Arthur,
Sorry if i mistakenly reacted to your response. There's so much flaming going on in any web board, that i just assumed that's what you were doing.
Scavullo is Francesco Scavullo, one of the top names in fashion photography for the last 30+ years. He's best known for having shot nearly all of the Cosmo covers. Not sure if he's still doing them. I assume so, since they're still in his style. He also has several other books dealing with fashion, portraiture and nudes. He's also rather famous for the Brooke Shields Calvin Klein ads ( i think?).
I didn't mean that he NEVER moves his flash NOW. I had heard, though, from an assistant or two that for a time (either in the 70s or 80s) that it was so fixed and immovable that it had gathered an appreciable amount of dust. He was so known for his standard of beauty lighting, that he kept it there semi-permanently. Not sure what type of light it was, maybe a custom-rigged umbrella concoction?
That's very interesting. I thought ring-flash was mostly only used
in macro, but I guess not! But if the light is all straight on
from the lens like that, how do you get any modeling shadows for
feeling of depth?
The ring flash is used a lot now by fashion guys, and is sort of a throwback to 70s/80s style when it was a big thing. You're right, the usual use is in macro applications, with smaller ones, but the better strobe manufacturers (profoto, sinar, etc.) make larger ones that are more often used in fashion. And yah, the effect is not to create natural looking light/shadows. It gives you a halo shadow all the way around the subject, if the subject is a certain distance from a flat backdrop. Examples: Raymond Meier uses it almost exclusively in product and fashion shots (Vogue). Also, Michel Comte uses it a lot. Most of the big fashion guys have experimented with it. If you want, i can email you an example or two. I don't know how to post pix here. I guess i should learn....
The advice I've gotten is to either get the subject away from the
wall or to put a slave flash behind to illuminate the backdrop.
I'm confused about where you place the shadow. If it's only to the
right....
I wasn't suggesting that the shadow should be on the right. I was saying that when you turn your camera to portrait position (vertical), unless you have a device to maintain the flash at the centered position, the flash will also be turned, resulting in it being on the left of the lens. That's assuming you turn the camera body counterclockwise, with the shutter button on top. So, the flash then illuminates from the left, casting the shadow on the right. I was just saying that that's the result people get when they don't take precautions not to arrive at that.
If you look at the better wedding photographers, as well, you'll usually see flash brackets on their cameras to ensure the flash stays centered. That's pretty much the standard in that line of work too.
In outdoor photography, it doesn't matter so much for a few reasons. The background may not be close enough to register a shadow in the frame. Or, the light is such a broad source that it doesn't focus the shadow as much as a small, close light source like a flash. Or, the hard sunlight can be part of the effect. Peter Lindberg and Helmut Newton love shooting in the harshest sunlight.
When you shoot outdoors, do you also try to line up the subject and
camera with the sun?
Nope. Outdoors, i almost never want flat lighting like that. I usually use two different manners of thinking and working with artificial light versus sunlight/ambient light. With flash, i make efforts to ensure that the light is as flattering to the subject as possible (usually women), and that means either "flat" (if it's hard and directional source), or with some modeling/from some angle (if it's soft). Those aren't rules, but if you focus a hard light source on a woman from the wrong angle, it's going to show every one of her skin's imperfections, every hair, etc.....
Okay then. I'm tired.
rk
