Barbieri's Spring Photo Shoot

[MICKEY88]

And people wonder why I don't post photos of my DD.

I agree, hopefully that person is banned... that was more than just a little bit creepy

 

[MarkBarbieri]

I was trying to say the same thing in a lot fewer words The girl I redid was a quick and dirty because I didn't think Mark's was quite at that definition.

I thought that I had everything in the photo (except her hair) at above middle tone. Is that dress too dark for high key? Should something like that be corrected by changing exposure or by changing clothes?

Anyway, as far as tonality, I basically got the look I wanted, except for the stupid floor thing. I like the ideas I got here and will look more into them.

For the paper, do you buy it in giant roles? Where do you get paper that big? How costly is it? Is it durable/re-usable or is it like the paper they use on the bed/chair thing at the doctor's office?

I agree, hopefully that person is banned... that was more than just a little bit creepy

Hmmm...we took that differently. I saw it as good natured bragging by the poster on how cute their sister is. Given the subjective nature of cuteness, I'm perfectly willing to concede the point even without seeing their sister.

 

[MICKEY88]

I thought that I had everything in the photo (except her hair) at above middle tone. Is that dress too dark for high key? Should something like that be corrected by changing exposure or by changing clothes?

Anyway, as far as tonality, I basically got the look I wanted, except for the stupid floor thing. I like the ideas I got here and will look more into them.

For the paper, do you buy it in giant roles? Where do you get paper that big? How costly is it? Is it durable/re-usable or is it like the paper they use on the bed/chair thing at the doctor's office?


Hmmm...we took that differently. I saw it as good natured bragging by the poster on how cute their sister is. Given the subjective nature of cuteness, I'm perfectly willing to concede the point even without seeing their sister.

I think you nailed it with the exception of the floor, and the photog I quoted from photocamel, stated that he will photoshop floors if they are dark, as you stated, throwing light on the floor can bounce onto the subject and thorw the exposure off..

the blue on the baby, might be a little dark for high key, but that wasn't something you were controlling...

you should check out his tutorial, it might answer any questions you might have, but I'd give ya 2 thumbs up.... great job..


seemless comes on large rolls, the stuff I once had, {unfortunately I left it behind when I moved...} it is re-usable to a point, more durable than the stuff at the drs office, more like construction paper thickness, but the floor part generally gets dirty, torn by heels if shooting adults etc....so you cut off the bad part and roll more out..

 

[Furgus]

For the paper, do you buy it in giant roles? Where do you get paper that big? How costly is it? Is it durable/re-usable or is it like the paper they use on the bed/chair thing at the doctor's office?

Mark,
You can get the seemless paper from B&H

One of my co-workers just got some shipped. I have never used it, so I can't comment on it.

 

[Steve's Girl]

hehe cute girls... i could put my sister here she is evena more preaty then other girls

Oh yeah! My sister can spell better than you!

 

[jann1033]

Mark,
You can get the seemless paper from B&H

One of my co-workers just got some shipped. I have never used it, so I can't comment on it.

it might not be white enough or large enough but i wonder if the stuff they use to put over wood floors ect in new construction would work...might be cheaper or how about a big drop cloth? ( you know me, always looking for a bargain)

i didn't think of the cute girl comment creepy either just he/she wasn't great at spelling.

so the only problem would be the baby and the kids in brighter colors( like the little dark haired girl and the boy in the gold in the slide show...)

thanks for the definition of high key i was just going to look it up since i have seen way different interpretations. how would you deal with a darker skinned or darker haired subject though? should the tones be natural not matter what or lighter than normal?

 

[MICKEY88]

it might not be white enough or large enough but i wonder if the stuff they use to put over wood floors ect in new construction would work...might be cheaper or how about a big drop cloth? ( you know me, always looking for a bargain)

i didn't think of the cute girl comment creepy either just he/she wasn't great at spelling.

so the only problem would be the baby and the kids in brighter colors( like the little dark haired girl and the boy in the gold in the slide show...)

thanks for the definition of high key i was just going to look it up since i have seen way different interpretations. how would you deal with a darker skinned or darker haired subject though? should the tones be natural not matter what or lighter than normal?

the fact that it was a first post , just seemed odd to me...

the last paragraph I posted answers your question..., basically the person should be normal, it's the background and clothing that should be above middle key

 

[MICKEY88]

I don't have any useful comments on the lighting. I haven't done much with studio lighting. The pictures are cute though and look nice and sharp.

Here's my cc - Have you done any post processing on these? They look a bit flat and dull. (Disclaimer - I like lots of color and contrast.) IMO, a quick edit would really give these a bit of a wow factor. Here's what I mean: (I hope you don't mind my play. If you do, let me know, and I'll take it right down.)

All I did was unsharp mask to remove digital haze (20, 60, 0), a slight contrast boost, and a slight saturation boost. That made the skin to red, so I did a slight unsaturation of the red tones only.

although your edit may make the pics more pleasing to you, they go against what makes a picture high key,

borrowed from photocamel tuturial by Benji..
So according to the above, a high key image must have:
1-A white or very light pastel background.
2. Subjects(s) dressed in white or light pastel clothing.
3. Little or no contrast.
4. Little or no heavy shadows.
5. Few middle tones.

A high key image will not have:
1. Any overexposure of the subject.
2. Any areas below the middle tone except for small areas like the iris of the eyes.

 

[alan]

Nice thought, but it won't work.

[...snippage...]

Thanks for the explanation. I did say that it probably was too obvious!

regards,
/alan

 

[SharonLowe]

seemless comes on large rolls, the stuff I once had, {unfortunately I left it behind when I moved...} it is re-usable to a point, more durable than the stuff at the drs office, more like construction paper thickness, but the floor part generally gets dirty, torn by heels if shooting adults etc....so you cut off the bad part and roll more out..

Get large clear plexiglass to put over the floor bit if you want to save it for more sessions. As for sources, just google seamless paper and you will find many. Here's one - http://www.filmtools.com/seamlesspaper.html and all the major dealers like B&H sell it.

You would need a way to hang the roll - they are heavy!

 

[Nikel]

although your edit may make the pics more pleasing to you, they go against what makes a picture high key,

borrowed from photocamel tuturial by Benji..
So according to the above, a high key image must have:
1-A white or very light pastel background.
2. Subjects(s) dressed in white or light pastel clothing.
3. Little or no contrast.
4. Little or no heavy shadows.
5. Few middle tones.

A high key image will not have:
1. Any overexposure of the subject.
2. Any areas below the middle tone except for small areas like the iris of the eyes.

How many times are you going to repost the definition? And I've already purged my edit and thus is no longer available for viewing, so you're coming across as a bit of jerk now. I'm thinking that you are imagining more contrast that I actually added.

I went and checked out Benji's website and took a peek at his galleries. Since he's being assumed as the expert here, I wanted to see what his high key images look like. Guess what? They actually are more saturated and higher contrast than my edit was. Take a peek yourself if you don't believe me: http://www.sonshinestudios.com/

 

[MICKEY88]

How many times are you going to repost the definition? And I've already purged my edit and thus is no longer available for viewing, so you're coming across as a bit of jerk now. I'm thinking that you are imagining more contrast that I actually added.

I went and checked out Benji's website and took a peek at his galleries. Since he's being assumed as the expert here, I wanted to see what his high key images look like. Guess what? They actually are more saturated and higher contrast than my edit was. Take a peek yourself if you don't believe me: http://www.sonshinestudios.com/

you purged your edit after my reply to you, how does that make me a jerk..??

so in other words it's OK for you to copy someone elses photo edit it, and tell them your edit is better, but no one can disagree with you..




have a great day..

 

[MarkBarbieri]

Just to be clear, I've never been bothered by anyone editing my picture and reposting it. Even when I prefer my original, I still find it instructive to see how others approach the same subject.

On other, more photo-centric forums, people have a spot in their profile in which they can specify whether or not they mind people reposting their photos for purposes like this. Some people hate it with a passion. Others, like me, find it helpful. Unfortunately, we have so similar flag here.

So if you ever see one of my pictures posted here that you think would look better with other post processing adjustments, feel free to make them and post them. If you want to work with the RAW file, let me know and I'll send it to you.

 

[Steve's Girl]

OK, back on track...

Mark, I love your photos! They look great to me. I'm not a fan of overly saturated colors. I personally prefer a more natural look. I love the white background and soft colors.

 

[MarkBarbieri]

Here are some of the lessons I learned with this shoot:

1) Modeling lights are great. When I paid attention to how the modeling lights made things it look, it really helped. I’ll rely on them more next time.

2) I shouldn’t have used a white sheet for the ground. I should have used white tile board, Plexiglas over a white sheet, or seamless paper.

3) Glasses are tricky. I moved the main light way up high and had my subject with glasses face away from the fill. That helped a lot. The modeling lights were what alerted me to the problem and helped me to fix it.

4) The problems of posing rise exponentially with the number of people in the shot.

5) I tried a variety of items to draw attention to me. With my wife, the kid's parents, and others in the studio, it was hard keeping their eyes on the camera. The tool that worked the best was a remote controlled fart machine. My wife hated the idea, but the kids loved it.

6) Posing is harder than lighting. There was almost a direction correlation between how well the subject posed and how many decent shots I got.

7) It is way worth the time to do a thorough sensor cleaning before a big shoot like this. I spend hours cloning out three or four dust spots. None would have been visible at f/4 or f/5.6, which is where I normally shoot, but at f/11, they were obvious.

8) I’m leaning toward shooting at f/8 next time. I think it will give me sufficient DOF for anything but possible a two layer group shot. Dropping the lights by a stop might help my subjects not be blinded so badly.

9) Painting the side wall and ceiling black helped considerably. In my tests last week, the spill light from the reflections was killing my lighting. I still had problems when people step into the background lighting zone. I think my next shoot will be with a more traditional background.

Overall, the effort was a success. I learned a lot. The parents walked away with pictures that made them happy at a price (free) that they liked.

My next planned shoot is Halloween. We'll set up for trick-or-treater shots on Friday night and then switch out backgrounds and do Christmas card and general portrait shots on Saturday and Sunday.

I'm still trying to decide if it is best to set aside a large open block of time (this was 9:00 AM to 5:00 PM) and let people show up when it is convenient or to have people book time slots. The latter helps prevent collisions, but it requires people to manage their time more closely. Given the informal nature of the shoot and the vagaries of nap times, I kind of like the flexibility. I'll ask the participants and see what they think.

I'll probably do more shoots between now and Halloween, but they'll be smaller. It'll be too hot soon for a garage studio (especially with lots of modeling lights). I did buy a portable power pack, so I plan to do some field shooting soon.

 

[MICKEY88]

Just to be clear, I've never been bothered by anyone editing my picture and reposting it. Even when I prefer my original, I still find it instructive to see how others approach the same subject.

On other, more photo-centric forums, people have a spot in their profile in which they can specify whether or not they mind people reposting their photos for purposes like this. Some people hate it with a passion. Others, like me, find it helpful. Unfortunately, we have so similar flag here.

So if you ever see one of my pictures posted here that you think would look better with other post processing adjustments, feel free to make them and post them. If you want to work with the RAW file, let me know and I'll send it to you.

I was fairly sure that you've said that before, otherwise I never would have posted the pic of my new family...LOL

my point was if one is comfortable doing so, then they certainly should not get upset if someone disagrees with them on something.. it goes both ways..

 

[MICKEY88]

Here are some of the lessons I learned with this shoot:

3) Glasses are tricky. I moved the main light way up high and had my subject with glasses face away from the fill. That helped a lot. The modeling lights were what alerted me to the problem and helped me to fix it.

some big time photographers, will either spend the money for blank frames or actually remove the lenses to eliminate glare..

 

[MICKEY88]

8) I’m leaning toward shooting at f/8 next time. I think it will give me sufficient DOF for anything but possible a two layer group shot. Dropping the lights by a stop might help my subjects not be blinded so badly.
[I'll probably do more shoots between now and Halloween, but they'll be smaller. It'll be too hot soon for a garage studio (especially with lots of modeling lights). I did buy a portable power pack, so I plan to do some field shooting soon.

you should be able to shoot at 2.8 as long as you get the eyes in focus...

as for the summer heat, maybe a huge fan for that windblown hair look....

 

[MarkBarbieri]

you should be able to shoot at 2.8 as long as you get the eyes in focus...

as for the summer heat, maybe a huge fan for that windblown hair look....

f/2.8 wouldn't work for my purposes. First, at 100mm eqiv and 10 feet subject distance, you're looking at less than half a foot of DOF at f/2.8 It's probably just enough for a face if I nail the focus, but I could easily lose focus on props and body parts. Also, when I'm shooting more than one person, I don't want to have to worry about lining then into exactly the sam focal range.

Using DOFMaster, the focus ranges for the various apertures at 100mm and 10 feet for my camera are:

f/2.8 0.38 feet
f/4.0 0.54 feet
f/5.6 0.77 feet
f/8.0 1.09 feet
f/11 1.54 feet

I think that's assuming pixel sized COCs. I can probably afford to be a bit outside that range without it being noticeable, but f/2.8 is still too shallow for my comfort in this situation.

As for the fan, well, you have to undertand Houston summers. It doesn't really get that hot here (typical high of around 95) but the humidity is every bit as bad as Orlando. Even with a fan, you'll have the wind-blown, sweating like a pig look. That might work for some athletic style shots, but I'm not enough of an artist to suffer that much for my art.

 

[Steve's Girl]

My light setup was pretty straightforward. I used a large softbox on my left as the main light. I used another softbox on my right as a fill. I had two lights with barn doors on the background to blow it out. I had a fifth light with a honeycomb grid for a hair light. I used the modeling lights and my light meter to get the levels about right.

Here are some of the lessons I learned with this shoot:

1) Modeling lights are great. When I paid attention to how the modeling lights made things it look, it really helped. I’ll rely on them more next time.

Mark -

Can you describe what you mean by modeling lights? (In lighting for dummies language)

Thanks.