# Just a few from 2012



## Kerbouchard (Feb 23, 2013)

Just getting all my photos back on my computer after the crash, but figured I would post a few from 2012.  I'll get more up when I get my computer where I want it to be.  As always, C&C welcome.  

Here are some of my favorites from 2012...

***Got my computer back up so went ahead and combined this post with my others and added the photos.

1.  
	

	
	
		
		

		
			





2.  
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




3.  
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




4.  
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




5.





6.





7.





8.





9.





10.





11.





12.





13.





14.





15.





16.





17.





Edited to combine photos...


----------



## tirediron (Feb 23, 2013)

Hey Kerby...  long time no see!  Nice set; I really like #3 (and I will be soooooooooo glad when fake eye-lashes are out of fashion!).


----------



## baturn (Feb 23, 2013)

John, I know what you mean. They really get in the way when you look thru the viewfinder. Haha


----------



## tirediron (Feb 23, 2013)




----------



## Kerbouchard (Feb 25, 2013)

Edited:  Combined photos to original post.


----------



## Ballistics (Feb 25, 2013)

Holy ****. I've just been intimidated lol.


----------



## Kerbouchard (Feb 26, 2013)

Ballistics said:


> Holy ****. I've just been intimidated lol.




I'm not sure if that's a good thing or a bad thing...


----------



## Ballistics (Feb 26, 2013)

Oh, it's a good thing... for you lol. 

I have to ask 2 very newbish questions. What camera equipment did you use to shoot this wedding, and more specifically
how did you light number 9 and 14? Was that shot on site at the wedding?


----------



## Kerbouchard (Feb 26, 2013)

Ballistics said:


> Oh, it's a good thing... for you lol.
> 
> I have to ask 2 very newbish questions. What camera equipment did you use to shoot this wedding, and more specifically
> how did you light number 9 and 14? Was that shot on site at the wedding?



Well, for camera equipment it varies depending on the shot.  Detail shots are usually a Sigma 150 2.8 Macro on a tripod.  Closeups are generally a Sigma 120-300 2.8.  Pull back or wide angle is generally a Nikon 16-35 2.8.  General stuff might be a 50mm prime or a Nikon 35-70 2.8.  Camera body was a D700 for I think all of these.  Flash is generally an SB910 on the hotshoe, but occasionally I will pull out light stands and studio flash.

As far as 9 and 14, they were shot at the recepetion.  Normally try to grab the rings for a few minutes while the couple is eating.  For the setup/lighting, it's a mixture of natural light and flash to add some kick.  SB910 on the hot shoe bounced off a wall or a ceiling depending on how I wanted the light to fall.  Long exposure, normally around 8 seconds or so.  F/22 or somewhere around there with Base ISO.  Tripod.  Manual focus using live view and zooming in to focus.  Then switch over to time delay/mirror lock up and push the button.

Hope that helps.


----------



## Kerbouchard (Feb 26, 2013)

Out of curiosity, does anybody have any feedback not related to fake eyelashes?


----------



## Ballistics (Feb 26, 2013)

I think they came out amazing but I do have some minor detail nitpicks. 

Number 8: I wish the flowers were in focus here. 
Number 11: I'm not a fan of the tilt. 
Number 14: Right next to the diamond, it looks like a small reflection of maybe a ceiling light is in the band. I would personally clone that out. 


That cake shot is ridiculously good. Did you dodge the cake at all? 
The close up kissing shots are captivating. These brides must have fallen over themselves after seeing them. 

4 and 5 are probably my favorite of the set and the ring shots are unbelievable.


----------



## Robin_Usagani (Feb 26, 2013)

These are a lot better than your 2011. The ring shots are good. I do think you tend to shoot everthing too tight. The most people you involve in one shot is 3 (last one). The rest are either 2 or 1. Wedding photography should be more about story telling.


----------



## Robin_Usagani (Feb 26, 2013)

Linda570 said:


> Hey Kerby... long time no see! Nice set; I really like #3 (and I will be soooooooooo glad when fake eye-lashes are out of fashion!).


Join date Feb 2013.  Long time no see?  I wonder who you are


----------



## Kerbouchard (Feb 26, 2013)

Robin_Usagani said:


> Linda570 said:
> 
> 
> > Hey Kerby... long time no see! Nice set; I really like #3 (and I will be soooooooooo glad when fake eye-lashes are out of fashion!).
> ...



I was wondering the same thing...  Plus, Linda seems to be posting a lot in the last few minutes.  I'm guessing a 'For Sale' Post is coming up in another few posts.

Edited to add:  Well, that was quick.  Linda is already gone.


----------



## Kerbouchard (Feb 26, 2013)

Ballistics said:


> I think they came out amazing but I do have some minor detail nitpicks.
> 
> Number 8: I wish the flowers were in focus here.


At first, I didn't agree with you because I was more going for the lights in the background, but as I look at it, I do think it would have been better if I would have had the roses in focus.  Either way, definitely could have been better.


> Number 11: I'm not a fan of the tilt.


I agree.  Probably should have fixed that.


> Number 14: Right next to the diamond, it looks like a small reflection of maybe a ceiling light is in the band. I would personally clone that out.


Yep, should have fixed that, too.


> That cake shot is ridiculously good. Did you dodge the cake at all?


No.  Just processed in Adobe Camera RAW...didn't really do a lot of editing on any of these.  Didn't even take any of them into Photoshop.  Just a quick process and a resize.


> The close up kissing shots are captivating. These brides must have fallen over themselves after seeing them.
> 
> 4 and 5 are probably my favorite of the set and the ring shots are unbelievable.



Thanks for the feedback.


----------



## Kerbouchard (Feb 26, 2013)

Robin_Usagani said:


> These are a lot better than your 2011. The ring shots are good.


Thanks.


> I do think you tend to shoot everthing too tight. The most people you involve in one shot is 3 (last one). The rest are either 2 or 1. Wedding photography should be more about story telling.



Well, last time around, you asked for more meat, so that's what I was trying to post this time.

As far as more people in the photos, I guess that isn't really what I was going for.  I was more going with minimize distractions and concentrate on the subject.  I think that is more my style and more of what I tend to lean towards.  I guess I just prefer details and isolated subjects.

I'll try to post some pull back/story telling stuff tomorrow.

FWIW, I took a look at your 2012 thread, and personally, I think many of the shots contained too much dead space...aka too wide.  I guess different strokes for different folks.    Either way, different styles give the clients something to choose from.  You and I are definitely on different ends of the spectrum.

In any case, I appreciate the feedback.


----------



## Robin_Usagani (Feb 26, 2013)

Kerb.. You really need to work on your people skill. Seriously if someone criticized my set, i just listen or ignore. Their oppinion!  No need to defend your self all the time. You pm me twice to look at your photos so I did. Why am I wasting my time giving you my opinion when all you do always shut it down?  If you want to cc my 2012, then cc it there.  While I do think my 2012 isnt anything amazing, your set isnt so hot either.  Sorry dude.


----------



## Kerbouchard (Mar 2, 2013)

Robin_Usagani said:


> Kerb.. You really need to work on your people skill. Seriously if someone criticized my set, i just listen or ignore. Their oppinion!  No need to defend your self all the time. You pm me twice to look at your photos so I did. Why am I wasting my time giving you my opinion when all you do always shut it down?  If you want to cc my 2012, then cc it there.  While I do think my 2012 isnt anything amazing, your set isnt so hot either.  Sorry dude.



Thanks for your feedback.


----------



## invisible (Mar 2, 2013)

Kerbouchard said:


> Pull back or wide angle is generally a Nikon 16-35 2.8.


Is that lens already available?


----------



## Ballistics (Mar 2, 2013)

Robin_Usagani said:


> Kerb.. You really need to work on your people skill.



Haha, awesome.


----------



## Kerbouchard (Mar 2, 2013)

invisible said:


> Kerbouchard said:
> 
> 
> > Pull back or wide angle is generally a Nikon 16-35 2.8.
> ...



I had to go look, but, yes, it looks like Nikon shorted me 1 mm.  Apparently, it's a 17-35.


----------



## Kerbouchard (Mar 3, 2013)

Any other feedback?  You know, on the actual photos?


----------



## Kerbouchard (Mar 4, 2013)

Kerbouchard said:


> Any other feedback?  You know, on the actual photos?



Well, I guess not.  

Thanks to those that offered their opinions. I appreciate it.


----------



## Robin_Usagani (Mar 5, 2013)

Come on.. Give George some love. CC.


----------



## sashbar (Mar 6, 2013)

No 4 really stands out. I love the dynamics and light. She is floating.. That spot of light behind her back just lifts this photo to another level   Probably more dynamis contrast would improve it a bit further.
No 6 is great: it has "baby" written all over their faces  It's like "I want it, I do.."  "Really?  No, really?? " great photo. 
No 11 should be straightend IMHO, otherwice it loooks like this ship is already tilting  But at least one can clearly see who is the boss here. I wonder if that was the idea )
I am not enthusiastic about No 3 - she is just copying pics she saw in a celebrity mag. But she will love it and that's the point   And probably she will think: "I need to get down to size 10 at least". 
I like No 2 - it has some theatre drama
No 13 - i do not get it. The only magic it has is that five toes go in and only two go out.  It looks a bit bizzre to me. 
Cake shot is great (not the white one . ) It just says - wedding or not, just look at me , I am a great picture 

And  btw I like tight wedding shots ( as long as they are balanced with a mandatory crowd) There is always a danger to end up with really bad ones, but the best tight ( shall I say intimate ?) shots go well beyond the formality of the event and these are the shots the couple will get back to again and again. Just ask theem - what shots are they most likely to put on the wall?   

Excellent photos overall.
This is all my layman/amateur opinion.


----------

