Rubbish Wedding photos

[Ricepilot]

I'm somewhat not really wanting to post this thread for fear of being found out as a bit of a burk but...

Got married last September and was let down at the last moment as our original photographer developed cancer, however he did arrange a replacement.

Anyhow I digress.

I love my photography and people tell me I do ok at it (but thats their opinion) but I am totally rubbish at the post processing bit.

The photo's that the replacement took were, how can I say... A little rubbish. To the point where I've actually not looked at the whole set more than about 4-5 times in the past 11 months. I know I am going to be asked to provide some examples but didn't really want to splash our photos around on a public forum (and out of respect for the photographer who may just have been having an 'off' day) but I would however be able to give some examples to serious responses.

What I'm talking about is massive shadows behind the subjects, wonky photos and the like. Now I can sort out the wonky photos but anything else is beyond me. Also, it'd be good to get some crops pulling out the details of things because it looks at the moment as if my auntie took the photos.

I understand that there are limits and it not going to make the wedding look like it happened in the Seychelles but I'm just after a few pics I can put in a book or something without me opening it every so often only to have my heart sink within 10 seconds.

In advance, thanks

[Kermit power]

Why would you not put this request firmly back with the photographer who took the shots? He was, after all, paid to do them.

[grumpy bear]

Not clear what you're asking for is it:

a. Advice on how to do the post processing
b. How to handle the discussions with the original photographer
c. Someone on here to offer to do the post processing for free
d. Someone to take on the post processing at a cost to you

If it is c or d what format do you have the images in ie Canon RAW, Nikon RAW, Jpeg etc and what size are the images ie maegapixels.

[Simpo Two]

Ricepilot said:

What I'm talking about is massive shadows behind the subjects, wonky photos and the like. Now I can sort out the wonky photos but anything else is beyond me. Also, it'd be good to get some crops pulling out the details of things because it looks at the moment as if my auntie took the photos.

I understand that there are limits and it not going to make the wedding look like it happened in the Seychelles but I'm just after a few pics I can put in a book or something without me opening it every so often only to have my heart sink within 10 seconds.

In advance, thanks

First, well done for trying to stay reasonable. Clearly there is a difference between what you expected and what you got, but unless you're going to personally approve every shot through the viewfinder on the day, it's difficult to see how the two can match exactly.

'Wonky', but which I presume you mean not level, is easy to correct and the photographer should have done this during processing - I always do, and readers of this forum will know how fussy I am about level horizons etc!

Crops are also easy to do if there is sufficient resolution. However cropping is a subjective matter and I always like to give my customers a 'full' version which can be cropped later if they wish (I offer up to two hours of extra Photoshop work free). After all, you can only throw away information once.

Your third comment is 'massive shadows behind the subjects'. I assume these photographs are taken outdoors on a sunny day? If so there WILL be very dark shadows - the camera cannot expose both for bright highlights (eg a white wedding dress in full sun) and dark shadows. However, there are ways to reduce the effect. In such high contrast scenes I double-process each RAW file, once for the highlights and once for the shadows. They can then be composited into a single image which has the best parts of both, either with a layer mask or simple eraser. It takes much more time, but can make a massive difference.

I think and hope that this is just a processing issue, and that if the original files are processed more sympathetically, and perhaps with some input from yourself (eg on how you want them cropped), you can end up with a significantly better set - certainly enough to make up a photobook. In short, think of what you have as a starting point rather than an end point. Let's hope he shot RAW and not JPG.

[plg101]

Can you PM a link to flickr or similar so that we could have a look?

[Simpo Two]

plg101 said:

Can you PM a link to flickr or similar so that we could have a look?

I agree it would be helpful technically, but there is almost certainly a copyright issue in reproducing the photographs, especially on the internet, unless otherwise agreed in writing. Boring but true.

[Kermit power]

Simpo Two said:

plg101 said:

Can you PM a link to flickr or similar so that we could have a look?

I agree it would be helpful technically, but there is almost certainly a copyright issue in reproducing the photographs, especially on the internet, unless otherwise agreed in writing. Boring but true.

If he's paid for the soft copy versions of the images, then surely he can do what he wants with them, can't he? I would imagine most people doing that with wedding pics would do so specifically so that they can stick them on the internet for people to share?

[Simpo Two]

Kermit power said:

If he's paid for the soft copy versions of the images, then surely he can do what he wants with them, can't he? I would imagine most people doing that with wedding pics would do so specifically so that they can stick them on the internet for people to share?

That's a logical but commonly held misconception - by law copyright remains with the author (the photographer) unless specifically agreed otherwise. Paying for the product/s does not transfer copyright. For myself, I grant customers a licence (ie permission to use) when the bill is paid to make prints, photobooks, copy the image files and upload to the internet for family and friend use (ie non-commercial). However, that is simply me and other photographers will have their own terms. The OP needs to look at the original terms of the agreement for guidance. Ultimately it's for the two of them to decide a way forward.

[plg101]

I understand copyright, but for a wedding photo shoot (and I had mine recently) - I would never agree anything that didn't give me the delivery of all of the RAWs and "developed" JPEGS/TIFFs and transfer of all rights to me; but that's me. I selected and paid for photographers + limited post processing, rather than a wedding book arrangement; everything post basic processing is up to me (hosting/printing) and at my risk, and they were fine with it.

[Simpo Two]

Yep, that's absolutely fine - whatever you agree with your tog is what you can do

[plg101]

Simpo Two said:

Yep, that's absolutely fine - whatever you agree with your tog is what you can do

Had a look at your site - some nice work - I think your reportage / less formal shots work the best; more fun to shoot as well?

[Simpo Two]

plg101 said:

Had a look at your site - some nice work - I think your reportage / less formal shots work the best; more fun to shoot as well?

Thanks plg! I never set out to do what I do, it found me... Essentially I do stuff the way I like to do it, and if people like it, they buy some That way I'm not pretending to be something I'm not, or trying to copy someone else. I think of myself not as 'wedding photographer', which instantly implies stuffiness and limitations, but as a 'photographer of people who mostly seem to be at weddings'... I love what I do and it still chuffs me when someone agrees





But anyway, where's the OP?

[Ricepilot]

Simpo Two said:

But anyway, where's the OP?

Sorry, night shifts last night and I've just woken. ;-)

OK, so I did leave out some relevant answers to the questions some of you posed but didn't think I'd have a really good response like you guys (as if I ever doubted) gave, so cheers for that.

grumpy bear said:

Not clear what you're asking for is it:

a. Advice on how to do the post processing
b. How to handle the discussions with the original photographer
c. Someone on here to offer to do the post processing for free
d. Someone to take on the post processing at a cost to you

e.If it is c or d what format do you have the images in ie Canon RAW, Nikon RAW, Jpeg etc and what size are the images ie maegapixels.

a. I haven't the skills (or possibly the time to learn them)
b. Not really that bothered on that, I could have a conversation but judging on standard of original work I have no confidence that this will correct them.
c. That'd be nice
d. More likely
e. I made sure that I had all the photos rights transfered to me so I can do whatever I want with them in all respects. However, they are all Jpegs and not the RAW files I expected unfortunately. Image size is 2128x1416 which isn't the greatest in the world.

Simpo Two said:

Your third comment is 'massive shadows behind the subjects'. I assume these photographs are taken outdoors on a sunny day?

No quite the opposite. It was raining and 99% of the shots were indoors. I'll give you an idea that it looks like the Honey Monster is stalking me! I do understand that the weather made a huge problem of not being able to shoot with some nice greenery in the background but to have a photo taken in our lounge with quite a lot of clutter around (including a waste paper bin) possibly wasn't the greatest of 'studios'. (Oh and I have since had a word with the new wife to make sure she empties the bins more often)

plg101 said:

Can you PM a link to flickr or similar so that we could have a look?

Yes, I have uploaded them to my website. I think the best thing to do will be send you all a link to it via PM. There was 192 photos after I had taken out all the blurred/out of focus ones. Would love to know opinions. Perhaps I am asking too much just because I have a keen interest in photography...

Thanks guys!

[nsa]

Mine were a bit pony as well. Her parents paid and they seemed happy so not much I could say. If I could do it again I'd do everything I could do get a friend or friend of a friend to do them. You can be a lot more honest about what you want.

Edited by nsa on Monday 10th August 18:14

[plg101]

Have PM'd... will post the comments only if you are okay with them.

[S. Gonzales Esq.]

I did a wedding for a friend last year, and it rained all day. I'd taken lighting kit so it wasn't a disaster, but they're not the greatest set of pics. It took an enormous amount of processing to get them to a point where I was satisfied with them - that's why I'm never shooting another wedding.

Not much help to the OP I know, but a professional should have some sort of contingency plan and be able to get something, whatever the conditions.

[Andy M]

grumpy bear said:

Not clear what you're asking for is it:

c. Someone on here to offer to do the post processing for free

Possibly a slightly odd offer/suggestion, but if a few others were to come forward and offer the same/similar, I'd be willing to edit 5-10 shots for free.

If no money is involved, I can't see anybody having the time to edit them all for you, but if they were broken up into batches I'm sure there are enough people here who would be willing to offer their services?

Anyway, feel free to mail me 5-10 of your favourite shots. Send the files exactly as the photographer gave them to you and I'll have a look at them, but please don't send any really sh*tty ones - I'm snowed under with work right now and don't want to have to spend hours on each file

fastcomdotnet at gmail dot com

[Ricepilot]

Guys,

Really am staggered by the responses I've had. Many many thanks...

I promise to reply to each email when I wake up (cos I'm way to knackered now!)

And, Andy thats a very very kind gesture. Cheers