Professional wedding photographer here. Honestly for a first effort not bad. Let us dig deeper.
>>3104243Lot of good stuff here, nice even light, good separation from the background. Nice expression. Bizarre choice of shutter/ISO but we can put that down to a rooky error. I still make them after 350 weddings.
That pile of logs needs to go, big distraction but easy to clone off. Also brides fingers appearing around the grooms waste at the back looks a little odd. After eyes and expression hands are the most important.
Thematically however the image feels utterly forced. It reeks of being posed and in the UK and US at the moment the fashion is very much towards natural. Couples are telling me they don't want to be posed at all because unless you are a model 99% of the time it looks shit and unnatural, which is true. You struck lucky here and I am guessing you know the couple because they seem comfortable with you but you need to focus on getting shots in the moment.
>>3104246OK, but no clear subject. I find myself looking at the stag no the groom. You either wanted to be further right and make the groom more dominant or further left and make it about both of them. As is the photo is sort of in a no man’s land. What was the subject?
An image is farm more likely to fail because it tries to do too much, not too little, so keep it simple. You can practice it with this game: Give a photograph a title. Then accentuate everything in an image that supports the title and diminish everything that does not. Work on that and you will see big improvement.
Also, ignore the bed wetters on here who slate wedding photography. It is one of the most challenging occupations as a photographer requiring mastery of many different technical disciplines as well as managing people which most of the autists that populate this board can't do.
Also please resize to 1000px.
