'Venture' style lighting help needed.

[leeb]

hi all, me again looking to learn from those who know.

i have been asked to do some 'venture' style pictures tomorrow. now they dont expect the false punchyness of the colours, just mainly the blownout backdrop, i have had a go, but to not a lot of good. i can clearly see every line and crease on the bacdkdrop.

i meteres the lights wrong i think.

i will be using one light each side on the backdrop, and a light with softbox directly behind me, im working with bowens 500 lights, and an olympus E1 camera. m

what i am hoping for is that someon can say "this is what you need to do, meter the backlights to f????? and the subject to F??? and jobs a goodun" i am normally shooting at 125th f11 for normal stuff without the white backdrop.

please can someone point me in the right direction.

Thanks a lot

[leeb]

the other little issue i know will be a problem is i have no barn doors. dammit.

????

[_dobbo_]

I haven't worked this out myself yet. You can deliberately over expose but it runs the risk of washing everything out and losing highlights.

I got the following by shooting against a white background, over-exposing a couple of stops, and then blowing the background out using the RAW options in Photoshop.

[leeb]

thats the effect im looking for, so that the subject just jumps out at you.

so if i expose the subject at f11 for example, my lights on the backdrop need to be on about f22? only issue i really have is that i am going to risk washing out the edges of the subject, due to the lack of barn doors to control the spread of light.

hhmmm?

sorting it on photoshop is not a problem, i would just rather get it right in the camera if poss

[andybuk99]

you would want a couple of lights just on the background behind the subject which is then flagged off, stopping any light from reaching the subject, then light the people however you want.

the venture stuff is all shot straight and then set actions are added in photoshop after.

[leeb]

yea i thought as much re the venture stuff, would be intereted to see what it looks like out of their camera though.

whats going to be the best way to block the light flooding onto the subject?

[andybuk99]

they wont show you the images before they have been processed, they are only operators not photographers.

in the studio i use 8ft x 4ft polyboards (polystyrene boards painted black on one side and left white on the other), use the black side facing camera.

[leeb]

nice one andy, that makes a lot of sense. thanks i think i will see how it goes tomorrow and look into that route if it is going to be done more often.

Lee

[doodah]

please, it's neither big nor clever. in fact it's awful, in a dido kinda mass appeal way.

Edited by doodah on Tuesday 10th October 23:28

[EmmaP]

doodah said:

please, it's neither big nor clever. in fact it's awful, in a dido kinda mass appeal way.

Me and my photographer chums refer to them as the Maccie Ds of photography. Cannot knock their success though.

[doodah]

van gogh once said, it wasn't his fault his paintings didn't sell...

Edited by doodah on Tuesday 10th October 23:50

[CVP]

EmmaP said:

doodah said:

please, it's neither big nor clever. in fact it's awful, in a dido kinda mass appeal way.

Me and my photographer chums refer to them as the Maccie Ds of photography. Cannot knock their success though.

It's wierd though, I saw these guys advertising in the Bentalls Centre in Kingston and folks were queing up saying weren't they good and how they were thinking of getting one done. I looked at them and for each portrait did not get any feeling from the image or feel any connection to the sitter, I just thought how bland they were.

From my simple perspective surely the key to a great portrait is to establish that connection with the subject? I have two key examples that I think get to the heart of the matter;

1. It's a portrait of Princess Margaret by Lord Snowdon in the 50's/60's. It's superbly lit and shows how beautiful she was, but the key for me is that somehow he has managed to capture
loneliness in her expression / mood. I guess for me it summarised how she was the glamorous one left on the side as all attention was focussed on her sister as queen.

2. By Heather Angel it's a portrait of a Snow Leopard freshly released into the wild after recovery from injury. The image is of the cat bounding up out of an explosion of snow, and you can't help but interpret the movement and expression on the face as "I'm free, I'm free...WOW".

I think good portraiture is a massively difficult task (and one I'm absolute rubbish at).

Chris

[andybuk99]

the thing is its the same as the 70/80's style school photo's, everyone at the time is raving about the style but within 10 years you WILL be taking those venture portraits off the wall. they are so last year darling!

[poah]

doodah said:

van gogh once said, it wasn't his fault his paintings didn't sell...

Edited by doodah on Tuesday 10th October 23:50

it was, they are crap lol

[poah]

to blow out the background meter the lights at the background at least 3 stops greater than the lights of the subject but watch for bleed through to the subject. the backgrounds for these venture places are very white and shiny so is probably metered differently to the white paper I use in the studio.

[_dobbo_]

doodah said:

please, it's neither big nor clever. in fact it's awful, in a dido kinda mass appeal way.

Indeed, instead why not force something onto people that they don't want and didn't ask for?



Not my cup of tea, but who am I to tell people what they should want?

This thing about them being out of date in ten years - erm... That will be the same as pretty much all mainstream portrait photography then? It doesn't matter how much the style of photo stands the test of time, when the haircut and clothes date it instantly.

[andybuk99]

you can nearly always tell when a shot was taken because of the style, everyone jumps on the same old band wagon.

[leeb]

can of worms well and truely opened there then. haha

only wanted a few pointers on lighting, for something a customer requested, sorted it in the end so thanks.

if people want something and want to pay good money i am not one to get sentimental about what will happen in 10 years and band wagons

thanks

[EmmaP]

andybuk99 said:

you can nearly always tell when a shot was taken because of the style, everyone jumps on the same old band wagon.

Whilst others create their own, timeless style. These are two of my favourite:



Truman Capote, New York, 1965 by Irving Penn



Francis Bacon, Primrose Hill (?), 1963 by Bill Brandt

Edited by EmmaP on Thursday 12th October 00:48

[andybuk99]

EmmaP said:

andybuk99 said:

you can nearly always tell when a shot was taken because of the style, everyone jumps on the same old band wagon.

Whilst others create their own, timeless style.

Edited by EmmaP on Thursday 12th October 00:48

yep nice shots, what i was referring to were the generic high street social studios, that once they have set the lighting up after reading "the only lighting setup you will ever need book" they never move it again, ever, ever,ever.