Tuesday, March 31, 2009

Four Seasons St. Louis: Wedding Photos of Christy and Mike

Christy and Mike contacted me looking for St. Louis wedding photography for their St. Louis wedding reception; they had recently gotten married in Hawaii. They secured the Four Seasons Hotel in St. Louis to use for some photos before their reception. The Four Seasons' elegant lobby plus its rooftop with a view of the Gateway Arch provided an amazing backdrop to use for some wedding portraits and formal pictures with their families:

Christy and Mike also asked if we could take a few shots in their room with some other members of their family:

Congrats to Christy and Mike!

What do you think of the selective coloring?


  1. I like it but they are a bit bold for my taste, I think I'd be more into less saturated but still colored flowers.

  2. Hey Johnathan! Great pictures, it looks like you had a great time with this shoot! I probably would have toned down the selective coloring so it's not quite as glaring, but other than that, well done!

    James Smith

  3. I'm with Crafty: like the concept but the execution on that overwhelms an otherwise the light tonal range of the pic ....

  4. IMO, I'm not a fan of the selective coloring. Personally.

  5. I think that particular photo works well with the color flowers and the rest black and white since the bride was kind of washed out with the background. But overall, I prefer full color or full black and white.

    You did a really good job on these photos. Nice location, great background, etc.

  6. I must say that I'm not a fan of selective coloring in general... just looks contrived to me. In this case I think it takes away from her pretty face. But I really like the rest of the set! Beautiful location :)

  7. nope - coloring not right here sorry - focus should be on the bride, not the flowers. I love selective coloring when it brings focus to the right place

  8. Thanks for all of the feedback regarding selective coloring! It's a technique I hadn't used before and I thought I'd give it a shot.

    Also, for the record, I supplied Christy and Mike with normal versions of that selectively colored photo. Fear not!

  9. I would stay away from doing selective color, that was so popular a few years back and really it dates you as a photographer which you don't want....

    Plus the bride and groom are going to look at those photos years down the road and think why the heck did we order photos like that....

    Glad you gave them the regular version as well.

  10. selective coloring has somewhat fallen to the wayside and isnt done to much anymore. In the pic with the flowers I would have toned down the color a bit, to much contrast between the bright and the b&w. The rest of the photos look pretty decent though!

  11. I know I'm late on this, but I just wanted to say, great use of the Arch in those photos!

    My thoughts on selective coloring: as someone who did A LOT of film photography back in the day, when I do selective coloring in Photoshop now, I try to make it pale and subtle, like a hand-colored photograph would be. (I've actually hand-colored prints before, see, so the aesthetic is clear in my mind.)

    So I would lean toward more subtle color, but that may be an artifact of my film experience.

    Also I agree that it takes away a bit from her face-- I actually think if I were going to color the flowers, I would do a severe crop and take her face out of the photo altogether to bring the focus to her hands.

    As for the suggestion that selective coloring is dated, I say pshaw. If the clients want it, the clients want it. If you personally like it, you like it. Fashions come and go, but selective coloring has been around since PHOTOGRAPHY has been around. (It's just that we used to have to do it very carefully with tiny brushes, and now it's a lot easier!)