On the portraits I would recommend turning the camera to a "portrait" orientation. That way it gives you more pixles of your subject, in case you need to crop. This orientation also gets rid of all the dead space on the sides. It comes with practice, soon you will shoot almost all your pictures that way.
On the portraits I would recommend turning the camera to a "portrait" orientation. That way it gives you more pixles of your subject, in case you need to crop. This orientation also gets rid of all the dead space on the sides. It comes with practice, soon you will shoot almost all your pictures that way.
You're right, I wouldn't have wasted as much pixels on the background!
Some good shots. Also, good advice on filling the scene. One of the things I am trying to learn to deal with is the balance between filling the scene at the capture vs. the print. What I mean is that I may have an excelent shot but my DSLR Rebel "film" area doesn't always translate well to each print size.
For example...
I like this shot and pose. I might have been interested in having an 8x10 printed. But when I look at the projected print, the top is cut off (not a big deal as there is some space to lose there ) and the bottom is cut off (losing her feet). However, it should look fine in a 4x6. And a 5x7 might lose less area (or none).
I currently use ClarkColor as my "photolab", maybe there is a way to adjust the cropping but I haven't found it.
THe crop of an 8x10 really stinks! I wish 8x12 were more standard. That way we can use full frame from the camera. I leave space on top and bottom for the 8x10 crop just in case, but sometimes the b&g ask me why I didn't get closer, when looking at the proofs, then I show them what happens when I crop to 8x10.
OK I will share a tip with you, and the only reason I recognize this 'mistake' is that I have made the same 'mistake' often.
Your backdrop has creases in it, and the short distance between your backdrop and the subjects make those creases stand out, and distract from the main subject(s). There are a couple of ways to solve this.
1) Roll your backdrops on a piece of schedule 40 PVC pipe, and never ever fold them, and unwrinkle them hanging once (use steam or water and let them hang)
2) Increase distance between subject and backdrop, where the backdrop will be OOF by DOF.
Or do both (I do both) this will also allow you to light backdrop and subjects seperately.
FWIW,
XO,
ps. in case those creases were there on purpose, discard all the above
You can't depend on your eyes when your imagination is out of focus. Mark Twain
OK I will share a tip with you, and the only reason I recognize this 'mistake' is that I have made the same 'mistake' often.
Your backdrop has creases in it, and the short distance between your backdrop and the subjects make those creases stand out, and distract from the main subject(s). There are a couple of ways to solve this.
1) Roll your backdrops on a piece of schedule 40 PVC pipe, and never ever fold them, and unwrinkle them hanging once (use steam or water and let them hang)
2) Increase distance between subject and backdrop, where the backdrop will be OOF by DOF.
Or do both (I do both) this will also allow you to light backdrop and subjects seperately.
FWIW,
XO,
ps. in case those creases were there on purpose, discard all the above
I have one of those Collapsible backgrounds, so rolling them on a pipe, doesn't really work. I also have them about 6ft in front of the backdrop most of the time, but with the Alien Bees (even at low power), I never get to shoot with anything wider than f/8.
I have one of those Collapsible backgrounds, so rolling them on a pipe, doesn't really work. I also have them about 6ft in front of the backdrop most of the time, but with the Alien Bees (even at low power), I never get to shoot with anything wider than f/8.
I think I might need an ND filter for this!
Thanks for the tips, though
Toine
OK, I don't understand this statement. Why can't you shoot wider than f8? (Trying to learn)
Also as a general comment. I think the photos are good I like # 1 the best, I think, looked good with a 8X10 crop . However they seem very dark on my monitor??? I put # 1 into PS and set the black & white point and that seemed to have fixed it for my monitor.
OK, I don't understand this statement. Why can't you shoot wider than f8? (Trying to learn)
Sam
I will answer this question as I at times fight this very issue.
My light setup (White Lightning Ultra 1200's) puts out a lot of light; and I mean a lot, plenty to fill a reception hall/room (that might be pushing it).
My camera's lowest ISO setting is 200.
My lights have an adjustment rate down to f/32. Sometimes at f/32 the lights still put out too much light to goto f/1.8 on my lens(es) so I close the lens and reduce the shutterspeed until I get the histogram I am looking for. Given that I can only reduce shutterspeed up to the minimum synch speed of my light setup (1/500th) I am at times (pending light modifiers used) forced to close my lens further than what I would like to do.
Now I have solved this issue as follows, given that I almost always use light modifiers (a shoot through and a regular umbrella). I purchased two pieces of metal screen/mesh and made them into nice circles that fit my reflectors with a small clip. This reduces the output by a good margin where I have 'control' again in portrait situations.
FWIW,
XO,
You can't depend on your eyes when your imagination is out of focus. Mark Twain
OK, I don't understand this statement. Why can't you shoot wider than f8? (Trying to learn)
Also as a general comment. I think the photos are good I like # 1 the best, I think, looked good with a 8X10 crop . However they seem very dark on my monitor??? I put # 1 into PS and set the black & white point and that seemed to have fixed it for my monitor.
Sam
With my Alien Bees at low settings, it's still too bright to shoot wide open.
Yes, some of them need to be lightened. These are all whitebalanced/exposed from the greycard RAW file, and are the proofs for the customers.
I have one of those Collapsible backgrounds, so rolling them on a pipe, doesn't really work. I also have them about 6ft in front of the backdrop most of the time, but with the Alien Bees (even at low power), I never get to shoot with anything wider than f/8.
I think I might need an ND filter for this!
Thanks for the tips, though
Toine
You should be able to lower the light intensity of your AB lights until you achieve the light level for any aperture that you choose. Move the slider on the back of the light to the left. Is your ISO at 100? What mm lens are you using? A longer lens will allow less DOF at any given f-stop.
You should be able to lower the light intensity of your AB lights until you achieve the light level for any aperture that you choose. Move the slider on the back of the light to the left. Is your ISO at 100? What mm lens are you using? A longer lens will allow less DOF at any given f-stop.
I'm typically between 28 and 60mm range on my 28-135. Don't have enough room to back up to get a wide enough angle. I do know that I can lower the intensity of the lights, and I do that, but to keep a 1 to 3 or 1 to 2 ratio, I can never lower them all the way.
I like your office photographs, but not the ones with the backdrop. Actually I like the actual portraits, but not the backdrop.
XO has it right, you have to get the subjects away from the backdrop and get it out of focus. If those big 'ol studio lights are too powerful, you'd be better off with a couple of regular flashes. One on a stand with a brolly and one for fill, you could get good results.
Seems to me there's a steep learning curve with studio lighting. The people that make it work (Rodney Blair over at DPReview for example) seem to use manual mode all the time so they can have a fast shutter speed to be able to keep the lens open.
I'm typically between 28 and 60mm range on my 28-135. Don't have enough room to back up to get a wide enough angle. I do know that I can lower the intensity of the lights, and I do that, but to keep a 1 to 3 or 1 to 2 ratio, I can never lower them all the way.
Toine
For all but the group shot I think you will find that 100mm plus in the portrait orientation will give you a nice tight composition and also help the background. You might try a large foam board reflector as fill and only use a main light & a background light/s. As others have mentioned light modifiers can help as well. You could also back up your lights some, but this will tend to give harder shadows. I hope this helps. If not, just say so. Keep shooting.
I will answer this question as I at times fight this very issue.
My light setup (White Lightning Ultra 1200's) puts out a lot of light; and I mean a lot, plenty to fill a reception hall/room (that might be pushing it).
My camera's lowest ISO setting is 200.
My lights have an adjustment rate down to f/32. Sometimes at f/32 the lights still put out too much light to goto f/1.8 on my lens(es) so I close the lens and reduce the shutterspeed until I get the histogram I am looking for. Given that I can only reduce shutterspeed up to the minimum synch speed of my light setup (1/500th) I am at times (pending light modifiers used) forced to close my lens further than what I would like to do.
Now I have solved this issue as follows, given that I almost always use light modifiers (a shoot through and a regular umbrella). I purchased two pieces of metal screen/mesh and made them into nice circles that fit my reflectors with a small clip. This reduces the output by a good margin where I have 'control' again in portrait situations.
FWIW,
XO,
Thank you for the time to give me an answer. So....one can hve too much light. Who knew? I don't really understand synch, but I get the concept.
When I need lighting I think I'll go with hot lights, that way I won't have to worry about synch, but I will make sure there are output controls to limit the amout of light..
Thank you for the time to give me an answer. So....one can hve too much light. Who knew? I don't really understand synch, but I get the concept.
When I need lighting I think I'll go with hot lights, that way I won't have to worry about synch, but I will make sure there are output controls to limit the amout of light..
Thanks again,
Sam
I have output controls, as do the Alieen Bees used here, however my output control is 5 stops (f/1 to f/32) with one light at f/16 and the other at f/32 (1:2 ratio) I still have too much light at times to achieve what I am after. And as mentioned here earlier, moving the lights away does help, but makes the shadows harder. It is actually easy to simply put more material in the path of light be it a modifier or a ND filter.
While the learning curve is a little steeper, I would always recommend going with strobes over continuous output.
BTW my thread photoshoot part X is done with my studio setup, as you can tell good results are very doable.
FWIW, YMMV,
XO,
You can't depend on your eyes when your imagination is out of focus. Mark Twain
I have output controls, as do the Alieen Bees used here, however my output control is 5 stops (f/1 to f/32) with one light at f/16 and the other at f/32 (1:2 ratio) I still have too much light at times to achieve what I am after. And as mentioned here earlier, moving the lights away does help, but makes the shadows harder. It is actually easy to simply put more material in the path of light be it a modifier or a ND filter.
While the learning curve is a little steeper, I would always recommend going with strobes over continuous output.
BTW my thread photoshoot part X is done with my studio setup, as you can tell good results are very doable.
FWIW, YMMV,
XO,
In my setup, the B800 is going through a shoot-through umbrella. The B400 is bounced into a silver umbrella.
I might just get an ND filter for this purpose. I shoot at location (read: customer's houses), and don't always have the space to backup far enough (lights, or me).
In (almost all of) these shots, the subject was about 6ft from the background.
I like your office photographs, but not the ones with the backdrop. Actually I like the actual portraits, but not the backdrop.
XO has it right, you have to get the subjects away from the backdrop and get it out of focus. If those big 'ol studio lights are too powerful, you'd be better off with a couple of regular flashes. One on a stand with a brolly and one for fill, you could get good results.
Seems to me there's a steep learning curve with studio lighting. The people that make it work (Rodney Blair over at DPReview for example) seem to use manual mode all the time so they can have a fast shutter speed to be able to keep the lens open.
Yes, there is definitely a steep learning curve
I of course, shoot in manual mode. It's really the only way to use strobes, at least, as far as I know Shutter speed has no impact with strobe lighting. Plus, I can't go faster than 1/200, due to the flash sync speed of the 10D.
I of course, shoot in manual mode. It's really the only way to use strobes, at least, as far as I know Shutter speed has no impact with strobe lighting. Plus, I can't go faster than 1/200, due to the flash sync speed of the 10D.
Toine
Hmmm turned way down in ISO and lights on f/32, shutterspeed does have an influence, as the modelling light and ambient light become less of a factor.
I always shoot manual in my studio setup (and lots of other occasions as well), and try it, it does make a difference. My D70 lets me goto 1/500 and still be synched.
XO,
You can't depend on your eyes when your imagination is out of focus. Mark Twain
Hmmm turned way down in ISO and lights on f/32, shutterspeed does have an influence, as the modelling light and ambient light become less of a factor.
I always shoot manual in my studio setup (and lots of other occasions as well), and try it, it does make a difference. My D70 lets me goto 1/500 and still be synched.
XO,
I have always learned that shutterspeed does not matter when using strobe lighting.
And, I'm shooting at ISO 100. The 10D's Flash sync speed is only 1/200s
I have always learned that shutterspeed does not matter when using strobe lighting.
And, I'm shooting at ISO 100. The 10D's Flash sync speed is only 1/200s
Toine
I have learned the same thing as far as shutterspeed not being an influence on flash, it does however influence the amount of ambient that gets into the picture, (f controls flash influence, s controls ambient influence). I am not sure about your setup, but between room lights and modeling lights in the strobes, there is ample ambient to be reduced. Not that it is a huge factor, but enough to make a difference.
XO,
You can't depend on your eyes when your imagination is out of focus. Mark Twain
I have learned the same thing as far as shutterspeed not being an influence on flash, it does however influence the amount of ambient that gets into the picture, (f controls flash influence, s controls ambient influence). I am not sure about your setup, but between room lights and modeling lights in the strobes, there is ample ambient to be reduced. Not that it is a huge factor, but enough to make a difference.
XO,
Okay, that makes sense. Of course, I was already at the fastest speed my camera would allow
Comments
Lee
Perfect Pix
Toine
Thanks,
Toine
For example...
I like this shot and pose. I might have been interested in having an 8x10 printed. But when I look at the projected print, the top is cut off (not a big deal as there is some space to lose there ) and the bottom is cut off (losing her feet). However, it should look fine in a 4x6. And a 5x7 might lose less area (or none).
I currently use ClarkColor as my "photolab", maybe there is a way to adjust the cropping but I haven't found it.
www.42FordGPW.com
Perfect Pix
Your backdrop has creases in it, and the short distance between your backdrop and the subjects make those creases stand out, and distract from the main subject(s). There are a couple of ways to solve this.
1) Roll your backdrops on a piece of schedule 40 PVC pipe, and never ever fold them, and unwrinkle them hanging once (use steam or water and let them hang)
2) Increase distance between subject and backdrop, where the backdrop will be OOF by DOF.
Or do both (I do both) this will also allow you to light backdrop and subjects seperately.
FWIW,
XO,
ps. in case those creases were there on purpose, discard all the above
Mark Twain
Some times I get lucky and when that happens I show the results here: http://www.xo-studios.com
I think I might need an ND filter for this!
Thanks for the tips, though
Toine
Also as a general comment. I think the photos are good I like # 1 the best, I think, looked good with a 8X10 crop . However they seem very dark on my monitor??? I put # 1 into PS and set the black & white point and that seemed to have fixed it for my monitor.
Sam
My light setup (White Lightning Ultra 1200's) puts out a lot of light; and I mean a lot, plenty to fill a reception hall/room (that might be pushing it).
My camera's lowest ISO setting is 200.
My lights have an adjustment rate down to f/32. Sometimes at f/32 the lights still put out too much light to goto f/1.8 on my lens(es) so I close the lens and reduce the shutterspeed until I get the histogram I am looking for. Given that I can only reduce shutterspeed up to the minimum synch speed of my light setup (1/500th) I am at times (pending light modifiers used) forced to close my lens further than what I would like to do.
Now I have solved this issue as follows, given that I almost always use light modifiers (a shoot through and a regular umbrella). I purchased two pieces of metal screen/mesh and made them into nice circles that fit my reflectors with a small clip. This reduces the output by a good margin where I have 'control' again in portrait situations.
FWIW,
XO,
Mark Twain
Some times I get lucky and when that happens I show the results here: http://www.xo-studios.com
With my Alien Bees at low settings, it's still too bright to shoot wide open.
Yes, some of them need to be lightened. These are all whitebalanced/exposed from the greycard RAW file, and are the proofs for the customers.
Toine
TML Photography
tmlphoto.com
I'm typically between 28 and 60mm range on my 28-135. Don't have enough room to back up to get a wide enough angle. I do know that I can lower the intensity of the lights, and I do that, but to keep a 1 to 3 or 1 to 2 ratio, I can never lower them all the way.
Toine
XO has it right, you have to get the subjects away from the backdrop and get it out of focus. If those big 'ol studio lights are too powerful, you'd be better off with a couple of regular flashes. One on a stand with a brolly and one for fill, you could get good results.
Seems to me there's a steep learning curve with studio lighting. The people that make it work (Rodney Blair over at DPReview for example) seem to use manual mode all the time so they can have a fast shutter speed to be able to keep the lens open.
Cheers!
David
www.uniqueday.com
TML Photography
tmlphoto.com
When I need lighting I think I'll go with hot lights, that way I won't have to worry about synch, but I will make sure there are output controls to limit the amout of light..
Thanks again,
Sam
While the learning curve is a little steeper, I would always recommend going with strobes over continuous output.
BTW my thread photoshoot part X is done with my studio setup, as you can tell good results are very doable.
FWIW, YMMV,
XO,
Mark Twain
Some times I get lucky and when that happens I show the results here: http://www.xo-studios.com
In my setup, the B800 is going through a shoot-through umbrella. The B400 is bounced into a silver umbrella.
I might just get an ND filter for this purpose. I shoot at location (read: customer's houses), and don't always have the space to backup far enough (lights, or me).
In (almost all of) these shots, the subject was about 6ft from the background.
Toine
Yes, there is definitely a steep learning curve
I of course, shoot in manual mode. It's really the only way to use strobes, at least, as far as I know
Toine
I always shoot manual in my studio setup (and lots of other occasions as well), and try it, it does make a difference. My D70 lets me goto 1/500 and still be synched.
XO,
Mark Twain
Some times I get lucky and when that happens I show the results here: http://www.xo-studios.com
And, I'm shooting at ISO 100. The 10D's Flash sync speed is only 1/200s
Toine
XO,
Mark Twain
Some times I get lucky and when that happens I show the results here: http://www.xo-studios.com
Toine