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 |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Back With A Vengence
Well, sort of ...
http://www.photography.dudley-hanks....ht/guitar1.jpg I had a blast, and hope it turned out. What do you think? Caio, Dudley |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Back With A Vengence
Dudley Hanks wrote:
Well, sort of ... http://www.photography.dudley-hanks....ht/guitar1.jpg I had a blast, and hope it turned out. What do you think? Caio, Dudley Getting better but... I have never bothered much about what some posters here call "blown highlights" provided the area blown is actually white. When there is such a large area as the neck of this young fellow blown totally off the spectrum, It makes the whole shot sort of damages in a visual sense. Next time (should there be one) meter for the highlight. You will pick up specular highlights from the instrument as well and produce an interesting shot. This one is too "flat". Too evenly lit. Light and shade make a portrait. If you get the chance to visit an art (real painting) gallery, you can see how the past masters knew all about light and shade, many using it to crate beautiful portraits with nary a blown highlight in sight! It is often easy to pull detail from shadows. You can never replace detail lost from blown areas. Me and Big Squid. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Back With A Vengence
Dudley Hanks schrieb:
Well, sort of ... http://www.photography.dudley-hanks....ht/guitar1.jpg I had a blast, and hope it turned out. What do you think? No. Learn more about lightning. Get closer! Andreas -- Fotos unter http://www.gugau-foto.de/ Special unter http://www.hoellenmusik.de/ Schottland unter http://www.whisky-guide.de/ |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Back With A Vengence
Andreas Gugau wrote:
Dudley Hanks schrieb: Well, sort of ... http://www.photography.dudley-hanks....ht/guitar1.jpg I had a blast, and hope it turned out. What do you think? No. Learn more about lightning. Get closer! Andreas You don't want to get too close to 'Lightning'. John. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Back With A Vengence
Dudley Hanks wrote:
Well, sort of ... http://www.photography.dudley-hanks....ht/guitar1.jpg I had a blast, and hope it turned out. What do you think? Caio, Dudley It's close to a very good shot! First the good: - the pose is unusual and therefore interesting (funnily enough, you could have tilted *this* one... (O - the side lighting is a good idea (but see below!), and the exposure of *most* of the shot is ok-to-good. Now the bad: - the boys neck and elbow are just too far gone... (hmm, I agree with Douglas - amazing!) You need to balance the lighting better, or perhaps the sidelighting could have been back- (or 'rim'-) lighting instead? It's not clear exactly how you lit this shot or what you have available, so I will refrain from what may be useless advice until we know more.. - way, way too much black space... A tight crop, maybe stopping just below the guitar, works better, or try an even tighter one where you take off his elbow, and crop the bottom just above the lower two control knobs. (- and a nit-pick - it is courteous to at least rotate the image for us lazy viewers, if not reduce it to a more friendly size! I know it's only a click or two away, but the easier you make it the more likely it is that you will get comments.) So tell us about your lighting setup and what you have to work with.. (I'm rashly assuming that was a setup image..) And how is your camera set up, Dudley - are you shooting raw and/or is it set to minimum contrast? mt |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Back With A Vengence
"2SQUID" wrote in message ... Dudley Hanks wrote: Well, sort of ... http://www.photography.dudley-hanks....ht/guitar1.jpg I had a blast, and hope it turned out. What do you think? Caio, Dudley Getting better but... I have never bothered much about what some posters here call "blown highlights" provided the area blown is actually white. When there is such a large area as the neck of this young fellow blown totally off the spectrum, It makes the whole shot sort of damages in a visual sense. Next time (should there be one) meter for the highlight. You will pick up specular highlights from the instrument as well and produce an interesting shot. This one is too "flat". Too evenly lit. Light and shade make a portrait. If you get the chance to visit an art (real painting) gallery, you can see how the past masters knew all about light and shade, many using it to crate beautiful portraits with nary a blown highlight in sight! It is often easy to pull detail from shadows. You can never replace detail lost from blown areas. Me and Big Squid. I've always like the blown highlight effect when working with concert type pics. To me, it ads an element of immediacy, as long as the facial area and instrument are mainly clean. When taking pictures in a studio, the lighting can be easily controlled for whatever portrait effects one wants, when working on other stages, the lighting is too variablle to worry about specular highlights; I find it works better to use them to add to the shot. Dudley |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Back With A Vengence
"John" wrote in message ... Andreas Gugau wrote: Dudley Hanks schrieb: Well, sort of ... http://www.photography.dudley-hanks....ht/guitar1.jpg I had a blast, and hope it turned out. What do you think? No. Learn more about lightning. Get closer! Andreas You don't want to get too close to 'Lightning'. John. I was thinking the same thing... If you check the EXIF data on this shot, you'll notice I shot it at 35mm (35mm equiv). That puts me about two feet in front of the musician. You can't get much closer than that. Dudley |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Back With A Vengence
"Mark Thomas" wrote in message ... Dudley Hanks wrote: Well, sort of ... http://www.photography.dudley-hanks....ht/guitar1.jpg I had a blast, and hope it turned out. What do you think? Caio, Dudley It's close to a very good shot! First the good: - the pose is unusual and therefore interesting (funnily enough, you could have tilted *this* one... (O - the side lighting is a good idea (but see below!), and the exposure of *most* of the shot is ok-to-good. Now the bad: - the boys neck and elbow are just too far gone... (hmm, I agree with Douglas - amazing!) You need to balance the lighting better, or perhaps the sidelighting could have been back- (or 'rim'-) lighting instead? It's not clear exactly how you lit this shot or what you have available, so I will refrain from what may be useless advice until we know more.. - way, way too much black space... A tight crop, maybe stopping just below the guitar, works better, or try an even tighter one where you take off his elbow, and crop the bottom just above the lower two control knobs. (- and a nit-pick - it is courteous to at least rotate the image for us lazy viewers, if not reduce it to a more friendly size! I know it's only a click or two away, but the easier you make it the more likely it is that you will get comments.) So tell us about your lighting setup and what you have to work with.. (I'm rashly assuming that was a setup image..) And how is your camera set up, Dudley - are you shooting raw and/or is it set to minimum contrast? mt Sorry, Mark. I usually either rotate shots or resize to smaller images (sometimes even both). However, I posted this one at about 1:30 in the morning and was a bit tired. I'll try to rotate it for others who might want to take a look. Regarding what I have available, a lot actually. From my earlier days, I have several light stands, tripods, umbrellas, reflectors, flashes, defusers, optical slaves, etc. What I don't have is a studio... Regarding the setup of the camera, it was my trusty A720 in Vivid mode, shooting in shutter priority. This camera does not have the RAW format as an option. You are correct in assuming it is a staged image. As pointed out by Douglas, the lighting is too flat. It would neverr be shot like this on a stage. My son, Robert and I were bored watching television, so we packed up a light stand and a remote flash, the camera, his guitar and headed over to a local greenspace. We shot for about an hour in total darkness; well, nearly total darkness, and tried a few different effects. What I wanted to do was to shoot a picture that mimicked what would be captured by most cheap ps cameras at a concert; hence, the blown highlight areas. Regarding the dark area, I like your ideas for cropping, and I will get Robert to try them out. But, darkness is a big part of my world, so it tends to creep into my shots whether or not I want it there. Many people have observed that the majority of my colour pictures look more like black and white pics than colour. I think this is because I need high contrast in order to see. A more moderately shaded image doesn't attract my attention because it pretty much comes across as the old 18% grey that our photometers use. Theoretically, if I had a good studio, I could stage a more traditional shot, light it traditionally, and shoot it in a way that nobody would know a blind photographer took the shot. But, what would it prove? It would simply show that I know what I'm doing, in a traditional sense, and that I have the same equipment other pros are using. For me, the challenge is to share a part of my world with others -- to show that a blind person can appreciate graphical beauty even if it isn't perceived in the traditional fashion. Part of that world is dark, high contrast, distorted perspective images that I find interesting. Obviously, fully sighted viewers of my pics will not (cannnot) see what I am seeing, but at least we are working from some sort of a common starting point. If I shift the playing field in favour of a sighted audience, I would only do that for some sort of financial gain or ego boost (to sell pics or obtain a patron, or to increase my self esteem by competing with the best even though the field isn't level); it would do nothing intellectually, emotionally or spiritually for me because I wouldn't be able to see anything from my very own images, myself. From my own personal point of view, I would find it more depressing to shoot a perfect paramount portrait, or a Rembrandtesque portrait with the shadow of the nose nearly approching the eye, but not quite reaching it. To have the umbra of my key light set so that the light falls off appropriately, rounding the features and giving nice depth, and adding that nice little twinkle to the eye. I have the parabolic reflecters, blue lights, flashes and defusers needed. I've used them, but that is no longer my world. I left it behind many years ago. Now, if you can appreciate the flatly lit image of a young man against a black background playing his guitar, and if you can appreciate the pride it brings in a blind father's heart to view this image, you have entered my world, or at least you have shared a small part of it. This is not to say that I cannot, or do not want to, learn from other photographers. Quite the opposite. Especially in the area of digital imagery, I have much to learn, and I relish the feedback, positive or negative, I receive each time I post an image. I hope I am progressing; I think I am; and I hope to reach a place where most people will actually be interested by shots I post. I just hope that people don't want me to imitate professional portraits, landdscapes, advertising shots, etc. I doubt very much I will ever have a paying customer who commissions me to take their picture or cover an event they are associated with. Instead, if I sell future shots it will be because the purchaser knows why I am shooting and understands the limitations I maneuver within. They would most likely also understand the symbollism inherent within most (but not all) of my work. BTW, no symbollism in the guitar shot. We were just fooling around trying to immitate a concert pic. Take Care, dudley |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Back With A Vengence
Dudley Hanks schrieb:
"John" wrote in message ... Andreas Gugau wrote: Dudley Hanks schrieb: Well, sort of ... http://www.photography.dudley-hanks....ht/guitar1.jpg I had a blast, and hope it turned out. What do you think? No. Learn more about lightning. Get closer! You don't want to get too close to 'Lightning'. Your point... If you check the EXIF data on this shot, you'll notice I shot it at 35mm (35mm equiv). That puts me about two feet in front of the musician. You can't get much closer than that. Hmmm... I do not like the distance in this picture. Andreas -- Fotos unter http://www.gugau-foto.de/ Special unter http://www.hoellenmusik.de/ Schottland unter http://www.whisky-guide.de/ |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Welcome Back, D-Mac !!! | Annika1980 | 35mm Photo Equipment | 9 | April 23rd 07 03:11 PM |
Back to Lew | G- Blank | In The Darkroom | 4 | January 18th 06 08:43 PM |
[SI] Tell me how it looks from back there | Al Denelsbeck | 35mm Photo Equipment | 11 | December 9th 05 11:21 AM |
I'm Back | Jim Phelps | 35mm Photo Equipment | 6 | July 28th 04 06:00 PM |