Scenic wedding: From a recent wedding. what do you think? I used a light behind them to give some rim, and I got as close to the big puddle to get the reflection as crisp. as possible...

MaggieMay1978 Loc: Calgary Alberta

From a recent wedding. what do you think? I used a light behind them to give some rim, and I got as close to the big puddle to get the reflection as crisp. as possible iso 160 1/200 f4.5 used 70-200 lens on 5d mark 3

(Download)

greg vescuso Loc: Ozark,Mo.

MaggieMay1978 wrote:

From a recent wedding. what do you think? I used a light behind them to give some rim, and I got as close to the big puddle to get the reflection as crisp. as possible iso 160 1/200 f4.5 used 70-200 lens on 5d mark 3

I love everything about this shot... You have made a beautiful image here. The only thing I think would improve this shot is if the light behind the bride was feathered more to not hit the grooms face so much, but that is a very little thing. Great shot!

superpijak Loc: Middle TN

Nice work, I agree with Greg about toning down the back lighting BIT

waltchilds Loc: Central Florida

This is really a beautiful shot, very sharp with perfect tones and color. Well done Maggie.

infocus Loc: Australia

MaggieMay1978 wrote:

From a recent wedding. what do you think? I used a light behind them to give some rim, and I got as close to the big puddle to get the reflection as crisp. as possible iso 160 1/200 f4.5 used 70-200 lens on 5d mark 3

Great shot, looks fab in download

cjc2 Loc: Hellertown PA

Nicely done and very innovative!

Weddingguy Loc: British Columbia - Canada

MaggieMay1978 wrote:

From a recent wedding. what do you think? I used a light behind them to give some rim, and I got as close to the big puddle to get the reflection as crisp. as possible iso 160 1/200 f4.5 used 70-200 lens on 5d mark 3

Agree with the others about the back light but I don't think it's a big issue with the subjects being that far away. A close in shot would have made it a real problem.

Like most everything about the shot EXCEPT . . . would love to see them a bit off center and the water line off center as well. (think rule of thirds). Different composition could make this almost a masterpiece!

jaysnave Loc: Central Ohio

Very nice Maggie. You must be very creative to visualize how to make the bride look angelic in the woods next to a puddle. That sounds funny, but I am serious. Nice job. It would have been nice to get some light illuminating the front of them, but that would have been very difficult.

After zooming in, I have a question. Did you have any problems afterwards with mud on the bottom of the brides dress?

bkyser Loc: Fly over country in Indiana

I absolutely Love this! If shot in raw, you could tone down the highlights just a touch, especially if you use the adjustment brush to basically just do it on him.

I have to admit, I would play around a bit with the crop as well. It may end up that what you have done is the best crop, but I'm thinking if you changed the orientation to portrait, then moved them off a wee bit to the side, it would "kick it up just a notch" but that is absolutely personal preference. There are many times that breaking the "rule" of thirds should be done.

The idea, the pose, and the use of the rim light, did make this magical as it is. Just tossing out a couple of ideas that I would personally try. (not everything I try is a home run, so my advice is to do what you do, because it is beautiful)

bk

MaggieMay1978 Loc: Calgary Alberta

Does portrait work?

(Download)

jdubu Loc: San Jose, CA

I like this composition much better. Losing the stump and tree on the tight really focuses your viewpoint. They actually aren't necessary to the story of place and time.

I would like to see the rim flash about half the power it is now for better detail of the veil structure, instead of blown out. I think you would still get a good rim light without it being obviously a flash behind them.

Weddingguy Loc: British Columbia - Canada

MaggieMay1978 wrote:

Does portrait work?

I personally prefer your original . . . but really had something like this in mind for a composition. I think if you bring them in too close, the rim light being over exposed and blown out will become an issue. As has been already mentioned, a lot of it is personal taste. Although "breaking the rules" is acceptable in any art form, some rules are broken most of time in the name of art.

(Download)

bkyser Loc: Fly over country in Indiana

MaggieMay1978 wrote:

Does portrait work?

Yes, I do think it works. While I liked the original, I don't think it focused as much attention on the bride and groom.

As for the rim light, it separates them from the background. I know it isn't "natural" but I still like it. As I said before, all of what you get here is each of our opinions. In my opinion, it's beautiful. In someone else's, they may think it is distracting.

All in all, my guess is that the bride and groom will absolutely love LOVE LOVE it.

in the end, they are really the ones you need to please, not me.

Beercat Loc: Central Coast of California

The issue with the rim light could easily be solved the next time by directing the flash toward the back of the bride with just the feathered side of the flash hitting the groom. The difference is the rim is more pronounced against the black suit whereas the white dress isn't as influenced by the light.

Personally I prefer the reflection to be in focus but again that's a personal thing. I would of gone for the sweet spot of the lens f/8 - f/11 and tried to get both the reflection and the subjects in focus.

Maybe a slight tummy tuck in PS ..........