|
My cute little old grandpa. Poppo by TomOlson, on Flickr
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2014 19:49
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 21, 2024 02:53 |
|
|
Arvid posted:Thanks for the feedback. While processing these I always struggle the most with the skintones, I just can´t seem to get them correct. If I remember correctly the white balance was set at just a hair above 6000K for most of these, since the flash is supposed to be around 5500K I guess I could dial the WB down slightly. I'm no pro so take what I say with a grain of salt, but the lighting just seems a little uneven for being a studioish portrait. For example, on the picture with the dog and two kids, the kids' faces are really dark compared to all your other pictures. In the next one with the parents, there's some really dark shadows on the dad's face and makes him seem kind of... sinister?
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2014 20:04
|
|
|
mr. mephistopheles posted:The shots are flattering so that's good. The composition is okay, but the lighting feels really flat and I can't quite figure out why. I see plenty of shadows and highlights but there's no depth to either of them. I think that it might be because I shot when there was thicker cloud cover. I had some from earlier in the day where I felt there was too much shadow that was harsh and I couldn't get enough fill light to balance it out. Thanks for the critique though.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2014 21:15
|
|
|
 Jaimee & Louie by Alex Gard, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2014 05:02
|
|
|
RangerScum posted:My cute little old grandpa. Did you add lighting to this, or is it just the practicals we see? It's surprising how different the color is on the light just from different bulbs in that case. As for the subject, he looks alright, but a bit... pained. Did you direct him in any way?
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2014 16:11
|
|
|
thetzar posted:Did you add lighting to this, or is it just the practicals we see? It's surprising how different the color is on the light just from different bulbs in that case. I didn't add any lighting to it, though there are various windows out of frame, one almost immediately camera right and then there are a few back behind the fridge that you can't see. Time of day was near sunset so I think that was mainly what was causing the differences in color. I also couldn't tell you if both light fixtures have identical bulbs... that could be the source as well. I didn't direct him in any way other than to tell him to put his hands on the counter and kind of lean in a little bit. He's 80+ years old and he lives by himself out in the country because his wife of 50+ years died, so I'd probably look a bit pained too, I dunno.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2014 17:19
|
|
|
The bulb on the left is cooler. I think it adds to the photo's interestingness and authenticity.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2014 02:07
|
|
|
Agreed - I love the look of that photo and you got a great authentic shot of your grandad.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2014 18:41
|
|
|
edit: just put it here instead of the other thread I'm sure this guy has come up before, but I'm wondering if anyone can give me any ideas as to how to emulate this style of very sharp detail with vibrant colors, completely enveloped in black. I have a tripod, a Canon T2i, a Canon 50mm 1.8, one removable flash, and can rig a cylindrical backdrop if need be. I'm aware it's dumb to come at very technical photography with a bunch of basic stuff like this, I'm just wanting some advice on where to start with this style of portrait photography. Mario Gerth   
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2014 21:28
|
|
|
There doesn't appear to be any studio lighting if you look at the reflections in their eyes. He probably shot them in natural light, possibly against a relatively dark background, maybe in a doorway and then just blacked out the rest in post. Everything else is just a matter of sharpness/saturation sliders being cranked.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2014 21:38
|
|
|
notlodar posted:The bulb on the left is cooler. I think it adds to the photo's interestingness and authenticity. Agreed completely. try it with a lime posted:There doesn't appear to be any studio lighting if you look at the reflections in their eyes. He probably shot them in natural light, possibly against a relatively dark background, maybe in a doorway and then just blacked out the rest in post. Everything else is just a matter of sharpness/saturation sliders being cranked. I'd agree. What you CAN see in the eyes is the fact that they're being photographed on a light colored dirt. This is serving as a reflector, bouncing a lot of light up, a different look than you'd get on grass or asphalt. You might get a similar look with light concrete, or by using a large whitecard for bounce.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2014 22:48
|
|
|
I looked closer and am thinking that he is probably standing in front of an intensely lit, light colored landscape (after all, these were taken in situ in parts of Africa and India). The illumination in their eyes would be hard to recreate outdoors in Seattle, which is only the color of clouds, trees, and pretension.
Tricerapowerbottom fucked around with this message at 23:52 on Feb 27, 2014 |
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2014 23:49
|
|
|
Tricerapowerbottom posted:I looked closer and am thinking that he is probably standing in front of an intensely lit, light colored landscape (after all, these were taken in situ in parts of Africa and India). The illumination in their eyes would be hard to recreate outdoors in Seattle, which is only the color of clouds, trees, and pretension. With light/flash you can recreate a plethora of conditions, including outside.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2014 23:54
|
|
|
Umbrella behind me? Some sort of foiled box?
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2014 23:56
|
|
|
Make a huge painting of a landscape using metallic/reflective paints, bounce a flash into that 
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2014 23:57
|
|
|
You'd need something a lot bigger than an umbrella. I think the easiest way to do it would be shooting on a white cyc with the vertical bit behind you and then bounce light off the floor and cyc wall, biased towards the floor. But really a huge landscape painting is the best option.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2014 00:36
|
|
|
A couple large V-Flats behind you would make a great bounce target.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2014 01:10
|
|
|
Finally got around to developing some negatives I had lying in a box in my fridge for a couple of months.
PushingKingston fucked around with this message at 05:18 on Feb 28, 2014 |
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2014 02:46
|
|
|
Oh man that is sick. Is the teal tone something you pushed in post, or is it just how it ended up developing? Reminds me of how Hollywood films are graded these days.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2014 03:07
|
|
|
1st AD posted:Reminds me of how Hollywood films are graded these days. Lmao yeah, orange/teal dystopia is forever now. e: I'm not laughing at your photo. 365 Nog Hogger fucked around with this message at 03:25 on Feb 28, 2014 |
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2014 03:21
|
|
|
Yeah I don't want to sound overly critical of it, in fact peoples' overreaction to it in films is weird. The color and composition of that photo is real nice, lighting is really good, I was just curious how much work was put into post on this one. If this was a aesthetic choice then I would suggest bringing the teal saturation down in her hair and maybe some of the shadow areas in the bookcase.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2014 03:34
|
|
|
Yeah, it was a bit too cool in the shadows, fixed and re-uploaded. I think when I had saved the psd, I had a color layer turned off or something. Anyway, it's just Portra 400, the colors come from that.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2014 05:20
|
|
|
My boss and I were both at the office late, so I borrowed him for five minutes to take some pictures. I've been consciously trying to not use my normal composition/framing — though I may now be in a different rut. Untitled by thetzar, on Flickr  Untitled by thetzar, on Flickr  Untitled by thetzar, on Flickr  Untitled by thetzar, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2014 05:21
|
|
|
Does your boss have a thing about his forehead or what?
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2014 05:25
|
|
|
PushingKingston posted:Yeah, it was a bit too cool in the shadows, fixed and re-uploaded. I think when I had saved the psd, I had a color layer turned off or something. Anyway, it's just Portra 400, the colors come from that. Changes look fabulous 
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2014 05:47
|
|
|
Tricerapowerbottom posted:I looked closer and am thinking that he is probably standing in front of an intensely lit, light colored landscape (after all, these were taken in situ in parts of Africa and India). The illumination in their eyes would be hard to recreate outdoors in Seattle, which is only the color of clouds, trees, and pretension. You just have to pick your shooting days a little better in Seattle but you can get a ton of mileage out of a reflector here even on dull days. It might be gray and lovely here most of the time but gently caress me if the good days don't blow away the east coast for awesome light.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2014 05:48
|
|
|
365 Nog Hogger posted:Does your boss have a thing about his forehead or what? Maybe he's just insecure about his chin. 
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2014 06:39
|
|
|
Yeah, cutting off his chin in every picture makes them really uncomfortable to look at. Maybe one shot in a set if it's done right, but having them all like that looks weird.PushingKingston posted:Finally got around to developing some negatives I had lying in a box in my fridge for a couple of months. Really like this.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2014 20:17
|
|
|
 Amanda by SPV Photo, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2014 03:32
|
|
|
 Amanda by SPV Photo, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2014 03:36
|
|
|
I really like the one on the right, but maybe crop slightly lower (or higher if you've already cropped) so the curvature of her head isn't creating a tangent with the edge of a the frame.
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2014 05:07
|
|
|
Is there a reason her skin tone is kind of mushy on the left one? It's like there's noise reduction that's applied a bit too aggressively. The one on the right is great though, and I don't mind the crop at all. Also her tits look like they're about to pop out of that tankini on the left 
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2014 05:59
|
|
|
Yeah, maybe it's just the 13 year old boy in me, but that looks like some nip on the left shot.
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2014 17:00
|
|
|
whatever, nipples rule
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2014 17:02
|
|
|
It enticed me into his flickr, and 13-year-olded all over the place. Some great stuff.
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2014 06:41
|
|
|
I've been getting really into this 19th century photographer Julia Margaret Cameron. All these pictures are from the 1860s-1870s:   How did she get that kind of strong directional lighting in a pre-light bulb era? Does anybody know any instructional guide to, like, manipulating natural light?
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2014 06:38
|
|
|
Window light for the main light, something light/reflective for fill.
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2014 06:47
|
|
|
try it with a lime posted:Window light for the main light, something light/reflective for fill. Yeah I figure that much, but look at the left eye on the first shot, it's not lost in darkness and all and it looks like there's some kind of key or something in the reflection. I dunno, maybe it's just my imagination or the film stock, but it looks way better defined than any shot I've managed with that kind of set up.
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2014 07:20
|
|
|
I imagine it's another window on the opposite side of the room.
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2014 07:32
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 21, 2024 02:53 |
|
|
penismightier posted:Yeah I figure that much, but look at the left eye on the first shot, it's not lost in darkness and all and it looks like there's some kind of key or something in the reflection. I dunno, maybe it's just my imagination or the film stock, but it looks way better defined than any shot I've managed with that kind of set up. That ain't film stock, at that point in time they would probably ambrotypes (wet plate on glass), and then made into salt prints. The upshot being the photosensitive material was all blue/UV sensitive, orthochromatic.
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2014 13:09
|
|
