|
xzzy posted:I got nothing to say about the first sample because it's out of my league and looks fake as gently caress. Like, she's got a flash hitting her in the face but she's casting a shadow on the log in the foreground? It has to be assembled from several exposures where they walked around the scene flashing light where they wanted it. You see that style of work a lot with car photography, I guess it works on children too. Yeah, I mean my point is not that I'm trying to solve for these photos. I'm more trying to understand what techniques I can explore and/or add to my toolbox. Photo #1 is basically never a style I'm trying for; but knowing how to accomplish elements and/or that it's available: nice to have. Option 2 is indeed dual processing after digging a bit; so sorta HDR sorta not. Either way, my goal is like "here's a book of 20 fairly common techniques to check out" or similar would be great. I've found a few on color grading / general cleanup which is how I've gotten to where I am today :P
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2021 20:07
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2024 12:23 |
|
|
I'm pretty sure the child shot is basically this technique: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_uaAdN4TNvw
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2021 20:11
|
|
|
I can't answer the tech question, but I do know the human eye/brain is incredibly efficient at spotting Photoshopping in the case of the girl in the yellow dress because we're automatically processing that every shadow is coming towards us, with the sun at 12 o'clock, and she's sidelit from 3 0'clock. It's how our brains just can't seem to process stop motion or bad CGI if the lighting is just slightly wrong, let alone very wrong. And why LED billboards have that unsettling look because they're not lit the same as their surroundings. In short, the photo jumps out as fake because the subject isn't close enough to have an aura with near-vision "front lighting" (think of how if you face the sun everything is a silhouette, and you couldn't read a business card held at arm's length, but if you bring it closer it will block enough light for your eyes to focus and it's fully lit), and is far enough away that she should be obscured in shadow unless there's a light beam highlighting her. So the human brain is just by default going to reject it to the uncanny valley for the unexplainable glowing right (her left) side of her.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2021 20:28
|
|
|
I'm not sure there is a ton of post processing trickery in the first photo. Exposing for the bright parts of a backlit day scene and lighting your subject with flashes always looks unnatural because it is unnatural, but it can be a fun look to play with. I really enjoyed having a compact with a leaf shutter for high speed sync on sunny days. The second photo isn't really that much of an HDR effect, the dark parts of the image are relatively dark. The plasticky look might just be a bump in local contrast, along with the color choice for the grass. Dynamic range is limited by shadow noise, multiple exposures can get you cleaner shadows but one image often has more information than you would want to pull up without making a mess of things. Landscape photographers want clean, sharp images across the whole frame so it is often worth the effort to start bracketing, even if you aren't going to extremes. Unless a photographer is doing tutorial videos walking through the editing process you aren't really getting a good feel for whether the post processing is adding (or even taking away) from what you like about an image.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2021 21:32
|
|
|
xzzy posted:I got nothing to say about the first sample because it's out of my league and looks fake as gently caress. Like, she's got a flash hitting her in the face but she's casting a shadow on the log in the foreground? It has to be assembled from several exposures where they walked around the scene flashing light where they wanted it. You see that style of work a lot with car photography, I guess it works on children too. That shadow is from the sun, but their dodging and burning of other parts of the scene messes with the balance of sunlight to flash, so it doesn't look like the sun should be strong enough to cast that shadow.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2021 15:59
|
|
|
Hello! I searched through the OP and the rules post and couldn't find anything related to my question. Does anyone have any suggestions about getting started with a good guide to product photography? I have a light box and my Nikon's kit lens hit the "30-40mm" lens requirement I've seen suggested. But any guides that would help me learn how to position things to be more visually interesting, or a link to a basic primer on what to do, would be very welcome. Thank you!
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2021 17:47
|
|
|
You don't want 30-40mm, you want 80mm+ "Product photography" and "visually interesting" are seldom written together
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2021 18:43
|
|
|
Skutter posted:Hello! I searched through the OP and the rules post and couldn't find anything related to my question. Does anyone have any suggestions about getting started with a good guide to product photography? I have a light box and my Nikon's kit lens hit the "30-40mm" lens requirement I've seen suggested. But any guides that would help me learn how to position things to be more visually interesting, or a link to a basic primer on what to do, would be very welcome. Thank you! Photography basics: - Aperture wide open. Never don't have the aperture wide open. Adjust white balance and ISO and shutter speed around the fact your aperture is as wide as possible. - for the classic white background have the subject halfway between the distance from the backdrop and camera - Use construction paper to eliminate unwanted reflections in shiny objects (like, say, black paper if you're shooting something glossy and black. Styling basics for when you're not just doing the blank void: - Buy a cheap picture frame and take the glass out of it. Put the subject on the glass. Use different colors of construction paper under the glass for color mirror effects. - Buy a cheap LED light that either changes colors or has color filters - Props! A bottle of your hobo kitchen brew wine will look good, but imagine if next to the bottle there were some grapes and there were, like, leaves or some poo poo under it. There are few product photos that can't be improved with some prop that implies a quality of the product. Work boots? Piece of rebar. Ketchup bottle? Deep red tomato. Anything artsy? Paintbrush with dried nail polish as "paint" on the tip. You get the idea. In general there's a ton of YouTube videos for product photography that will cover the very basic stuff in detail, as it's the ideal type of photography where you can spend all day staging one shot. Digging through my own watch history, Peter McKinnon came up a lot, and he does a lot of really swanky tricks to get great shots using some cheap tools. But this video above all others helped me with getting those dramatic, moody shots I love: https://youtu.be/BeLWiFkOVhI
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2021 19:07
|
|
|
A GLISTENING HODOR posted:- Aperture wide open. Never don't have the aperture wide open. This is horrifically bad advice
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2021 19:42
|
|
|
Ric posted:This is horrifically bad advice Okay yeah if you have insanely bright lights maybe, but in their specific case, using a kit lens and a pre-fab box, you're probably not going to have $500 in studio lighting and you'll want that backdrop blurred out. You can go with a narrower aperture but then you'll get some background detail and some greys. Unless I misread, I'm picturing they're using something like this:  in which case very much yes, blast that aperture wide open.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2021 20:22
|
|
|
Skutter posted:Hello! I searched through the OP and the rules post and couldn't find anything related to my question. Does anyone have any suggestions about getting started with a good guide to product photography? I have a light box and my Nikon's kit lens hit the "30-40mm" lens requirement I've seen suggested. But any guides that would help me learn how to position things to be more visually interesting, or a link to a basic primer on what to do, would be very welcome. Thank you! A guy I found through my YT algorithm is Tin House Studio, who is a professional food photographer in the UK. He also has an FB group where people ask questions and post stuff for critiques.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2021 20:32
|
|
|
If you put your camera on something steady like a tripod or pile of books, you can collect as many photons over as long a period you need for your given aperture and iso settings. It's not like your still life is running away.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2021 20:40
|
|
|
im guessing the point is less about exposure and more about whatever detail you might not want to see in the background Its not helpful advice im sure and ive never really done product shots but i assume like everything sometimes you may want deeper focus and sometimes you may want it more narrow and figuring that out requires practice and experimentation ! Twenties Superstar fucked around with this message at 20:47 on Dec 6, 2021 |
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2021 20:45
|
|
|
Health Services posted:If you put your camera on something steady like a tripod or pile of books, you can collect as many photons over as long a period you need for your given aperture and iso settings. But, again, how much of the background do you want to be unblurred? Do you want the white void:  or do you want the texture of the background coming through? The standard white void photo (the whole point of buying a light box) is to have that homogeneous white background. Which you'll get with a lightbox and a kit lens by having the aperture wide open and compensating for lighting by adjusting ISO and shutter speed. If you're shooting still life for any other purpose, then, yeah, just go hog wild. Shoot pinhole with a 24 hour time lapse if you want. But the Amazon listing pure white is going to be easily achieved in a lightbox with a kit aperture maxed out. The Anime Liker fucked around with this message at 21:01 on Dec 6, 2021 |
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2021 20:54
|
|
|
A GLISTENING HODOR posted:Okay yeah if you have insanely bright lights maybe, but in their specific case, using a kit lens and a pre-fab box, you're probably not going to have $500 in studio lighting and you'll want that backdrop blurred out. You've got it completely back to front. One should set the aperture first to give the visual qualities one wants the image to have, then match the other settings to compliment this. Using flash lighting, the shutter speed is almost moot, unless including or balancing ambient light. ISO can change the overall light level if needed beyond the controls of the flash itself. A £20 285HV will blow out a background. What more expensive lighting offers is a greater degree of output control, flash temperature consistency, range of modifiers available, and build quality. Twenties Superstar posted:im guessing the point is less about exposure and more about whatever detail you might not want to see in the background A DoF calculator is helpful in directing this kind of experimentation. 85mm and f/11 at a distance of 6ft to subject gives a DoF of under 30cm, making it easy to have a sharply focused subject and defocused background (sufficient to conceal wrinkles or similar). 85mm and f/1.4 at a distance of 6ft to subject gives a DoF of under 4cm.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2021 21:03
|
|
|
I don't know what everyone else does, but I cut out 99.9% of the product photos I take at work so the white background is just there for reflections/contrast when cutting the item out. Always use a narrower aperture as well so the entire product is in focus. Camera is on a tripod so exposure times aren't an issue. We have a basic Canon t5i we use so we're not rocking high performance equipment neither.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2021 01:01
|
|
|
Depending and the product and the background, a tilt shift lens may be a really nice tool.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2021 02:52
|
|
|
Aperture wide open? No. Most professional product photography is focussed stacked to some degree (if suitable) or if suitable using a tilt shift lens, maximising control of depth of field and lighting is key. Stacking allows maximum control of DoF. If stacking use an aperture where your lens is sharp and your stack count is reasonable. If you can't stack use an aperture that gets the product in the DoF, you can adjust distance/focal length if required. Avoid closing down too much that you get diffraction. Often the background is intentionally blown out using a flash to allow easy masking. Control over colour temperature is important to accurately represent the colour of the product. Be wary of thinking that some product shots are photos, a lot are renders (especially of electronics) jarlywarly fucked around with this message at 11:24 on Dec 7, 2021 |
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2021 11:22
|
|
|
What are some good stocking stuffer ideas for someone who shoots entirely in digital? If they shot analog, I'd include a few rolls of film, but that's not an option here. Maybe just some microfiber cloths for lens cleaning? Any other ideas? Thanks!
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2021 19:55
|
|
|
Tortilla Maker posted:What are some good stocking stuffer ideas for someone who shoots entirely in digital? I’d buy them whatever size/price appropriate photo book you can find. You would think I would have enough lens pens, microfiber clothes, sd cards, and lens caps, but I guess they’re getting lost in the laundry or something and I would genuinely appreciate an extra.
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2021 19:59
|
|
|
Get them a viewcatcher. It's fun.
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2021 20:04
|
|
|
Tortilla Maker posted:What are some good stocking stuffer ideas for someone who shoots entirely in digital? I have a hand strap for my camera that I love. New eye cup, lens filters, sensor wipes, batteries, rain cover, grey cards, light meter, wireless trigger, intervalometer, Canon R3, lots to choose from.
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2021 20:08
|
|
|
Tortilla Maker posted:What are some good stocking stuffer ideas for someone who shoots entirely in digital? Gloves that are well suited for photography. They're 0% to miss because worst case theyre still useful at this time of year and you need to know absolutely nothing about their actual kit/equipment/etc
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2021 20:17
|
|
|
Walked posted:Gloves that are well suited for photography. Just don't assume the top result when you google it is the best choice. Vallerett is hilariously overpriced and overengineered.
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2021 20:29
|
|
|
um excuse me posted:I have a hand strap for my camera that I love. New eye cup, lens filters, sensor wipes, batteries, rain cover, grey cards, light meter, wireless trigger, intervalometer, Canon R3, lots to choose from. Also, neck straps, those lens cleaner bulb doohickeys if they don't have one, a spare SD card, a spare external HDD, a gift card for prints, dirt cheap used lenses to tinker with, a nice camera bag if they don't have one, bulk frames for prints... And if they shoot indoors: Light reflectors, light diffusers, grey cards, light gels, reflective paper, backdrops, turn tables...
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2021 20:31
|
|
|
I've got 20,000ish photos across many years which I manage with Lightroom and store in Google drive. Sometimes when I want to pull up a photo in conversation, on my phone, I go diving through folders trying to find it. My folders are currently organized by locations and events (jobs I've worked at, road trips, etc ). Curious if anyone has suggestions for improving this process so it doesn't take forever.
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2021 21:24
|
|
|
Similar vein: Is flickr worth it? Like if I want to send a link to my account to, say, a soapmaking company and say "here's my product photography portfolio, gimme dollars" is flickr good for that, is there an alternative, or should I bite the bullet and go with one of those website builders like square space even though I've never done a website thing?
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2021 21:35
|
|
|
A GLISTENING HODOR posted:Similar vein: I would say no. Pointing clients to a portfolio hosted on a semi-defunct social network, even with a little "pro" badge in corner, isn't going to wow them as a first impression. If you've got Adobe CC for photographers, it includes their portfolio builder which is pretty easy to use and make something that looks decent. I get the educational pricing already and getting a hosted portfolio tips it over into "continuing to put up with an Adobe subscription" for me.
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2021 21:58
|
|
|
huhu posted:I've got 20,000ish photos across many years which I manage with Lightroom and store in Google drive. Sometimes when I want to pull up a photo in conversation, on my phone, I go diving through folders trying to find it. My folders are currently organized by locations and events (jobs I've worked at, road trips, etc ). Curious if anyone has suggestions for improving this process so it doesn't take forever. Put year/month at the front of the folder name so you can sort that way? That’s usually what I do for my cold storage and my Flickr account. Speaking of! A GLISTENING HODOR posted:Similar vein: If you want to host a lot of photos on Not Google or Amazon or Facebook, with a decent mobile app, and built-in management in the CMS on things like Wordpress…it’s good. I pay for the unlimited as a storage option, and then use something like Wordpress for actual publishing.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2021 06:29
|
|
|
harperdc posted:Put year/month at the front of the folder name so you can sort that way? That’s usually what I do for my cold storage and my Flickr account. Yeah I'd say if you want to build a website for your local soap company somethign liek Wordpress or Joomla is a good thing to use. back in the day I did several business sites on Wordpress, you can get as deep as you want but it's pretty easy to use a shoping cart system for online orders or set up somethign for a B&M pretty esaily with a few pages. I'd say main Page with blurb & Hours & location with some shop pictures, Products page with some picures of your soaps.. maybe an about us blurb.. and if Desired an online shop system in another page. Should take you like a week of work with reading and understanding from like zero to fully done depending on how in depth you want to go. Edit: I totally missed that you weren't selling soap you were showing photos so soap seller uses you. tater_salad fucked around with this message at 14:52 on Dec 22, 2021 |
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2021 14:41
|
|
|
A GLISTENING HODOR posted:Similar vein: Look at something like smugmug or zenfolio.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2021 15:01
|
|
|
What's a good photo printing service? NYTimes recommended "Nations Photo Lab": https://www.nytimes.com/wirecutter/reviews/best-online-photo-printing/ PC Mag recommended MPix: https://www.pcmag.com/reviews/mpix It's frustratingly hard to find a shop that does custom pano sizes. Target does, but I wonder about its quality? I need exactly 6x15.
|
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2021 00:08
|
|
|
Ramrod Hotshot posted:What's a good photo printing service? NYTimes recommended "Nations Photo Lab": https://www.nytimes.com/wirecutter/reviews/best-online-photo-printing/ WHCC says they do custom sizes: https://www.whcc.com/products/photographic-prints/
|
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2021 00:54
|
|
|
Ramrod Hotshot posted:What's a good photo printing service? NYTimes recommended "Nations Photo Lab": https://www.nytimes.com/wirecutter/reviews/best-online-photo-printing/ I can give it a shot on my Pro 100. Pay postage and its yours.
|
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2021 01:58
|
|
|
I'm not sure this is the best place to ask, so feel free to send me elsewhere: Once upon time my brother has a girlfriend who took a photo of my mother before she died, and I out a sample of the photo to show her (on standard printer paper) but her laptop was stolen and I never got the file, or a regular photo print. All I have is the print sample she gave me. Unfortunately I lost the rest of the photos I had of her so I'm kind of at a loss, are there folks who will take photos and do editing magic to produce an at least similar quality digital file so I can get a decent photo to hang? Most of the places I looked at need an actual photograph when they do touch ups and such, but maybe I'm not using that correct term.
|
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2021 04:29
|
|
|
Ramrod Hotshot posted:What's a good photo printing service? NYTimes recommended "Nations Photo Lab": https://www.nytimes.com/wirecutter/reviews/best-online-photo-printing/ What about just adding white space around your panoramic in Photoshop to make it the nearest standard aspect ratio, then trimming it down after you get the print?
|
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2021 05:19
|
|
|
Ramrod Hotshot posted:What's a good photo printing service? NYTimes recommended "Nations Photo Lab": https://www.nytimes.com/wirecutter/reviews/best-online-photo-printing/ * giclee being a made-up name that sounded better than inkjet (which people associate with crappy throw-away consumer crap that barely works)
|
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2021 22:05
|
|
|
Pablo Bluth posted:You could do a google search for 'giclee print lab <your nearest big city>' and try to find the smaller, more specialist print labs. 'Best of' articles tend to be dominated by large scale operations. Yeah, I had a great local shop when I lived in Tampa, but there's literally none in my hometown where I am for Christmas. Went with Target because they do custom sizes and had an easy interface. Whatever, I'm lazy. Hope they turn out ok, but I'm no pro so whatever.
|
|
#
?
Dec 24, 2021 18:08
|
|
|
Thoughts on Flickr Pro as a medium for storing and displaying photos? I know there's better, portfolio kind of stuff for actual pros, but I'm just a pretty basic hobbyist with a shitload of pictures I'd like to put on the cloud. I have imageshack currently, which is super cheap but it otherwise sucks for anything than the most basic storehouse for images. Impossible to organize anything, and the photos just seem to be sorted alphabetically by file name with no other options. Great! Is Flickr Pro a bit better? At $50 a year, it's still not bad.
|
|
#
?
Dec 24, 2021 22:33
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2024 12:23 |
|
|
Flickr pro is worth it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 24, 2021 22:59
|
|