Portable portrait lighting question...newby alert...

While I never mind criticism that would expand my visioin, and am not going to debate whether something is 'great' or normal, I will take issue w/Joe's assessment, terminology and corroborating support. The reference that he utilizes is clearly differing than corporate and press release work At dg28.com, Mr. Turner clearly states "I tend to specialize in editorial portraiture, so that is the area of work that I'm going to talk about." In an example called the 'big glass box' it is interesting to note the similarities between the two shots. Is the gentlemans expression anymore or less engaging, or the bkgde too bright or dark and gloomy? Also in regard to the question of posing, perhaps Joe could take a gander at Joe Zeltsman's Approach to Traditional Classic Portraiture, particularly the two sections in regard to posing women. ( http://jzportraits.home.att.net/ )

In the photograph in question, Joe commented on how flat yet at the same time it was 'brightly lit'? This high profile lawyer, soon to be judge wanted to look conservative, stoic yet feminine. The posing part was conservative, yet maintained femininity while the lighting(classic butterfly) brought out her softer side. While all that matters is what that law firm and judge chose, Joe's opinion is appreciated, however he should be sure his terminology, his reference's and understanding of professional work be consistent and matches some viewpoint.

--

btw Phtodug...the lighting was w/a large strip light, that's all. Powered by a 4800cx probably at about half power, that is how I managed to 'up' the interior power up softly in order to render some blue in the sky since it was a somewhat cloudy day. She has only one catchlight, wrinkles minimized by posing. Art director and agency rep had the final decision as to cropping. This is their building...
--

...I picked up a light stand and 46" unbrella from a friend. For light I used an aluminum painters clip-on light with a 500w GE photo bulb. I set it up angled downward from the left at roughly the 7 o'clock position. I also picked up a set of 18% gray cards and custom set the WB per the manual. I shot in manual mode with the 50mm 1.8.

This is the result. The umbrella is reflected in his glasses.



For this shot I used a second clip-on light with the same size bulb angled downward from the right but directly at the subject. I don't have a second umbrella stand.



The second image seems too bright and the first image a little dark.

I know the pose isn't perfect but right now I'm concentrating on exposure then I can work on the poses.

Thanks for looking and I really appreciate all of the tips and suggestions!!

Doug

http://www.pbase.com/photodug

...rather than fabric, if you are near a camera store consider seamless paper... get the subject away from your background lets say 4-6'...it's alright to perhaps get a 60 or 100 watt bare bulb for a bkgd light...use some aluminum foil to make a half cup shape towards the bkgd, tilt it up or down and move it closer or further from the bkgd once you see how it behaves to create some gradation if you want. This will give separation...that one umbrella is plenty of light...simply go to some art supply store and get some white foam board or a home depot/lowes and get that large sheet of white insulation for fill...it does not have to be right next to the subject unless you really want a lot of fill light. All you have to do is clamp the board to a stand w/an a-clamp or something similar or extend the lightstand and lean the white insulation against the stand. Unless there is an air duct blowing right there that insulation board will work great. You can see that bright umbrella in anyone's glasses, now you know what to look for...you ought to feather the umbrella light, what I mean is rather than the umbrella facing the subject dead center, you might consider rotating the umbrella a little so that you are grazing the subject w/light, that will also help w/your fill board and help you determine how much or little fill you want. Not everyone will or should have the same fill...most women will need more than most men, for example. Not everyone is the same so there are small adjustments to each persons lighting because of their facial features. Also, I can't tell if the subject is standing or sitting down, but whatever the case the light should be at least 18" to a couple of feet above the subjects eyes or whatever would come to about a 45º angle and you have a pretend radius on your left side(umbrella) from camera position all the way around to the subjects right. You really don't need to go past 45º w/30º being a good starting point. For women, in particular pretty one's you might try to position them and the light to where the shadow falls under their nose(butterfly) lighting. I know it sounds like a lot...but w/2 lights and reflector it isn't all that bad, simply work the subject w/your lighting or change the lighting some to make it work. Is it miller time or will a silver bulllet do?

Lee Kupfer said:

While I never mind criticism that would expand my visioin, and am
not going to debate whether something is 'great' or normal, I will
take issue w/Joe's assessment, terminology and corroborating
support.

Click to expand...

Oh Jeez, CLASSIC DPR!!! Criticism get enormous rebuttals but "great shot" get a simple blush and thanks.

Wasting my time here, I know.

Joe

I tried to walk away but I just can't resist . . . the more I read your post the more I find it annoying. See below . . .

Lee Kupfer said:

While I never mind criticism that would expand my visioin, and am
not going to debate whether something is 'great' or normal, I will
take issue w/Joe's assessment, terminology and corroborating
support.

Click to expand...

Your preamble about being open to criticism is BS. You're obviously defensive here so why not be honest and say you don't want my opinion?

Lee Kupfer said:

The reference that he utilizes is clearly differing than
corporate and press release work At dg28.com, Mr. Turner clearly
states "I tend to specialize in editorial portraiture, so that is
the area of work that I'm going to talk about."

Click to expand...

The OP was doing location work of corp execs. Neil Turner does the same regardless of your interpretation of his stated purpose.

Lee Kupfer said:

In an example
called the 'big glass box' it is interesting to note the
similarities between the two shots. Is the gentlemans expression
anymore or less engaging, or the bkgde too bright or dark and
gloomy?

Click to expand...

If you don't see the superiority of Neil's shot then I can understand why you think your shot is so good. The only similarities are the formal suit and the window. The pose, expression, lens choice, lighting are all better than your shot. A comfortable yet strong pose. Excellent expression - confident, engaging. Good use of broad light. The symbolism of the man being appointed to oversee education in the city with the panoramic view of the city through a wide angle lens. The shot is in another league vs. your shot.

Lee Kupfer said:

Also in regard to the question of posing, perhaps Joe
could take a gander at Joe Zeltsman's Approach to Traditional
Classic Portraiture, particularly the two sections in regard to
posing women. ( http://jzportraits.home.att.net/ )

Click to expand...

Oh, Zeltsman! How could I miss that one. You should have told me you were applying the magical posing principals of Zeltsman.

Lee Kupfer said:

In the photograph in question, Joe commented on how flat yet at the
same time it was 'brightly lit'?

Click to expand...

So you don't know what flat light is do you? The shot is a bit flat - that's a comment on shadow and contrast. BRIGHT is a comment on luminosity. A shot can be flat AND bright.

Lee Kupfer said:

This high profile lawyer, soon to
be judge wanted to look conservative, stoic yet feminine. The
posing part was conservative, yet maintained femininity while the
lighting(classic butterfly) brought out her softer side.

Click to expand...

First, she looks stiff and uncomfortable. Stoic doesn't mean scared. She has a classic deer in the headlights look - wide-eyed with tiny pupils. The smile looks forced and she shows no connection to the viewer. It looks posed which is exactly what you DON'T want. Her body looks too big for her head. Particularly her right arm. The sleeve is so wide it looks like the arm of a large man.

Lee Kupfer said:

While all
that matters is what that law firm and judge chose, Joe's opinion
is appreciated, however he should be sure his terminology, his
reference's and understanding of professional work be consistent
and matches some viewpoint.

Click to expand...

Do me a favor and stop with the patronizing bull$hit. My opinion was not appreciate - be honest and just admit it. Second, how pathetic that you can't take criticism and need to question my qualifications for using terminology and understanding "professional work".

You're a dime a dozen pro who feels important due to a meaningless affiliation with "high profile execs". But hey, at DPR you'll probably be a legend. Hell, you can be a lighting and portrait guru around here without ever posting pics so there's no limit to what you can achieve with actual samples!

Joe

--lol, you are what is annoying...not thin skinned or defensive at all...at least I post my website for all to see...all you do is spout your big mouth erroneously and exhibit soccer mom pix...it was your reference's... editorial is quite different from corporate and press releases, once again questioning your veracity is something you brought upon yourself. As far as 'feeling important here', those are your words not mine. As far as posting pix I do post, I haven't seen one pix that you've posted(other than soccer mom type pix, nothing professional let alone bordering on amatuer). There seems that there is a lot to question about your opinions, judgment and quite frankly you as a person, or should I say agitator(judging from tone's of other posts in your history) I'm glad to be a dime a dozen photographer w/a 12k sq ft studio, oh, but wait...doesn't one have to take a lot of some kind of pix commercially to afford that type of warehouse? lol Your a buffon Marques.

good one you tell him?

Hey Doug,

Approaching conventional portraiture in this fashion kind of reminds me of a scene from a movie in which a blind man is trying to solve a Rubik's cube by making one move at a time and asking his friend seated next to him if he's got it yet.

There's many problems here, but the real problem is that the approach seems as if it has come entirely from random, from posing to lighting to gear.

If you're going to do this thing, try starting with a good book that covers the FUNDAMENTALS OF PORTRAITURE. Not the fancy stuff, but just the basics. Build your understanding of tried and true techniques from the ground up one step at a time, not moving on to the next step until each previous step is understood.

Without this systematic approach, you're just going to be twisting the Rubik's cube again and again, hoping that you'll stumble across a solution without having any true understanding of how you got there. Then you can use these forums for providing guidance and feedback on your progress rather than for providing basic instruction.

Your enthusiasm is great. Just make your approach as wise as possible.

Photodug said:

...I picked up a light stand and 46" unbrella from a friend. For
light I used an aluminum painters clip-on light with a 500w GE
photo bulb. I set it up angled downward from the left at roughly
the 7 o'clock position. I also picked up a set of 18% gray cards
and custom set the WB per the manual. I shot in manual mode with
the 50mm 1.8.

This is the result. The umbrella is reflected in his glasses.



For this shot I used a second clip-on light with the same size bulb
angled downward from the right but directly at the subject. I don't
have a second umbrella stand.



The second image seems too bright and the first image a little dark.

I know the pose isn't perfect but right now I'm concentrating on
exposure then I can work on the poses.

Thanks for looking and I really appreciate all of the tips and
suggestions!!

Doug

http://www.pbase.com/photodug

Click to expand...

--
Michael Thomas Mitchell
http://michaelphoto.net

Michael Thomas Mitchell said:

Hey Doug,

Approaching conventional portraiture in this fashion kind of
reminds me of a scene from a movie in which a blind man is trying
to solve a Rubik's cube by making one move at a time and asking his
friend seated next to him if he's got it yet.

There's many problems here, but the real problem is that the
approach seems as if it has come entirely from random, from posing
to lighting to gear.

If you're going to do this thing, try starting with a good book
that covers the FUNDAMENTALS OF PORTRAITURE. Not the fancy stuff,
but just the basics. Build your understanding of tried and true
techniques from the ground up one step at a time, not moving on to
the next step until each previous step is understood.

Without this systematic approach, you're just going to be twisting
the Rubik's cube again and again, hoping that you'll stumble across
a solution without having any true understanding of how you got
there. Then you can use these forums for providing guidance and
feedback on your progress rather than for providing basic
instruction.

Your enthusiasm is great. Just make your approach as wise as possible.

Click to expand...

Very good advice.

--
Russell Holmes Photography
http://www.focusingonflorida.com

Hey Doug,

It looks like you are off to a good start. At least you were able to spot the problems yourself. Most suggestions I would have proposed have already been covered. I think borrowing the umbrella and light was a wise move on your part.

I totally agree about you moving your subject further from the backdrop. The alternative is increasing your aperture (if you have a bit more to squease out of your lens). Not sure how tight your shooting space is.

If worse comes to worse and I try to avoid as much Post Processing as possible, you can extract the subject or create a mask layer and apply a little blur to the background. I believe you said you have 15 or so people to photograph so PP shouldn't be too labor intensive.

Be careful of getting your subject in full frame, remember crop values. If they like a photo and decide they would like to print and frame one, you'll want a little "wiggle" room to crop for their desired size.

Not sure if I posted this or just thought about it , but here is a small checklist from a fellow photographer on another forum. It has some good pointers.

http://www.focusingonflorida.com/Documents/Benji_RulesOfPortraiture.pdf

--
Russell Holmes Photography
http://www.focusingonflorida.com

n/t

So how did it go?
Rex

...Last Tuesday I went by their office and took several test shots then e-mailed the results for approval. Gave them a rate and told them there would be no charge if they weren't satisfied. They liked the shots and want to schedule a sitting in a couple of weeks. If that goes well, they want me to do at least 2 more portrait shoots and go out in the field to shoot them practicing their trade.

Thanks for asking,

Doug
--
http://www.pbase.com/photodug

If this is the case, my suggestion would be to take the gig.
I do not say job, because well you should take this as a FREEBIE!
I don't think that anywhere you said anything about money and thats
a good thing. Even if they have a budget, tell them you will do it
for free on the argument that if they like the photos then they will

pay what ever has all ready been offered. Just do not take cash up front in any form whither it be check or PO or whatever.

If they did this with a Point and Shoot camera before, this tells
me there either a tiny company or using these very informally.
Either way upgrading from a point and shoot, to a newbie with a good
camera is not that bad of a idea.

As long as you go in with telling them exactly who you are, what experience and LACK of you have. Well this could be a great learning experience. If you go in not expecting great results or that PRO look as you called it.

I doubt you will get great pics with just a pop up flash, at least try and use a on camera accessory flash unit. Of course using that off camera and infa red triggered or how ever your unit may work.
And don't ignore the use of a reflector, you don't have to buy a really

really nice one right away. A good looking round silver reflector for your car works almost as well and for your level is a good price investment point.

Try this, learn from it. But make sure its a relaxed fun playful experience with no great expectations. You have to learn somewhere, and if they don't care that your just learning and everyones on the same page HAVE FUN!

Let us know how it works out. Include some sample shots. Some of us are rooting for you!
Rex

Doug,

I agree with several others, and with you now it seems, that this job is probably one you should decline. I appreciate your willingness to ask others' opinion here.

One thing I have done that got surprisingly positive response is to give the requester both a verbal and written disclaimer that expresses the pros and cons of using me. I am a fairly accomplished, serious amateur, but I have neither the experience nor the consistency of a good pro. Nor the level of equipment. Requesters may not understand the full impact of what this means, so in my disclaimer I try to describe it in terms of final product: my images may not be quite as sharp, the lighting may not be quite as professional, and I may mess up and miss a shot entirely. I show them examples of what I have done. That said, I will do my best. I try to balance the requester's risk by not charging a sitting fee and charging only for actual prints purchased. That leaves the risk that I will mess up a fleeting moment. I tell them, no offense taken if, after considering this, they prefer to use a bona fide pro. I include my prices in the disclaimer, along with some key suggestions as to clothing, etc., for the shoot.

I have used this method with 3 friends, each of whom told me that this document along with my demeanor at the shoot were "more professional" than most others they had dealt with. A small sample, admittedly. And best of all, they each loved my photos! Whew!

If you DO take on this assignment, I would strongly recommend you visit the site a couple times beforehand with someone who will pose for you, and experiment enough, all the way through to finished prints, so you'll know what setting, lighting, and poses to use on the actual shoot.

Best wishes,
--
Mike D.
http://www.mikedphoto.smugmug.com