# First wedding!! SUPER large share



## paigew (Oct 29, 2013)

Brace yourselves for a lot of photos 

1
I met the bride at a salon where she got her hair and make up done. I didn't realize until I went to edit this, but that is the bride in the reflection!! Talk about lucky timing



6W2A0761.jpg by paige_w, on Flickr

2



6W2A0868.jpg by paige_w, on Flickr

3



6W2A0876.jpg by paige_w, on Flickr

4



6W2A1062.jpg by paige_w, on Flickr

5



6W2A1091-Edit.jpg by paige_w, on Flickr

6
despite all the crap on the table I really love this photo



6W2A1108.jpg by paige_w, on Flickr

7



6W2A1277.jpg by paige_w, on Flickr

8



6W2A1664.jpg by paige_w, on Flickr

9



6W2A1704.jpg by paige_w, on Flickr

10



6W2A1722-Edit.jpg by paige_w, on Flickr

11



6W2A1806.jpg by paige_w, on Flickr

12



6W2A1759.jpg by paige_w, on Flickr

13



6W2A1895.jpg by paige_w, on Flickr

14



6W2A2056.jpg by paige_w, on Flickr

15



6W2A2134.jpg by paige_w, on Flickr

16
father daughter



6W2A2285.jpg by paige_w, on Flickr

17



6W2A2401.jpg by paige_w, on Flickr

18



6W2A2428.jpg by paige_w, on Flickr

19
one of my favorite shots of the night (despite the hand chop). bride and her mom



6W2A2484.jpg by paige_w, on Flickr

20



6W2A2492.jpg by paige_w, on Flickr

21



6W2A2566.jpg by paige_w, on Flickr

22
garder toss



6W2A2542.jpg by paige_w, on Flickr

23



6W2A2624.jpg by paige_w, on Flickr

24



6W2A2629.jpg by paige_w, on Flickr


there it is! My first wedding! I know mistakes were made...lots of them HA! But I am pretty happy with my results. I do wish the ceremony would have been on time so I could have done beautiful outdoor portraits for the bride and groom, but it is what it is and I have made peace with that


----------



## Juga (Oct 29, 2013)

I think you did a wonderful job given the circumstances that you previously stated and as Kathy Thorson stated before you do a wonderful job incorporating digital noise into your photos.


----------



## PhotoWrangler (Oct 29, 2013)

Holy Haze Batman.

There is such a thing as overkill.


----------



## paigew (Oct 29, 2013)

PhotoWrangler said:


> Holy Haze Batman.
> 
> There is such a thing as overkill.


LOL ummm well there is no haze since I shot in the dark...are you not liking the matte processing?


----------



## paigew (Oct 29, 2013)

Juga said:


> I think you did a wonderful job given the circumstances that you previously stated and as Kathy Thorson stated before you do a wonderful job incorporating digital noise into your photos.


Thank you Joe!


----------



## PhotoWrangler (Oct 29, 2013)

Haze, matte, faded, vintage, bleach bypass, whatever you want to call it. I think it could stand to be toned down - a lot.

Otherwise, you did a great job.


----------



## DiskoJoe (Oct 29, 2013)

Noise reduction. Some of these are way too grainy. I dont care what kathi says, xP


----------



## paigew (Oct 29, 2013)

PhotoWrangler said:


> Haze, matte, faded, vintage, bleach bypass, whatever you want to call it. I think it could stand to be toned down - a lot.
> 
> Otherwise, you did a great job.


Thank you for the feedback! You guys are the first to see these besides my second shooter and husband .  The processing is pretty much in line with how I normally process my photos. I'm curious to see what others think.


----------



## DiskoJoe (Oct 29, 2013)

PhotoWrangler said:


> Haze, matte, faded, vintage, bleach bypass, whatever you want to call it. I think it could stand to be toned down - a lot.
> 
> Otherwise, you did a great job.



Offset


----------



## pixmedic (Oct 29, 2013)

numbers, numbers, where for art thou numbers? :mrgreen:
#4, #5, #8, #10 needed flash, but good posing. 
#3, #9, #15 are binners IMO. 
I really like #6, except for the B&W part. its the most creative shot of the set. (although i might have cleared off that table first)

not a fan of the matte look, but ultimately the only opinion on these that really matter are the clients. 
if they are happy then you should be happy.


----------



## paigew (Oct 29, 2013)

okay you guys really have me second guessing my processing here. I just don't know. I really like the matte. I really don't feel like the clean edit look represents my work. ugh what to do




6W2A2285.jpg by paige_w, on Flickr




6W2A1806.jpg by paige_w, on Flickr


----------



## paigew (Oct 29, 2013)

pixmedic said:


> numbers, numbers, where for art thou numbers? :mrgreen:
> #4, #5, #8, #10 needed flash, but good posing.
> #3, #9, #15 are binners IMO.
> I really like #6, except for the B&W part. its the most creative shot of the set. (although i might have cleared off that table first)
> ...



Thank you pixmedic  I have a lot more with flash but ultimately, I really love the natural light ones .


----------



## PhotoWrangler (Oct 29, 2013)

paigew said:


> okay you guys really have me second guessing my processing here. I just don't know. I really like the matte. I really don't feel like the clean edit look represents my work. ugh what to do





Have you tried just toning it down a bit.  I don't mind a slight matte or haze, but there's a difference between 50% opacity, and 12% opacity if you get what I'm saying.


But then again, as the medic said, if your clients are happy who cares... they're signing your check anyway.


----------



## kathyt (Oct 29, 2013)

DiskoJoe said:


> Noise reduction. Some of these are way too grainy. I dont care what kathi says, xP


I had stated in a previous thread that, if you follow any of the work that Paige does or on Flickr, she uses grain and matte processing as part of _her _style. It works for her, and she is very consistent with it. I would know what to expect if I hired her. She is very unique in her style and I enjoy it. It may not be a style choice for everyone, but I can surely appreciate someone that goes above and away from the norm. Paige's style is completely opposite from mine, but that is why I find it so creative.


----------



## paigew (Oct 29, 2013)

> Have you tried just toning it down a bit.  I don't mind a slight matte or haze, but there's a difference between 50% opacity, and 12% opacity if you get what I'm saying.
> 
> 
> But then again, as the medic said, if your clients are happy who cares... they're signing your check anyway.



okay yes, I will try it toned down....I edit in LR but I can still adjust the curve some.


----------



## paigew (Oct 29, 2013)

kathythorson said:


> DiskoJoe said:
> 
> 
> > Noise reduction. Some of these are way too grainy. I dont care what kathi says, xP
> ...


Thank you kathy! This is exactly what I wanted to hear!! Does it look like me


----------



## kathyt (Oct 29, 2013)

paigew said:


> kathythorson said:
> 
> 
> > DiskoJoe said:
> ...


I think it represents your style very well. I am assuming your clients are well aware of your work, and what the end results will compare to.


----------



## paigew (Oct 29, 2013)

thanks kathy. I am really struggling right now with whether I should re-editing them LOL. :/ :/


----------



## paigew (Oct 29, 2013)

okay toned down....what do you think now?





6W2A2285.jpg by paige_w, on Flickr




6W2A1806.jpg by paige_w, on Flickr


----------



## PhotoWrangler (Oct 29, 2013)

Much better.


I like vignettes, like heavily like vignettes. But if I'm not careful I can get carried away and before you know it, its like you're looking through a black hole.


----------



## manicmike (Oct 29, 2013)

There are a couple that I would bin, but most of them I really like.


----------



## Juga (Oct 29, 2013)

paigew said:


> thanks kathy. I am really struggling right now with whether I should re-editing them LOL. :/ :/



Why not provide both types of edits? I have done that for clients. I don't know if you are planning on giving them all the photos but it might also prevent them from putting cheap instagram filters on the photos and posting them on FB...unless you have it written into the contract that they can't re-edit.


----------



## Robin_Usagani (Oct 29, 2013)

Your ISOs were way too low.  You have a 5DIII.  Bring that ISO up!  1600 or 3200.  When there is barely any light, just shoot it wide open with your f/2.8.  You have the 2 nicest canon equipment for weddings (5DIII and 24-70 II), utilize it to the max!


----------



## paigew (Oct 29, 2013)

What shots robin? The reception ones?  I guess I was keeping low ISO bc I was using flash. How do you light your receptions? I had to bounce off ceiling since it was so crowded.


----------



## Robin_Usagani (Oct 29, 2013)

paigew said:


> What shots robin? The reception ones?  I guess I was keeping low ISO bc I was using flash. How do you light your receptions? I had to bounce off ceiling since it was so crowded.


Bounce and high ISO.  I bet your flash battery ran out?


----------



## paigew (Oct 29, 2013)

Yes something was going on with it. I changed the batteries (brand new) and though better there was still problems (ie not firing). It was really hot too. And so were the batteries. I think I need a better flash.


----------



## manaheim (Oct 29, 2013)

External battery helps a lot with the flash heat issues.  Something to consider.  Also a higher ISO will make it so your flash doesn't have to work quite as hard.  Even a bump to something as low as 800 makes a BIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIG difference.

Nice set.

I liked the haze, btw. It was definitely a noticeable style choice, and maybe a lot of it... but if that's what you like and what your clients dig, then stick to your guns and do what feels right.


----------



## Robin_Usagani (Oct 29, 2013)

Here is a sample of HIGH iso with flash (bounced + off cams)






Here is a sample of low ISO and with direct on cam flash and off camera flash






Do you see how dark the background is?  That is even with off camera flash with the background!  




Here is one with direct on camera flash.  Your photos look like this but without the fisheye distortion, dragged shutter, but with bounced flash.  You didnt let enough ambient light and your flash was not powerful enough to light up the whole room (with the low iso).


----------



## Robin_Usagani (Oct 29, 2013)

paigew said:


> Yes something was going on with it. I changed the batteries (brand new) and though better there was still problems (ie not firing). It was really hot too. And so were the batteries. I think I need a better flash.



Thats because every shot your flash was probably shooting at almost full power every time.


----------



## TamiAz (Oct 29, 2013)

Paige..I like your original edits. I'm a matte, grain/noise whatever you want to call it kind of girl.. Don't let anyone make you second guess your editing style..You have your own unique style and I think you should stick to it!! Did you share these on CM?


----------



## mmaria (Oct 30, 2013)

I think you did a great job considering that it's your first wedding! 

And I kind of know that you'll do even better next time


----------



## frommrstomommy (Oct 30, 2013)

I'm mobile but I think you want your edits to reflect your normal style! They look fantastic, Especially for a first. Great job!!


----------



## elmhurre (Oct 30, 2013)

I think it's very good for a first timer.... correct me if i'm wrong, i think the motif of the wedding is classical, because i saw the tires of the wedding car and you like the image to be like the 40's or 50's theme. If that's what your clients want then the grain and matte finished will be perfect in addition to the B&W making the shot looks old. Sometime when you are earning from photography, specially in weddings, what the clients wants always the one we need to follow. One photographer said in an article that " Amateurs are lucky because in every click of a shutter you fells great once you capture a good shot, but once you become professional and works to a company even your greatest shot sometimes not enough to the expectation of a client and they sometimes asked you to work on things you don't want to shoot.". So do what you think will make you & your client happy even others don't want or thinks that you could have done more better...... well this was your first wedding job later you will be the one criticizing your own work, that's is what we call learning.


----------



## paigew (Oct 30, 2013)

Robin_Usagani said:


> ....... You didnt let enough ambient light and your flash was not powerful enough to light up the whole room (with the low iso).



okay I get it. Makes perfect sense! Thank you  

Now how about the ceremony? I shot it with direct on camera flash....Also how do you light coming down the isle shots? I guess I could have set up a light stand 1/2 way but it seems pretty imposing.


----------



## paigew (Oct 30, 2013)

TamiAz said:


> Paige..I like your original edits. I'm a matte, grain/noise whatever you want to call it kind of girl.. Don't let anyone make you second guess your editing style..You have your own unique style and I think you should stick to it!! Did you share these on CM?





bmmision said:


> I think you did a great job considering that it's your first wedding!
> 
> And I kind of know that you'll do even better next time





frommrstomommy said:


> I'm mobile but I think you want your edits to reflect your normal style! They look fantastic, Especially for a first. Great job!!





elmhurre said:


> I think it's very good for a first timer.... correct me if i'm wrong, i think the motif of the wedding is classical, because i saw the tires of the wedding car and you like the image to be like the 40's or 50's theme. If that's what your clients want then the grain and matte finished will be perfect in addition to the B&W making the shot looks old. Sometime when you are earning from photography, specially in weddings, what the clients wants always the one we need to follow. One photographer said in an article that " Amateurs are lucky because in every click of a shutter you fells great once you capture a good shot, but once you become professional and works to a company even your greatest shot sometimes not enough to the expectation of a client and they sometimes asked you to work on things you don't want to shoot.". So do what you think will make you & your client happy even others don't want or thinks that you could have done more better...... well this was your first wedding job later you will be the one criticizing your own work, that's is what we call learning.





manaheim said:


> External battery helps a lot with the flash heat issues.  Something to consider.  Also a higher ISO will make it so your flash doesn't have to work quite as hard.  Even a bump to something as low as 800 makes a BIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIG difference.
> 
> Nice set.
> 
> I liked the haze, btw. It was definitely a noticeable style choice, and maybe a lot of it... but if that's what you like and what your clients dig, then stick to your guns and do what feels right.



Thank you :heart:

 I have another wedding May, although now I'm even more nervous because I know what to expect LOL


----------



## Robin_Usagani (Oct 30, 2013)

I have never used a flash during ceremony and I truly believe you didnt need it.  You may use it when they walk through the aisle but that's it.  I would have shot it at ISO1600 or 3200 wide open no flash.


----------



## paigew (Oct 30, 2013)

Robin_Usagani said:


> I have never used a flash during ceremony and I truly believe you didnt need it.  You may use it when they walk through the aisle but that's it.  I would have shot it at ISO1600 or 3200 wide open no flash.



Oh I NEEDED to...sadly  By the time the pastor started talking it was completely dark. #12 was shot at  ISO 102500 f2.5 . #9 was iso 25600.  Even #8 was at 51200!! What would you do in that situation?


----------



## Mach0 (Oct 30, 2013)

paigew said:


> Oh I NEEDED to...sadly  By the time the pastor started talking it was completely dark. #12 was shot at  ISO 102500 f2.5 . #9 was iso 25600.  Even #8 was at 51200!! What would you do in that situation?



Damn that's some high ISO!


----------



## paigew (Oct 30, 2013)

Mach0 said:


> paigew said:
> 
> 
> > Oh I NEEDED to...sadly  By the time the pastor started talking it was completely dark. #12 was shot at  ISO 102500 f2.5 . #9 was iso 25600.  Even #8 was at 51200!! What would you do in that situation?
> ...


I know! This is the  point of the ceremony I was freaking out...contemplating running away. Not a good situation for a natural light girl! LOL


----------



## Robin_Usagani (Oct 30, 2013)

I see... Then I would brace my cam on a chair or a wall and shoot it with like 1/30 shutter wide open and ISO 6400 or something when they are not moving around.  When they start walking then maybe 1/60 with direct flash still with maybe ISO 6400.  Dragging the shutter+ wide open + flash will take you far.


----------



## paigew (Oct 30, 2013)

Robin_Usagani said:


> I see... Then I would brace my cam on a chair or a wall and shoot it with like 1/30 shutter wide open and ISO 6400 or something when they are not moving around.  When they start walking then maybe 1/60 with direct flash still with maybe ISO 6400.  Dragging the shutter+ wide open + flash will take you far.


your right I should have dropped my shutter WAY down. I am so used to shooting toddlers LOL. Thanks for all your help!!


----------



## kathyt (Oct 30, 2013)

Robin_Usagani said:


> I see... Then I would brace my cam on a chair or a wall and shoot it with like 1/30 shutter wide open and ISO 6400 or something when they are not moving around.  When they start walking then maybe 1/60 with direct flash still with maybe ISO 6400.  Dragging the shutter+ wide open + flash will take you far.


Yeah, I am going to agree with this. I would have shot with a monopod for some of these so you could have tweaked your shutter speed. At least for these pitch black time frames. For the dance recitals I shoot, I use a monopod so I can use the lowest ISO possible with the fastest shutter speed. There are some numbers that are sooooo dark. I can't use flash at all. It does make a difference for print quality too and color noise.


----------



## paigew (Oct 30, 2013)

kathythorson said:


> Robin_Usagani said:
> 
> 
> > I see... Then I would brace my cam on a chair or a wall and shoot it with like 1/30 shutter wide open and ISO 6400 or something when they are not moving around.  When they start walking then maybe 1/60 with direct flash still with maybe ISO 6400.  Dragging the shutter+ wide open + flash will take you far.
> ...



Ahhh a monopod...I will pick up one of those for sure. I can see it coming in handy, thanks for the tip!


----------



## Robin_Usagani (Oct 30, 2013)

the problem with monopod is that it will limit your framing creativity.  You are always on the same height, probably no vertical photos unless you put a head on it, and it will also slow you down.  Seriously, just put your left hand on a wall corner, rest your lens on the top of it (while standing), or rest your lens on the back of a chair or ledge.  For a dance recital, sport, etc. when you mostly stand at one spot, it is a perfect tool.


----------



## cbarnard7 (Oct 30, 2013)

I enjoy the photos. They're really nice considering it was your first wedding- and hey, if the clients like them, then they're perfect! For my taste, I do think they're a little bit TOO grainy. I know that's your style, so run with it. I would use your style, but not bump the grain up too much (considering the grain from the super-high ISO already). Otherwise, nice job!


----------



## DiskoJoe (Oct 30, 2013)

paigew said:


> kathythorson said:
> 
> 
> > DiskoJoe said:
> ...



Specifically I was talking about shots like #8 and 12. Those two are really grainy, much more so then anything in your portfolio on flickr. I like grain personally but these are on the extreme end to the point that a lot of quality is being lost in the grain. Evrything else was pretty clean. Some small bits of noise but nothing as overt as those two images where it is instantly noticeable.


----------



## Flare (Oct 30, 2013)

Love #6.


----------



## elmhurre (Oct 30, 2013)

At least this coming May you will be more prepared.  Just don't forget to created list of different motif and then show it to your client for them to choose what they like and what they will expect, give them also recommendation on what you think that will be better for them but expect that some recommendation or suggestion will be a NO NO to them at least you try. Let them choose a least a week before the event, because this will give you time to prepare and experiments on lighting setup. If you can experiment on the venue itself then it will be better because you already know where to place the lights and where to position your self. Good Luck..... hoping to see those photos.... to be criticized again... LOL


----------



## DougGrigg (Oct 30, 2013)

1. 4. 13. 17. 22  All would look brilliant in a series of images. if possible I'd recommend you put these images together and have a look at them as I believe those 5 would look really strong in terms of portfolio images to show for future weddings etc. The soft colour you have achieved looks really nice. Not a fan of any of the others though for various reasons sorry, 

No.1 is definitely a lucky shot but photography is 20% luck anyway and you certainly threw the dice right I love it to set off the story.


----------



## sashbar (Oct 31, 2013)

I think, unless the client has specifically asked or it, all this matte/haze/digital noise/whatever stuff is just crazy and wrong. A lot of clients will just not get. I can tell why I do not like it at all. 
All this matte/digital noise stuff has strong connotations with a faded memory, distant past, XX century etc. etc. A wedding is NOT one of those moment in life that most people would want to fade in their memory. They do not want to look at it in 10 years, think that these photos look like their grandfathers distant past and feel old. They want it vivid and look as if it was yesterday, because it is one of the happiest days in their lives. Unless, of course, they have already divorced and really want it to be a distant past and someone else's life. Then you can take these photos and treat it with matte/digital noise and whatever it is. 
This is just my first reaction to these photos. I just strongly believe that behind any artistic decision there must the reason and the explanation why, and "because I like it" is not enough.
Apart from that I think you did very very well.


----------

