Photos from recent shoot

shredmaster · #1 07-06-2007, 01:13 AM

Here are some photos from an engagement session I did last weekend. I think I took around 150 photos of them in the hour, kept about 100 of them. Really harsh sun that day, made it difficult to shoot in, but, overall, most of the shots turned out nice. I have to go over them just a bit to bring out their eyes in photoshop...shadows are a tad too harsh. I will be shooting their wedding in september.

Steve

jem20thlover · #2 07-06-2007, 01:48 AM

Nice shots, great depth of field on many of them. I just got a 50mm 1.4 for my Canon 5D and I love how it pulls the subjects out. Very well done considering the lighting. Its always hard to get great shots when the subjects are squinting, the eyes are so important, but fine shots none the less. What gear did you use?

Distantshore · #3 07-06-2007, 03:29 AM

Nice Shots, if you could just Photoshop my face over that guys and they would be perfect!

Nice Job!!

mi2tom · #4 07-06-2007, 03:30 AM

Awesome photos! I'm getting married this month

JJEMMER777 · #5 07-06-2007, 03:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mi2tom

I'm getting married this month

awww...you crazy people all need your heads examined

Nice shots shred and you two are a nice looking couple

and ~D is just jealous because he's not as pretty as you

Congrats Alfy and shred on the marriages.

Good luck

shredmaster · #6 07-06-2007, 10:51 AM

thanks guys....i think there was some confusion...that isn't me...that is a client. i post some of my fav shots here and there on jemsite as i shoot. i have been married for going on 2 years.

jem20th, i used a Canon 30D for these shots. The lenses were Canon 70-200 IS F2.8 and a Sigma 30mm F1.8 for the closer shots. i love my sigma lenses but am switching over to all canon...glass is much better...just need the money to get the lenses. i believe the settings were ISO 100, F2.8-5.6, and of course a very fast shutter....not sure what the speed was. All things considered, the photos turned out better than i thought they would. that sun was brutal. for the wedding i will be bringing some reflectors and such to help cut that down. i just heard from the groom - to - be this morning. he saw the shots on line and loved them so that's cool.

Steve

jemplayer55 · #7 07-06-2007, 11:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mi2tom

Awesome photos! I'm getting married this month

Congrats Alfy on your upcoming wedding.....

Love the B/W shots..... but if this girl put on any more makeup/foundation she wouldn't be able to hold her head up! It looks like she's wearing a ton already!

**jemsite** · #8 07-06-2007, 11:01 AM

they look nice... i really like the B&W one w/ flowers in back.

steve have you tried ND or polarizer filters w/ your digital setup? i haven't used one in years but seeing photos like this - even w/ photoshop - really makes me wonder if they're not still necessary. i used to use them alot at a lake where we took waterskiing/boating photos and also in the snow where the results were outstanding once you got the light metering adjusted.

also, you're using white balance cards right? ...glen

shredmaster · #9 07-06-2007, 11:43 AM

Glen,

i have the polarizer filter but didn't use it. i really should have used it on the sigma lens. i don't have a polarizer large enough for the 70-200 lens and i should get one. i was relying mainly on Adobe LR for post-production work. these photos did need more work than i expected. i white balance during the editing of photos, save the preset, and apply to the others that are in a similar location, but have thought about really getting the white balancing cards. usually i will shoot something white and balance off that in the camera but the cards would be a great idea. i didn't want to be carrying them around. i like that BW as well. candids are the best...can't beat 'em.

Rotti · #10 07-06-2007, 11:47 AM

I heard you can just use something like a coffee filter for your white card. At least things will be consistant. I haven't tried it yet.

shredmaster · #11 07-06-2007, 12:09 PM

that's a good idea. you wouldn't have to worry about it getting bent or destroyed. since a coffee filter isn't pure white, that may work out well. i'll try that this weekend. Rotti, nice shots in your recent thread! And correct me if i'm wrong, but, i'm assuming i would have the polarizer filter on the lens as i white balance? would it throw things off if i white balanced with the polarizer off and then put it on? seems to make sense to WB when it is on.

**jemsite** · #12 07-06-2007, 12:27 PM

don't waste any further time except to order these (whatever size you like).

http://www.rawworkflow.com/products/.../purchase.html

problem w/ WB on a dSLR is the camera (& software) tries to meter "white" (that you balance to) a neutral shade of grey and hence your camera will grossly underexpose real white and blowing out bright highlights. (ie. sorta why you need to add + exposure in sun/snow not decrease exposure - i dont think i explained that too well but you get the point hopefully)

with these cards you'd WB a sample shot every time you change shooting conditions... so if you added a filter you take a subject/test WB shot to meter. if you go indoors.... new WB shot... if the sun goes behind clouds new WB shot. Then post process with WB set off the card (not camera or photoshop guessing what "white" is)... glen

Rotti · #13 07-06-2007, 12:56 PM

Check this out.

http://www.digitalimagecafe.com/learn/coffeeFilter/

Rotti · #14 07-06-2007, 12:57 PM

I shoot everything in RAW so I do something more like this..

http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tut...te-balance.htm

Rotti · #15 07-06-2007, 01:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jemsite

don't waste any further time except to order these (whatever size you like).

problem w/ WB on a dSLR is the camera (& software) tries to meter "white" (that you balance to) a neutral shade of grey and hence your camera will grossly underexpose real white and blowing out bright highlights. (ie. sorta why you need to add + exposure in sun/snow not decrease exposure - i dont think i explained that too well but you get the point hopefully)

Maybe I'm not understanding your post or maybe I'm just mistaken about white balance (I'm still learning) but I don't think it has anything to do with exposure. (grossly underexpose real white and blowing out bright highlights) Isn't just the "tint" of your photo that is effected? When shooting RAW WB is adjusted after the photo is taken. If WB effected things like blown highlights then you would not be able to correct this after the fact. Once the photo is overexposed all detail is lost of not recoverable.