Disclaimer: I'm a newb at wedding photography, but the below is an explanation of my/the philosophy of wedding photography that I personally enjoy.
ahab wrote:Point taken Jayne. I just thought that the B&G were more important than the scenery For instance in the first one why not have the bride look over her shoulder.No2 I can't see the point of the balustrade hiding half the bride.
It's because I didn't want to interrupt/corrupt a story that was naturally unfolding, yes I know both of those images won't win any awards, but the reason I like them or at least feel they are important is because No.1 sets the scene, and in No.2 the bride is whispering something to her dad just before they are about to walk down the bridge/aisle. Only her and her dad know what was said, but hopefully when she is looking back through her album, that picture might just trigger a warm memory of that moment.
ahab wrote:and why would a shot of a pumpkin be in shot and the couple not?
It's a metaphor. Also sometimes I find less information is better, where it's better to imagine than see, maybe it's just me, but most kiss shot's look ugly (or forced) to me, and the real magic isn't the kiss, but the moment before and after. Also and maybe this is just me again, but... I get bored pretty quickly looking at 'typical' or 'traditional' repetitive shot after shot of the B&G, so I just looking to add some spice and depth where I could, and maybe force the viewer to take a moment to think about what the picture is trying to convey.
I set out that day to "tell the story" as best I could, but above all I didn't want the story telling to be typical, or bland.
ahab wrote:As I said it's the toggers choice
but it wouldn't be mine 
And I respect that.
