|
 180mm-8878  suit-8835  contour
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2014 02:38
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 19, 2024 17:20 |
|
|
1: it's interesting, nothing mind blowing 2: delete it. 3: awesome.
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2014 02:52
|
|
|
-- nevermind i just won't shitpost --
bellows lugosi fucked around with this message at 18:47 on Oct 25, 2014 |
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2014 18:42
|
|
|
ansel autisms posted:-- nevermind i just won't shitpost -- awww come on. I know it's directed at me! That makes it ok!
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2014 19:05
|
|
|
 Naamah by SPV Photo, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2014 23:15
|
|
|
Pukestain Pal posted:awww come on. I know it's directed at me! That makes it ok! Kindly cease posting.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2014 02:12
|
|
|
This is probably a dumb lighting 101 question, but I was shooting my girls in their halloween costumes tonight on a white vinyl, and I'm not happy with the dingy grey look it has in places.   So - what's the best way to overcome this in the future? I feel like I would have blown out details on them if I pushed the lights higher I was using boxes, maybe an umbrella would have worked better just because it would poo poo light everywhere instead of being focused? The other option I thought of is that the vinyl is 2 sided - one is matte and the other is pretty shiny/reflective. I used the matte side because I figured the shiny side would have scattered too much and again, blown stuff out, but I'm feeling now like that was a mistake. Any advice for shooting on a white backdrop would be great.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2014 03:26
|
|
|
You physically separate the background and give it its own lights.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2014 09:14
|
|
|
evil_bunnY posted:You physically separate the background and give it its own lights. Nothing I can do if I have them on it like here? (besides photoshop after the fact) Edit: by that I mean, wouldn't I still have the same problem with the foreground parts of the backdrop, while the far background part would at least be blown out? timrenzi574 fucked around with this message at 11:08 on Oct 26, 2014 |
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2014 10:55
|
|
|
timrenzi574 posted:
This might help. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2I75ZwKeA9M Also, post a picture of your setup.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2014 11:21
|
|
|
TheAngryDrunk posted:This might help. Thanks - I will check this video out today. I don't have a photo of my setup as I had to take it down last night since it was in our den. But I drew a terrible mspaint diagram - backdrop is 6ft wide, kids were right up against it, and there was about 3ft unrolled on the floor. The lights were at either corner of that angled in to the center, in 24x36 softboxes, and angled slightly down since the kids were sitting. I had thought that having them right up against the backdrop would mitigate falloff issues since I was space limited. It seems what would have worked better was exposing the background a lot more than them, not just trying to avoid too much falloff. The part I'm really confused about if I do that is how I'd deal with the part of it that's around their immediate vicinity if I have them sitting or laying on it like I did here. Not sure how you can light that without overexposing the subject, or if it's just something people deal with in photoshop. 
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2014 12:29
|
|
|
Space is probably the most important thing about getting stuff properly seamless without post production. It's pretty easy to whiten the whites in post though.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2014 13:24
|
|
|
timrenzi574 posted:Thanks - I will check this video out today. If you're limited by space then maybe you'll have to fix it in Photoshop, which is pretty easy anyway. If you have space, you would bring the kids forward, light them up separately and add 2 more lights after them to light up the background and their shadows.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2014 14:18
|
|
|
Thanks to all. I'll give it a whirl in a bigger room next time so I can light the background seperately. Appreciate the advice
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2014 17:58
|
|
|
Got hired to take a few photos of a statue installation. The studio manager convinced the sculptor to let us grab a few shots of him with his work. 
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2014 20:50
|
|
|
is that a statue of Mr. Fixit Hulk
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2014 21:30
|
|
|
Geektox posted:is that a statue of Mr. Fixit Hulk It's some famous canadian guy.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2014 22:51
|
|
|
8th-snype posted:famous canadian what?
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2014 23:06
|
|
|
Mr. Despair posted:what? I think it's Anne Murray
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2014 01:00
|
|
|
That doesn't look like the guy from Rush.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2014 01:05
|
|
|
Whirlwind Jones posted:Rush. I'm assuming he meant famous outside of Canada or nerdland. That said it doesn't look anything like Chad Kroeger or Celine Dion so idk
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2014 01:36
|
|
|
Apparently he was some dude that built a bunch of stuff in Vancouver. It was a very polite statue.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2014 02:30
|
|
|
i guess the trailer park boys are canadian, so I retract my previous statement
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2014 04:36
|
|
|
Mr. Despair posted:i guess the trailer park boys are canadian, so I retract my previous statement so is shortbus
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2014 04:49
|
|
|
i'm sorry canada, I have failed you
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2014 04:52
|
|
|
Mr. Despair posted:i'm sorry canada, I have failed you it's ok, we're sorry too
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2014 04:54
|
|
|
SoundMonkey posted:it's ok, we're sorry too 
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2014 05:27
|
|
|
 mulan_audition-0148 by ian.mrozewski mulan_audition-9655 by ian.mrozewski pianopractice-0641 by ian.mrozewski
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2014 06:58
|
|
|
Late night photos on a partybus Party Bus!-3309 by sildargod, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2014 10:28
|
|
|
TheAngryDrunk posted:
Nice. Where'd you dig up this truck from? Kinda wish there was a rim light providing a bit more separation on the left side, but I'm still really digging the pose and lighting overall. I'm not sure if I really like the processing on this or if I should crop in a bit more   Aerialist 3 by chazaraz, on FlickrOther options:  Aerialist 6 by chazaraz, on Flickr Aerialist 1 by chazaraz, on Flickr Aerialist 7 by chazaraz, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2014 17:59
|
|
|
1st AD posted:Nice. Where'd you dig up this truck from? Nelson, NV. It's a ghost town that is a photographer's wet dream.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2014 04:02
|
|
|
 cello test by ian.mrozewski ellen by ian.mrozewski rose-garden1.jpg by ian.mrozewski teal2 by ian.mrozewski
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2014 20:50
|
|
|
This is really first time I've done something I'd consider portraits, and first time with a flash. Hit me with some critique, homies. DSCF1326.jpg by Geektox, on Flickr DSCF1436.jpg by Geektox, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2014 07:49
|
|
|
 Naamah by SPV Photo, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2014 01:10
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2014 17:40
|
|
|
I like this a lot.
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2014 18:53
|
|
|
Huxley posted:I like this a lot. why? just curious is all 30hz fucked around with this message at 19:08 on Nov 7, 2014 |
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2014 19:01
|
|
|
30hz posted:why? just curious is all I don't know about Huxley but I like it because it's a little bit jarring - a somewhat different take on a portrait and it's pretty cool because of that.
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2014 22:31
|
|
|
30hz posted:why? just curious is all It's a little unexpected. It's a very standard portrait, his posture, the positioning, the cropping, the exposure. Everything about it is handled like I would expect there to be a smile there, except there is a weird robot face. Or from the other direction, welder pics usually focus on the grit of the job, the sparks, the mask turned up, sweat pouring, big man hard at work style. But he's all clean, the background doesn't give much away on location. You're used to this kind of picture screaming "HARD WORK" at you, but this says more like, "Daft Punk Laundry Day." It may not be award-winning cover of your portfolio work or anything, but I appreciate it for what it is (to me), sort of a little punchline in a photo.
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2014 22:36
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 19, 2024 17:20 |
|
|
30hz posted:why? just curious is all Shapes! Lots of them. It's just cool looking.
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2014 22:37
|
|