I decided to try to duplicate this so.....

Using my Canon 6D which supposedly has very slightly better noise characteristics than the 5D III I took a shot of my car. ISO 160, 1/1600, f/4, 24mm, did an EXTREME crop and set sharpening to 100 in LR.
I end up with the same "wormy" looking kind of noise.

A 35mm lens on a FF gives a fairly wide angle of view. The Photographer may have been some distance back and just took a shot when he saw them walking together holding hands.
He did a severe crop and tried to improve the image with some additional sharpening.

I think that this is normal noise tremendously enlarged.

For those who participated in my initial post about image noise in my son's wedding photos, I have learned that the images are NOT proofs but the final product, unfortunately. The couple was given a presentation box, a bottle of champagne, and the thumb drive with the noisy images. I did not ask if she was a professional or how they found her as their photographer because of the sensitivity of the issue (they are, at least on the surface, pleased with the images). They will not receive any prints, but are free to print their pictures from the drive. I am still mystified how 20mb images were made with quality equipment resulting in such noisy images. Thanks to all who have voiced an opinion or taken interest in this discussion.

The camera and lens settings indicate a shooter who lacks experience with these exposure variables: ISO, shutter speed, and aperture.

This camera no doubt has an ISO setting of ISO 50 in the extended ISO range. This lower ISO equates to a stop and a half of exposure -- not trivial in diffuse lighting as here combined with the shading effect from a street scene with tall buildings and with an overcast sky. This lower ISO would have produced an exposure free of noise.

Yet even a setting of ISO 160 should have rendered a noise-free exposure with this superior camera.

The shutter speed of 1/2000th of a second indicates the same thing: an inexperienced shooter.

After all, a shutter speed of 1/250th of a second would almost certainly have frozen all motion in the scene. This setting would have gained another 3 stops of exposure, also not trivial under the conditions.

The rationale for the wide-open aperture setting of f/1.4 may or may not have reflected a conscious choice by the shooter. This setting will tend to blur the background while the main subject remains largely in focus. An aperture of f/5.6 or f/8 might have produced a slightly more interesting picture of a couple walking a city street by bringing more detail into focus. The gains overall in exposure discussed here would have allowed this smaller aperture opening.

The upshot here: Before hiring a wedding photographer, check the shooter’s Web-site for three things: (1) credentials documenting any formal training in doing photography in general; (2) experience in the field of wedding photography; and, (3) samples from previous successful wedding shoots.

Number 3 will tell the most because despite higher-end gear and training, experience and results count the most.

In fact, a self-taught photographer may produce better and more interesting photographs for having followed his bent and his eye instead of relying on formulas, convention, and hackneyed approaches in his photography.