Need PP critique...

[ChristopherCoy]

So recently I've begun following a photographer that I really look up to, and I've been trying to disect their pictures and specifically their post processing. I couldn't for the life of me figure out how their subjects came out looking so sharp and crisp. And then it hit me one day, there is a blurred layer and then the subjects are masked out to make them appear sharp. I figured it out because in one particular picture there was a couch and portions of the couch that SHOULD have been blurry werent, and there was a clear line of 'sharpness' across the entire picture. I recently learned that somewhere along the way I've picked up a PS action called 'beauty blur', which is basically just an action that apparently applies a blurred layer and sets everything up for you to brush back in the detail. I am diggin it so I've decided to experiment, and I have a couple questions.

Is this 'trick' something thats common, and I've just not noticed it? AND... What do you think of the attached photo? Too much? Likes/dislikes?

Now let me clarify cause I aint trying to be burned at the stake for shooting a wedding photo when I'm not a 'professional,' typical story... friend on a budget. But I am really trying to further my PP knowledge and skills so I would appreciate some constructive feedback.

BTW.... this particular shot was one that I tried to 'save.' I shot this entire event with TTL flash, but decided that because of the little 'twinkle' lights on the ceiling I wanted to try something. Needless to say, even at ISO 1600 it was still a tad underexposed, so I ran it through LR and CS3, did a few things here and there, and attempted to come out with something salvageable.

[marcq]

i guess you've done an awesome PP salvage for this photo. :) i think you should have blur the grooms back..(the table at the back is clear while its opposite object is blurred) therefore not proportion.

i say this is a common trick (if you don't have fast or bigger apperture lens). :)

[J Eddington]

The trick is to use the right DOF and not have to do any photoshop! :)
Your edges are noticeable I would try more of a feather.

[ChristopherCoy]

Well this was shot at f2.8 1/60 and ISO 1600. The only other lens that I have that's faster than this one is the 1.8 50mm.

And Janice,
I'm still PP'ing with a mouse! I hope to learn how to use a tablet soon.

[AllenAyres]

You could adjust the feathering of your brushes a bit, may help with the blending.

I think the 50/1.8 could have nailed the exposure on this shot :)

[J Eddington]

Originally Posted by ChristopherCoy

Well this was shot at f2.8 1/60 and ISO 1600. The only other lens that I have that's faster than this one is the 1.8 50mm.

And Janice,
I'm still PP'ing with a mouse! I hope to learn how to use a tablet soon.

My tablet just sits on the desk top. I do better with a mouse! Adjust your brush and you will be fine.

[ChristopherCoy]

Originally Posted by AllenAyres

You could adjust the feathering of your brushes a bit, may help with the blending.

I think the 50/1.8 could have nailed the exposure on this shot :)

This is what the original looks like...

[CaptainTom]

There's an old English idiom.