Photography Studio and Lighting Forum

Hosted by fabulous Florida-based professional fashion photographer, Asylum Steve, this forum is for discussing studio photography and anything related to lighting.
Results 1 to 17 of 17
  1. #1
    Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Posts
    149

    What I did Friday

    Studio session Friday evening. All one light or natural light.
    Attached Images Attached Images     
    "Foolish consistency is the hobgobblin of little minds." - Ralph Waldo Emerson

  2. #2
    Sleep is optional Sebastian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Chicago Suburbs
    Posts
    3,149
    The last two are the strongest IMO. How did you meter? The skin tones seem blown or close to it, it looks very much like my chots did when I was using just the histogram to meter with the D100.

    The poses work for me in the last two, and I like the choice of environments.
    -Seb

    My website

    (Please don't edit and repost my images without my permission. Thank you)

    How to tell the most experienced shooter in a group? They have the least amount of toys on them.

  3. #3
    Moderator Irakly Shanidze's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    198
    Sebastian, you need a refresher course on lighting! In portrature it is very important to use shadows for modeling, even if you have a very diffused light source.

  4. #4
    Sleep is optional Sebastian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Chicago Suburbs
    Posts
    3,149
    Irakly,

    I don't really get what you're saying, i don't see how it correlates with what I said to Dennis...

    A clarification would be most helpful.
    -Seb

    My website

    (Please don't edit and repost my images without my permission. Thank you)

    How to tell the most experienced shooter in a group? They have the least amount of toys on them.

  5. #5
    Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Posts
    149
    Quote Originally Posted by Sebastian
    The last two are the strongest IMO. How did you meter? The skin tones seem blown or close to it, it looks very much like my chots did when I was using just the histogram to meter with the D100.

    The poses work for me in the last two, and I like the choice of environments.

    Sebastian,

    I would agree with you. The "chots" definitely look a bit blown. It seems the harder the light source the more difficult it is to get a nice range of tones when I am shooting digital.

    I was metering with a light meter, in 1/10ths of stops. When I went on the low side, the exposures seemed a bit muddy on the LCD so I opened up. Maybe I should have kept it a bit muddy and opened it up in PS post capture.

    Well back to the drawing board.

    Dennis
    "Foolish consistency is the hobgobblin of little minds." - Ralph Waldo Emerson

  6. #6
    Sleep is optional Sebastian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Chicago Suburbs
    Posts
    3,149
    Quote Originally Posted by dsl712
    Sebastian,

    I would agree with you. The "chots" definitely look a bit blown. It seems the harder the light source the more difficult it is to get a nice range of tones when I am shooting digital.

    I was metering with a light meter, in 1/10ths of stops. When I went on the low side, the exposures seemed a bit muddy on the LCD so I opened up. Maybe I should have kept it a bit muddy and opened it up in PS post capture.

    Well back to the drawing board.

    Dennis

    Yes, yes...the "chots."

    Fingers are too fat for my typing. Anyway, that is the same thing I ran into, I would open up to either budge the histogram over or two get a better look on the LCD. Repeat after me, "NEVER use the LCD to judge exposure, NEVER use the LCD..." ;)
    -Seb

    My website

    (Please don't edit and repost my images without my permission. Thank you)

    How to tell the most experienced shooter in a group? They have the least amount of toys on them.

  7. #7
    has-been... another view's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Rockford, IL
    Posts
    7,649
    Looks a little hot to me too. Ever heard of this?

    http://www.shootsmarter.com/infocenter/wc001.html

  8. #8
    Sleep is optional Sebastian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Chicago Suburbs
    Posts
    3,149
    Quote Originally Posted by another view
    Looks a little hot to me too. Ever heard of this?

    http://www.shootsmarter.com/infocenter/wc001.html
    That's one for bookmarking, printing and pasting the walls with.

    Great tip Steve, thanks for posting it.
    -Seb

    My website

    (Please don't edit and repost my images without my permission. Thank you)

    How to tell the most experienced shooter in a group? They have the least amount of toys on them.

  9. #9
    Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Posts
    149
    Quote Originally Posted by another view
    Looks a little hot to me too. Ever heard of this?

    http://www.shootsmarter.com/infocenter/wc001.html
    Actually saw that before. I was supposed to go to a seminar with Will Crockett but something came up.

    It's great info. But what do I do during the session?

    I'm going back to film....psych.

    Dennis
    "Foolish consistency is the hobgobblin of little minds." - Ralph Waldo Emerson

  10. #10
    Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    ABQ, NM
    Posts
    294
    My first studio foray with digital resulted in overexposed images too. What I've learned is to expose like I did for chrome, which is more for the highlights than the shadow. With kodak portra (negative film) I used to over expose by about 2/3 - 1 stop by setting the iso different from the film in my flash meter to expose for the shadows. Now I'm setting it just about dead on with the camera ISO. Then, if I'm between stops, I'll error 1/3 towards underexposed. A simple levels adjustment will bring it in.

    After you dial-in for your camera and meter, it'll becomes straight forward.

    Mike

  11. #11
    has-been... another view's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Rockford, IL
    Posts
    7,649
    Quote Originally Posted by dsl712
    Actually saw that before. I was supposed to go to a seminar with Will Crockett but something came up.
    A friend of mine went to it - here's the follow up e-mail, a lot of people had questions:

    Thanks so much for joining me this past Monday for our Professional Workflow program at the Rosemont Convention Center. As you could probably tell, I really had a great time! I've received a pile of emails from the show regarding follow up info and thought I would send you some quick links to the pages that folks have been asking about.

    Here's the the info:

    Facemask histograms rock!: http://www.shootsmarter.com/infocenter/wc001.html

    Exposure tolerance of digital (downloadable examples from the show too): http://www.shootsmarter.com/infocenter/wc024.html

    Why we use sRGB instead of Adobe RGB in the portrait world: http://www.shootsmarter.com/infocenter/wc025.html

    Our 5 recommended monitor profiling kits (gotta get one and use it please): http://www.shootsmarter.com/infocenter/wc026a.htm

    5 tips for better digital on-camera flash: http://www.shootsmarter.com/infocenter/wc004.html

    My section of the InfoCenter with all sorts of info like this: http://www.shootsmarter.com/infocenter/wc000.html

    And the best Photoshop instructor in the world (no kidding): http://www.shootsmarter.com/infocenter/sa000.html

    And plenty of more detailed info in our DVDs if you wish: http://www.shootsmarter.com/videos.html

    Thanks again for joining us Stan, and thanks too to Fujifilm for picking up the tab. I really enjoyed the day, so please thank your lab, dealer or Fujifilm rep for me? See you soon!

    Will Crockett / shootsmarter.com

  12. #12
    don't tase me, bro! Asylum Steve's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Middle Florida
    Posts
    3,667

    Well, this info sounds ok for general shooting...

    Yeah, the Facemask Histogram technique has it's merits, but I would be real careful about striving to get "average" results in anything photographic.

    I don't know about you guys, but IMO all the examples on that linked page are pretty boring, kind of "at the mall" shots. Not everyone has the same idea of what PROPPER tonality for a face is, and his method is based on that.

    I also think this method assumes a lot, like you have a computer at your disposal that you can bring a proof up in photoshop to check the exposure, then go back and make adjustments to your exposure.

    For many, working in photoashop is well AFTER the fact, and at that point there's not much you can do about the exposures of your shots.

    Yes, I shoot with a laptop handy, but I still prefer to use the histogram feature on the CAMERA to judge exposure. I completely disagree that those first couple of "full scene" histograms are too vague to use to judge exposure.

    I use my meter to figure light ratio. Knowing the tonality I want in the shot, I can look at the camera histogram and judge how close I am. I don't need to just focus on a face to know if my exposure is correct...

    And BTW, I also disagree with the narrow exposure latitude the writer professes. Sure, it's good to learn to nail an exposure, especially if you want that "Glamourshot" effect, but again, it all depends on the shooting and lighting style of the photog.

    I've worked with digital shots that were over and under exposed by multiple stops and yes, DID fix it in photoshop and got great results.

    I'd certainly recommend this as a good technique to try or maybe as a starting point if you're not happy with your prints. I just wouldn't get completely locked into it, that's all.

    Once you get into "formulas" for your work, you work will start looking formula...
    "Riding along on a carousel...tryin' to catch up to you..."

    -Steve
    Studio & Lighting - Photography As Art Forum Moderator

    Running the Photo Asylum, Asylum Steve's blogged brain pipes...
    www.stevenpaulhlavac.com
    www.photoasylum.com

  13. #13
    Sleep is optional Sebastian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Chicago Suburbs
    Posts
    3,149
    Steve,

    Don't forget that you are on a much different level than some of us. I for one can really benefit from a "baseline" such as the articles recommend, then I can have a better idea of how far I want to deviate from said baseline.

    It is important to remember though that few things in the world of photography are "right." The articles say that that is the best way to get the most tonality into a print, but sometimes that won't be the desired effect.
    -Seb

    My website

    (Please don't edit and repost my images without my permission. Thank you)

    How to tell the most experienced shooter in a group? They have the least amount of toys on them.

  14. #14
    Moderator Irakly Shanidze's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    198

    Oooooooopssss

    Sebastian, my mind was clouded I thought that you shot those pictures
    Irakly


    Quote Originally Posted by Sebastian
    Irakly,

    I don't really get what you're saying, i don't see how it correlates with what I said to Dennis...

    A clarification would be most helpful.

  15. #15
    Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    ABQ, NM
    Posts
    294
    Steve,

    What you're saying makes sense; of course! I do find, however, that fixing an underexposed image is much easier than fixing an overexposed image. Though they are both doable.

    I always prefer learning cause and effect over over serendipity or formula (probably why I'm a physisist). For me, when something serendipitious happens, I spend the time to learn how and why so I can put it to good use in the future. This attitude causes many people I try and teach things (anything) to great difficulty. They want to know "how" as opposed to "why."

    The formula part becomes a wierd thing. I've found when I've posted something too different, people explain to me how to get it "right!" Apparently people don't want something too different?

    Mike

  16. #16
    don't tase me, bro! Asylum Steve's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Middle Florida
    Posts
    3,667

    Hey, Newzboy...

    I get what you're saying. That's exactly why I made it a point to mention that the page definitely has useful information...

    Still, I like to use every opportunity I can to get some of the people here to think OUTSIDE THE BOX, or in this case, the face histogram. Using that technique as a starting point to maybe try other things is IMO the best approach...
    "Riding along on a carousel...tryin' to catch up to you..."

    -Steve
    Studio & Lighting - Photography As Art Forum Moderator

    Running the Photo Asylum, Asylum Steve's blogged brain pipes...
    www.stevenpaulhlavac.com
    www.photoasylum.com

  17. #17
    has-been... another view's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Rockford, IL
    Posts
    7,649
    Steve -

    Thanks for your input. Being new to this type of photography myself, I've got a lot to learn and what Will says is different than what a lot of other people say. I don't plan to shoot with a laptop tethered to my camera at this point (heck, I don't even have a laptop yet), but paying attention to the (overall) histogram of the image has always worked well for me.

    I also agree about formulas!

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •