me asking questions about the wedding. So, while it is a good image, it may not be the best to show to potential clients.


----------



## thetrue (Dec 21, 2012)

^^^That was my unspoken gripe. I really don't like the rings and how they go (or don't go) together.


----------



## Bitter Jeweler (Dec 21, 2012)

curtyoungblood said:


> ***My critique is something COMPLETELY out of your control, but may be important anyway***
> 
> This images reads really strange to me because the rings don't really look like they go together. I see the man's ring, and her engagement ring, and I'm guessing the third ring is her wedding ring. It looks a whole lot like a man's ring, that, imo, doesn't really go with her engagement ring. There's nothing wrong with this for the couple, and it is a great shot for them to have. However, if I were looking at your portfolio and considering hiring you, this image would leave me asking questions about the wedding. So, while it is a good image, it may not be the best to show to potential clients.



That's very common for the wedding bands to match, and not match the engagement ring.


----------



## Robin_Usagani (Dec 21, 2012)

I agree with derrel about the hard edges on the circles.  I also think you could have picked a better table surface.  Perhaps more reflective surface or natural wood?


----------



## thuchton (Dec 23, 2012)

NICE!


----------



## ceejtank (Dec 23, 2012)

I'm a fan of the shot.. though I must admit I think the watermark somehow added something to the original image that I can't explain, but I definitely get what they're saying.  Regardless of that, its a great shot, executed very well.


----------



## amolitor (Dec 23, 2012)

I agree that there's too much background, and the bokeh are not very nice.

The rings don't separate enough from the background for my taste. The tonality seems to be similar, and the harsh bokeh make the background weirdly similar in texture to the rings. Smoother bokeh would give you better textural separation, and I think this is looking for a darker background.

Also, it's "for all intents and purposes" not "all intensive purposes" -- this is a really common mistake, but it drives me nuts!


----------



## AgentDrex (Dec 23, 2012)

It may be me but its such a shallow DOF that the ring is on the edge of the OOF part of the photo...the focus is landing just in front of the ring...also, should the diamond be a little more noticeable? It seems dull and lifeless.  The OOF points in the background are very distracting from the subject which I would assume is the ring.  What were the points of light in the background or is that faked "bokeh".  I notice a few of them have irregular bottoms (specifically the ones to the immediate left and right of the ring).


----------



## ColorExperts (Dec 23, 2012)

Fabulous shot !!


----------



## Bitter Jeweler (Dec 23, 2012)

AgentDrex said:


> It may be me but its such a shallow DOF that the ring is on the edge of the OOF part of the photo...the focus is landing just in front of the ring...also, should the diamond be a little more noticeable? It seems dull and lifeless.  The OOF points in the background are very distracting from the subject which I would assume is the ring.  What were the points of light in the background or is that faked "bokeh".  I notice a few of them have irregular bottoms (specifically the ones to the immediate left and right of the ring).  Perhaps this link will give you a feel of what to shoot for: hturl




There is a big difference between wedding shots of rings, and product photography.
A photographer at a wedding is trying to creatively show the wedding rings, in relation to the theme of the celebration.


----------



## AgentDrex (Dec 23, 2012)

No problem Bitter.  Figured your photography and awesome jewelry would be a good match for showing how to pull of good shots.  I've added a link somewhere else instead.  I apologize for pointing someone to your website, I didn't realize you would mind.  I'll duly note that for the future.  You do have good shots that would inspire others though.



> There is a big difference between wedding shots of rings, and product photography.
> A photographer at a wedding is trying to creatively show the wedding rings, in relation to the theme of the celebration.


There may be differences but are there not also similarities? Product shots and wedding shots should both have the ring in focus, no?


----------



## Bitter Jeweler (Dec 23, 2012)

I HATE my website.


----------



## AgentDrex (Dec 23, 2012)

Be that as it may, I still like the products in the website and the gifted artist for whom the website is for...no opinion about the website itself...


----------



## Frequency (Dec 24, 2012)

i may be despised of, but believe me, i liked the image with your watermark; as a whole it looks like a cover page of a novel


----------

