ron mcmillan
Leading Member
Thanks for trying, Brian.
ron
ron
He has not done much photography in the last 8 years and none of
-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
Full length lighting
- Thread starter Michael Ant
- Start date
photolando
Senior Member
Because this could go on forever. Threads tend to get way off the subject at hand and start to get personal. In the end, no one benifits.
The only reason I responded was in support of Dean. He was/is my mentor and to this day a very dear friend. I look forward to seeing him in Atlanta in Dec.
What I find funny is that most in here are commenting on the few images they have seen of Dean's work. Dean does not have a website that I know of the showcases his work. Nothing wrong with that. I know a lot of top photographers who don't. That's like saying an actor is bad just because you saw him in one movie. The way people steal images off the net, I don't blame them. As I stated a few posts ago. Photography and lighting is so subjective. I see a lot of stuff in popular magazines that is just horrid. Do we blame the photographer? The art director? The publisher? Who knows. Dean always assured me that 'Beauty is in the eye of the checkbook holder.' You could absoluty hate the way a shot came out, but if the buyer likes it, that's all that matters. At least in commercial photography. Your there to please the client. No one else. If you think your going to make it in commercial photography by making only the images 'you' want, you have another thing coming.
You don't get to produce work for some of the top corporations and ad agency's in the world by producing weak work. They know a hack when they see one. Those of us who know Dean know that he has worked for these very people and pleased all of them. And after 25 years, continues to do so. Again, what 'you' think does not matter. Only what your client thinks. Their the one's who hire you.
No one has yet to comment on any of the information Dean discusses in his videos. If you think there is something he is wrong about are doesn't cover about lighting, I for one would love to know about it. Of course, you would have to watch every single video. Believe me, he covers all the bases. And like I said, what you decide to do with that knowledge is up to you. He uses simple images so everyone can understand what he is talking about. His job there was to produce videos that would sell. They did and do. I would also love to know of any other video, book, website, etc, that explains better the theory of light control for photographers. Please, give me one example. One website. One book. ONE!
Dean didn't discover all that he teaches. He just teaches what he knows. That's all any good teacher does. And to say he hasn't affected many photographers, well, every seminar I've ever been to of his has always had at least 200 or more people there. He must have affected some of them. And we will never know who benefiited from his teachings. Of the thousands of people he has spoken to, it's hard to tell. None of us know ALL these people. And we don't know who they passed information to.
People who have been in photography a long time may not learn anything new from Dean. But for those just starting out, or are looking for answers about lighting, I can't think of one better source of information than Dean's videos. Again, if anyone, ANYONE, knows of any, I'm all ears. I'm always willing to learn something new from anyone.
If anyone would like to comment on Dean's teaching's, I'd love to hear from you. Dean's 'images' have no bearing on my or anyones career. And it matters not whether you like any of them. He didn't shoot for you. Though the techniques he taught me may.
Mike
The only reason I responded was in support of Dean. He was/is my mentor and to this day a very dear friend. I look forward to seeing him in Atlanta in Dec.
What I find funny is that most in here are commenting on the few images they have seen of Dean's work. Dean does not have a website that I know of the showcases his work. Nothing wrong with that. I know a lot of top photographers who don't. That's like saying an actor is bad just because you saw him in one movie. The way people steal images off the net, I don't blame them. As I stated a few posts ago. Photography and lighting is so subjective. I see a lot of stuff in popular magazines that is just horrid. Do we blame the photographer? The art director? The publisher? Who knows. Dean always assured me that 'Beauty is in the eye of the checkbook holder.' You could absoluty hate the way a shot came out, but if the buyer likes it, that's all that matters. At least in commercial photography. Your there to please the client. No one else. If you think your going to make it in commercial photography by making only the images 'you' want, you have another thing coming.
You don't get to produce work for some of the top corporations and ad agency's in the world by producing weak work. They know a hack when they see one. Those of us who know Dean know that he has worked for these very people and pleased all of them. And after 25 years, continues to do so. Again, what 'you' think does not matter. Only what your client thinks. Their the one's who hire you.
No one has yet to comment on any of the information Dean discusses in his videos. If you think there is something he is wrong about are doesn't cover about lighting, I for one would love to know about it. Of course, you would have to watch every single video. Believe me, he covers all the bases. And like I said, what you decide to do with that knowledge is up to you. He uses simple images so everyone can understand what he is talking about. His job there was to produce videos that would sell. They did and do. I would also love to know of any other video, book, website, etc, that explains better the theory of light control for photographers. Please, give me one example. One website. One book. ONE!
Dean didn't discover all that he teaches. He just teaches what he knows. That's all any good teacher does. And to say he hasn't affected many photographers, well, every seminar I've ever been to of his has always had at least 200 or more people there. He must have affected some of them. And we will never know who benefiited from his teachings. Of the thousands of people he has spoken to, it's hard to tell. None of us know ALL these people. And we don't know who they passed information to.
People who have been in photography a long time may not learn anything new from Dean. But for those just starting out, or are looking for answers about lighting, I can't think of one better source of information than Dean's videos. Again, if anyone, ANYONE, knows of any, I'm all ears. I'm always willing to learn something new from anyone.
If anyone would like to comment on Dean's teaching's, I'd love to hear from you. Dean's 'images' have no bearing on my or anyones career. And it matters not whether you like any of them. He didn't shoot for you. Though the techniques he taught me may.
Mike
Bern Caughey
Senior Member
I didn't realize he was a good friend & I am sorry if I offended you.
I am not bothered at all by his lack of images on the net in general, but I am skeptical that he doesn't feature any images on his site. Even though you say he is a busy shooting pro, the e-mail Brian received made it out that he hasn't been shooting for eight years. But you know of a job he is currently involved in & I believe you, so the wheels go round. I am more interseted in ads, or such, that I could find in publication. If he is shooting, someone must know where to view his work.
Please tell him his bio is terrible & misleading. He has influenced alot of people, & false claims make him look cheap.
As far as "beauty being in the eye of the checkholder", well that is short sighted & perhaps the reason he isn't busy shooting. You only get hired for the work you are known for.
If a picture is worth a thousand words, what does a lack of pictures say. One look at Sokolsky site makes you want to see more. He pursued directing for quite awhile & only recently returned to the editorial world. Perhaps Dean is up to something similar, but I doubt it.
Once again, if you ever find any work that could change my mind then I would be trilled. I think you are best positioned to accomplish this, but I know it can be awkward.
Sorry for the offense & regards,
CLTHRS
I am not bothered at all by his lack of images on the net in general, but I am skeptical that he doesn't feature any images on his site. Even though you say he is a busy shooting pro, the e-mail Brian received made it out that he hasn't been shooting for eight years. But you know of a job he is currently involved in & I believe you, so the wheels go round. I am more interseted in ads, or such, that I could find in publication. If he is shooting, someone must know where to view his work.
Please tell him his bio is terrible & misleading. He has influenced alot of people, & false claims make him look cheap.
As far as "beauty being in the eye of the checkholder", well that is short sighted & perhaps the reason he isn't busy shooting. You only get hired for the work you are known for.
If a picture is worth a thousand words, what does a lack of pictures say. One look at Sokolsky site makes you want to see more. He pursued directing for quite awhile & only recently returned to the editorial world. Perhaps Dean is up to something similar, but I doubt it.
Once again, if you ever find any work that could change my mind then I would be trilled. I think you are best positioned to accomplish this, but I know it can be awkward.
Sorry for the offense & regards,
CLTHRS
Doug Mac65597
Forum Enthusiast
Mike,
Sorry you find the turn of the thread distressing.
Other than one image, I can't find any work of Dean Collins. What I did find is a lot of hyperbole and self promotion. I think this makes him fair game.
I think some of the posters are like me. I see a lot of you who are starting out falling for the self promotion of folks like Dean and the whole gang at zuga. A lot of outdated technique is being emulated. My complaint is that the technique is heavily formulaic, where have the nose shadow 3mm too long has led to photos being considered "bad technique". This is no exagerration, watch a PPA judging sometime. The result of all this rigidity is boring photography.
While I think learning some basic lighting technique is constructive, please keep it all in perspective. Also, don't let it constrain your experimentation. You'll learn more from doing it "wrong" and studying why you don't like it than you will copying what some "expert" purports as "right".
BTW, I don't think someone has to prove to anybody they can do it better before they can offer their opinion. I don't know CLTHRS, but I have deduced the identity of some of those with whom he has worked. Based on that, I'd be much more inclined to believe anything he says over those whose biggest talent is self promotion.
Regards,
Doug
Sorry you find the turn of the thread distressing.
Other than one image, I can't find any work of Dean Collins. What I did find is a lot of hyperbole and self promotion. I think this makes him fair game.
I think some of the posters are like me. I see a lot of you who are starting out falling for the self promotion of folks like Dean and the whole gang at zuga. A lot of outdated technique is being emulated. My complaint is that the technique is heavily formulaic, where have the nose shadow 3mm too long has led to photos being considered "bad technique". This is no exagerration, watch a PPA judging sometime. The result of all this rigidity is boring photography.
While I think learning some basic lighting technique is constructive, please keep it all in perspective. Also, don't let it constrain your experimentation. You'll learn more from doing it "wrong" and studying why you don't like it than you will copying what some "expert" purports as "right".
BTW, I don't think someone has to prove to anybody they can do it better before they can offer their opinion. I don't know CLTHRS, but I have deduced the identity of some of those with whom he has worked. Based on that, I'd be much more inclined to believe anything he says over those whose biggest talent is self promotion.
Regards,
Doug
Bern Caughey
Senior Member
I woul happily watch the entire Dean series then spend 5 mins with these judges. As much as I cannot recomend Dean's series, posing guides are far, far worse.
Michael Ant
Well-known member
"BTW, I don't think someone has to prove to anybody they can do it
better before they can offer their opinion. I don't know CLTHRS,
but I have deduced the identity of some of those with whom he has
worked. Based on that, I'd be much more inclined to believe
anything he says over those whose biggest talent is self promotion."
Well honestly I think you have the right to offer your opinions as well, but to flat out bash someone is a different situation. I just think if someone is going to continue to go against a persons techniques or abilities they should at least show how superior they are to that person, especially when they write as if Dean Collins flat out sucks.
Also like I said from the start, I have no idea about Dean Collins except from the videos I had seen. I could care less if he really does suck or if he is the greatest lighting guru out there. I just was asking a question to people about a lighting technique, not whether I should follow his opinions. If CLTHRS is as good as you are telling me then I would like to hear his/her opinions!
better before they can offer their opinion. I don't know CLTHRS,
but I have deduced the identity of some of those with whom he has
worked. Based on that, I'd be much more inclined to believe
anything he says over those whose biggest talent is self promotion."
Well honestly I think you have the right to offer your opinions as well, but to flat out bash someone is a different situation. I just think if someone is going to continue to go against a persons techniques or abilities they should at least show how superior they are to that person, especially when they write as if Dean Collins flat out sucks.
Also like I said from the start, I have no idea about Dean Collins except from the videos I had seen. I could care less if he really does suck or if he is the greatest lighting guru out there. I just was asking a question to people about a lighting technique, not whether I should follow his opinions. If CLTHRS is as good as you are telling me then I would like to hear his/her opinions!
Brian Mackey
Veteran Member
thanks for the mental exercise...
everyone have a great week
))
Oly E-20's? -- Aint no doubt about it!
http://mywebpages.comcast.net/mackey135/njdigitalservices.htm
http://www.pbase.com/mackey
http://www.photosig.com/userphotos.php?id=3459
everyone have a great week
))--
Oly E-20's? -- Aint no doubt about it!
http://mywebpages.comcast.net/mackey135/njdigitalservices.htm
http://www.pbase.com/mackey
http://www.photosig.com/userphotos.php?id=3459
Brian Mackey
Veteran Member
Back in the 80's with his Finellight series in Peterson's photographic. I remember waiting at the news stand for the latest copy of it and american photographer..
I have nothing but respect for what Dean has brought to the photographic industry...
regards
Oly E-20's? -- Aint no doubt about it!
http://mywebpages.comcast.net/mackey135/njdigitalservices.htm
http://www.pbase.com/mackey
http://www.photosig.com/userphotos.php?id=3459
I have nothing but respect for what Dean has brought to the photographic industry...
regards
--
Oly E-20's? -- Aint no doubt about it!
http://mywebpages.comcast.net/mackey135/njdigitalservices.htm
http://www.pbase.com/mackey
http://www.photosig.com/userphotos.php?id=3459
Brian Mackey
Veteran Member
--
Oly E-20's? -- Aint no doubt about it!
http://mywebpages.comcast.net/mackey135/njdigitalservices.htm
http://www.pbase.com/mackey
http://www.photosig.com/userphotos.php?id=3459
Mastrianni
Leading Member
Hi Brian, Mike, and others,
I think many of you misunderstood what CLTHRS was saying. First, let me say that I know who CLTHRS is, and, yes, he is the lighting director for a photographer who is a household name. You have all seen his lighting work on major magazine covers, editorials and print advertisements. That said, we are talking apples and oranges here. Dean's videos are probably perfectly suitable for people, (most), who do not have access to ever assisting a well known photographer in a major art center, (i.e., Paris, NY, etc.), and have no desire to live and work in such a place. Everyone must make their own choices, and a price will be paid for whatever that choice may be. To wit, a photographer in Cleveland will not have the same client base as one in NY, and therefore will develop a totally different style, with totally different lighting requirements. And, in fact, many well known photographers have only the most cursory knowledge of lighting! They are, in essence, equivilent to movie directors, as opposed to cinematographers. They are the ones with the vision, but not necessarily the technical know-how, and rely on those around them with that know-how. This is a much different perspective to be working from than the one man shop in Cleveland who is forced by client requirements and economic scale to be a jack-of-all-trades, photographically speaking.
Your choices, then, are to go to school, (Parsons, etc.), take courses and seminars, (NYIP, etc.), assist some high profile guys,.....or, buy Dean's video's. As a starting point, I would think his, (and others) videos would be a perfectly valid method of learning the basics before venturing into modifying those basics to develop your own style. Or just accepting his teachings as gospel if it fits your client base and interests.
I think CLTHRS, (and I, sometimes), tend to forget that their are many levels and genres of imaging that exist outside of the major art centers of the world that may not go over well here, but would be the cat's meow in DesMoines. And, although I've not seen his videos, I suspect Dean's teachings would fit perfectly into 95% of all photographic pursuits.
But, one must remember, opinions of visual and audio stimuli are very subjective. And they're only opinions,...so, take it with a grain of salt. (which is why I avoid commenting on anyone's work, whether positive or negative)
I think CLTHRS was just saying it would be better to just work at emulating your favorite photographer then buying a video. And I agree. After all, we do all have digital cameras, and film is free, eh?
Regards
Mastrianni
I think many of you misunderstood what CLTHRS was saying. First, let me say that I know who CLTHRS is, and, yes, he is the lighting director for a photographer who is a household name. You have all seen his lighting work on major magazine covers, editorials and print advertisements. That said, we are talking apples and oranges here. Dean's videos are probably perfectly suitable for people, (most), who do not have access to ever assisting a well known photographer in a major art center, (i.e., Paris, NY, etc.), and have no desire to live and work in such a place. Everyone must make their own choices, and a price will be paid for whatever that choice may be. To wit, a photographer in Cleveland will not have the same client base as one in NY, and therefore will develop a totally different style, with totally different lighting requirements. And, in fact, many well known photographers have only the most cursory knowledge of lighting! They are, in essence, equivilent to movie directors, as opposed to cinematographers. They are the ones with the vision, but not necessarily the technical know-how, and rely on those around them with that know-how. This is a much different perspective to be working from than the one man shop in Cleveland who is forced by client requirements and economic scale to be a jack-of-all-trades, photographically speaking.
Your choices, then, are to go to school, (Parsons, etc.), take courses and seminars, (NYIP, etc.), assist some high profile guys,.....or, buy Dean's video's. As a starting point, I would think his, (and others) videos would be a perfectly valid method of learning the basics before venturing into modifying those basics to develop your own style. Or just accepting his teachings as gospel if it fits your client base and interests.
I think CLTHRS, (and I, sometimes), tend to forget that their are many levels and genres of imaging that exist outside of the major art centers of the world that may not go over well here, but would be the cat's meow in DesMoines. And, although I've not seen his videos, I suspect Dean's teachings would fit perfectly into 95% of all photographic pursuits.
But, one must remember, opinions of visual and audio stimuli are very subjective. And they're only opinions,...so, take it with a grain of salt. (which is why I avoid commenting on anyone's work, whether positive or negative)
I think CLTHRS was just saying it would be better to just work at emulating your favorite photographer then buying a video. And I agree. After all, we do all have digital cameras, and film is free, eh?
Regards
Mastrianni
Bern Caughey
Senior Member
Mastrianni,
It is good to hear from you again. I've been debating sending you email to see how you've been. I suspect why you've been absent & congradulations perhaps are in order?
There are a some threads that I'd like to get your opinion on. i'll get back to you shortly.
Regards,
CLTHRS
It is good to hear from you again. I've been debating sending you email to see how you've been. I suspect why you've been absent & congradulations perhaps are in order?
There are a some threads that I'd like to get your opinion on. i'll get back to you shortly.
Regards,
CLTHRS
Bern Caughey
Senior Member
I think this thread could use your advice.
http://www.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1014&message=3474075
Thanks,
CLTHRS
http://www.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1014&message=3474075
Thanks,
CLTHRS
Bern Caughey
Senior Member
Mastrianni
Leading Member
Hey CLTHRS,
Yes, I was out of town shooting, then came back to the birth of a boy....6lbs 4oz. So, I have a new toy I'm playing with.
In reference to the moire, I find that other more technical types appear to know much more than I about it. (what the hell is nyquist?) Additionally, I have been shooting digital for 3 years, including D1, D1x, D30, 1D and Kodak back, and have yet to experience moire. But that may be due to my style or subject matter, and I have never tried to 'get moire'. But, if a job is important, I 'double' shoot it on digital and film. I don't find it takes me any longer, (once I fill up a 512m card, I'm handed a loaded film camera, then back again to digital). Right now, this makes everyone 'feel better'. I do match film/digital speed and focal lengths so I don't disturb the lighting or perspective. It certainly is no slower than being handed film cameras.
I will say that even doing this, it is the digital images that are usually chosen. But, you know what a bunch of nervous nellies the AD's can be, so everyone is happy.
As far as the 1Ds,....well, I don't have one yet, nor have I even seen one. I suppose at PhotoExpo.
Regards
Mastrianni
Yes, I was out of town shooting, then came back to the birth of a boy....6lbs 4oz. So, I have a new toy I'm playing with.
In reference to the moire, I find that other more technical types appear to know much more than I about it. (what the hell is nyquist?) Additionally, I have been shooting digital for 3 years, including D1, D1x, D30, 1D and Kodak back, and have yet to experience moire. But that may be due to my style or subject matter, and I have never tried to 'get moire'. But, if a job is important, I 'double' shoot it on digital and film. I don't find it takes me any longer, (once I fill up a 512m card, I'm handed a loaded film camera, then back again to digital). Right now, this makes everyone 'feel better'. I do match film/digital speed and focal lengths so I don't disturb the lighting or perspective. It certainly is no slower than being handed film cameras.
I will say that even doing this, it is the digital images that are usually chosen. But, you know what a bunch of nervous nellies the AD's can be, so everyone is happy.
As far as the 1Ds,....well, I don't have one yet, nor have I even seen one. I suppose at PhotoExpo.
Regards
Mastrianni
photolando
Senior Member
I think what a lot of people must realize is that there is all kinds of photography out there. Believe it or not, the photography world doesn't revolve around NYC. Your's does, not mine. The best photogrpahers do work there, but they shoot for their markets, others shoot for their's. Comparing someones style, say Dean's to Avedon's, is, well, apples and oranges. The work produced in New York is way different than the markets here in Orlando, San Diego and other places.
As I mentioned, Dean has cut way back on his shooting and is now putting all his efforts into his Software-Cinema CD's that feature top photographers and instuctors on Photoshop. http://www.software-cinema.com
Dean's bio is not misleading. When you teach to thousands of people as he did in his seminars, you are influencing a lot of people. He's selling a product. I don't think saying 'here's a video with a few good lighting tips' would sell very well. It's just advertising.
And in closing, let me say this. Dean set out to do something about the way photographers were taught lighting. He did it. He made 15 tapes. Each one discussing how and why light does what it does in a variety of situations. I think probably 90% (maybe more) of the people in this Forum could learn a lot from him. I'm always seeing questions in here that Dean addresses in one or more of his tapes. Like the one that started this whole thread to begin with. Dean's tape on Commercial Portraiture discusses full length lighting. Dean even mentions in his tapes that it's not what he's photographing, it's the idea and technique behind it. In other words, use the knowledge to create your own stuff.
http://216.86.135.103/store/merchant.mv?Screen=PROD&Store_Code=SC&Product_Code=VIDF04
This reminds me of the joke 'How many photogrpahers does it take to screw in a light bulb? 100. 1 to screw it in and 99 to stand around saying how much better they could do it.'
I've always believed that even if you learn one thing that might help your photography, it's worth it. No matter where or who you learn it from.
Mike
As I mentioned, Dean has cut way back on his shooting and is now putting all his efforts into his Software-Cinema CD's that feature top photographers and instuctors on Photoshop. http://www.software-cinema.com
Dean's bio is not misleading. When you teach to thousands of people as he did in his seminars, you are influencing a lot of people. He's selling a product. I don't think saying 'here's a video with a few good lighting tips' would sell very well. It's just advertising.
And in closing, let me say this. Dean set out to do something about the way photographers were taught lighting. He did it. He made 15 tapes. Each one discussing how and why light does what it does in a variety of situations. I think probably 90% (maybe more) of the people in this Forum could learn a lot from him. I'm always seeing questions in here that Dean addresses in one or more of his tapes. Like the one that started this whole thread to begin with. Dean's tape on Commercial Portraiture discusses full length lighting. Dean even mentions in his tapes that it's not what he's photographing, it's the idea and technique behind it. In other words, use the knowledge to create your own stuff.
http://216.86.135.103/store/merchant.mv?Screen=PROD&Store_Code=SC&Product_Code=VIDF04
This reminds me of the joke 'How many photogrpahers does it take to screw in a light bulb? 100. 1 to screw it in and 99 to stand around saying how much better they could do it.'
I've always believed that even if you learn one thing that might help your photography, it's worth it. No matter where or who you learn it from.
Mike
Edmund Ronald44579
Forum Enthusiast
lots of people explain their technique here, and respond to questions.
I learnt enough for my purposes from the kind people on the net -
no irony intended. Renting a video may not be a necessity anymore.
Edmund
I learnt enough for my purposes from the kind people on the net -
no irony intended. Renting a video may not be a necessity anymore.
Edmund
P
Phred
Guest
I could be wrong but Mike didn’t ask some esoteric question about lighting style, he asked a pretty basic question about lighting techniques. Somehow his post has turned into a pi* ing contest about who’s shirts are whiter.
Being in a position to emulate someone else’s style can only come after mastering basic techniques. It isn’t a prerequisite that someone teaching basic techniques is a master at their art, in fact they often make the worst teachers – they only need to be able to teach and to use relevant material.
To learn about specular highlights, diffused, shadows and transitions,, to learn about scrims, diffusion panels,, Mike could do a lot worse than purchasing a Collins lighting video.
Mike, don’t let all this professional bickering about “style” get in your way. Avail yourself of material that will help you learn.
Cheers,
Phred
Being in a position to emulate someone else’s style can only come after mastering basic techniques. It isn’t a prerequisite that someone teaching basic techniques is a master at their art, in fact they often make the worst teachers – they only need to be able to teach and to use relevant material.
To learn about specular highlights, diffused, shadows and transitions,, to learn about scrims, diffusion panels,, Mike could do a lot worse than purchasing a Collins lighting video.
Mike, don’t let all this professional bickering about “style” get in your way. Avail yourself of material that will help you learn.
Cheers,
Phred
Bern Caughey
Senior Member
You might find this helpful. It was posted in another thread.
http://www.lumiquest.com/frmhow.htm
http://www.lumiquest.com/frmhow.htm
Bern Caughey
Senior Member
The best animation is the the first. It illustrates the difference between specular & diffuse light. The next part to understand is how this works at varios distances. The larger the source the softer or more diffuse it will be. But the Sun is the largest object in our solor system & it is a very specular light source on a clear day. This is due to it's distance from the earth. If we moved much closer to the Sun it would become the most diffuse light source possible in our Solar System.
You need to learn about the inverse square law as it applies to fall-off. Basically the closer the light is the subject the less the light will carry to a wall behind them. If the subject leans into or away from a light that is near, the exposure will change dramatically. The Sun is so far away that the shadow of the earth is cast sharply on the moon. The law is important to understanding so you should study it.
This is all I have time for right now, hopefully someone could elaborate.
Regards,
CLTHRS
You need to learn about the inverse square law as it applies to fall-off. Basically the closer the light is the subject the less the light will carry to a wall behind them. If the subject leans into or away from a light that is near, the exposure will change dramatically. The Sun is so far away that the shadow of the earth is cast sharply on the moon. The law is important to understanding so you should study it.
This is all I have time for right now, hopefully someone could elaborate.
Regards,
CLTHRS
Brian Mackey
Veteran Member
Phred,
If we can't stretch our mental and verbal wings, and come out better than when we went in, then why bother. I think the roller coaster ride went rather well, in the end, I was somewhat dissapointed and dissmayed that the Collins web people couldnt offer up more of an explaination of why we cant find any of Deans pictures even if they are more than 8 years old.
anyway, the point is, if we did not love what we do we wouldnt fight, argue, reasearch etc.. for it would we?
Clthrs, and ron, mike myself and others, I dont think any of use can say this thread was not worth while, I know I have 3 new resources I can talk to about different strengths I believe they have. one thread, three news resources, man thats a deal...
Take care, fight the good fight, my 2cents, if we all didnt match wits now and then, life would get rather boring.
Heres a great new resource I found. It's a glamour models posing guide, hope it helps someone..
Oly E-20's? -- Aint no doubt about it!
http://mywebpages.comcast.net/mackey135/njdigitalservices.htm
http://www.pbase.com/mackey
http://www.photosig.com/userphotos.php?id=3459
If we can't stretch our mental and verbal wings, and come out better than when we went in, then why bother. I think the roller coaster ride went rather well, in the end, I was somewhat dissapointed and dissmayed that the Collins web people couldnt offer up more of an explaination of why we cant find any of Deans pictures even if they are more than 8 years old.
anyway, the point is, if we did not love what we do we wouldnt fight, argue, reasearch etc.. for it would we?
Clthrs, and ron, mike myself and others, I dont think any of use can say this thread was not worth while, I know I have 3 new resources I can talk to about different strengths I believe they have. one thread, three news resources, man thats a deal...
Take care, fight the good fight
, my 2cents, if we all didnt match wits now and then, life would get rather boring.Heres a great new resource I found. It's a glamour models posing guide, hope it helps someone..
--
Oly E-20's? -- Aint no doubt about it!
http://mywebpages.comcast.net/mackey135/njdigitalservices.htm
http://www.pbase.com/mackey
http://www.photosig.com/userphotos.php?id=3459
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum