#24 starting EARLY this time!

divamum

Some of you may recall that I played around with copying the famous Steichen photo of Gloria Swanson just for fun a few months back, but I never quite worked out the problems, and didn't reshoot it.

What better motivation to try again than #24?

I did this the hard way, by the way - it's a real piece of lace held up over my face, NOT a texture (I wish- that would be so much easier!)

The problems I found are that:

1. The lace is gold (don't have a piece of black, darnit), and it makes it hard when converting to keep skin tones light while darkening the lace. Lots of masks and multiple layers to balance them!

2. The blobs on the lace cast shadows, but the complex but regular pattern makes cloning them out tough - had to do this the hard way too, by dodging, burning and then geeennntttllly cloning where I could.


Does it work better this time?

"Hommage a Steichen"



As far as I can tell (which isn't saying much, I know!) the look of the original is ALL about the makeup. Took way longer to figure that out than the lighting, which was pretty simple although I WISH I could figure out what he used to get those unusual catchlights in her eyes!

Here's the original for reference: http://katilifox.files.wordpress.com/2008/06/gloria-swanson-steichen.jpg (left as a link rather than embedding for copyright reasons)

ETA: I intentionally chose a slightly different angle, which I know from experience is more flattering to me and brings out my eyes more, thus letting me try more successfully for the INTENSITY of the original shot rather than a strict reproduction of it. Aiming for mood rather than precise copy.

ETA: the big difference between this and when I tried last time was that I actually studied the photo! When I tried the "lace shot" before, I was going on memory, because I couldn't remember the name of the photographer ::embarrassed look:: Fortunately, somebody else mentioned it and I looked at it properly and have it saved for reference now!

Halite

You're off to a great start here. It's a fantastic concept to explore and a great image to emulate.

The lighting in the original looks like a big window at an angle--maybe a giant skylight in a sloping attic ceiling. If you don't have a similar window, try bouncing your flash off a really large piece of white foamcore. Two possible ways you could avoid the shadows on your face: 1. shoot the portrait and the lace separately and then composite in post, or 2. move the lace farther away from the face and shoot with a longer lens so it compresses the perceived distance between face and lace.

BradJudy

Very nice - I think the lace is looking good and you've done a very nice job on the makeup. Your face isn't quite as "hard" as Swanson's was, partially because of the angle and partially because of the expression.

I was fortunate enough to be at the LA County Art Museum earlier this year and see the Vanity Fair Portraits exhibit. Among many other wonderful items was the one you are emulating. IIRC, the description mentioned that the lace was a curtain in front of Swanson, so I suspect the original may have been shot as halite mentioned - with distance between the lace and face. Swanson's face is just slightly out of focus, which may also support that idea. Here's a larger version of the original: http://dutchimport.files.wordpress.com/2009/02/vanity_gloriaswanson.jpg

You may take a peek at the Vanity Fair portraits book at a bookstore and see if the description provides any more insights.

I think you've already got a very good entry and I look forward to seeing further shots.

divamum

Halite wrote:

You're off to a great start here. It's a fantastic concept to explore and a great image to emulate.

The lighting in the original looks like a big window at an angle--maybe a giant skylight in a sloping attic ceiling. If you don't have a similar window, try bouncing your flash off a really large piece of white foamcore. Two possible ways you could avoid the shadows on your face: 1. shoot the portrait and the lace separately and then composite in post, or 2. move the lace farther away from the face and shoot with a longer lens so it compresses the perceived distance between face and lace.

Thanks Halite! Yeah, it does look like a window, doesn't it? I know I read an account of Steichen's himself about this shoot,b ut now of course I can't find it. I'll keep googling and reading until I track it down.

I thought about trying to do them separately, but then decided to be a purist I also couldn't figure out how to photgraphe the lace on its own to make it see through ....

I may not have time to reshoot, but we'll see. Interestingly, ones I did earlier in the session suffered less from the shadowing; I'll have to figure out what I changed in the lighting when I adjusted my position.

For the record, I did have a reflector under my chin to try and capture some of the sparkle and flat-but-not-flat lighting he gets. If I get a chance to reshoot I may utilize that even further.

Thanks for the feedback!!

divamum

Thanks Bradjudy!!

Interestingly, I think some of that "softness" (other than the older-than-Swanson fluffiness which my face displays ) is partially the conversion. In trying to bump up the yellows and reds to boost the skintone, it seems to make it a bit fuzzy - the original was much sharper. I've noticed this in other bw conversions, so it's something worth addressing, I think. Is it just the nature of the beast?

divamum

A second version, from earlier in the shoot. Initially I thought the expression wasn't intense enough, but perhaps....

Better?

dnie

divamum wrote:

A second version, from earlier in the shoot. Initially I thought the expression wasn't intense enough, but perhaps....

Better?

I like it better.... not that it means much. I'm not always on the same page as the rest of the class. (I always have been the oddball:D )
I actually had to stop and think a second of if that was yours or the one you linked to.. even went back to check myself.

divamum

dnie wrote:

I like it better.... not that it means much. I'm not always on the same page as the rest of the class. (I always have been the oddball:D )
I actually had to stop and think a second of if that was yours or the one you linked to.. even went back to check myself.

Actually, on reflection that's what I like about it least - it's too much of a verbatim copy.

I keep thinking of fashion shoots that utilize photographic styles gone by... I wonder if I can use this as a basis and come up with something similar? Hmmm.... I fear I'm going to run out of time (busy, busy 2 weeks coming up in that - HOORAY!! - my "real" professional life is on the boil with an out of town gig), but perhaps....

Hmm. Gloria Swanson with a cell phone?!

dnie

divamum wrote:

Actually, on reflection that's what I like about it least - it's too much of a verbatim copy.

I keep thinking of fashion shoots that utilize photographic styles gone by... I wonder if I can use this as a basis and come up with something similar? Hmmm.... I fear I'm going to run out of time (busy, busy 2 weeks coming up in that - HOORAY!! - my "real" professional life is on the boil with an out of town gig), but perhaps....

Hmm. Gloria Swanson with a cell phone?!

Yea, that is true, it isn't meant to copy exactly. I wasn't thinking of that. I tend to just react to what I like without breaking it down as to why, and I need to learn to think that way.
I think what it was that I liked was that it seemed a bit darker, like the lace and seeing more hair also... but that's me.

Flyinggina

Personally, I love the idea and think the second version is fantastic.

I know that this is fanciful, but the second one makes me think of Madam Butterfly. Something about the eye makeup and the mouth.

I have no doubt that whatever you decide to enter will be a contender.

Your persistence and perfectionism will serve you well.

Virginia

dnie

divamum wrote:

Hmm. Gloria Swanson with a cell phone?!

I just noticed the cell phone line... funny... but hmmmm.... it could work!
:ivar

divamum

Flyinggina wrote:

Personally, I love the idea and think the second version is fantastic.

I know that this is fanciful, but the second one makes me think of Madam Butterfly. Something about the eye makeup and the mouth.

I have no doubt that whatever you decide to enter will be a contender.

Your persistence and perfectionism will serve you well.

Virginia

You're always so sweet - thank you!

I think I slightly over-burned in the eye makeup, actually (and yeah, I see why you think Butterfly - hadn't thought of it, but you're totally right!); I may tone it down a little if I get a chance to reprocess the image. I'm still trying to think of exaclty *what* I want to do with it - if no inspiration I'm ok using it as is, but I keep thinking there's got to be a way to give it a twist....

We'll see if I come up with anything. My head is kind of back into Operaland again which results in a bit of a split personality these days, but maybe once I'm out on the road I'll have too much time on my hands again and come up with something inventive to keep my mind occupied....

Flyinggina

Wondering if you could play on the opera idea as the enhancer. Carmen?

Still loving #2 as is, though.

Virginia

divamum

Flyinggina wrote:

Wondering if you could play on the opera idea as the enhancer. Carmen?

Hmmmm.... you gave me an idea

I know we all hate selective colouring but... does it work in this? Can't decide if I like it or REALLY hate it

Flyinggina

I'm torn too. My first thought was just do the eyes. That would be subtle but would add some mystery to an already mysterious photo.

The red is jarring, but strangely compelling too. It really changes the feel of the photo., moving it towards the creepy, giving it an offbeat noir feel, which may not be a bad idea at all.

What if you bleached out the skin tones even more (lol - I'm back to Butterfly again). On second thought, probably not the greatest idea. Fun to think about though.

Virginia

dnie

divamum wrote:

Hmmmm.... you gave me an idea

I know we all hate selective colouring but... does it work in this? Can't decide if I like it or REALLY hate it

well, not all of us....
I like it (I know, I am always the problem child)
as long as it is done well and fits in with what is being done.

I really like the eyes.
The lips I can't decide on. Maybe too much? But it really grabs you too.

travelways

I cannot tell about technical aspect... but I actually like your photo more than the original...

This, because of the position of the "model" - I personally find the composition more artistic...

- I'm talking about #1 and #2

silversx80

Hi divamum,

I though I'd chime in because I've been staring and comparing (with the original image) for the past couple days. I like what you've done, it's an interesting artist and photo to emulate. It's personally not my style, but I'm intrigued nonetheless. Anyway (and a big anyway, with a huge grain of salt) I'm wondering what you did for the B&W conversion. It seems that a little more contrast would bring the image out more, perhaps lighter in the skin. Maybe a little more red and green, and less blue in the channel mixer would do the trick.

Bah, I'm an amature's amature, so it's a rare occation that I even remotely know what I'm talking about. Keep up the good work.

divamum

Thanks folks! Appreciate the comments.

I actually went ahead and posted a version with just the eyes coloured, but then silver's further comments prompted me to look at it again (I wasn't sold on the conversion either, but it was the best of the ones I had done, so I went with it).

I also spent last night looking at loads more of Steichen's work; I'd seen much of it before, but decided to really try to get inside it a little more, particularly his earlier pictorial-style work. Not sure I have the art-history technical understanding (or language) to fully articulate it, but it made me look harder, which is good (and what this challenge is all about )

In any case, played around some more this morning. What do we think of this?

silversx80

divamum wrote:

In any case, played around some more this morning. What do we think of this?

Wow!

I find I'm liking it much better than the photo you're emulating. Fantastic!

Katmitchell

Me No Likey
I don't like this one... I like the one with the coloration..BUT.. not the lips,, the lips are too much... they eyes are ok and I would even try a muted natural type green for the eyes, maybe..

but not the lips..

I personally love colorations when they are done right with layers and are tastefully done. A coloration in my opinion should be utilized to direct the viewers eyes, and it should not overpower the overall composition.

As a matter of fact, I wonder if a person can pick coloration as a theme in the mini challenges if you win one? are you allowed to pic a theme with a photoshop requirement? just curious..

anyways,, I think your photo is better than the one you are trying to emulate and I like the tasteful and mild coloration on the eyes, or even without it altogether..

Best of luck to you..rofl

Kat

dnie

That is great! It reminds me of a old movie star photo, like something silent movieish... (I know, it ain't a word)
Very cool!! This one is working out well for you.

divamum

dnie wrote:

That is great! It reminds me of a old movie star photo, like something silent movieish... (I know, it ain't a word)
Very cool!! This one is working out well for you.

Well, since that's what Steichen was shooting, I guess maybe I've managed to get the mood I was trying for

Kat, no problem - I think I like the brown-eyes one too (would struggle with green - my eyes are in reality MUCH darkerbrown than I processed them in the photo, so it's weird enough to me as it is!!) - appreciate your feedback!

Katmitchell

Hmmmm
Y-V-W.....

Hey I keep going back to your first one... something about it really stands out... it is the look on the face and the way the lace is falling on the right side of the eye and the fact that the top lace on the head area almost looks like a headdress... I don't know, but out of the three so far I am beginning to favor number one after a 3rd look...

It will be fun to see where you go with this...thumb

Kat

JAG

out of all the pictures you have posted on this thread...I really like the last one! I stared at that one....the whole image takes me in. The other colorized ones with the lips or eyes only color...distract from the over all image. I really like the sepia type tonal quality of the last one. JMO

divamum

Thanks all - really appreciate the comments. I played with a couple of other versions combining elements of the original version 2, the one w/ coloured eyes (the one in the gallery) and the most recent one in this thread. However, this most recent one has particularly grown on me as I review (and re-review) his pictorialist stuff which is so impressionistic in style (thus softness) for instance this famous picture of the Flatiron building in NYC http://www.masters-of-photography.com/images/full/steichen/steichen_flatiron.jpg

There are hand-tinted versions of this shot which is why I keep working with some kind of colorization somewhere, but I keep coming back to the version here no matter what else I try.

This challenge is so much fun

Thanks everybody!!