Weddingguy Loc: British Columbia - Canada

What would you have done differently other than shoot full length, which I also did.

(Download)

waltchilds Loc: Central Florida

I like it, not sure I would have changed anything.

superpijak Loc: Middle TN

I like it as is. Possibly shift the main light source more to camera right?

Bobbee

Although it would have change the picture. Maybe bringing the veil up over and onto the shoulder. Had to go back up and look again, was about to suggest bring the hair on one slide slighlty forward onto her shoulder. Then saw it was pinned. I like the S curve you got. Much better than straight. Did a wedding yesterday and the sister-in-law-brides-maid who was tell me about all the photos we were NOT ding from my portfolio that was of a certain 'type' seemed to be going out of her way yesterday to pull off those exact shots with her posing. Guess she had a slight intention to make sure she was promoting herself as the sexie one at the wedding.

Nice shot, did she like it.

Weddingguy Loc: British Columbia - Canada

Seems so . . . they ordered a framed wall print along with this one of the groom.

(Download)

Bobbee

From the look on his face I would assume he drained the flask already!!! LOL

Weddingguy Loc: British Columbia - Canada

Let's just say that the guys had a fun day! It was a fun wedding to shoot!

Bill Houghton Loc: New York area

It's a very well done photo. The only thing I might have done would have been PP. It is a personal call but I would have have done some PP on the red blushes on her chest area. Reducing some of the red blemish around the the necklace area.

Bobbee

Had one of them Dec of 2014. From Friday to Sat, every picture of the groom his eyes were slits. Wonder if he finally sobered up.

bkyser Loc: Fly over country in Indiana

I like the pose. Her nose is dangerously close to breaking the plane of her cheek, but it works.
The only issue I have at all, is just one of my personal taste. Not a fan of the skin smoothing, or soft glow, whatever it is that makes it feel just a little out of focus. Once again, that is mainly my taste and not really a critique. Trust me, I realize that we all have personal tastes, and mine isn't the "right" one, just "an" opinion.

I definitely like it better than the one of the groom, but then, I always like photos of brides. Always have. Brides are beautiful, even an ugly one will look absolutely stunning on her wedding day. IN my opinion.

Thanks for sharing.

jaysnave Loc: Central Ohio

They are both wonderful images and I can understand why they would want large prints. If forced to reflect what I would do differently, I would probably have tried to get more of the umbrella in the scene. Maybe framing horizontally and holding the umbrella back a bit so the umbrella was a greater part of the background and retains more of it's circular shape. Don't know I would have liked that better, but when asked that is probably what I would have done. I don't mind the blush coloring. I think it adds to the image. The soft look works well. It really depends on what the client likes.

Wedding Guy, I know you are a proponent of bounced light and the Lite-Scoop. Were either one of those or both in play here?

Weddingguy Loc: British Columbia - Canada

With rare exception, I always shoot flash, indoors and out. Unless I am using an umbrella or softbox (formals only), My speedlights always have a Lite-Scoop or Peri-Scoop mounted on them. These are both taken outdoors with Lite-Scoops. These of course are straight on, no bounce. Flash was on-camera as it was a stroll though some paths in a park.

jaysnave Loc: Central Ohio

I have two Lite-Scoops and love the results. The big one looks kind of odd on my camera but so do I so no one notices.

E.L.. Shapiro Loc: Ottawa, Ontario Canada

The bride: This is not a "bad" bridal portrait and I am sure the client will like it but I find a number of issues for discussion. The lighting is rather flat. The nose is crossing the far cheek line. Composition-wise, it is not a head a head and shoulder portrait nor is it a real 3/4 length composition- it is somewhere in between and that leads to another issue where the subject's left arm is abruptly cut off at the forearm. The flat lighting tends to bring out the inner structure of the parasol which I find a bit distracting. If perhaps the parasol was more trans-illuminated it might have been more effective.

The Groom: Again, the lighting seems to be somewhat flat- perhaps overly flash filled. The tilt of his head is a bit extreme. His boutonniere is not pinned on neatly and his necktie is loosely fitted- those details should be attended to. I sometimes remove the groom's flowers, for the formal portraits, if they are too big and serve as a distraction. The flat lighting has also emphasized the texture in the tree which tends to draw the eye away from the subject.

Theses are, admittedly nitpicks but with formal wedding portraiture, all the details add up.

Weddingguy Loc: British Columbia - Canada

Really good points! Thanks so much for taking the time to comment. That's why I love this profession . . . always so much to learn!