How to get a gradient on black background! HELLLLP

[MrBrightSide]

Almost everyone recommends shooting on a medium gray background, that way you can take it either to black or White depending on how much light you use. Savage’s Thunder Gray is a popular choice

Also, the closer your flash the faster it falls off, is it possible he’s lighting the face and hair separately?

 

[Don89]

Dumb thing to say eh! The best way to learn is read the books watch tutorials, learn about modifiers, learn posing, etc. Go to workshops etc, then see others style of work and see what you can accomplish. Chances are you will have a different personality than other photographers and you will have to find your own way of relating to your subjects and getting the expressions you want. A steep learning curve.

Who said anything about personality, relating to subject and expression?? The question is about learning lighting, this thread is about lighting, this subform is lighting. What the bloody hell are you talking about? LOL!

Ding’s right Even with talk and study, a fotog needs to make his first 1,500 errors in lighting, exposure, posing models, listening to a client —>and learn from them before great pics Start popping up with regularity.

 

[photolando]

I don’t see any problem with the OP asking about how to do something. That IS what THIS forum is all about. It’s better than people asking about brands of lights. THAT is not Studio and lighting “technique”. At least he is asking about “technique”. And asking is how you learn.

No where did anyone ask if you liked the style or not. That has nothing to do with anything. The OP does and is wondering how he can do the same.

The only problem I see with these kinds of questions is that it’s usually a new person wanting to shoot just like an experienced pro with very high end equipment. Sometimes. Yes, you can create similiar lighitng sometimes with other gear but some gear is very unique and almost impossible to replicate. LIke a very large Bron or Profoto Para. JUst using a large umbrella is not the same.

And then of course there is the post production work that follows. SO even if you got the lighting down, the post production may be yet another hurdle.

BUt good lord, don’t discourage someone by saying you don’t like the work so why bother. Nobody asked you if you liked the work.

 

[Don89]

I don’t see any problem with the OP asking about how to do something. That IS what THIS forum is all about. It’s better than people asking about brands of lights. THAT is not Studio and lighting “technique”. At least he is asking about “technique”. And asking is how you learn.

No where did anyone ask if you liked the style or not. That has nothing to do with anything. The OP does and is wondering how he can do the same.

The only problem I see with these kinds of questions is that it’s usually a new person wanting to shoot just like an experienced pro with very high end equipment. Sometimes. Yes, you can create similiar lighitng sometimes with other gear but some gear is very unique and almost impossible to replicate. LIke a very large Bron or Profoto Para. JUst using a large umbrella is not the same.

And then of course there is the post production work that follows. SO even if you got the lighting down, the post production may be yet another hurdle.

BUt good lord, don’t discourage someone by saying you don’t like the work so why bother. Nobody asked you if you liked the work.

--
Mike

Folks can and do opine as they wish. You just did and no one and asked you...

--
Nikons, Rolleiflexes, Elinchroms

 

[elliotn]

Almost everyone recommends shooting on a medium gray background, that way you can take it either to black or White depending on how much light you use.

Almost everyone? Really?

It doesn't seem relevant in this scenario, where the models are posed so close to the background.

 

[BAK]

For the general edification of posters and lurkers who are completely confused.

1/ The original poster uses a 60D, so any comments that refer to other formats should be qualified to take that into account.

2/ I certainly have trouble with the idea of a black gradient. There's no dark black and no light black. Those colors and tones are called grey.

3/ The first pictures in the first message are awful.

4/ Nevertheless, they set the composition standard for what's considered a portrait in the original poster's search for some help.

5/ There are some pointless statements about focal lengths and what professional photographers use for portraits. If a comment says 100 mm is standard, the poster of that needs to say 100mm is standard when used on a so-called full frame camera, and not on the original poster's APS-c so-called crop frame Canon 60D.

If the op wants the same look as 100mm on full frame, he needs a lens around 60 - 70mm on his 60D.

6/ Portraits don't have to be tight head shots.

7/ Irving Penn took portrait photographs and he used a gray V-background. Look him up on the interweb, or even better, go to a good book store and find the same huge, heavy, thick, book I spent an hour with last night. He was using the V background as long ago as 1948.

Many of the V-backed pictures in the book seemed to use one big light above the camera.

8/ Yes, original poster, it is a good idea to study and learn. But photography is hard, and sometimes advice / comments is/are wrong.

9/ Good luck to all who want to get better.

BAK

 

[BAK]

You are recommending 150 to 320mm focal length lenses on his 60D for head shots?

If he would like a choice of recommendations, I'll toss in the recommendation of choosing a lens in the 50 - 55 - 60 - 70 - 80, maybe 85mm range for head shots. 55 - 60 -70 - 80 are pretty rare, but there are these positions on lots of zooms.

A 50mm lens a a bit of cropping works well for head shots without face squishing or stretching, too.

BAK

 

[MrBrightSide]

elliotn wrote:Almost everyone? Really?

It doesn't seem relevant in this scenario, where the models are posed so close to the background.

Excellent point. However, if you want to expose a black backdrop as gray, you will likely have to use so much light that you're going to overexpose the face. With a gray backdrop you can position your light close to your subject, feather it off the background and you'll get a natural fall off to black.
The reason people use Thunder Gray is because it's fairly dark.

 

[elliotn]

elliotn wrote:Almost everyone? Really?

It doesn't seem relevant in this scenario, where the models are posed so close to the background.

Excellent point. However, if you want to expose a black backdrop as gray, you will likely have to use so much light that you're going to overexpose the face. With a gray backdrop you can position your light close to your subject, feather it off the background and you'll get a natural fall off to black.
The reason people use Thunder Gray is because it's fairly dark.

Black paper backdrop (as opposed to black velvet, or similar) will render grey with this guy's lighting setup.

 

[BAK]

read ab out it here

Loading…

www.irvingpenn.org

 

[FingerPainter]

You are recommending 150 to 320mm focal length lenses on his 60D for head shots?

No. I'm advocating using about 150-300m on FF. On his 60D, I'd be looking more at 95-190mm.

This is for when "head shot" is used to mean a shot of a head, and not much else, in portrait orientation. Slightly longer if in landscape orientation. I have seen the term "head shot" (mis-) applied to half-body shots.

If he would like a choice of recommendations, I'll toss in the recommendation of choosing a lens in the 50 - 55 - 60 - 70 - 80, maybe 85mm range for head shots. 55 - 60 -70 - 80 are pretty rare, but there are these positions on lots of zooms.

To frame a head such that it is 2/3 of the height of an 8x10 frame when shooting on a FF camera with an 85mm lens, without cropping, you'd have to shoot from about 1.3m distance. That's much too close for most subjects. I much prefer 3m fo rmost people, though i'll go down to about 2.2m if I have to, and for some subjects I may even want to.

On a 6D, that same framing with an 85mm lens would be shot from 2m, so closer, but not quite close enough.

A 50mm lens a a bit of cropping works well for head shots without face squishing or stretching, too.

If you shot a 50mm lens on a 6D from a distance of 3m, to get that same framing you'd have to crop to only 13.3% of the original area. That's a 2.4MP image with only about 1/.3 the SNR.

 

[BAK]

He can shoot from across the street, shouting, or from across a table,chatting.

BAK

 

[JillSandersPhotography]

Hi! I love the exercise of taking a photo and trying to backwards engineer it. It's a great way to learn. And I also love the Noles look for headshots, especially the hot light on the hair. Anything to get your client's photo to pop out from the thousands is a good thing. It doesn't matter if I aesthetically dislike looking at "lizard eyes". It matters if those eyes will make a casting director stop turning over photos.

OK now for the gradient: I will take a guess that it's a very basic Photoshop Lightroom adjustment. Try this: choose the circular gradient tool, and set it to -.5 exposure, and about 70-80 feathering. But play with the feathering because it will need to change according to the photo. Just make sure it doesn't darken any of your main subject's face. Another thing to try is flagging the model, not the lights. This can be done very easily with two black foam panels from a craft store placed on either side of the model, just out of camera view.. You don't need to construct and haul around full-sized V-flats. They will suck any bounced light from that umbrella out of the sides of the image. This is creating the gradient from the "opposite" direction. Instead of adding light behind your subject, you are taking it away from the perimeter.

As for his overall lighting technique, I am going to make another guess that hasn't been discussed yet. Look at the eyes again. Notice how much of the eye is colorful iris, and not boring pupil? He's getting the pupil to close before he fires the shot. That can be achieved a variety of ways. The easiest is with continuous lighting. Another thought is that he's shooting with high-speed sync. HSS extends the flash duration, and might capture a closed pupil. I'm only taking guesses here. Or it could be that he shoots in TTL with pre-flashes, and adjusts with exposure compensation. That would be the least likely method. Not sure a pupil can close fast enough for it to work. I am betting that he incorporates some kind of continuous light. Maybe he shoots at a shutter speed/aperture combo to allow for lots of ambient light in the studio. This will probably require a neutral density filter for your lens if you still want a shallow depth of field. If you don't understand how flash and continuous (ambient) light respond differently to shutter speed and aperture, I recommend doing whatever it takes to learn that relationship. Some learn better from reading, others from practice. But it's crucial for headshots to really, really know it.

I would also bet that hot hair light is just a speedlight or strobe with a ½ or ¼ CTO, also real close to the model, gridded or snooted.

Happy sleuthing!

 

[Chris Dodkin]

You can use a separate light for the black backdrop - the paint type used on the backdrop will make a big difference to the grad you get BTW

--
Your time is limited, so don't waste it arguing about camera features - go out and capture memories

 

[Chris Dodkin]

Moving the subject and single light away from the backdrop, allows you to play with getting black/grey grads from the spill light from your source illumination.

In this case a single 190cm deep octa - by pulling the model away from the wall, I get a nice grad backdrop. The wall in this shot is pure white, only the distance and lighting power makes it appear grey/black. I have angled the light to feather the lighting over the infinity wall.

If I'd started with a grey backdrop, I'd see a darker version of the same with this setup.

Here's the lighting used in the actual studio from the above shot

--
Your time is limited, so don't waste it arguing about camera features - go out and capture memories

 

[RobRob60]

Thanks for this response. This clears up the catch light in the eye. Does the deep (assuming para) umbrella cause the shadows on the face and the highlight in the center? I'm wondering if he's using (black side) V flats for negative fill on either side of the subject and the strip of highlight down the center (more prominent on darker skin tones) is simply caused by the umbrella. I too, thought it was two strip banks VERY close together, but alas. If you're on the east coast, any idea how Jeffrey Mosier shoots these days? I feel like that could also be two LARGE softboxes (Profoto 3x4) being shot through? Those are some huge catch lights. Thanks again for the insight. Best.

 

[KE_DP]

In most of his shots the background is being lit by the same key light that is lighting the model. The background is not far from the model - often a soft shadow is cast by the model onto the background. IMO.

Exactly - he's using spill light with the model near the "wall".
Otherwise (shown below) - you move the model further away and pop in a light behind them to create the effect you want. This was a color gel on black paper BG. the texture is the paper itself - I didn't modify it at all.



EDIT - I probably shouldn't have replied - this thread is 100 years old. LOL

 

[dinoSnake]

So you are basing your judgement to a large degree on the lighting?

No, primarily my judgement is based on a sense of how close the photographer is to the subject. I get this sense from looking at the pictures and comparing them with my knowledge of what people look like in real life at various distances.

The judgement comes from an (unconscious) analysis of the relationship between the subject's bodily features. So in the picture of the guy with the red tie, his ears look really small compared to his nose. This suggests a wide angle lens. (Maybe though he just has a big nose and small ears.)

What I perceive to be the physical constraints of the lighting setup simply re-inforce my ideas about focal lengths.

(Perhaps the OP could chime in with the relevant information? He seems to be friends with five of the photographer's assistants.)

I'll have to say, based upon my limited knowledge, I'm not sure about that. The clues are in the photos





Look at the catchlights in the eyes. That "snake eyes" effect, the one that some photographers have noted and either like or hate, is Ellis himself, standing in front of his parabolic reflector. There he is, in all his glory.

Now, factoring in the average human male's height, we can deduce that the parabolic itself is quite substantial. In order to fit the reflection of that much of Ellis's body, plus his [large] parabolic, into the reflection of that human's eye, he is almost certainly NOT standing a mere 2 to 4 feet away. The edge of the parabolic in the background is over Ellis' head, meaning that it must be a 7 foot+ parabolic, and standing a mere 3 feet away would mean that the edges of that huge parabolic wouldn't show in the eye, they would be beyond it (there wouldn't be a black halo around the catchlight).

I might be wrong, as I've never shot with a source that large, but to me it looks as if he's further away, but not "far".

 

[elliotn]

You think this is a long lens portrait?

 

[Rico Tudor]

KE_DP wrote:
Otherwise (shown below) - you move the model further away and pop in a light behind them to create the effect you want. This was a color gel on black paper BG. the texture is the paper itself - I didn't modify it at all.



EDIT - I probably shouldn't have replied - this thread is 100 years old. LOL

Karen, you make any old thread minty fresh when you post to it. Love ya!

--
Canon, Nikon, Contax RTS, Leica M, Sony, Profoto