The last 3 weddings...

[craigsexton]

Thanks Kelly!
To your question, both 4 & 5 on the first set are Metz shots. I just wish I had the forethought to drag the shutter on 5 (aisle shot). I'll definetly be using that technique in my next wedding in July.

Thanks for all of you other comments too.

I'm definetly no Pro and have a long ways to go but I'm sure enjoying the RIDE!

Craig

[Peacefield]

Well, I'll start with my negatives, some of which have already been expressed:
- The images lack a distinct style, a sense of continuity that ties them all together.
- I think you did a fine job on them, but I'm definitely not a fan of double exposures.
- Like double exposures, selective color seems a bit gimmicky by now. Unless it has something to really add to the photo which I don't think is the case with #6. The basic shot is good, but what really would have been nice is to simply have her look up into the camera.
- 7 definitely doesn't work for me. Try a wider lens and getting closer. And though casual groups can be great, they look like they were arranged TOO casually.
- Too many bubbles to see the couple exit the church
- 10 is too hot (which I know is part of the processing and done intentionally), 12 is a little flat.


All that said, I LOVE 4, 14, 17, 20, 23, and 25. And 18 is a hoot! You have some excellent images here.

All expressed as one man's opinion in a cordial spirit.

[littlegal]

I agree with the above. There is definately some killer stuff there, but it also kinda looks like several photogs took the photos. It's just not consistant. I mean they are consistantly good, but just not "joined". Does that make sense?