Great job on pulling this one off. There's lots of lighting concerns going on. It all works well. I definitely get a feeling of the coming season.
Tom
Thank you!
Yes indeed, almost everything is strobe lit. I tried going for back-lit leaves in the foreground and normal lighting for the ones further back. I would like to know if this comes across on your display, as I've found the back-lit effect doesn't quite make it on all devices. I used bare lights and a redhancer filter on the camera to get the maximum colour out of the leaves.
There's separate lights behind the building pointing in through another window to get the room lit, that one also got the far background in the same exposure. One light handles foreground (behind the leaves). CTO-gels on these to get the incandecent look.
Lot of throwing leaves in front of the camera and stacking in post involved to combine all of it together
Great idea! Again surprised how shutter of 180 gave such crisp details in leafs! Fall is coming and I will use this idea of yours somehow....if given the chance! Cheers!
Great idea! Again surprised how shutter of 180 gave such crisp details in leafs! Fall is coming and I will use this idea of yours somehow....if given the chance! Cheers!
Thank you, and do go ahead and give it a try
The exif is not the whole truth here. It's coming from one the background layers I used to build the final image onto (it's a composite).
I think I shot most of the leafs at 1/60 f/8. The shutter time matters very little when it's dark and the light is coming from strobes - it is the length of the strobe pulse that counts then, which would have been around 1/10000 here.
The exif is not the whole truth here. It's coming from one the background layers I used to build the final image onto (it's a composite).
I think I shot most of the leafs at 1/60 f/8. The shutter time matters very little when it's dark and the light is coming from strobes - it is the length of the strobe pulse that counts then, which would have been around 1/10000 here.
Thanks for the info and okay!:D
0
black mambaRegistered UsersPosts: 8,327Major grins
Yes indeed, almost everything is strobe lit. I tried going for back-lit leaves in the foreground and normal lighting for the ones further back. I would like to know if this comes across on your display, as I've found the back-lit effect doesn't quite make it on all devices. I used bare lights and a redhancer filter on the camera to get the maximum colour out of the leaves.
There's separate lights behind the building pointing in through another window to get the room lit, that one also got the far background in the same exposure. One light handles foreground (behind the leaves). CTO-gels on these to get the incandecent look.
Lot of throwing leaves in front of the camera and stacking in post involved to combine all of it together
Thank you very much
I appreciate the insight you've provided about all the machinations required to get your results....which are impressive.
My display clearly shows the difference in lighting on the leaves. Those in the foreground are decidedly backlit.
Tom
I always wanted to lie naked on a bearskin rug in front of a fireplace. Cracker Barrel didn't take kindly to it.
Really well done. One nitpick given all the post processing that you did do, could you fix the vertical lean out of the building too?
Thank you!
It's 12 mm wide angle, there's nothing running pararrel because of the perspective distortion and straightening it would just make the distortion more noticable. That's my story anyway and I'm sticking to it!
Comments
Tom
www.mind-driftphoto.com
Thank you!
Yes indeed, almost everything is strobe lit. I tried going for back-lit leaves in the foreground and normal lighting for the ones further back. I would like to know if this comes across on your display, as I've found the back-lit effect doesn't quite make it on all devices. I used bare lights and a redhancer filter on the camera to get the maximum colour out of the leaves.
There's separate lights behind the building pointing in through another window to get the room lit, that one also got the far background in the same exposure. One light handles foreground (behind the leaves). CTO-gels on these to get the incandecent look.
Lot of throwing leaves in front of the camera and stacking in post involved to combine all of it together
Thank you very much
http://pyryekholm.kuvat.fi/
Thank you, and do go ahead and give it a try
The exif is not the whole truth here. It's coming from one the background layers I used to build the final image onto (it's a composite).
I think I shot most of the leafs at 1/60 f/8. The shutter time matters very little when it's dark and the light is coming from strobes - it is the length of the strobe pulse that counts then, which would have been around 1/10000 here.
http://pyryekholm.kuvat.fi/
Thanks for the info and okay!:D
I appreciate the insight you've provided about all the machinations required to get your results....which are impressive.
My display clearly shows the difference in lighting on the leaves. Those in the foreground are decidedly backlit.
Tom
Thanks Tom, I'm glad it works!
http://pyryekholm.kuvat.fi/
Thank you!
It's 12 mm wide angle, there's nothing running pararrel because of the perspective distortion and straightening it would just make the distortion more noticable. That's my story anyway and I'm sticking to it!
http://pyryekholm.kuvat.fi/
Spinner
Thank you very much Spinner!
http://pyryekholm.kuvat.fi/