for my website

I intend to take my calligraphy business online soon, and I have some pics from a while back of some invitations I did. I'd like to know what forum users think of these, and if they will work for a website. The look I'm going for is pretty and romantic, since most of my clients are brides.
So, the question is: if you saw these on a calligraphy services website, would you be impressed? Please nitpick if necessary.

1.




2.




3.




4.





There's a few more on my picasa web album. Have a look and feel free to comment there as well, if you like. Since I took these, I have more to photograph, but would like feedback on these before I proceed with the rest. Thanks!

Exquisite work and lovely presentation. Most suitable for a website I think.

Cheers,

Stephen

Difficult to image this commercial type of thing being done any better. Should make a very favourable impression.

Andrew

They look fantastic, I'm sure they will appeal to millions of brides-to-be

From a photography pointy of view number 2 is a bit noisy in the top right

Numbers 1 & 3 lack clarity to my mind. It's clear that the calligraphy is beautiful but you can't really read the words well enough as you can with nos 2 & 4.

We need ken for example to tell us how to light them to their best advantage.

The dressing with jewellery is a good idea but (as always) I think they need to be killer sharp and very well lit. That rose looks dreadful so either get it looking better or lose it. In fact you'll struggle to have the rose in focus as well as the paper so why not use petals rather than a bloom then you'll get them in focus.

The orange shell doesn't look so great to my eyes but that's probably just me and in the same shot the shell has cast a hard shadow which I suspect you don't want for perfection.

Of course given the obvious quality of your work I'm not sure how important any of this is!

Mike

Ack, sorry to differ with the first responses. Yes the shots are ok of cards, but I don't think they do justice to the calligraphy. For example the first and third I can barely see the words and the second needs more contrast/sharpness(?). The 4th is fine although again I'd say get in closer.

Calligraphy is an incredibly beautiful, patient & skilled craft - I used to do a lot of it when I was younger. I'm surprised actually how badly calligraphy is generally photographed! - I went for a look around the web to give you some concrete examples of what calligraphy photography impresses me but there are very few. http://www.quillskill.com/ homepage has the sort of impact I'd want to see, but I'm struggling to find others.

I love the writing
I think numbers 2 and 4 work best. Number 3, being white on white, has too little contract (IMHO) and strong white lines around some of the edges looks...erm..odd??

I think you should take comments from photographers with a pinch of salt Surely most of your clients won't care about the low contrast? They'll notice the silver ink and say "I want that one!". I know I've received enough wedding invitations in silver!

I think they're gorgeous shots and very well suited to a commercial website.

Very nice and well presented, but I do agree with Nass about the writing not standing out, especially on the third shot. I know you want to show examples of the finer writing (is it grey or silver?) but perhaps for the shot showing the entire package something with darker ink?

Great choice of background on the last one, goes great with the shells, it would be perfect for someone from a nautical family.

Very profesional work.

Thanks for the input. Much appreciated.

# 1 and 3 were very difficult, the ink is a pale grey. I realize the words are hard to see, and that's a problem. These will probably be redone, and I just might change the background to a darker color for more depth - maybe a plum satin to go with the grey. There's not a whole lot to be done with the ink color. Hopefully Tim is right, and brides will see the unusual color and be intrigued.

Good idea!! I'll try that. I agree the rose looks terrible.

Overall, I think these are just ok. I would really like to have more ambience in them, to stand out as a true "event" professional. I'm starting to ask the event photographer if they will snap a few tablescapes and such (to show placecards, menus, etc) for me, which I can buy and use. I do have closeups of some of the script, and can produce more of course, which I plan to present as a mouse-over on the coordinating images.

I think everyone else has said it so far. The only thing I might add is that for good examples of the text (so that someone could choose a style for example) you might be better off scanning some. For arty attractive images clearly this is the way to go. I like the rose petals idea, helps with DOF a great deal.

I just found out that in Colorado you can get married without anyone officiating and without any witnesses. Ahhhh bliss

K.

Your calligraphy is pure artistry, absolutely beautiful. This type of subject is quite difficult to light. I think you used natural light on no.2 hence the high iso and resultant noise, and on camera flash on the others. This will tend to flatten the texture of the card and is a little harsh. I would suggest using two, or even three, flashes lighting from the sides with perhaps a tiny bit of fill flash on camera. Lighting from the sides may raise the card texture a bit. Or use natural light with a low iso and longer shutter speed. Play around with your lighting and you will find what works for you.
Cheers
Chris

GT,

There's a dichotomy here, as raised by Tim.

The rub is, if you're using photographic images to promote your products, you may need to take account of that aspect as well.

That said, the cards deserve plenty of positive feedback - they are good.

I would personally probably focus differently, using f2.8 and a 100 to drop the focus point down to a word "marriage" or "ceremony" in some incidental shots. I also don't like the lack of focus on the shells in the last one, I'd go up to f/16 with a 35 or 50 macro.

I'd also emphasise the reality of the paper somewhere, the 2.8 idea would do that, too.

Bret