We love how that white draping background and lack of color makes it so you can barely even tell she’s wearing a wedding dress!
← Previous post
Next post →
This isn’t black and white, it’s grey and greyer.
Ahhh! A ghost!!!
I’ve seen a lot worse.
was about to say the same thing.
Honestly, pop up the contrast just a tad and its not a terrible photo, I actually like the draping backdrop. Its high-key, its a look, they greyed it out and exposed a tad too much – but really not terrible. They very well may have been going for a washed out vintage look.
More like bring down the exposure. Contrast would make the hot spots hotter.
This photo is as colorful as the photographer’s creativity. Has the photographer ever seen a histogram before? She probably just thought it wasn’t working since the only thing you’d see is a long straight line hugging the right side of the graph; desperately hiding to disassociate itself from the photo, I bet.
I don’t really think this one deserves to be here. I’ve seen much worse and while it could use some definite highlight recovery, I kind of actually like the high key effect. It’s clean.
You know…as far as photos that make this website are concerned this one isn’t horrible. The editing though is dreadful.
Why do people always say this? are we trying to put a positive spin on it for the poor fauxtog’s feelings? Come on, the composition is horrible, the weight of the photo is horrible, the lighting is not good, and even turned to monotone, the adjustments are horrible. If this was shot in monotone, the lighting is even worse than I thought.
True, but compared to what else makes it onto this site, it’s downright brilliant.
I said it because in this case it’s not a super feathered cut-out of a baby’s head stuck into the center of a grayscale flower with a white vignette and text (in comic sans.) I want to see people with direct flash sitting on plastic horses dang it! Is it a dated pose? Yes. Would getting lower have helped…probably. Does she have some man hands going on? Yes. But based on the standards here and the fact that you don’t have to look at it for 3 minutes to tell what the heck it is…it’s “not horrible.” What I was really getting at is that it hasn’t sunk to the same level suck I hope to see here. It sucks…it just sucks less. I think the processing is what brought it down to the level of youarenotaphotographer.
A little contrast would have helped immensely. The backdrop is nice – very bridal looking, I think. And props for not coloring just the bride’s face or something.
C’mon, no one has said it yet? Oh ok, I’ll sacrifice my own dignity and make the obvious comment, and what title on this should have been.
’50 Shades of Grey’
I’ll be here all night.
This is pretty much in line with the hip style right now. Yeah, it’s a tad bit more exposed than optimal, but this absolutely in no way deserves to be here. This is not from a fauxtographer. You can tell this photographer is at least generally competent.
Please show me an example of this that is trending AND good.
I know what Sean means, I have seen this style a lot and have used it myself. I think the bride looks uncomfortable in it though and that ruins it for me. Straightening the photo would have also helped as well as slightly more contrast, although looking at it, it would possibly cut off some of the dress. Not sure if I agree it’s from a competent photographer as crookedness is usually a rookie mistake.
I’ve seen the “S curve” , vintage “thing” a lot lately, it is trending. But I agree it’s really overexposed and I don’t think recovery would help. However, if this is a new photographer, lets hope they are the kind who is willing to learn. This is the kind of image that could use CC so the photog can learn from it, It’s not the total disaster that is common to the fauxtog.
I agree. It has that blown out “vintage” look that seems to be circulating. There are definitely worse photos to be on here.
I am engaged, and just showed the photo to my bride-to-be, and her exact words were, “you can’t even see any details of her dress. if I got this in my package, I’d be pissed.” So… maybe she’s not “in line with the hip style”, or maybe this is just bad…
50 shades of gray
182 actually. Yeah, I counted. 😀
To be honest, a lot of those shades only have a few pixels used. Most pixels live in the 130 to 183 range (8-bit, so 255 is black). So 50 is probably not a bad estimate.
And yes, I do get the reference. 😉
This could have been a nice shot. I like it – when I use my imagination and change the contrast so I can actually see what’s happening.
I’ve seen a lot worse! No, not a professional standard pic,and exposure is all wrong, but not awful. It’s boring.
It’s not a bad photo – just need a little work. I see horrible photos everyday and this is nothing.
If compared to the normal greyed out “dead baby” look pictures, this one is of suoerior quality. If compared to good bridal pictures, there are those that are lots better but also that are much worse,,,
Did my best to make it look less crappy. http://prntscr.com/e3kcs
A bit better, so now I can see what’s happening. Still, overall, I’m sad to say a rather ho-hum photo. I’ll freely admit it might be a photo I’d take, but I’d have never left it where the photog did. Different angle, lighting, contrast, white balance, zoom in. Something, anything more than just this.
A few people have said that this image is too good to be on this website…………………….
The image is way, way over exposed. To me threre also appears to be camera shake. A faster shutter speed could have easily rectified both. This is basic stuff that this fauxtog is getting wrong, so it definatley should be here imo.
“It’s not a bad photo – just need a little work. I see horrible photos everyday and this is nothing. ”
No, it is a bad photo and it needs more than a little work. You can’t polish a turd- you just end up with a shiny turd. The lighting is bad, contrast is bad, composition and posing is bad, the background is distracting.
If we keep saying “it is not awful” or “there are a lot worse out there” we just continue to lower the bar and say crap is the new normal- which is the direction we are moving in. As the market gets flooded with crap, the general public looses sight of quality. It is an awful picture for the simple reason someone paid money to capture their wedding memories and this is what they got. Would you have the same attitude if it was your wedding?
I like the minimalist concept, but it is really badly executed. Like everyone else has said, the contrast, brightness and lighting obliterate the lines of her dress. The folds in the backdrop might have helped define the model’s contours had the lighting been better, and the dress itself should have been arranged with more care around her feet. Also, though it’s probably a matter of preference, she needs something for her hands like a bouquet so that they do not look so awkwardly idle.
As for its place on this web site, I’m dubious. Most of the stuff on here is not only bad in comparison to professionals, but is bad even by most amateurs’ standards. This one is not a good photo, but hardly worth working oneself up into a tizzy over.
More care went into the draping of the bg than into showing the details of her dress. And she looks either *ahem* crampy and/or indecisive with her hands in that position. Previously mentioned flaws aside, all of which I agree with, it’s simply a boring pic because there’s a whole lotta nothin’ going on.
Uh oh, I actually kind of like this photo! It’s a bit too over exposed, but it’s well composed and it does have that vintage feel that is so popular right now. This, to me, looks like it was taken by a pro and maybe edited to the liking of the client.
What is good about the composition? It’s off-center just a little bit, but not enough to look purposeful. And “that vintage feel” is the feel of being left in the sun wayyyy too long so that all detail is washed out. What bride wants the drapery in the background of her photo to be more detailed than her dress?!
Here’s a bridal photo with “that vintage feel” that is well executed (with the bride as the focal point instead of the background), not a complete hack job with the loss of any meaningful detail… http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_k3G4RMNSVTE/TG7ORe6ulpI/AAAAAAAAAVU/5pkVfIgQQo0/s1600/vintage_bridal_ads2.jpg
I keep seeing people say this is vintage. I thought it was a modern thing. I know the dress the OP model is wearing is nontraditional, which is why the drapery works..or would have worked, had the lighting been better. It actually brings out the minimalism in her dress. Then again, most people don’t care for minimalism where weddings are concerned.
As for this idea that overexposure is Emperor’s New Clothes, I’ve seen it too. A friend just had a set of family portraits done by a reputed professional, and she is just raving happy about the set, many of which look like the developed print has been kept sun-bleaching on the dashboard of a car for two years. I suppose in a medium where colours no longer fade, people begin to long for their photos to look like “real” faded family photos.
The staging just makes her look about three feet tall.
At least it’s all exposed properly!
No, it’s not exposed properly at all. Look at the histogram…
I don’t know why… but first thing that came to mind was… shot from the Ghost Whisperer. :p
This is not a bad photo at all. It’s a little too light. Make it darker and I can guarantee you it will be a beautiful photo. I wouldn’t call it vintage, it’s more a matte-look which is the current “in-thing” at the moment.
As I said, make it darker to show a true black + white and it would be great.
I actually think this one doesn’t belong here too. For all we know this could be a film image and a high key project at that. When I took a portrait class, we had to do a high key just like this. I think this one has more of a personal taste to it, but is by no means a bad capture. Especially when compared to some of the flops you post. Give this one a break 😉
I don’t think this belongs on here at all – this is a site for “fauxtographers” – is this picture amazing? No – but its NOTHING compared to the stuff you guys have on here – in fact this kind of photo is what gives your website a bad name. We don’t all have to agree with each other about stylistic stuff and honestly there are tons of us pros who can look at our work and wish we could go back and change stuff. This is not a critique site to help a person hone their craft – this is supposed to be a site to point out people that have no effing clue – no skills and who are ruining our trade. Let’s keep it classy please
This one wasn’t so bad, kind of like cleansing the palate before going on.
Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.