|
Bottom Liner posted:Shot my favorite band/client again tonight. Possibly going on tour with them in the near future, psyhced. Click through any of them for the rest of the set. So I saw these in PAD and loved the lighting and look. Were you using the softbox attachment on these? I've had one for awhile that I use at home for lighting stuff, but never taken it to a venue. Since I got my flash sync cable I've just been using my flash frame for my shots as it helps getting rid of horrendous shadows for the most part, but your Ravens set seems to have very nice light. Kit lens and flash/softbox right pointed right at them?
|
#
¿
Apr 11, 2009 19:52
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 29, 2024 19:45 |
|
|
Couple. Still have more coming. This was more a photographic documentary if anything. We've been meaning to meet up and do a couple promos but our schedules conflicted. Then by some random miracle our schedules collided. Bad side is that I didn't have all my equipment and they wanted to jam. Only light was from a single light bulb dangling from a cord in the middle of them. I had my 40D with my 17-85 4.0/5.6 so my lighting was limited. Bumped it up to 3200 and shot at like 1/40th to 1/80th with IS on. I think I might have pushed these a bit far.       
|
|
#
¿
May 4, 2009 06:31
|
|
|
Nihiliste posted:You underestimate the appeal of grainy band shots. They're not perfect, but given the conditions, they're pretty good. Well I look at them and I think that they are decent and I'm pretty happy with them. I know grainy band shots work well, and I know that the band likes them and they want me to do more for them because this impressed them, it was more so from a photographers standpoint my question is - are these good photos? can the viewer look at these and see and feel at least a little bit of what I did when I was shooting them. I've been doing band photography on the side now for awhile and I haven't quite figured out my "technique" for them, though I really like this way, so I'm hoping these are considered at least decent.
|
|
#
¿
May 4, 2009 16:05
|
|
|
            So these are some ones for my friends Winner Takes All at McDunnas in Chicago. In all brutal honesty... I've stared at these way too long. Are these even good? The band likes them, but the more I look at them I hate them.
|
|
#
¿
May 14, 2009 07:14
|
|
|
guidoanselmi posted:I personally like to capture stage lighting and i think the flash over powered it, otherwise they're ok (some are a bit better than others). There weren't really any stage lights and I brought my 50 1.8 and used it though I had to stop down to 1/30 to get anything. So I decided to stick with using my flash and my 17-85 4.0/5.6 because of how wide it gets, plus I had a polarizer on that lens. My 24-70 is great but I felt it was too documentary like rather than energetic and fun/cool looking.
|
|
#
¿
May 14, 2009 16:07
|
|
|
Did some promos today for a friend. Third time doing a promo shoot, second time in a 'studio.'     
|
|
#
¿
May 20, 2009 00:01
|
|
|
rockcity posted:I'll be honest. It looks like you're trying to sell clothes with those shots, not the artist. Nothing really draws the eye in to the person. 2,3 and 4 are basically shots for American Apparel. 5 looks like a candid shot of a friend at the park. The first photo is really the only photo that looks like it would be a promo shot, though I'm really not liking that crop. Now that you say that I agree. How can you do singular artists promo shots? I don't really know. I want to do into advertising photography, so I guess the fact that I've nailed down that style is good... but still. shudder fucked around with this message at 02:54 on May 20, 2009 |
|
#
¿
May 20, 2009 02:48
|
|
|
JohnnyC posted:The photos aren't going to make money on their own and besides that plenty of truly incredible bands never get the opportunity to quit their day jobs. Thats really not a good photo at all and I don't know why you would want to use it at all. It's a good thing you DIDN'T pay someone for that. I'm actually going to be shooting an old friend again tomorrow, it's been awhile since we shot last, but he actually saw some of my newer work and wanted to pay me for some. Hes not paying me 250, but less which I'm fine with. If a band is something you want to actually do, and get far with, you eventually need good pictures to get somewhere, and to get pictures you need to pay. It's just that simple.
|
|
#
¿
May 27, 2009 03:48
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 29, 2024 19:45 |
|
|
HPL posted:Out of curiosity, I was wondering what the bare minimum investment would be to get up and running with concert photography. I ended going with film because of the cheap equipment. Here's what I came up with: HPL, I've seen TONS of shots from you and LOVE your film stuff. Where do you guys go and order your chemicals for the film? I believe freestyle has some, but just curious as to where you guys go. (sorry if this is a bit of a tangent) Reason why, is I've been shooting digital for... 4-5 years now. Only had a year of film before I switched over, then this semester had a class in film and started liking it a bit again. Since I already have some of the stuff to start doing film again, I thought I might want to start bringing my film camera along with me on my next couple of ventures.
|
|
#
¿
May 28, 2009 01:16
|
|