Kathy

It's nice to see such admirable work from one of our members, the lighting pose, composition, and depth of field are perfect, congratulations very well done.

Many thanks. If anyone's interested, I used a 6x7 165 f2.8 LS lens at f/11 with VPS 400 film. The main light was a 600 w/s Photogenic 1500 bare bulb strobe in a 28" Westcott Apollo with a mini Apollo over her head as a hair light and white reflector to her left. I might add the backdrop was a Westcott Hazel Pastel Muslin 10'x20'. You could light it different ways for different effects.

an image to be treasured for generations, no doubt!

To me it looks rather old fashioned and done in the 70s. But if that's what you were going for that's fine. My problem is the lighting. Also when describing your lighting to others, it's better to describe things as camera right and camera left so it's not as confusing as saying her right and her left, because her left is our right in a picture. Camera right is the right side of the picture. You obviously, from your Francis series, know how to light and to use a broad and a short light. So my problem with this picture is that in my opinion it should be a short light with much less reflector on camera right. From the catchlight in her left eye the right side of the picture received too much light.

Old fashioned, I don't know but, you're way off on the time line by quite a ways. I'm not an accomplished scanner and the original photo was actually a bit darker than what's here on the Internet. I wasn't sure how it would take and lightened it accordingly. Saying "her right" doesn't seem confusing to me but, I suppose may be for some. She liked the pose and lighting as did her Mom and they ordered enlargements for the family from 5x7 to 11x14 so if they were happy that makes me happy.

I'm guessing what PE means is the studio lit wedding portrait seems to have gone to the by and by, all wedding pics these days are al fresco, reportage or whatever....glad I'm out of it! What works is what works, and as you say, if the bride likes it, then we are all happy campers.

No one does studio portraits anymore? I find that most odd if so. I enjoyed the studio much more than weddings. Her wedding lasted five hours and wore me out. Afterwards another two hours at the reception. I was ready to go home. I too, am glad I no longer do the weddings but would still enjoy studio work as well as outdoor work. Lugging a large Pelican case that contained two 6x7 bodies, three lens, two Quantum Radio 4i slaves, extension cords, light stands, light modifiers and umbrella, flashmeter, two Photogenic 1500 lights and portable backgrounds was a lot of work.

I am horrid at studio lighting. I admire the heck out of this because it is a very nice rendition a woman on the biggest day of her life. Very frontal lighting, not hiding any of her faults. Showing her beauty as it is.