Here's a couple shots of a glass blower from a nearby town. C&C always welcome. Enjoy!
Thanks for looking!
Thanks for sharing... I did some glass blowing shots once.. I remember being "very hot"! I was a little distracted on the first with all the stuff on the wall behind the man.. took me a while to focus down on the actual subject. Number 2 was easier to focus in on but it's a little blurred on my screen. How were they in color.
Thanks for sharing... I did some glass blowing shots once.. I remember being "very hot"! I was a little distracted on the first with all the stuff on the wall behind the man.. took me a while to focus down on the actual subject. Number 2 was easier to focus in on but it's a little blurred on my screen. How were they in color.
Thanks for the comments, Lynn. I tried to darken the background in #1 but I was afraid to do too much. In the end I admitted defeat and posted what I had! The combination of a poorly lit room and a fast glass blower made these photos blurry.
In color they were all extremely busy. There was colorful (and not in a good way) stuff everywhere so I decided B&W might help subdue it all a little bit.
It's pretty neat stuff. This guy works in a small town on the Mississippi (Clarksville, MO) that has, in recent years, turned in a haven for artisans of all types. Over the next couple months I will be going back down there to shoot some woodworkers and metalworkers in action. It should all be great fun!
The subject matter sounds like it could have a lot of potential but the 2 shots offered are soft and of course there are not shots of actual glass being blow or manipulated. heh..just a guy with a stick.
The subject matter sounds like it could have a lot of potential but the 2 shots offered are soft and of course there are not shots of actual glass being blow or manipulated. heh..just a guy with a stick.
Yeah, they're soft. I've admitted as much. The softness, a product of the low light and focal lenght, was not intentional. I do think, however, that that it helps to demonstrate the speed at which he was working.
Should you find yourself in a position to watch a glass blower you'll find that blowing glass is a very small part of the job. I wasn't impressed with a man blowing on a stick any more than you, apparently, are impressed with one "holding" a stick. I was impressed by the vast array of very intricately blown trinkets and statues this man has created with blindingly fast precision. He appeared careless and reckless yet the final product was inticate and fully of detail. That, as far as I'm concerned, is the point of these two shots.
Yeah, they're soft. I've admitted as much. The softness, a product of the low light and focal lenght, was not intentional. I do think, however, that that it helps to demonstrate the speed at which he was working.
Should you find yourself in a position to watch a glass blower you'll find that blowing glass is a very small part of the job. I wasn't impressed with a man blowing on a stick any more than you, apparently, are impressed with one "holding" a stick. I was impressed by the vast array of very intricately blown trinkets and statues this man has created with blindingly fast precision. He appeared careless and reckless yet the final product was inticate and fully of detail. That, as far as I'm concerned, is the point of these two shots.
While the motion blur does suggest some movement..without your explanation I would have been hard pressed to figure out what the guy was doing. Not trying to be argumentative here.
I have to agree with much of what was said above with a bit of clarification.
There's a distinct difference between motion blur and softness. Image #2 as an example - the blur of his arms adds interest to the shot (even though you don't really know he's working glass) but his face is not sharp while parts of his trousers are. So the issue with "softness" has to do with your focal point.
Also not trying to be argumentative... (I'm not part of the agressocracy, and refuse to try to be, so I don't get to mean. )
I'd wonder: what aperture were these taken at? Background looks not-enough out of depth while you were struggling for enough light for the image?
Having done glass blowing back in the day, it _is_ hot, and you can move fast, but that seems like that would allow a slightly shorter shutter and still get the hand motion while the head motion would be stopped. (I'd guess the face was moving too much for the shutter on #2; the neck is sharp and given how much the background is in focus, it seems like motion may have been to blame for this softness.)
Another suggestion; change angles so that you get the piece and him closer together, making his hands, the piece, and his still(er) body more a single subject, or at least something that's closer together.
Not that he would have thought positively, but if you had been able to use that ladder in the background to get above/behind him while he wasn't swinging (stretching) the piece (so as to avoid burning you too much... ), you might have gotten the three elements together more.
Of course, if you thought it was hot where you were, you should have raised your hand above the edge of the exhaust fan skirt (in the shop I worked in; this was about 7 feet from the floor and skirted the whole of the kilns and glass pot; the Glory Hole was closer to the door that stayed open all year round, if I remember right.)
If you got up on that ladder, I'll bet your time up there would have stayed to less than a couple minutes, certainly less than 5. Camera might have wanted to stay lower than the edge of the skirt for most of it, too.
Next time I get back out to my parent's place, I've got a coupon for glass studio time at a local place in town (Racine, WI). Totally bringing the camera with me too!
If responding to a picture I've posted: please, provide constructive criticism. Destructive criticism can go take a flying leap.
If we don't know what could be improved or could have been done differently, we'll never know how to get better at what we're doing.
Also not trying to be argumentative... (I'm not part of the agressocracy, and refuse to try to be, so I don't get to mean. )
I'd wonder: what aperture were these taken at? Background looks not-enough out of depth while you were struggling for enough light for the image?
Having done glass blowing back in the day, it _is_ hot, and you can move fast, but that seems like that would allow a slightly shorter shutter and still get the hand motion while the head motion would be stopped. (I'd guess the face was moving too much for the shutter on #2; the neck is sharp and given how much the background is in focus, it seems like motion may have been to blame for this softness.)
Another suggestion; change angles so that you get the piece and him closer together, making his hands, the piece, and his still(er) body more a single subject, or at least something that's closer together.
Not that he would have thought positively, but if you had been able to use that ladder in the background to get above/behind him while he wasn't swinging (stretching) the piece (so as to avoid burning you too much... ), you might have gotten the three elements together more.
Of course, if you thought it was hot where you were, you should have raised your hand above the edge of the exhaust fan skirt (in the shop I worked in; this was about 7 feet from the floor and skirted the whole of the kilns and glass pot; the Glory Hole was closer to the door that stayed open all year round, if I remember right.)
If you got up on that ladder, I'll bet your time up there would have stayed to less than a couple minutes, certainly less than 5. Camera might have wanted to stay lower than the edge of the skirt for most of it, too.
Next time I get back out to my parent's place, I've got a coupon for glass studio time at a local place in town (Racine, WI). Totally bringing the camera with me too!
Ah, good memories.
Those are all great suggestions, Nate. I wasn't there, unfortunately, on any official capacity to take photos. I was with my family and was confined to a small observation area, looking through a window, at the blower some 15 feet away. The angles you see are pretty much all I had available.
The shots were both taken at 80mm, 1/30" at ISO 640. I could have gone a little higher with the ISO but my D80 doesn't do so well up there. Even at 1/60", though, I'm sure I wouldn't have been steady enough to eliminate the extra blur from camera shake.
I know these aren't pro-quality shots but I really thought they held a little interested regardless. It seems I am in the minority.
Comments
Thanks for sharing... I did some glass blowing shots once.. I remember being "very hot"!
In color they were all extremely busy. There was colorful (and not in a good way) stuff everywhere so I decided B&W might help subdue it all a little bit.
It's pretty neat stuff. This guy works in a small town on the Mississippi (Clarksville, MO) that has, in recent years, turned in a haven for artisans of all types. Over the next couple months I will be going back down there to shoot some woodworkers and metalworkers in action. It should all be great fun!
Man, when the light hits that stuff it's magic... Catch it if you can
14-24 24-70 70-200mm (vr2)
85 and 50 1.4
45 PC and sb910 x2
http://www.danielkimphotography.com
Should you find yourself in a position to watch a glass blower you'll find that blowing glass is a very small part of the job. I wasn't impressed with a man blowing on a stick any more than you, apparently, are impressed with one "holding" a stick. I was impressed by the vast array of very intricately blown trinkets and statues this man has created with blindingly fast precision. He appeared careless and reckless yet the final product was inticate and fully of detail. That, as far as I'm concerned, is the point of these two shots.
While the motion blur does suggest some movement..without your explanation I would have been hard pressed to figure out what the guy was doing. Not trying to be argumentative here.
14-24 24-70 70-200mm (vr2)
85 and 50 1.4
45 PC and sb910 x2
http://www.danielkimphotography.com
There's a distinct difference between motion blur and softness. Image #2 as an example - the blur of his arms adds interest to the shot (even though you don't really know he's working glass) but his face is not sharp while parts of his trousers are. So the issue with "softness" has to do with your focal point.
Moderator of: Location, Location, Location , Mind Your Own Business & Other Cool Shots
I'd wonder: what aperture were these taken at? Background looks not-enough out of depth while you were struggling for enough light for the image?
Having done glass blowing back in the day, it _is_ hot, and you can move fast, but that seems like that would allow a slightly shorter shutter and still get the hand motion while the head motion would be stopped. (I'd guess the face was moving too much for the shutter on #2; the neck is sharp and given how much the background is in focus, it seems like motion may have been to blame for this softness.)
Another suggestion; change angles so that you get the piece and him closer together, making his hands, the piece, and his still(er) body more a single subject, or at least something that's closer together.
Not that he would have thought positively, but if you had been able to use that ladder in the background to get above/behind him while he wasn't swinging (stretching) the piece (so as to avoid burning you too much...
Of course, if you thought it was hot where you were, you should have raised your hand above the edge of the exhaust fan skirt (in the shop I worked in; this was about 7 feet from the floor and skirted the whole of the kilns and glass pot; the Glory Hole was closer to the door that stayed open all year round, if I remember right.)
If you got up on that ladder, I'll bet your time up there would have stayed to less than a couple minutes, certainly less than 5. Camera might have wanted to stay lower than the edge of the skirt for most of it, too.
Next time I get back out to my parent's place, I've got a coupon for glass studio time at a local place in town (Racine, WI). Totally bringing the camera with me too!
Ah, good memories.
NTWPhotos.com
Member, Livingston County Photographers Group (http://livcophotographers.com)
If responding to a picture I've posted: please, provide constructive criticism. Destructive criticism can go take a flying leap.
If we don't know what could be improved or could have been done differently, we'll never know how to get better at what we're doing.
Those are all great suggestions, Nate. I wasn't there, unfortunately, on any official capacity to take photos. I was with my family and was confined to a small observation area, looking through a window, at the blower some 15 feet away. The angles you see are pretty much all I had available.
The shots were both taken at 80mm, 1/30" at ISO 640. I could have gone a little higher with the ISO but my D80 doesn't do so well up there. Even at 1/60", though, I'm sure I wouldn't have been steady enough to eliminate the extra blur from camera shake.
I know these aren't pro-quality shots but I really thought they held a little interested regardless. It seems I am in the minority.