A Photography forum. PhotoBanter.com

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.

Go Back   Home » PhotoBanter.com forum » Photo Techniques » Photographing People
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Dark-skinned subject



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old January 1st 05, 07:00 PM
Mxsmanic
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

writes:

Incidentally, for anyone reading in due to interest in the original
topic, a Google search (terms: photographing dark skin, IIRC) took me to
a discussion group on a page used mostly by professional
cinematographers. They seconded Mxsmanic's advice.


By way of explanation to others who might be interested, the reason for
the lighting differences is that dark skin tends to reflect light only
from localized points (so-called specular highlights), whereas light
skin tends to reflect light over large areas.

This being so, if you light dark skin with directional light sources,
you get a lot of sharp "hot spots" on the skin surrounded by relative
darkness. If you use diffuse light, you get large areas of gradually
modulated light that show skin detail very well.

For light skin, it's the other way around. Diffuse light will wash out
white skin, obliterating detail. So you use directional sources instead
to force shadows that can bring detail into relief.

Exposure times in all cases remain the same. Yes, dark skin is dark,
and light skin is light, but that's the way you want them to look in the
finished photos, too, so you just expose normally and that's how they
come out.

If you have the luxury of shooting in a studio and you're mixing white
and black skin in a shot, you may be able to separately light your
subjects so that each receives the most flattering type of light for his
or her skin tone.

These ideas concern subjects with either very dark or very light skin.
For subjects of intermediate complexion, you have more flexibility and
you can light either way, depending on your preference.

--
Transpose hotmail and mxsmanic in my e-mail address to reach me directly.
  #22  
Old January 1st 05, 08:23 PM
Udie Lafing
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

In article ,
Randall Ainsworth wrote:

In article ,
wrote:

Finally, a word to everybody except Mxsmanic. The small but sincere
photo studio I work for has been in business for a quarter of a century,
and done thousands of weddings. (I'm the neophyte, with only about 250
under my belt.) And we've done every one of them in 35mm. In all that
time, we have never spent a dime on any form of promotion or advertising
other than business cards. Word of mouth keeps us hopping without it. I
know that it's tough for you to believe that you don't know everything, or
that your way of doing things isn't the only way. But it's so none the
less.
Put another way, excuse me if I don't really care how big your cameras
are or how far you can **** with them.


Any way you cut it, 35mm weddings are amateurish.


And one would think if he had 250 weddings experience he would have known
how to shoot "dark skin".
--
In my book its another pointless post from another
nameless nobody. I hope it made you feel better.
--
LOL.
  #23  
Old January 1st 05, 08:23 PM
Udie Lafing
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

In article ,
Randall Ainsworth wrote:

In article ,
wrote:

Finally, a word to everybody except Mxsmanic. The small but sincere
photo studio I work for has been in business for a quarter of a century,
and done thousands of weddings. (I'm the neophyte, with only about 250
under my belt.) And we've done every one of them in 35mm. In all that
time, we have never spent a dime on any form of promotion or advertising
other than business cards. Word of mouth keeps us hopping without it. I
know that it's tough for you to believe that you don't know everything, or
that your way of doing things isn't the only way. But it's so none the
less.
Put another way, excuse me if I don't really care how big your cameras
are or how far you can **** with them.


Any way you cut it, 35mm weddings are amateurish.


And one would think if he had 250 weddings experience he would have known
how to shoot "dark skin".
--
In my book its another pointless post from another
nameless nobody. I hope it made you feel better.
--
LOL.
  #26  
Old February 20th 05, 05:22 AM
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Mr Ainsworth.....
I've tried to be nice,but I find your attitude to be a pain in the ass....
Not everyone can afford somebody who shows up with a Hassie or a Bronica.
Frankly, I'm tired of your "It's my way or the freakin highway ".attitude
As I've said in the past,very few people ever enlarge a wedding photo past 8
by 10 or rarely 11 by 14. The few times someone told me in advance they
wanted a big blow up, I brought a Mamiya Press or in the one case they
wanted a 40 by 50...(yes, a 40 by 50 to go over the mantel...what nightmare
that turned into!) I brought a 4 by 5 Speed Graphic and 10 holders with ISO
100 print film.
Your attitude is that there is only one tool for weddings..the one YOU
use...Look, if you use 120 format cameras at a wedding, your film and
processing costs are about 3 times what 35mm costs. A lot of young couples
simply can't afford that. If you had your way, it'd be a crime to shoot a
wedding on 35mm.
Instead of ****ing about this guy shooting in 35mm,why don't you give him
some useful advice?
My advice would be to shoot some test shots and figure out how to bias the
exposure or to shoot on manual and meter the flash using a flash meter..
wrote in message
...
I've been shooting for a long time, but suddenly I find myself facing
an unfamiliar situation, and I could use some advice. I happen to live in
a part of the country that has very few black people. Lots of Latinos and
Polynesians, but very few black. I have been booked to shoot a wedding at
which the groom is a very dark-skinned African. (No, he's not
African-American. He's from Ghana.) And I'm told he has very dark skin.
Same presumably goes for his family.
The bride will be wearing white, which means the range between her
dress and the groom's skin tone could be pretty significant.
I will be using Nikon 8008 and/or N90 cameras, in program mode, with
flash. I generally shoot Portra, with a rated ISO of 160, but I set the
camera for 100.
So what's the best course of action? Wash out the whites to get the
dark skin tones? Keep the whites and risk losing the groom's face? Just
let the computer decide for me? Any wisdom from someone who's handled
this kind of shoot would be greatly appreciated.



 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Dark frames on bulb Not A Speck Of Cereal Digital Photography 2 November 15th 04 03:47 AM
[SI] There is no god after all... Al Denelsbeck 35mm Photo Equipment 14 October 11th 04 04:51 AM
Any good web resources on how to use a digital camera? Joe Digital Photography 10 July 13th 04 11:54 AM
got rid of shadows on portraits, but now subject too dark - help? Lynn Photographing People 7 October 15th 03 10:44 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:21 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 PhotoBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.