Amateur Wedding Photography - Comments Please

[Tantor]

Hi CSers,

Just completed this wedding shoot for a friend not too long ago, any constructive comments is greatly appreciated. Please visit this link

http://markandwailing.multiply.com/photos/album/206

Cheers,
Tantor

[Tantor]

Just some pics from my website.

[Tantor]

[hongwei]

It seems to me that most of your photos above are OOF.

[shahrecover]

out of focus mostly.. maybe its the jpeg quality when saving to low res.

[Tantor]

Originally Posted by shahrecover out of focus mostly.. maybe its the jpeg quality when saving to low res.

It is quite difficult to keep it to 100kb, while getting the size and quality..... any tips on how to solve this issue? The actual high res shots can be seen on my multiple site.

Cheers.

[zaxh81]

nice...i like these pictures.Best if #3 have a focus point on either the bride or groom.
Flash is good.

[~Arcanic~]

Hey... haha, i just realized that you took the AD of one of my secondary school friends...

I haven seen her in a while, wow.. didn know she got married..

[Tantor]

Originally Posted by ~Arcanic~ Hey... haha, i just realized that you took the AD of one of my secondary school friends... I haven seen her in a while, wow.. didn know she got married..

Hahaha..... What a small World. Who were you refering to Lynn or Michelle?

It's a small world after all.

[~Arcanic~]

Originally Posted by Tantor Hahaha..... What a small World. Who were you refering to Lynn or Michelle? It's a small world after all.

I was referring to Lynn, you know her as a personal friend or?

She was a school mate of mine in secondary.. and i see a lot of familiar faces in the photos..

[Tantor]

Originally Posted by ~Arcanic~ I was referring to Lynn, you know her as a personal friend or? She was a school mate of mine in secondary.. and i see a lot of familiar faces in the photos..

I just got to know Lynn in this shoot. Really nice lady... and Ivan is a nice guy too. They have a really nice pad too. Maybe you should catch up with her.

[~Arcanic~]

Originally Posted by Tantor I just got to know Lynn in this shoot. Really nice lady... and Ivan is a nice guy too. They have a really nice pad too. Maybe you should catch up with her.

lolx, but you did a good job there, i believe she would have liked the photos.

[Tantor]

Originally Posted by shahrecover out of focus mostly.. maybe its the jpeg quality when saving to low res.

Actually after this discussion, I went back and examine the photos and it seems that there are issues with the softness of the photos produced by the D200.

Even Dpreview.com highlighted that it might just be too soft, and requires the in-built sharpening to be set around +1 or +2. Guess it explains partly why it seems OOF.

Nevertheless, learnt something new today, and will continue to see how to improve my photos.

Cheers

[Tantor]

Originally Posted by ~Arcanic~ lolx, but you did a good job there, i believe she would have liked the photos.

Thanks for the compliments. I sure hoped that they enjoyed my services as much as I enjoyed taking their photos.

[jOhO]

Originally Posted by Tantor Actually after this discussion, I went back and examine the photos and it seems that there are issues with the softness of the photos produced by the D200. Even Dpreview.com highlighted that it might just be too soft, and requires the in-built sharpening to be set around +1 or +2. Guess it explains partly why it seems OOF. Nevertheless, learnt something new today, and will continue to see how to improve my photos. Cheers

better check that body then. i shoot with a d200 (2 of them actually), let me know if my photos on my website are not sharp. for the record, i rarely use USM. i just think USM makes it look "too sharp". also.. could be your lenses.

anywayz u were asking how to save images under 100k but retain quality. i use the "save for web" function on photoshop setting it to around 80%. i've gotten away with 60% too. this is how all my images are saved if they are to be displayed online.

[Tantor]

Originally Posted by jOhO better check that body then. i shoot with a d200 (2 of them actually), let me know if my photos on my website are not sharp. for the record, i rarely use USM. i just think USM makes it look "too sharp". also.. could be your lenses. anywayz u were asking how to save images under 100k but retain quality. i use the "save for web" function on photoshop setting it to around 80%. i've gotten away with 60% too. this is how all my images are saved if they are to be displayed online.

Thanks for the tips, will try to send the body and lens to Nikon to get them checked? And thanks for the tip on the saving... usually I just save in jpeg with the quality set at around 9.

Cheers.

[Tantor]

Originally Posted by jOhO better check that body then. i shoot with a d200 (2 of them actually), let me know if my photos on my website are not sharp. for the record, i rarely use USM. i just think USM makes it look "too sharp". also.. could be your lenses. anywayz u were asking how to save images under 100k but retain quality. i use the "save for web" function on photoshop setting it to around 80%. i've gotten away with 60% too. this is how all my images are saved if they are to be displayed online.

One more thing... what lens do you usually use by the way... if you don't mind me asking? If I'm not wrong, you did mention that you usually use primes?

[jOhO]

Originally Posted by Tantor One more thing... what lens do you usually use by the way... if you don't mind me asking? If I'm not wrong, you did mention that you usually use primes?

i use the afs17-55 on one body because it's a "catch all lens" but i prefer my primes (which are on the other body) which are 24/2.8 50/1.4 85/1.4.

i've been using canon as well on and off with a 5D, with the 35L 85L and 135L. (basically almost identical to the nikon primes - at least in focal length - without the crop factor since 5D is full frame).

for ultra wide i use a sigma 10-20, on canon is the 16-35II.

[Tantor]

Originally Posted by jOhO i use the afs17-55 on one body because it's a "catch all lens" but i prefer my primes (which are on the other body) which are 24/2.8 50/1.4 85/1.4. i've been using canon as well on and off with a 5D, with the 35L 85L and 135L. (basically almost identical to the nikon primes - at least in focal length - without the crop factor since 5D is full frame). for ultra wide i use a sigma 10-20, on canon is the 16-35II.

Thanks for sharing. That's way cool. Seems like you have tried both DSLRs camps. I would like to try out the Canon cameras if I could have the chance, but Nikons will be my choice for now.

[The Oracle]

I think as an amatuer it is quite ok. Maybe you want to improve the composition and have more creative shoot will make the album more interesting.