What Do These Wedding Photos need

[GraciAnn]

Hi Folks,

I am trying to sort out wedding photos taken from professional photographer of my daughters wedding. They were copied on to a CD.

I am making very basic adjustments using PS CS3.

I have come across several (high resolution) photos zooming in at 100 percent and finding a not so clear image that is impossible to edit with my basic PS skills - If I were to describe the major frustration - it looks like 'spattered ink' - perhaps a not in focus issue (?)

Can anyone identify what is wrong here & perhaps suggest a PS adjustment that I can add to the work flow? Many thanks! GraciAnn

[David Worthington]

this is one of the problems with an "images on cd only " coverage...I do warn my clients about this....but to be fair the image quality doesnt look professional to start with IMHO....way to much noise for me......and if its a Pro job , the basic image adjustments should have been carried out by the tog before they gave you the cd images..........and its badly posed too !!


apart from that...........you have a stunning daughter.

go to the "who are you board" and say HI to the folks in here....then more replies to this thread may follow

[MickT]

this is one of the problems with an "images on cd only " coverage...I do warn my clients about this....but to be fair the image quality doesnt look professional to start with IMHO....way to much noise for me......and if its a Pro job , the basic image adjustments should have been carried out by the tog before they gave you the cd images..........and its badly posed too !!


apart from that...........you have a stunning daughter.

Welcome to the forum.....Completely agree with Dave here - the image is very 'noisy'...I've had a quick go with it but it's not so easy with a 'low res' shot....increased the exposure using curves and then increased contrast again using curves and dropped the levels a bit. Rotated the canvas to straighten it and added a vignette ...and then applied a quick 'pass' of noise ninja.
Cheers :)
Mick

[David Worthington]

thats about the best that can be done with the low res file.....and the crop is spot on too !

[GraciAnn]

Thanks Dave & Mike,

Appreciate the time you took to improve the image - wasn't a good idea to have a photographer just do a shoot & burn to cd (daughter's idea). I'm the one trying HARD to put together some sort of album & am having a very hard time of it after almost a year coming up in May - have 500 photos to go through that were supposedly all HIGH RESOLUTION.

I hesitated introducing myself because I'm not a photographer (learner photoshop) but love your forum & am getting lots of knowledge on quality photography from everyone here ~ Thanks again!

p.s. curious - camera raw settings indicate 'high resolution', also what about photo makes it a 'bad shot' (even though I might agree..)

[MickT]

Hi - the exif data is showing this was taken on a canon 20D at 75mm, f10, 1/500th second at iso 800 - no flash. Im not sure how good the 20D is at that iso setting but there was no need for it to be that high...and I would imagine the exposure has already been 'pushed' on this resulting in the noise issues (meaning it was under-exposed to start with). If the shot had to be taken where it is with that background I personally would've reduced the ISO setting and opened up the aperture significantly (both to reduce any noise as well as to get the background out of focus). When you add in that the pose isn't great either, this all adds up to a 'bad shot' as Dave has said.
Hope this helps.
Mick

[Adam J Binnie]

Im not sure how good the 20D is at that iso setting

Got a 20d. Not very!

[Garthy]

Hi - the exif data is showing this was taken on a canon 20D at 75mm, f10, 1/500th second at iso 800 - no flash. Im not sure how good the 20D is at that iso setting but there was no need for it to be that high...and I would imagine the exposure has already been 'pushed' on this resulting in the noise issues (meaning it was under-exposed to start with). If the shot had to be taken where it is with that background I personally would've reduced the ISO setting and opened up the aperture significantly (both to reduce any noise as well as to get the background out of focus). When you add in that the pose isn't great either, this all adds up to a 'bad shot' as Dave has said.
Hope this helps.
Mick

Have to agree with mick T here on what hes said, its a bit of a joke Im no Pro and never likely to be a weddin tog , however, the issues that are fundamentally wrong with this image are the very basics of photograhpy

High ISO - Why?? this looks like a well lit scene and this is reflected in the 1/500 shutter speed ISO 200 or 400 would have been oh so much better meaning the image had less noise and would be better for editing.

F10 Apeture - Why? I can only see the reason for keeping the apeture this size and keeping the backgrouns in focus would be if there was something nice looking in the background. Although some would argue no matter how good looking the background was you shouldnt be distracting from the couple in the foreground, its their day after all.

But that said It would be unfair for any of us to judge the photographer on this one image, its what happens when people take the cheap option in the photographer, ive heard it said before things like couples are willing to spend thousands on a cake, a venue, decorations, the cars etc but the one thing that last forever (Photographs) they try to skimp on and then wonder why the product they get aint all that great :-(

A wedding Tog shooting with a 20D using an 800 ISO was probably quite cheap compared to other togs and thats now reflected in the fact that you have to yourself sort through 500 photographs and do all the work as opposed to a pro doing it on the images he created.

Sry to get on my hi horse as Im not a pro tog so some may say dont have the right to, however, Im sure some pro togs probably have the exact same thoughts and are A either just not willing to express them or B aint seen this post yet.

Other than that good luck with the sorting and hope the albm comes out well.

[Digicase]

ISO 800, shooting out door at 1/500th, WHY? :swoon: Was the guy using a 300mm lens or something? If the rest of them are like that, and he is claiming to be a pro, I'd ask for my money back

[GraciAnn]

Great info - thanks! Garthy: I agree on the 'cheap way out' regarding the wedding photographer. I thought it stunk from the get go - & the trouble is; she wasn't exactly cheap ($1200). Grooms folks paid as a 'gift' and I offered to do my basic photoshop thing. Out of 500 shots, only a handful are salvageable. I've left a dozen bad 'reviews' on several wedding vendor websites/blogs to warn other brides to beware so I am also on high horse! Thanks for the time, guys. Love this forum. GraciAnn

[David Worthington]

so sad when this happens.....I wish you well to salvage something from the mess they left you in .

[Garthy]

yeah seems like she wasnt all that cheap after all 1200 dollars is about 900 pounds our money and thats deinately not cheap.

Wish you luck salvaging them, we are here for any advice if you need it (Probably wont be me im a learner on PS too lol)

[Paul Swift]

Im not sure how good the 20D is at that iso setting


Got a 20d. Not very!

Agree, I have one in my bag and anything above ISO400 is quite noisy.

[MickT]

Great info - thanks! Garthy: I agree on the 'cheap way out' regarding the wedding photographer. I thought it stunk from the get go - & the trouble is; she wasn't exactly cheap ($1200). Grooms folks paid as a 'gift' and I offered to do my basic photoshop thing. Out of 500 shots, only a handful are salvageable. I've left a dozen bad 'reviews' on several wedding vendor websites/blogs to warn other brides to beware so I am also on high horse! Thanks for the time, guys. Love this forum. GraciAnn

Hi GraciAnn....we get exactly the same over here - seems it's a symptom of the digital age that so many people with a cam think they can stick it on full auto and 'do weddings'.....agree with Dave that it really is sad when things go wrong (seems to be happening an awful lot - which isn't surprising to most of us tho). Anyway...editing a low res file can be difficult....I'd be more than happy to have a go at one of your full res files if you like and tell you exactly what I did...you can email me from my profile if you'd like me to have a go :)

Cheers
Mick

[GraciAnn]

What a mess & you all are so right...very sad. Thanks everyone for your helpful input! :banghead:

Mick - I appreciate your offer & would love for you to take a look at a photo or 2. I tried to get your contact info from your profile but it says I don't have 'privileges' eventhough I'm signed on. Any suggestions why this is happening?

[Garthy]

What a mess & you all are so right...very sad. Thanks everyone for your helpful input! :banghead:

Mick - I appreciate your offer & would love for you to take a look at a photo or 2. I tried to get your contact info from your profile but it says I don't have 'privileges' eventhough I'm signed on. Any suggestions why this is happening?

yeah i beleieve only premium accounts can pm on forums

[MickT]

What a mess & you all are so right...very sad. Thanks everyone for your helpful input! :banghead:

Mick - I appreciate your offer & would love for you to take a look at a photo or 2. I tried to get your contact info from your profile but it says I don't have 'privileges' eventhough I'm signed on. Any suggestions why this is happening?

Hi - if you click on my website link below and drop me an email using the contact form I'll get back to you :)
Cheers
Mick

[akb]

Going by the settings used, they are pretty close to putting the camera on Auto. Pro, my ass!
I would have a chat with the pro; state you arent happy with the quality. To charge you that much money for the unedited CD is not good. They are doing nothing for their reputation and you, the customer are clearly not satisfied. Whilst you can't do much about the posing, I would ask for another copy, edited and ready to print, high res.
Good luck! Maybe you can email each of us one high res image, and we can have a dabble... :-)

Anil.