If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
Gene Palmiter wrote:
I have 2 low-powered strobes now...and have a higher power one coming. I have brellas for all. So I set my best one near camera position...it's 800Ws...with a belle. Set another (just 120ws I think) 30 or so degrees to the side away from the camera...just out of frame...for some shadows to shape the face with shadows. The third light (120ws) can be behind the model and light the backdrop and bounce back to light hair (until I get a light with a snoot to light just the hair). Number 1 (main) should have a brella...the other two should not. Is that about right? There *is* no "right". The right setup is one which does what you want it to do. A simple, normal situation is to use a large source (umbrella/soft box) for the fill as doing so will just about preclude distracting/conflicting shadows from the fill. But that doesn't mean one *has* to; hell, I've used spots for fill...true spots, totally collimated light. What you are looking for is a set of rules: do this and you will always be safe. Such exist (check PPA) and it doesn't hurt to know them, just don't treat them as gospel as they are creativity stiflers. Much better to try various things, assess the results and figure out *why* you like or dislike an effect. ____________________ Once I get this part right...then we discuss metering....I meter off the one to the side? The fill? And adjust the main to not over power the fill? No. Meter as I told you. "Draw" with the main, use the fill to lighten shadows to the extent desired. You can even use NO fill. Or you can use two fill lights. Or more. When you know more, you can use fill lights both to fill and create additional highlights and/or shadows. -- dadiOH ____________________________ dadiOH's dandies v3.05... ....a help file of info about MP3s, recording from LP/cassette and tips & tricks on this and that. Get it at http://mysite.verizon.net/xico |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
In message ,
David Dyer-Bennet wrote: Yeah, I'm confused too. But Randall sounds like he's talking from long experience making it work, which is a good indication he knows something :-). He just said in another post that his experience with studio lights is film-only. That should tell you something right there. -- John P Sheehy |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
In article bXJld.3168$h15.487@trnddc07, dadiOH
wrote: So says you and that idiot Texan, Criccio. Other people understand light/exposure. I've met and studied with Frank, along with a number of other well-known portraitists from across the country. His system worked very well for film. As I said earlier, I haven't done any multi-strobe work in digital yet so there's probably some adjustment in order. Frank's method is technically sound and produces repeatable results every time. |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
In article bXJld.3168$h15.487@trnddc07, dadiOH
wrote: So says you and that idiot Texan, Criccio. Other people understand light/exposure. I've met and studied with Frank, along with a number of other well-known portraitists from across the country. His system worked very well for film. As I said earlier, I haven't done any multi-strobe work in digital yet so there's probably some adjustment in order. Frank's method is technically sound and produces repeatable results every time. |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
In article tlKld.6627$pP5.5912@trnddc05, dadiOH
wrote: Randall is talking PPA (Professional Photographers of America) standard. What he is saying is partially right inasmuch as it will give a printable negative under the limited lighting conditions used by the vast majority of portrait photographers. But it will also result in denser than necessary negatives and limits creativity. This method does not stifle creativity. On the plus side, it gives you consistent, repeatable results every time. You can't recreate the wheel every time a customer walks in the door. Moreover, the PPA "standards" flip flop. I used to have an article from the PPA magazine...an article extoling the virtues of the portraits illustrated in the article. The portraits were just about the worst i ever saw and I saved the article to remind me that the PPA is full of **** much of the time. Yeah, let's see some of your work. |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
In article tlKld.6627$pP5.5912@trnddc05, dadiOH
wrote: Randall is talking PPA (Professional Photographers of America) standard. What he is saying is partially right inasmuch as it will give a printable negative under the limited lighting conditions used by the vast majority of portrait photographers. But it will also result in denser than necessary negatives and limits creativity. This method does not stifle creativity. On the plus side, it gives you consistent, repeatable results every time. You can't recreate the wheel every time a customer walks in the door. Moreover, the PPA "standards" flip flop. I used to have an article from the PPA magazine...an article extoling the virtues of the portraits illustrated in the article. The portraits were just about the worst i ever saw and I saved the article to remind me that the PPA is full of **** much of the time. Yeah, let's see some of your work. |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
In article ,
wrote: He just said in another post that his experience with studio lights is film-only. That should tell you something right there. I haven't hooked up my Flashmasters to the 10D yet because I don't want to blow out the electronics. I've got a Quantum radio slave the would isolate the two quite well but need a PC-PC cable which I don't have. Also, what used to be my photo studio is now a recording studio filled with drums, amps, PA stuff, and guitars. |
#28
|
|||
|
|||
There *is* no "right". The right setup is one which does what you want it to do. True....I am just looking for some place to start. I don't use rules when I shoot without lights....I expect to be breaking them soon enough with lights. I am just looking for some place to start. With natural light I can see it....with flash....not so much. Heck...its digital....I can see....I can fix. But, I want to learn what those who came before discovered. |
#29
|
|||
|
|||
There *is* no "right". The right setup is one which does what you want it to do. True....I am just looking for some place to start. I don't use rules when I shoot without lights....I expect to be breaking them soon enough with lights. I am just looking for some place to start. With natural light I can see it....with flash....not so much. Heck...its digital....I can see....I can fix. But, I want to learn what those who came before discovered. |
#30
|
|||
|
|||
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
help, new problem: can;t get the ground glass back on the camera. | [email protected] | Large Format Photography Equipment | 5 | September 23rd 04 07:15 PM |
Linhof Technica back movements | Mark Baylin | Large Format Photography Equipment | 32 | August 19th 04 03:09 PM |
Linhof Technica back movements | jjs | Large Format Photography Equipment | 25 | August 19th 04 04:34 AM |
Camera's built-in spotmeter as densitometer? | Phil Glaser | In The Darkroom | 22 | March 18th 04 12:41 AM |
Film holders for Graflok back for Nikon Multiphot | Edwin Barkdoll | Large Format Photography Equipment | 0 | March 9th 04 02:07 AM |