Hello, all:
Had a very difficult assignment this weekend - a high-key studio shoot of two very cute but hyperactive girls, ages 1 and 2-3/4. At no time were either of these girls still. Usually they were moving at or near maximum speed around the lighting set. The mom had tried several other photographers with (what she considered) little luck.
So... what to do? High-speed kids, finicky Mom.
First, I flooded the set with light, main and fill to either side of the camera (Canon D60) at 45 degrees, white paper backdrop/floor lit by two background strobes, one rather broad gridded hairlight overhead. 2000 watt-seconds total on a 9 foot by 9 foot set.
I placed props (hats, cute dolls) at strategic intervals on the set perimeter to catch the kids attention, and my assistant helped encourage them to play.
Then, the adults acted as bumper cushions, redirecting the kids as the bounced around in the shooting space wearing hats, carrying dolls and whatnot. I set the lens (Canon 24-70L) to cover the set, f13 for deep depth of field, shutter speed at max synch (1/200th) and tripped the camera via wired remote release (I've just GOT to get an RF remote). 106 shots later, we were fininshed.
In general, the "sweet zone" for the effect I sought was only about 2 feet deep by 6 feet wide. Even with the main and fill at 45 degrees, getting the correct facial angles was... random. And lighting ratios varied with subject location. Thats why I love digital, too. No film changing, infinite supply at near zero cost.
Many resulting images needed to be heavily cropped in Photoshop, to capture just the girls... but... it worked. So, out of 6.3 Mpix, some shots use only 2 Mpix due to cropping. Good enough for 5x7's. And a few are good for 8x10's. THIS is one reason why I need more pixels. For dynamic subjects, I need to shoot much wider angle than normal, to capture unpredictable movement, then crop down. Accurate framing is not possible. Therefore, 50 percent or so of pixel capacity is thrown away.
I did and carry the camera and shoot on the fly for some of the images. But most were taken from a tripod mount.
This shoot also demonstrated why I like powerful strobes. The need to flood a broad area with light - and maintain fast recycle time (about 1.5 sec. at the power levels I used). I used 5 Travelite 750's.
I had to quickly select a few examples and process them in PS7 to show the mom. She was sure that we got nothing. But... not so. We had quite a few "good ones". After post processing, I've got 22 proofs to provide and will see her tomorrow. Wish mw luck!
Brian C.
Had a very difficult assignment this weekend - a high-key studio shoot of two very cute but hyperactive girls, ages 1 and 2-3/4. At no time were either of these girls still. Usually they were moving at or near maximum speed around the lighting set. The mom had tried several other photographers with (what she considered) little luck.
So... what to do? High-speed kids, finicky Mom.
First, I flooded the set with light, main and fill to either side of the camera (Canon D60) at 45 degrees, white paper backdrop/floor lit by two background strobes, one rather broad gridded hairlight overhead. 2000 watt-seconds total on a 9 foot by 9 foot set.
I placed props (hats, cute dolls) at strategic intervals on the set perimeter to catch the kids attention, and my assistant helped encourage them to play.
Then, the adults acted as bumper cushions, redirecting the kids as the bounced around in the shooting space wearing hats, carrying dolls and whatnot. I set the lens (Canon 24-70L) to cover the set, f13 for deep depth of field, shutter speed at max synch (1/200th) and tripped the camera via wired remote release (I've just GOT to get an RF remote). 106 shots later, we were fininshed.
In general, the "sweet zone" for the effect I sought was only about 2 feet deep by 6 feet wide. Even with the main and fill at 45 degrees, getting the correct facial angles was... random. And lighting ratios varied with subject location. Thats why I love digital, too. No film changing, infinite supply at near zero cost.
Many resulting images needed to be heavily cropped in Photoshop, to capture just the girls... but... it worked. So, out of 6.3 Mpix, some shots use only 2 Mpix due to cropping. Good enough for 5x7's. And a few are good for 8x10's. THIS is one reason why I need more pixels. For dynamic subjects, I need to shoot much wider angle than normal, to capture unpredictable movement, then crop down. Accurate framing is not possible. Therefore, 50 percent or so of pixel capacity is thrown away.
I did and carry the camera and shoot on the fly for some of the images. But most were taken from a tripod mount.
This shoot also demonstrated why I like powerful strobes. The need to flood a broad area with light - and maintain fast recycle time (about 1.5 sec. at the power levels I used). I used 5 Travelite 750's.
I had to quickly select a few examples and process them in PS7 to show the mom. She was sure that we got nothing. But... not so. We had quite a few "good ones". After post processing, I've got 22 proofs to provide and will see her tomorrow. Wish mw luck!
Brian C.
