Close up of the bride
Jan 7, 2015 09:40:51 #
One from last fall. Full figured bride, gorgeous looking IMO. One of my favorites. Added the flame to the candle in PS. Retouched by me. Always trying to improve. Always game for some CC, otherwise I wouldn't post anything :)
Jan 7, 2015 19:14:33 #
skidooman wrote:
One from last fall. Full figured bride, gorgeous looking IMO. One of my favorites. Added the flame to the candle in PS. Retouched by me. Always trying to improve. Always game for some CC, otherwise I wouldn't post anything :)
Good exposure settings for this shot.
Only critique would be a suggestion to have stood on a 2 foot step ladder and had her change the angle of her head slightly upwards. This would of eliminated the slight double chin. KelbyOne has a hole series on how to shoot full figured brides and I've watched them a few times. Having the bride look slightly up helps a bunch.
Jan 8, 2015 01:57:46 #
My first wife was 6' tall and at 200# was a fox! When I saw her in her wedding dress, I was even more surprised at how beautiful she was. What we choose to call "full-figured women" can be amazingly attractive; sometimes they're just a bit fluffier. Had my first wife lived, I am sure she would have heartily approved with what the OP did with this shot.
Jan 8, 2015 06:12:33 #
Beercat wrote:
Good exposure settings for this shot.
Only critique would be a suggestion to have stood on a 2 foot step ladder and had her change the angle of her head slightly upwards. This would of eliminated the slight double chin. KelbyOne has a hole series on how to shoot full figured brides and I've watched them a few times. Having the bride look slightly up helps a bunch.
Only critique would be a suggestion to have stood on a 2 foot step ladder and had her change the angle of her head slightly upwards. This would of eliminated the slight double chin. KelbyOne has a hole series on how to shoot full figured brides and I've watched them a few times. Having the bride look slightly up helps a bunch.
Good tip.
Jan 8, 2015 06:13:12 #
Mogul wrote:
My first wife was 6' tall and at 200# was a fox! When I saw her in her wedding dress, I was even more surprised at how beautiful she was. What we choose to call "full-figured women" can be amazingly attractive; sometimes they're just a bit fluffier. Had my first wife lived, I am sure she would have heartily approved with what the OP did with this shot.
Thank you Mogul, nice of you to say. Sorry for your loss.
Jan 8, 2015 09:40:30 #
Actually, I agree with you. Too many people associate "sticks" with being attractive. The way I'm wired, CURVES are what make a woman a woman. I think she's beautiful.
Also agree with Beercat, you nailed the exposure.
As for the pose, I can see his point about trying to reduce the appearance of a double chin, but in this pose, I just don't think it is so obvious that I'd be too worried about it. Of course, I'm like a monkey with constantly changing positions, instead of taking 4 identical shots, then I would pick what I thought was most flattering.
I like the idea of adding the flame, but wonder how it would have looked if you had blurred the flame to match the rest of the background, then maybe add a slight glow around it.
Also agree with Beercat, you nailed the exposure.
As for the pose, I can see his point about trying to reduce the appearance of a double chin, but in this pose, I just don't think it is so obvious that I'd be too worried about it. Of course, I'm like a monkey with constantly changing positions, instead of taking 4 identical shots, then I would pick what I thought was most flattering.
I like the idea of adding the flame, but wonder how it would have looked if you had blurred the flame to match the rest of the background, then maybe add a slight glow around it.
Jan 8, 2015 09:43:18 #
Beercat wrote:
KelbyOne has a hole series on how to shoot full figured brides and I've watched them a few times. Having the bride look slightly up helps a bunch.
I used to subscribe to KelbyOne training. Is this series only for subscribers, or is it part of his free stuff? If so, do you have a link? I'm on the fence about subscribing again, after a while, I found that I wasn't using them enough to pay for the cost of the ticket.
It's been a couple of years, so if there is some new/good stuff on there, I may end up biting the bullet again.
Jan 8, 2015 12:28:47 #
bkyser wrote:
I used to subscribe to KelbyOne training. Is this series only for subscribers, or is it part of his free stuff? If so, do you have a link? I'm on the fence about subscribing again, after a while, I found that I wasn't using them enough to pay for the cost of the ticket.
It's been a couple of years, so if there is some new/good stuff on there, I may end up biting the bullet again.
It's been a couple of years, so if there is some new/good stuff on there, I may end up biting the bullet again.
Lots of new stuff ......
I really devoured the stuff for a the first 6 months and it was well worth the $200 for a year of use, helped me a bunch. The stuff I'm talking about is on the paid/private stuff.
BTW, I think the bride looks great ...... my suggestion was to stick the idea in your head and pull it out for the right situation. KelbyOne points out the chin issue and how to eliminate, how to compose/crop to deal with hefty arms and how to camouflage tummies .....
You composed well ........ any time you get a downward loop from the nose and don't loose the far end of the eye it looks great ..... 8-)
Jan 17, 2015 11:39:17 #
bkyser wrote:
I used to subscribe to KelbyOne training. Is this series only for subscribers, or is it part of his free stuff? If so, do you have a link? I'm on the fence about subscribing again, after a while, I found that I wasn't using them enough to pay for the cost of the ticket.
It's been a couple of years, so if there is some new/good stuff on there, I may end up biting the bullet again.
It's been a couple of years, so if there is some new/good stuff on there, I may end up biting the bullet again.
Bob,
You may have missed the boat. A couple of years ago Kelby Training merged with NAPP. If you were a NAPP member at that time ($99/yr) and not a Kelby Training ($200/yr) subscriber (me) you were automatically enrolled in the new Kelby One. What a deal!!!! They have maintained the $99 thing for me and I think they plan to keep it that way or something not too expensive. From what I can tell, if you join Kelby One now for $200, I think, you will get both memberships. The people at Kelby One are nice but strict with their membership policy. I was late last year for my renewal but they gave me a pass with a stern warning. Maybe if you call with your best teary eyed appeal they will cut you a deal. At any rate subscription/membership with this group is priceless. I have gotten 10 times more each year out of this than the $800 I spent one year attending seminars.
Also, the Creative Live series is really good if you can find the time to watch the free original broadcasts. However, the cost of buying the broadcast often equals what a Kelby One membership costs and almost everything you get on CL can be found at KO. Also, as you know, you can drill down to the exact info you are seeking with KO and you can get some great discounts at suppliers through KO.
Are you making that call yet?? No I don't get a commission. LOL
Don
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.