A bride can spend hours in a makeup chair to look as though very little has been done, then step in front of a camera for photographs expected to feel as though nobody arranged them. Couples want to look convincingly unposed, but often arrive armed with reference images of the exact laughter, glances and stolen moments they hope their photographer will capture.
“I’ve come to realise that when a bride asks for natural makeup, she’s not necessarily asking for less makeup. She’s asking for makeup that feels natural to her,” says wedding makeup artist Reva Goswami.
Photographer Rahul Saharan has much the same problem with the word candid. “Honestly, I find the term candid quite confusing within the realm of wedding photography,” he says. “Today, we have posed candids, guided candids, and even pre-planned moments designed to appear spontaneous.”
Goswami remembers a bride who asked for minimal makeup and eventually chose a brown smoky eye and a blotted red lip to complement her red outfit. What mattered to her was that the base looked as though she were wearing very little foundation. “I think that experience really captures how subjective the word natural is,” says Goswami.
A candid photograph can be just as constructed; Saharan might position someone, adjust the light or offer some direction before allowing the moment to develop. “I believe there is a fundamental difference between documenting something that happens organically and creating something specifically for the camera,” he says. “Both can be done with honesty and creative intent, and both can have their place in the final body of work.”
In both cases, the technique may be doing a great deal while allowing the person to remain the first thing you notice.
That gets harder when the reference itself has concealed how much went into it. Goswami recalls studying a bridal photograph with impossibly smooth skin, fuller lips and exaggerated eyes and wondering how the makeup artist had achieved the finish. “I didn’t realise I was looking at editing,” she says. “It was only when I learnt about the filters being used that I was like, ‘Okay, now it makes sense.’”
Saharan encounters a different version when couples bring photographs of moments they would like recreated. “We all perceive, plan, and imagine things differently, and there is nothing wrong with having a certain taste or set of expectations,” he says. The difficulty begins when the reference becomes something to reproduce. “With some basic understanding, almost anyone can replicate an image. The real challenge lies in creating something original that reflects your own vision and brings your sensibilities to life.”
Goswami approaches beauty references by asking what the bride is responding to in the image. It might be the eye makeup, the lip colour or the way the skin catches light, elements that can be interpreted without promising to reproduce a digitally altered face.
“We can make it look really flattering, but we can’t make normal skin texture disappear,” she says.
Pores can be softened, pigmentation concealed and the complexion evened out, though she does not believe every mark needs covering. “I’m okay with a little pigmentation showing through if the alternative is skin that looks like it’s wearing a ton of makeup,” she says. “I still want it to look like your skin.”
Saharan’s equivalent is knowing how far to direct a photograph before the direction itself starts showing. During a portrait, he might guide someone into position and then leave them there long enough for the first layer of performance to wear off. The initial minutes can be awkward, with people wondering where to look or what they are supposed to do.
