uh oh, it's a bride photo for critique

[n8]

I'm pretty sure I like this one, but there's just something that's saying "not yet." I'm almost thinking treatment wise rather than technical stuff. This was done with my lensbaby and the sweet 35. I keep thinking she could be a bit sharper in the face, but I'm getting some good eyelash detail at 100%, so I don't know.

[Skyman]

Just my two cents but I don't like lensbaby or similar optic effects for a wedding unless it is on your second / spare camera or you are fast enough to take one sharp photo for each shot with an effect.

The reason is exactly this photo. Its a good photo, with loads of potential except the lensbaby overdoes it a bit. If this were taken with a regular lens, you could create the lensbaby effect in photoshop easily enough, but you can't fix the shot when the effect occurs in the lens.

photographically, I want to see more sharpness in her dress and flowers. I don't need the far shoulder super sharp but not that blurred and I find the way the bokeh changes itself a little dizzying - like a bad zoom effect but worse.

[n8]

Thanks Skyman. The bright side is that I was the second shooter, so the #1 got the shots you were referring to while I got to play. I hear the LB is a love or hate it kind of thing. I enjoy doing it in camera, although I know several ways to fake it. I do agree that the bokeh can be rough, so I've played with blurring it a tad to calm it down.

[SmartWombat]

The lensbaby is definitely a Marmite thing - love it or hate it.
I thought I liked it initially, but having seen it in action I would want it on a 3rd body and I suspect I would throw 90% of them.

I hate it.
I am not sure I'd like doing it in post either, but at least in post I can fine tune the effect.

On first viewing I thought the image was a slow exposure pull zoom, and the effect was overdone to the point of feeling dizzy.

[n8]

I'm getting that the lensbaby effect isn't too popular, but I'm wondering if it's the blur, or the quality of it (I think it's a bit rough compared to the 50mm optic). Here's an edit where I tamed the bg a bit, and also did some other stuff.

[GB1]

Hmm... hard to evaluate this one, as it's quite abstract and therefore artsy, hence more in eye of the beholder than a regular image capture. But I would say that I like the first better because the more intense green of the second is too intense and steals a little attention from her. A lot of blow out hot spots, but I think it's OK from the perspective that you captured her smile and eyes. I would individually sharpen her eyes and mouth a bit here, and maybe reduce contrast a bit. Nice creation in post too btw.

G

[geraldb]

I agree with skyman, this would have been a classic if lensbaby was not used, I don't think the bride would have a different opinion years from now. She will probably say "I love the way I looked but I don't know why the photographer did that?".
Wedding pictures are about memories that couples love to remember every detail of by looking at the pictures, including the dress, flowers, surroundings. Details should not be compromised for creativity, my opinion. As a creative work, I like it.

[LeeIs]

n8, that thing that says 'not yet' to me is the blurred out top of the head. I wish that was sharp along with her face. I don't mind the rest of it. lovely colours, pose and smile though.

[Photo-John]

I like the first one the best and although I don't love the LensBaby effect here, I don't really mind it, either. I do think it would help if her face were a little sharper. I definitely wouldn't blur anything more. I like the bit of detail that's bleeding through in the lower part of the image. To my eye, the real issue with this image is the contrast. I think a bit of fill flash to open up and soften up her face would have made it a lot better. Flash might have also helped sharpen up here face, too. Correct me if I'm wrong but it looks like there may be a bit of motion blur here as well as the effects of the LensBaby?

[n8]

Motion blur? Maybe. I usually shoot w/ auto iso and a minimum of 1/125. It was shot a 2.5, but would have to check the exif. Like I said before, zoomed in, even her eye lashes confirm a pretty solid focus, but there's certainly a lot of room for error when the focal point is getting moved around like this. It's a good thing I was second shooter, and given free reign to experiment. One thing I don't like about this optic compared to the others is that the bokeh is certainly a bit rough.