Wedding - Curzon Hall, Sydney

[dche5390]

A selection of photos from a recent wedding. Comments and opinions are most welcome.

1.


2.


3.


4.


5.


6.


7.


8.


9.


10.


11.


12.


13.


14.


15.


16.


17.


18.


19.


20.


21.


22.


23.


24.


More here: http://www.danielkcheung.com/wedding...lm-nikon-asian

Cheers,
Dan

[cuzbruz]

Very nice as usual mate. PS, we need to catch up!

[k1ll3r]

<--- In no way an expert or should take my advice seriously.

IMO the photo's look dull and not enough colour in them.
But this is in all photos and might be a theme your doing?

19 is my pick of the bunch

[nEBUz]

Very nice Dan I liked 9 as soon as I saw it. Framing excellence imho.

P.s., we should also catch up (If I ever get to Sydney again...)

Should rename the thread to 'the we should catch up with Dan' thread.

[2SHY]

Nice Shots. Great Location too.

[The_Shadow]

Really like 19 and 22 and of course your usual consistency, also had to say that I have a pair of those cufflinks though mine is 1 Autobot and 1 Decepticon so I'm thinking of getting another set so I can wear 2 of each.

[Blankdots]

15 and 22.

Have you ever used a tilt shift when shooting a wedding where the architecture stands out?

Not really a fan of the post processing (although I can see how it might look good when printed).

[Dropbear]

The processing is consistent, but why you're trying to mimic the look of 20 year old washed out prints is beyond me ...

6,8,11 and 16 i guess are 'hip' but in my opinion just bad composition..

[Azrael]

Originally Posted by Dropbear

6,8,11 and 16 i guess are 'hip' but in my opinion just bad composition..

Composition using negative space to frame the subject, even if it is an obscured framing, isn't anything new, and i don't think you could call it distinctively 'hip' or anything.

I think it works really well in 16, and in 8 and 11 i think it would work slightly better with a tighter crop (minus door itself in 8, and closer on the mirror in 11).

Im not such a big fan of the desat, but i loved Velvia too....

[Dropbear]

its the de-contrast that looks cheap compared to the de-sat IMO

[Arch-Angel]

A lot of these (if not all) look quite soft to me.
Not sure if that is a result of the de-contrast, since I’ve seen you process other shots this way and they’ve always looked fine. Might have something to do with the new logo maybe? (assuming it’s an automated process)
Or could be both…

[triggerpeg]

Nice set Dan told the day quite well and the last one capped it off as a good ending. Loved the lines of 2. eyes kinda pinball around the lines and found things interesting all over. no.24 is good too. wanted to do something like this to end all my weddings but couples have never given me any time to sneak away.

Now for the salt... I found that its not your best work, looks a bit too muted, blacks cut too much. Aslo I found most of them to be soft...(hmm processing?)

PS. Curzon hall as in the one near Eastwood?...Damn they must have fixed up the venue. A few years ago I went there it was kinda like a 100yo brown sandstone building with rotten wood railings.

[dche5390]

Blogstomp at 95% killed the quality of the jpegs. I think (I hope). Having irregularities with sharpening in my workflow. Scratching my head at the moment for web purposed images as they look crap on screen, without killing someone's 3G data plan.

Curzon Hall is ... not somewhere I would like to photograph again. Worst lighting inside.

[triggerpeg]

Originally Posted by dche5390

Curzon Hall is ... not somewhere I would like to photograph again. Worst lighting inside.

green tint energy savers? Come on Dan...nothing that cant be fixed with some 100 hours of colour correction...

[dche5390]

I don't know what lights they have in there. There is absolutely no colour apart from yellow/green/gray tints. Worst combinations ever.