Wedding photo techniques
underexposed background – additional remote flash light
Umesh
thanks for the submission. I like your images due to the fact they are different and you have used the additional flash light with a remote control from the side. I am not sure if have followed on of my wedding examples doing a similar approach but that is irrelevant. Your images look good and interesting. One thing I am not crazy about is the composition and the ratio between the subject the rest. There is no clear indication of your intention…is is symmetry, is it the rule of thirds, where is the balance. If you want to have a subject with the feet cropped, either you do a clean crop, or you allow the entire subject the breath inside the picture. I have seen this in other places and I understand the need to create a difference, but that is not the way to achieve it in my own personal opinion, just a limitation to your audience.
Of course the difference in opinion comes from subjectivity, however I believe there are common patterns of what people like and ignoring that will just get less peole to like your work.
Is this an intent, or just an accident and I am doing theoretical jibber jabber?
Just out of interest see the composition article here and let me know if you agree or not
……………………….
I really like the imagery. I can see what the photographer was trying to do. The second submission with the first back drop I think would have a very good photo. One can sense the wonderful feeling of the couple in that shot. I would think this technique would be a good one to pursue for weddings.
Dennis
thanks for the interest. They are different due to the extra step using the remote flash, which probably 90% of the world wedding photographers do not use.