# My First Wedding



## knicolej (Jan 21, 2013)

C&C welcome. Thanks for looking 

#1 


#2 

#3 

#4 

#5


----------



## Light Guru (Jan 21, 2013)

They are all under exposed.


----------



## o hey tyler (Jan 21, 2013)

As LG said, they have some pretty serious exposure issues. In addition to that, there are also some focus issues as well, or motion blur due to too slow of a shutter speed. I'm on my phone so I can't see the exif if there's any embedded. 

1 appears to have been popup flashed, and has some pretty extreme exposure variations. 

The crops and composition are another thing entirely. 

Photo 2 offers little of interest. The subject is underexposed and doesn't look engaged or in a moment he's hoping to remember. It just doesn't do a lot for me. There's a tilt too. 

3 is centered, and too tightly cropped. 

4 is mainly just too tightly cropped and pretty severely underexposed. 

5 is probably the best photo, but the conversion is muddy and the background is a little much. 

What was your gear setup for this wedding? And was it a commissioned event? If it was shot for free, then that's fine... But this is not the type of work that should be paid for IMO. Apologies for being blunt, but there could be a lawsuit in your future if you're not careful.


----------



## Tee (Jan 21, 2013)

This looks like it was a fun wedding to photograph based on their choice of attire.:thumbup:  Have to agree with the replies so far but some can be enhanced by a bump in exposure.  Not a fan of the processing style in #4.


----------



## AmberLynneParker (Jan 21, 2013)

The last three seem too close-up.
#2 is pretty good, but the man could of been better if he was on the left side of the picture, not the right, since he is looking to the right.
I'm new to Photography, but that's my opinion.


----------



## cgipson1 (Jan 21, 2013)

Underexposed, and too tightly framed! I love the "green" silver in the rings...


----------



## cgipson1 (Jan 21, 2013)

o hey tyler said:


> What was your gear setup for this wedding? And was it a commissioned event? If it was shot for free, then that's fine... But this is not the type of work that should be paid for IMO. Apologies for being blunt, but there could be a lawsuit in your future if you're not careful.



[ PhotoME ]
PhotoME version: 0.79R17 (Build 856)

[ Overview ]
URL: http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/...7d1358808761-my-first-wedding-dsc_0515-2-.jpg
File type: JPEG
File size: 1,625.4 KB
Creation date: 9/8/2012 15:11
Last modification: 1/21/2013 18:58
Make: NIKON CORPORATION
Camera: *NIKON D3100*
Lens:* AF-S DX VR Zoom-Nikkor 18-55mm F3.5-5.6G*
Software: *GIMP 2.6.11*
Dimension: 1800 x 2279 px (4.1 MP, 3:4)
Focal length: 28 mm (equiv. 42 mm)
Aperture: F4.5
Exposure time: 1/100" (+2 EV)
ISO speed rating: 1600/33°
Program: Manual
Metering Mode: Pattern
White Balance: Preset
Focus Mode: Manual
Image Stabilizer: On
Noise Reduction: Off
Flash: Flash did not fire


----------



## flow (Jan 21, 2013)

The background is really throwing me, that wallpaper is very busy & distracting. I know you couldn't ask them to redecorate for you ... but aside from exposure issues, some lighting might have pulled the people out a little, separated them from the stuff behind them.


----------



## knicolej (Jan 21, 2013)

I did this for free for a friend. They loved the pictures. I didn't use the flash during the ceremony. The ONLY lighting I had was the large window. I was between the couple and the window so I wouldn't block everyone's view. Thanks for the critiques


----------



## Raian-san (Jan 22, 2013)

Free or not...this is bad.


----------



## Pallycow (Jan 22, 2013)

Use this as an example for that other thread where the dude wants to do a wedding with a d3100.


----------



## rexbobcat (Jan 22, 2013)

cgipson1 said:


> o hey tyler said:
> 
> 
> > What was your gear setup for this wedding? And was it a commissioned event? If it was shot for free, then that's fine... But this is not the type of work that should be paid for IMO. Apologies for being blunt, but there could be a lawsuit in your future if you're not careful.
> ...



Why manual focus I wonder? Lol

It doesn't too dark for the AF to handle.


----------



## Raian-san (Jan 23, 2013)

Pallycow said:


> Use this as an example for that other thread where the dude wants to do a wedding with a d3100.



It's not the fact that it's a D3100.


----------



## Pallycow (Jan 23, 2013)

Raian-san said:


> Pallycow said:
> 
> 
> > Use this as an example for that other thread where the dude wants to do a wedding with a d3100.
> ...



No, that's not the sole factor, but it's a huge one.  I have not seen any 3100's perform well at a wedding.  I say this having owned one and loving the camera.  It's a great entry level camera, and does a fine job.  Just does not belong at a wedding IMO.  Even with great lenses, its performance can't handle what is needed for a good wedding.  Notice I say "good", sure it "will work" but not "good".

Really not sure why people like to argue this, no entry level camera belongs in a wedding, period.


----------



## o hey tyler (Jan 23, 2013)

Pallycow said:
			
		

> Really not sure why people like to argue this, no entry level camera belongs in a wedding, period.



Unless they're a guest... In which case they better stay the F- out of my way while I'm shooting the damn formals!


----------



## Raian-san (Jan 23, 2013)

Pallycow said:


> Raian-san said:
> 
> 
> > Pallycow said:
> ...



I'm not saying it belong in wedding photography, but even with a decent and good lens and a person who actually know how to use it, I'm sure it would come out pretty decent. All I'm saying is the person who posted this, don't even know how to use a camera.


----------



## QuantumFrame (Jan 23, 2013)

It seems everyone agrees that the images are cropped too tightly and underexposed. 
I will add that natural window lighting is a great source of light to use *on* your subject, rather than behind. 
I am sure your next one will show a lot of improvement


----------



## sashbar (Mar 6, 2013)

I am trying to figure out if there was some particular aestetic idea behind this set. Is it a deliberate attempt to create  some darkish creepy mood that reflects the occasion or the people there? The tight crop just adds to the intensity of it. Forget about D3100 it might as well be shot with a 10 y.o. Nokia mobile phone, but there is something seriously unsettling about these images.  The shot No 3  is Cannibal Lector territory.  If I were shown this shot only and asked what it was, I would say - probably this is the funeral of a seriously hated, unbelievably miserly and fabulously rich man. 
I did not want to offend anyone.


----------

