Photographer Dustin Dolby of workphlo is back with another of his straightforward, easy-to-follow lighting tutorials. This time, he's showing us how to shoot (and post-process) a professional-looking splash photography shot—a very popular ad style—using just the affordable speedlights in his home studio.
As usual, his setup is extremely affordable. To start, he places the empty glass-and-lime combo onto a sheet of plexiglass, with two diffusers behind it and a cheap Yongnuo speedlight behind that. Then he uses a second speedlight off to the side to light the garnish, and that same speedlight is what he'll use to light the splashes once he adds water and begins throwing in his fake ice cube.
From start to finish, here are all of the exposures he captured and combined in post to create his final image:
Along the way Dolby offers a bunch of little tips and tricks that help really round out the final image, and produce something beautiful. Here's the final shot, after a bit of post-production magic:
To see the full tutorial, click play above. And if you love product photography his YouTube channel is definitely worth a look.
All photographs by Dustin Dolby/workphlo and used with permission.
Nice going kid! What I am not sure about in your final product is a really dense shadow on the lime skin making it look like it has known some seriously better days. Also, I would keep a vignette more symmetrical with this this much of light fall-off involved.
Interesting tutorial which includes some handy hints and reminders. Interesting too, to note his workflow, dedicated to post-production assembly in Photoshop, or in my case, Pixelmator and Affinity Photo. Please keep posting the tutorials. Thanks.
Please keep posting these interesting tutorials. Not because I need them, but because there are a lot of people here who clearly need therapy by venting their anger,jealousy, frustrations, insecurities and inadequacies at anyone who is successful and they aren't. Cheer up guys. You're making progress.
As someone who gets a kick out of learning new things I appreciate Dustin's tutorials. But I am smewhat confused with the criticism , is this tutorial an oversimplified hot mess with a ratty lime OR step by step set of instructions to throw professionals out of a job?
No professional photographer will lose work because of this.
Also no amateur photographer photographer will learn anything to help him to become a professional.
I've been-there-and-done-that, from the mid 1970s until 2010. I also did some of the motion-control model shots (photographic effects gaffer: Apogee, Inc) for Star Trek: The Motion Picture (1979). Here's my International Movie Database page http://www.imdb.com/name/nm1379875/?ref_=ttfc_fc_cr125
People like this have never cost me even one days lose of work. I just don't like people being misled.
Charles, thanks for sharing the perspective of a professional. I agree that only the most insecure pro (or crabbed DPR member) would be concerned about such a tutorial, but I'm not sure how Dolby's efforts would mislead anyone. What did I miss?
As an aside, what was it like working with V'ger? : )
@453C, V'ger (top view) was about 50 feet long, a very large miniature. The Klingon ship had a more reasonable wing span of maybe 5 feet.
Most scenes were made-up 20-24 shots married on a aerial image optical printer.
The cone of laser-light was an ultra strong unit that could burn through a 2x4 piece of wood in about 15-20 minuets, when cranked-up. It was aimed at a spinning mirror, which made the cone of light. No-one could be on the stage when the laser was at full power—too dangerous.
Charles, I'm willing to challenge your experience with mine. Not because I'm bigger than you. The exact opposite. Because I am SMALLER than you.
If I got things correctly from your post:
- you're working (or have worked) at Hollywood level. Like any high end pro, I seriously doubt, even better, I doubt with a passion that you have any solid idea what it is to battle in the lower end of the market.
Do you know what it is to start out *today*?
- If I got it correctly, you've been working up until 2010. Anything before that, the market was reasonably healthy.
IMO, it was past 2010 that the photo business have shown its illness.
From day 1 to year 2000: healthy photo industry due to film barriers.
2001 - 2006: healthy industry. Digital still in its infancy, which means expensive, and small selection of used products.
2007 - 2017: Digital is now mature. New gear becoming cheaper and cheaper. Lots of stuff in the used market, lots of workshops, tutorials, internet, You Tube...
Above, that's my 2011 beginner's portfolio. In that video, I wasn't half the photographer I am today.
Is there quality in that portfolio? Some say yes, some say no, it really doesn't matter.
What matters is that I don't even get a "yawn", because the agency guy has already seen 200 portfolios that week, he's fed up, and won't waste any time seeing more portfolios.
Simple as that.
You don't even make it to the *starting* line. You're out before even trying.
A reality someone who started out in 1970 probably isn't familiar with.
The problem with a lot of traditional high-powered strobes is that they have very long flash times—like 1/800 of a second or even slower. Speedlights can get you up into 1/10,000 or faster. It's definitely not a rule, but it is something to check before you get too far down the road. Different manufacturers use different electronics.
Next idea for a video: how about amateurs / enthusiasts learning easily and for free brain surgery?
Let's make some of those well paid doctors out of work. They're overrated anyway, I'm sure every enthusiast out there can do it at home, for a fraction of the cost.
So here's my suggestion, but please feel free to offer yours as well.
Undervaluing a whole profession and putting people out of work must be a lot of fun, right?
I never quite get this "putting people out of work" mentality. If the world has progressed to the point that people no longer need to purchase your services, then you simply need new services to offer. It's always been this way and will always be this way.
Marcio - Hear, hear! My good man, I am with you to the end!
It is easy for the unthinking mob to suckle knowledge from the teat of this Mister Dolby, but how soon they forget the plight of the poor splash photographer, toiling away for decades in his dark, wet studio. He braves the mysteries of this new-fangled electricity to bring us fruity photographs of spirits in motion, only to have this crafty ragamuffin give away the crown jewels of his very livelihood? Nay! Nay, I say to this travesty!
Aye, work has been scarce for this hard-bitten craftsman ever since the Great Buggy Whip Debacle of '09. Bennett Buggies gave my people hope in the 1930s, but it was a tough go of it until I transitioned to splash photography from splash sketchery.
Saurat, I dearly hope you are right. Time has been kind to those of us that have honed our skills with the ice & crystal, but these Youtubians and their indiscrete moving pictures have shaken the IGSFP (International Guild of Splash & Fire Photographers) to our core. Praise be to kind souls such as yourself and Marcio for giving a thought to those of us in the cellar, using the dark arts to capture the magical commingling of ice and alcohol.
Egads! What devilry will next be visited upon us? Will this Mister Dolby provide instruction that leads to people driving their own automobiles? Think of the chauffeurs, man!
I'm going to jump to "marcio_napoli's" defense a little bit because it's obvious that people commenting have never faced the issue he's talking about.
There are in industries what are known as "trade secrets," those little techniques that insiders know that give pro work that extra edge. You had to either go to school to learn these little techniques or work in the biz to acquire them.
Over the years, people have been giving trade secrets away for free to make tons of cash via internet marketing. Because the amateurs don't appreciate the value of these techniques, they then produce and give away professional images for dirt cheap/free or wind up flooding the marketplace based off of those trade secrets.
This issue is part of the reason why Adobe and other companies went subscription-based. Too many amateurs learning trade secrets off the web were getting copies of Photoshop, 3DS, etc. giving away work for near free and devaluing graphic design and computer graphics in the process.
If a "trade secret" is so simple it can be taught in a ten minute youtube video, then charging through the nose to use that trade secret on a job is nothing more than a con. If it's a real skill and despite knowing the secrets the amateurs can't get the same results, then people will continue to pay for it. If anyone can do it, then it doesn't have value and shouldn't be kept a secret just to keep conning people.
Ah, the minababe has returned, feelings of hurtness in tow from a past failure on these inter-webs! I see that good humour is not a friendly companion in your travels. No matter; we of the IGSFP deeply value your support in these matters. If not for the pathos of the minababe, all is lost!
"Next idea for a video: how about amateurs / enthusiasts learning easily and for free brain surgery?" It is not so complicated, I've seen this several times in "The Walking Dead".
Please for a little more imagination. There are a lot of similar films on the youtube. Why do you all want to photograph the same issues? Glasses, bottles, watches, cosmetics, food, jewels, rings, splashes , bokeh, fire, … Shoot something new-different. And the most important. Do not satisfied with the average shoot.
@ william .... i remember that and i was adapting nikon lenses with modified body caps glue and giant washers in 2009 to my ep-1 before many adapter were made ... i hung on to my contax g lenses and knew someone would create a gearing adapter someday ... it changed what a camera was for me
the corner evf evf i waited ages for came in the pen f which i have but fuji has my attention now
thanks for the cool memory of the most creative camera ad ever , house of cards style.....lol
Again... people should learn to be able to do this kind of thing in one shot. It is not hard. If you have to composite so many images together it's more photoshop than photography, and it shows you've understood the basics... but no more than that.
Given you said it's not hard, where is your tutorial for doing this kind of thing in one shot? Also, if the end result is the same, why does the process matter?
Ah of course, because I haven't posted a tutorial I must be lying...
It matters a lot. If you want to spend a lot of your time in post processing by all means, but that's time you can also spend on other clients, other projects, or I dunno, just chilling :-) Second, the more you photoshop the more you move away from actual photography. I know everybody draws the line somewhere else, but generally I'm far less impressed with a good shot if I find out that it was just blended together afterwards. Getting it right in one go takes effort, and allows a little bit more pride in your work.
I understand your sentiment wrt getting the shot in one go, use film when possible, etc., but the guy has put in effort and shared his methods, which work perfectly well, and explained it very well too. When you say something is not hard, and I thought his methods were hard enough, you need references. Whether you are lying or not is not important.
Alright I'll admit, saying "it's not hard" may have been a bit harsh. If you understand lighting, it's prefectly doable with a little extra effort, but if you've never done product shots before and are new to lighting then it may not be very easy. But I have done this kind of shot as a method of experimentation before, and I didn't need to composite multiple images.
I do believe that when you intend to teach other people something new, you should do it right. For example, instead of removing a shadow in post processing, position everything so that the shadow is avoided. I don't make tutorials because I don't consider myself an authority (but at least, better than him :p )
It did seem odd that he continued working from the side of the flash after shooting his shadow multiple times. Maybe that had more to do with his tutorial video set up than the splash photography.
This guy is a joke. I'm no better with speedlights, I'll admit. I clicked on this video to learn how to use speedlights, not Photoshop. I'm well sufficient enough in PS to make composites . Maybe if he took his time setting things up, instead of trying to look like he's effortlessly doing this , he would have to do each step 16 times. Just saying .
The tutorial beginning was the part that was the speedlight tutorial, rest was just tutorial for process to capture the needed files for image manipulations purposes.
Part 1: The stand, diffusers and camera location etc as general product photography and giving the general tip to use multiple diffusers in stack to diffuse light even more (works with any light)
Part 2: speedlights at lowest power (he has them 1/128 and camera set ISO 1600) has shortest flash duration so fast motion freezes efficiently and could use side speedlight in one hand, but couldn't because needs both hands free as doesn't have a optical/sound trigger like MIOPS.
Part 3: REST is about how to shoot many many frames with variable lighting (black cardboard to add contrast to highlights and mentions the image editor layer effect mode to get it visible) and to just do pure luck trick to get wanted splashes.
The actual tutorial part of the subject was like 30 seconds.
Splash, long exposure flowing water, milkyway, star stripes, northern lights, person walking through doorway, person taking step on empty street, shallow DOF, freezing objects in the air (splash, food, phones etc etc), young women biting her lips or incapable keep mouth closed, while dressed sexually, eagle in flight, eagle diving to fish, birds against backlight, aerial drone shots...
All those and many many other things are just cliches.
And there are millions of people who see them first time or few times and get the experience seeing them as great ones...
It's a nice idea but this guy is doing a huge disservice to his viewers if he thinks any client would accept his trailer park production values and ignorance of subject matter. First of all that raggedy lime wheel wouldn't even pass muster at a Skid Row bar, and as every practicing alcoholic knows, a martini is always garnished with an olive. In reality a shot like this begins days before with the assembling of a wide variety of glass shapes, fake and real ice, bar picks, and of course sizes, shapes, colors, and stuffings of olives. The shooting and compositing are almost incidental to the finished product.
...He clearly states that the idea of the video is the workflow of the shooting, not the technicality of his garnish or glass that he's using. Get over yourself.
Agreed.... I have been trying to get over myself for the past 50 years but, as you point out, with only limited success. Nevertheless, teaching others is a solemn obligation and you can't weasel out of your duty by saying "I'm a nice guy so ignore this heinous mistakes I'm making in part of these instructions." It's just not the way serious people do things. And now I will go back to my "Get Over Yourself in 90 Days" workbook. If I complete three more pages, I get a sticker!
Workflow means everything from start to end. In this case as OP says, it starts days before by planning and gathering elements and making decisions and testing all kind exposure setups etc and then getting the final image to out....
But this was a tutorial of speedlights usage in 30 seconds from whole video with only a two information that was worth it.
1) speedlights at lowest power gives fastest flash duration needed
2) you can use speedlights to do this kind photography but prepare to overcome (or try at least) many of challenges that studio lights and proper studio solve more easily.
Meaning the tutorial was more for a enthusiast who just got their speedlight and wants to take one or two splash photographs to impress friends and family of high skills...
So yes, good job in video but hardly a topic tutorial.
Why? I can never understand that flawed logic you people use, when you go: "it's easy with digital, try doing that with analog". Why would you use inferior gear to try to achieve the same result?
No client ever told me: "no, I'm not paying for this image because you produced it with digital gear and processed it in Photoshop". It doesn't happen. You know why? Because the only thing that matters is the result. No one is interested in your ego or your biases. No one gives a toss about difficult or easy it was for you to create an image. The only thing that matters is the result and your ability to produce it.
Using the gear that's available to you to produce something worthwhile is what photography is about. It's fine to love analogue gear (many of us do) as long as it does not turn into elitism.
It's not about the digital/analog gear. It's about telling "how to shot a photo". In fact you shoot multiple pictures to create one resulting out of it, which is, in my humble opinion, no photo but a composition. Is this a photo after all? Problem of the definition... for me not.
Product photography + technical camera You don't find a single digital camera better than that.
Downside, you only have single exposure that you don't see right away.
Good side, you can always drumscan negatives and do same image manipulations if required for digital but when customer pays *a lot* that they get a authentic single film negative.... You can't use multiple frames!
Snapa, I don't care for these images and it seems you don't either, but this (at least in the past) used to be a very specialized niche in commercial photography.
A niche that dedicated photographers could build a whole career on, and earn a very decent living.
This video (and many others of similar nature) is essentially killing or at least undervaluing a lot professional photography.
So back to the start: you and I may not care for these images, it might even appear to be an innocent thing.
But it's quite realistic to say a video like this is making someone out of job (or at least having a harder life) as we speak.
The Panasonic Lumix DC-G100 (G110 in some regions) is a mirrorless camera designed for vlogging. Its 20MP Four Thirds sensor is paired with clever tracking audio technology, but we have our reservations.
The Olympus PEN E-PL10 is the latest in the company's entry-level mirrorless line-up. It's a beginner-friendly camera that does many things well, but ultimately doesn't stand out amongst its competition.
The Nikon Coolpix P950 is a powerful superzoom compact camera, built around a 24-2000mm equivalent zoom lens. Successor to the popular P900, the P950 adds an improved EVF, Raw capture and 4K video. So is it worth $800?
The Fujifilm X-T4 brings image stabilization, faster shooting and a bigger battery to the X-T series. It's not without its shortcomings but we found it to be an excellent stills and video shooter.
With its unusual form factor can the Tourbox aid the editing process? Will its price and variety of tactile controls appeal to photo and video editors who would like to streamline their workflow?
What’s the best camera for under $2000? These capable cameras costing less than $2000 should be solid and well-built, have both speed and focus for capturing fast action and offer professional-level image quality. In this buying guide we’ve rounded up all the current interchangeable lens cameras costing under $2000 and recommended the best.
What’s the best camera costing over $2000? The best high-end camera costing more than $2000 should have plenty of resolution, exceptional build quality, good 4K video capture and top-notch autofocus for advanced and professional users. In this buying guide we’ve rounded up all the current interchangeable lens cameras costing over $2000 and recommended the best.
We've updated our 'best cameras over $2000' buying guide, and the Sony a7R IV is now our favorite mirrorless camera in the $2000-4000 price range. It sits alongside the Nikon D850, which is our choice for those who prefer DSLRs.
If you're looking for a high-quality camera, you don't need to spend a ton of cash, nor do you need to buy the latest and greatest new product on the market. In our latest buying guide we've selected some cameras that might be a bit older but still offer a lot of bang for the buck.
What's the best camera for shooting sports and action? Fast continuous shooting, reliable autofocus and great battery life are just three of the most important factors. In this buying guide we've rounded-up several great cameras for shooting sports and action, and recommended the best.
The Tamron 28-200mm F2.8-5.6 Di III RXD provides a wide zoom range in compact, weather-sealed design. Find out why it's Chris and Jordan's new favorite travel lens.
Kodak Portra 800 is a wonderful and versatile color film. And any rumors of it being discontinued, we're pleased to report, are simply untrue. That's a good thing, because it's capable of producing lovely results in all sorts of conditions.
Boering has left the World Press Photo without much of an explanation from either him or the organization, but he tells DPReview the COVID-19 pandemic is forcing the WPP to change the way it makes money.
The Sony ZV-1 and Panasonic Lumix DC-G100 are the first cameras we've seen that are overtly designed with vlogging in mind – and the changes they represent could have implications for the future of all cameras.
Olympus is showing final images of its under-development 150-400mm F4.5, which it says will arrive this winter. An unspecified macro and 8-25mm F4 Pro have also been added to the lens roadmap, and the E-M1X's AF gains bird detection.
Fujifilm is one of just two producers of tape media (the other being Sony) and it is hard at work on a breakthrough that will allow single tape storage drives to offer 400TB capacities in the coming years.
The National Parks Service says it's investigating the incident, which took place just two days after the park opened following a shutdown due to the COVID-19 pandemic.
Professional full frame lenses are usually large and have fast apertures. In this episode of DPReview TV, Chris and Jordan argue that there's a need for slow professional lenses – inspired by some of their favorite Micro Four Thirds lenses.
NASA's Solar Dynamics Observatory (SDO) photographs the sun every 0.75 seconds. In its first decade in space, the SDO has captured more than 425 million images of the sun. NASA has compiled these images into an amazing time lapse, come check it out.
The lens is available for Leica M, Sony FE, Nikon Z and L-mount camera systems, and now holds the title as the world's widest rectilinear lens for full-frame camera systems.
Tamron's new 28-200mm F2.8-5.6 is a versatile zoom lens for Sony E-mount. Well-suited for travel photography, it's compact, lightweight, and fast/quiet to focus.
Fujifilm's latest lens is a sharp, reasonably compact and well-built wide-angle for the company's GFX medium-format cameras. We took it out and about in the warm Seattle summer with the company's 50 and 100 Megapixel camera bodies to see what it can do.
Although the channel is still growing, it currently has nine videos that offer concise overviews of just a few of the cameras Japan Camera Hunter founder Bellamy Hunt has sitting around his Japanese storefront.
ON1 has launched ON1 360, the latest version of ON1 Photo RAW 2020 with ON1's new Photo Mobile application for iOS, iPadOS and Android mobile devices. The new solution syncs raw processing between your mobile device and computer.
Switching screw-on filters between lenses of different thread sizes is much quicker with the Revoring adjustable step-up ring. It uses a sprung iris that expands to fit a range of filter thread sizes, so a single filter can be used on multiple lenses
Kodak's discontinued Aerochrome film gets a digital remake in the form of a new Lightroom preset pack from film emulation specialists Really Nice Images.
We've updated our Best cameras under $2000 buying guide, and the Fujifilm X-T4 is our top pick for those seeking a camera that excels and both stills and video shooting.
The Canon EF-M 11-22mm F4-5.6 is by no means a new lens, but it's one we've been shooting with over the years, and appreciate for its compact form, solid build and useful wide-angle range.
Mauritius is a remote island off the southeastern coast of the African continent that's never had Google Street View. So, an island resident, Reuben Pillay, decided to use his own DJI Phantom 4 Pro drone to create more than 220 high-resolution 360-degree images of the island.
Pye Jirsa explains how blowing out the highlights in an image — usually a no-no in the world of photography — can result in a 'perfectly imperfect' photo that feels more authentic and natural.
A recent copyright infringement lawsuit against Newsweek, as well as Facebook's subsequent statement about its sublicensing terms, prompted the judge to reopen the case against Mashable.
Comments