2006, a very good yearModerators: Greg B, Nnnnsic, Geoff, Glen, gstark, Moderators
Forum rules
Please note that image critiquing is a matter of give and take: if you post images for critique, and you then expect to receive criticism, then it is also reasonable, fair and appropriate that, in return, you post your critique of the images of other members here as a matter of courtesy. So please do offer your critique of the images of others; your opinion is important, and will help everyone here enjoy their visit to far greater extent. Also please note that, unless you state something to the contrary, other members might attempt to repost your image with their own post processing applied. We see this as an acceptable form of critique, but should you prefer that others not modify your work, this is perfectly ok, and you should state this, either within your post, or within your signature. Images posted here should conform with the general forum guidelines. Image sizes should not exceed 950 pixels along the largest side (height or width) and typically no more than four images per post or thread. Please also ensure that you have a meaningful location included in your profile. Please refer to the FAQ for details of what "meaningful" is.
Previous topic • Next topic
9 posts
• Page 1 of 1
2006, a very good yearWhilst BBQing some pork chops last night, I hastily set up the lights to take a shot of some of our 2006 Penfolds, being the year in which Alicia & I married.
I think the black background is a little boring, but would appreciate comments. Regards, Patrick
Two or three lights, any lens on a light-tight box are sufficient for the realisation of the most convincing image. Man Ray 1935. Our mug is smug
Re: 2006, a very good yearVery nice wines Patrick but I feel that the labels are just a wee bit too dark. Seeing as how the label is so important I thought I would point this out
Chris
-------------------------------- I started my life with nothing and I’ve still got most of it left
Re: 2006, a very good yearPatrick
There is something wrong with those bottles........they are full. Regards
Matt. K
Re: 2006, a very good yearChris, agree - I was trying a range of reflectors that would jot be reflected in the glass too little avail.
Matt, they are but babies, due for consumption over the next 20 years. Regards, Patrick
Two or three lights, any lens on a light-tight box are sufficient for the realisation of the most convincing image. Man Ray 1935. Our mug is smug
Re: 2006, a very good yearLabels are a real challenge. Especially the metallic ones
Either a VERY large light camera front, dialled down so it just contributes a little. or a gobo set so just the label gets light. Greg
It's easy to be good... when there is nothing else to do
Re: 2006, a very good yearPatrick
The trick to lighting wine and other bottles of liquid is to source some aluminium backed cardboard...the type they put cakes on....cut them out to the shape of the bottle, but a bit smaller so the edges can't be seen, and stick them on the backs of the bottles with blue tac or a hot glue gun or tape.They reflect the light forward back through the wine giving it an ethereal glow. Cut some smaller pieces and use them as side reflectors to catch a little light and throw it across the embossing on the labels. They should be just out of the picture space. By manipulating these reflectors it is possible to bring bottles of wine to life and make them jump off the page. These small, credit card size home made reflectors are trade secrets used by still life photographers. Use a little dry ice in the background to create a fog and use long exposures to turn that fog into a beautiful mist. Regards
Matt. K
Re: 2006, a very good yearhow about light painting them with a soft box? this coupled with a hairlight flash (similar to what matt was saying about the lighting the BG) might be a goer?
gerry's photography journey
No amount of processing will fix bad composition - trust me i have tried.
Re: 2006, a very good yearPatrick nice set. Wow, it would be a job to keep these babies at constant temperature through Aussie summers for 20 years!
I agree with the underexposed labels. 1. I think you might want to try double diffusion for the sides. 2. For labels, snooted light (either direct or to the side) 3. For #1, separate shots of bottles if you wanted to avoid some of those reflections 4. combined exposures if you don't want to light the labels separately. As Gerry mentioned, you can lightpaint the labels until you are satisfied and blend them in.
Re: 2006, a very good yearThanks folks, I will try these techniques next time. I did notice that these images are darker than on the Mac.
Regards, Patrick
Two or three lights, any lens on a light-tight box are sufficient for the realisation of the most convincing image. Man Ray 1935. Our mug is smug
Previous topic • Next topic
9 posts
• Page 1 of 1
|