DSLRUsers.com

Hello,

in an image such as this;
http://www.pbase.com/digitalcmh/image/69107800

wondering on the flash set up.

The light looks harsh, shadows drop off immediately, as we can see under her leg. But light seems to spread wide over a large area.

What setup do you think is used in this case?

Perhaps a softbox with the difuser panel removed? A 60 degree reflector, or a wider, sunlight reflector/beautydish?

What about a disc reflector? do you think there is one used for fill? (or perhaps the sun in contributing.

I'm just thinking through some ideas for Wednesday night, and was thinking to use one light, with sunlight reflector, one sunlight disc reflector if needed. I hate teh idea of using a large softbox or similar and it blowing over int eh wind (as I dont have sandbags...)

Anyone in here shoot this kind of thing, or can add some wisdom to my learnings?

regards,
Oz

I'm thinking basically direct, perhaps through a small diffuser. As you've noted, the shadows are harsh, which precludes a softbox.

My guess is SB800, on camera, and direct, with the small (included) diffuser cap attached.

With the low ISO and aperture in use, and for the time of day this appears to have been shot at (somewhere around 4:30 pm would be my guess) the ambient light would be fading, and thus the fall-off would be partially attributed to that and entirely expected.

And one of my very favourite restaurants is just behind the photographer, just over his right shoulder and up the hill, in fact.

Anyone for dinner at Las Brisas?

thanks Gary, feels like im on track.

This camera angle, do you think the camera is almost at ground level?

I was just taking test shots at the location I am using on Wednesday, and the tide is very close to the wall at the time of day I want to shoot (for the sky color)... dont like the idea of lying in the salt water...

yes you have to be quite low to the ground...pretty much lying down with the model to get her at eye level.

use the flash on manual mode and meter for the sunset. adjust the flash accordingly and bob's your uncle...so to speak (unless you have an uncle named bob therefore rendering the phrase useless)

if you have a diffuser, try it and see.

PiroStitch wrote:yes you have to be quite low to the ground...pretty much lying down with the model to get her at eye level.

use the flash on manual mode and meter for the sunset. adjust the flash accordingly and bob's your uncle...so to speak (unless you have an uncle named bob therefore rendering the phrase useless)

if you have a diffuser, try it and see.

yeah I thought that might be the case

might shoot a little earlier, before the tide comes in???

don't forget depending on the location you can fudge the perspective.

if the model is on a bit of a rise and there's few metres of sand until the water and you're eye level with her, it will look like she's close to the water.

besides, if you're planning around the bay area...the tide doesn't come in that much and that fast!

thanks

I think the tide was up because it was stormy, so it was only due to swell, not tide.

I took these tonight, as some tests. (spray was covering my lens with salt, think it added to the lens flare... might take the filter off for the shoot)...?

What do you think of these as backdrops? I think less of the pier is better, what do others think (please comment on framing/props/backdrop, not exposure, or color)?

tonight was a very bad example as the wind was quite gusty and the water was VERY choppy. I was down at Beaumaris SLSC taking some shots and almost lost the camera from having the wind managing to blow the tripod over. Luckily I caught it

first shot was taken too early as the sun would have created havoc for metering. either wait for a few more minutes until it's nice and low like you have in the second shot or get a grad filter to stop down the sky.

lose the pier sticking out as the background as it's rather untidy. best to keep things simple and have a tidy background as the sunset and nothing more (well except the sand and water).

If you want to use the pier, move the model up and be prepared to work IN the water to get some nice portrait shots of her (I'm presuming it's a her) leaning up on the beams, etc

also why are they cropped square?

umm, no cropping. not sure what you mean, this is straight out of the camera, and reduced file size.

So frame out the pier, use something a little more like this?



I will call the Port of Melbourne and make sure there are no ships in the way too

Oz_Beachside wrote:thanks Gary, feels like im on track.

This camera angle, do you think the camera is almost at ground level?

Yep. On your knees, dude!

Or lower.

A throw rug or similar will be useful to help minimise the sand you'll need to wipe fropm your jeans and shirt.

Wayne has already given you the lowdown on setting the exposure, and his suggestion for fudging the perspective is on the mark as well.

don't worry about the ships either that or move further down the coast line

Hi Oz,
I agree with the others here.

Use your camera to expose for the background (in manual mode, so the settings don't change on you) and when you have found your settings to give you the exposure for the backdrop you're after, bring the model in and set the SB800 (assuming you have one) to manual mode....or two if you have them. You can also try underexposing the background a little on a few shots, which will emphasize the model more and bring out a greater contrast between her and the background....just another idea.

Then, it's just a case of playing with output power and flash angles to get the model exposed correctly and the shadows falling where you want them. Additional speedlights to the onboard SB800 can be used to soften the shadows (if that's what you're after)...OR reflectors (if you have some assistants).

I'd start the speedlights on 1/128th power and work up from there....depending on how far away you're shooting - of course. You'll soon find the right combination and then shoot away as fast as you can before the light changes too much (which at that time of day can be fairly quickly). You can also play with flash to subject distance which will also have an effect on light fall-off, to the foreground behind the model.

Also, depending on any sea breezes or wind on the day it may be a good idea to try and setup the shot so the model is looking into the wind (or thereabouts). Otherwise, you're likely to spend half your time taking photos of a beautiful model with hair in her face

In terms of your location, I agree with less pier in the images you posted as an example. Not sure how much wet sand you will get (and it would possibly involve the model getting wet - which by the sounds of it is out of the question) However you can get some nice reflections happening......such as THIS and THIS. May not be possible in this location...but something to keep in mind for the future.

Good luck and I hope to see some images posted to show us how you went

Aussie Dave wrote:Then, it's just a case of playing with output power and flash angles to get the model exposed correctly and the shadows falling where you want them. Additional speedlights to the onboard SB800 can be used to soften the shadows (if that's what you're after)...OR reflectors (if you have some assistants).

I'd start the speedlights on 1/128th power and work up from there....depending on how far away you're shooting - of course. You'll soon find the right combination and then shoot away as fast as you can before the light changes too much (which at that time of day can be fairly quickly). You can also play with flash to subject distance which will also have an effect on light fall-off, to the foreground behind the model.

Also, depending on any sea breezes or wind on the day it may be a good idea to try and setup the shot so the model is looking into the wind (or thereabouts). Otherwise, you're likely to spend half your time taking photos of a beautiful model with hair in her face

In terms of your location, I agree with less pier in the images you posted as an example. Not sure how much wet sand you will get (and it would possibly involve the model getting wet - which by the sounds of it is out of the question) However you can get some nice reflections happening......

thanks, some solid feedback there. the water thing was me, model intends to be in the water, but i'd like to keep my meter, camera, and flash dry.

THanks for the tip on the hair! Wind is often heading inland in the location, so that will be key! Great heads up. I like the simplification of the backdrop.

I'll post some in here on the weekend.

Bruce,

If you don't want to be in the water or anywhere near it, use the 85mm or even the 70-200 or 80-200 whichever lens you have right now.

You're not working with short primes like me (ie. 20mm)

Also other ideas you might want to try is using the reflector and bouncing the flash off the reflector onto the model. Mind you, you will need an extra person to help out with that otherwise you might be spending more time chasing the reflector down the beach than taking photos.

Good luck with it.

Cheers,

Wayne

Wayne,

If he's wanting to shoot full length, as per the example originally referred to, using something lie the 85 means that he'll have a half hour commute between his subject and his shooting position in order to get the images.

I note that the example image was shot at 20mm using a 17-55 (IIRC).

Gary,

He DID say he didn't want to be near the water....I took it to the far end of the scale At least i didn't suggest using a 500mm f4

PiroStitch wrote:Gary,

He DID say he didn't want to be near the water....I took it to the far end of the scale At least i didn't suggest using a 500mm f4

Whereby shooting from the local pub might perhaps hamper the image quality at the tail-end of the shoot.

That's a bit narrow minded isn't it Gary? Don't forget if it's blurry, it's art

thanks Guys.

I think I'll manily use the 28-70 for the zoom is handy with different framing quickly between poses. Might also break out the new 70-200VR which came in this mornings post.

I was thinking the 85 if looking into bright sun, to get less flare than zooms, but yes, I'll need to be a few hundred yards away...

PiroStitch wrote:That's a bit narrow minded isn't it Gary? Don't forget if it's blurry, it's art

Ok, Wayne, I'll bite: which of those three fine lenses do you suggest will permit Bruce to make blurry images?

could just use the old vaseline on the filter trick

Here's one technique and the background on the method;

http://www.glamour1.com/tips/articles/s ... beauty.php

Oz,
Looks like you might get an interesting sunset tonight, with the very heavy mist of smoke from the fires covering most of Melbourne today.

Hopefully you'll actually see the sun late this afternoon through it all....

Oz_Beachside wrote:I was thinking the 85 if looking into bright sun, to get less flare than zooms, but yes, I'll need to be a few hundred yards away...

You will be getting heavy CAs with this method, unless you stop down below f/11. If ever using this method, check CA closely in the hair, mostly likey to have heavy purple CA under strong contrast with this lens.

Dont worry about flare, get the model to block the sun and you'll have a backlight and hairlight in effect.

another way is to make a fire and make sure it's out of the frame...the smoke should diffuse the sunlight a bit

I think around the time Oz is planning to have the shoot, the light should be alright by then...mind you he'll have to work pretty damn quickly

Dont you have enough fire around Melbourne now?? and you are suggesting to start another one...

saw the sun a few minutes ago, might be ok, come on wind, blow that haze away...

you saw the sun? what sun? it was a red disc the entire day

shoot went great, lots of learnings, and a big thanks to a great tutor!

I'll process a few now, and post asap

ouch, HDD full of pics... copying now to a new 320GB ext drive, should give the little laptop drive, 30GB, some breathing space...

my pics folder is 16gb... grew much faster with large pics from D200... just another half an hour

16Gb? That makes barely a dint in my hdd space for photos Looking forward to the pics.

Here is one, with great assistance from Antls, we worked through a number of different looks, and I've picked up numerous tips which we can apply to subsequent shoots.

We used a single flash, a 500ws gemini espirit, with battery for location work. A 60cm softbox (round), and a gold reflector.

With the bushfires, the sky was smokey, so unfortunately no colorful sky, but that ok, we have to work with what we have...





and one with no flash, through the new 70-200 VR...

cool! all that setup just to shoot the chopper?

PiroStitch wrote:cool! all that setup just to shoot the chopper?

WHOOPS, WRONG url...

and one of my favourites, lots of lessons here, this one by Antsl...

Oz,
Thanks for posting some images so quickly. Hope you had a great time....looks like you did

Some C&C:

#1
Great image...works really well. Very nice exposure. It almost looks like you turned the background into B&W and kept the model in colour...but I'm assuming that was just the overcast/smoky weather conditions helping out ?!?

#2
Again, nice image & exposure. I'm not sure if there's a touch too much space above her head, but if there is it's only a little (and that's being really picky - which I hope you don't mind).
It also looks that her face is a little softer than the rest of the image. Not sure if this is the case on the full-size version or not ??

#3
great shot...especially without the use of flash to get this one.
My only critisism on this image is that it might have been better if the model had taken off her bikini top (settle down guys !!!!!) so the straps weren't showing. You can also see the pattern through the white dress, which ruins it a little for me....but again I'm being very picky.

#4
A very different angle. Great exposure & colour...I'm just not sure on the viewing angle....possibly because I'm not used to it

Look forward to seeing the rest ! Fantastic effort.....

Aussie Dave wrote:#1
Great image...works really well. Very nice exposure. It almost looks like you turned the background into B&W and kept the model in colour...but I'm assuming that was just the overcast/smoky weather conditions helping out ?!?

#2
Again, nice image & exposure. I'm not sure if there's a touch too much space above her head, but if there is it's only a little (and that's being really picky - which I hope you don't mind).
It also looks that her face is a little softer than the rest of the image. Not sure if this is the case on the full-size version or not ??

#3
great shot...especially without the use of flash to get this one.
My only critisism on this image is that it might have been better if the model had taken off her bikini top (settle down guys !!!!!) so the straps weren't showing. You can also see the pattern through the white dress, which ruins it a little for me....but again I'm being very picky.

#4
A very different angle. Great exposure & colour...I'm just not sure on the viewing angle....possibly because I'm not used to it

THanks for your feedback Dave,
this was my second time with outdoor flash, first was with an SB600, this time was with a studio flash.

#1 - yes, was the backdrop, was cold, overcast, and smoke was thick (heard it has even made it over to NZ)
#2 - the space can be used for mag cover name
#3 - this was with VR on, and it was very overcast, so the natural light was VERY even. Agree on top straps, but this one was an adhoc shot while we were setting up, so unplanned.
#4 - agree, I found myself turning around to view, however I like those ones too, as they get a reaction and require more focus from the viewer.

May process some more over weekend

Great stuff, all of 'em.

Looks like it was a productive session.

2nd and 4th ones would be my pick - the colour and tone is fantastic in the second photo especially. The composition is nice as well.

Even though the 4th one might be on a bizarre angle, it forces you to look more into the pic. The soft light highlighting her hair is a very nice touch as well. There are a lot of elements in the pic which complements one another to really bring out the model (ie. the towel, angle of the towel with the pier, etc).

The third one with natural lighting is pretty cool as well - ain't the haze great for photography? You can probably convert it to a more high key shot if you want to.

Oz_Beachside wrote:
#2 - the space can be used for mag cover name
#3 - this was with VR on, and it was very overcast, so the natural light was VERY even. Agree on top straps, but this one was an adhoc shot while we were setting up, so unplanned.

its always good to take such things into account. saves a lot of frustration/disappointment due to inability to crop etc later.

as for VR..l ast night i experienced for the first time ever, the true power of VR

-julz

Bloody Murphy's Law, today is sunny and nicer sky, however, I am actually happy we had less than ideal conditions, so that I was able to learn how to make the most of a day.

Looking back at the sets of images, the daylight ones were VERY evenly lit, yes, the clouds were my friend.

Very grateful for feedback in here, and generous support from Antsl.

Well done Oz, some great shots there !

Chris

Good work on the portraits there Oz, looking good. But just to nitpick, I find a touch of too much red in the first 2 images.

gooseberry wrote:Good work on the portraits there Oz, looking good. But just to nitpick, I find a touch of too much red in the first 2 images.

thanks, agree, and understand, but that was the warmth we were going for in the images.