Copy Me Lighting Thread 4

Michael Sewell

Michael Sewell

Messages
1,689
Name
Michael A. Sewell
Edit My Images
No
Basically posted to refresh the "Follow me lighting technique" thread, as I believe it's a valuable resource :)

Something a little different this time, and yes, even though threads one, two and three haven't had much support, I believe there are more folks reading and learning even if they aren't participating. :baby:

ok, moving on :cool:

The flying groom was an idea I'd been carrying around for a good few years, but obviously required the right couple. Not many folks are going to readily agree to allow me to photograph the bride and groom in their bedroom! (no smutty remarks please :nono: )
The aim was to freeze the action (the action in this case was the groom flying through the air). I could high speed sync it, but that would actually have prolonged the flash output, and possibly caused some blurring.
Instead, I shut down the ambient light to a minimum by closing the curtains and turning off the lights. With the ISO at 200, a shutter speed of 1/125th sec and an aperture of f5.6, I was pretty damn near guaranteed to kill what little ambient light was left.
Now what? Well, I wanted a short flash duration to freeze the groom in flight, so I dialled the flashes to 1/4 manual, and used three to basically get a combined power output of 3/4 (still with a short duration of a 1/4, if you follow).
It took a few goes to get the right height, and I would have preferred a longer run up so the groom could flatten out above the bed properly. However, the bed had a wooden footboard that was likely to smash his feet if not careful. And I for one, wasn't about to take the groom to casualty on his wedding night! :puke:
4275791313_ba8ebd74f3_o.jpg

I had the post processing in mind whilst prepping the shot
 
Sorry if I seem to come across as critical all the time Michael :eek:

But I think that's a poor shot, the lighting is terrible and the bride looks pregnant. With three flash guns at your disposal anything is possible but you could probably have done it very nicely with just one bounced off the ceiling (if it's not too dark) with the hi-light panel (or your Stofen) providing fill. If that's not putting enough light under the groom to show his outline, stick another gun in a lower position. It would have looked great if the groom was highlighted by a direct flash fired out of sight below the bed on the far side.

You don't need a mega-short flash duration for that and 1/1000sec or less that you would get normally is plenty fast enough - it's not as if he's flying like superman, practically stationary in that shot. And if you were worried about the ambient light interfering, 1/250sec x-sync on the D3 would have been better than 1/125sec you used.

Personally, I think a bit of blur from the ambient would have been really good and it sounds like you could have got some of that very easily. It would have looked great with second-curtain sync.

Basically this: Stofen'd flash on camera, second flash behind bed, second curtain-sync and adjust shutter speed according to level of ambient and speed of movement/amount of blur. Bang. Done. And i-TTL auto will sort the exposure.

It sounds like you had plenty of time to think out this shot and set it up. Opportunity missed methinks.

Apologies ;)
 
Well, I chose to freeze the movement, rather than allow blurring.
If I had put the flash at the foot of the bed, it would be in the frame. (You can see the curtain at frame right). The room was only about two foot wider than the bed, hence no run up, and the groom having to jump from the wooden footbed.
All three flashes were stofen'd.
Usually, personal comments about the models is frowned upon, and larger brides are certainly self conscious.
But all the same, thanks for your comments Hoppy ;)
 
Michael Sewell said:
Well, I chose to freeze the movement, rather than allow blurring.
Click to expand...

Maybe you are confusing blur with my suggestion of sharp/frozen flash image combined with some added ambient blur. But if you just want frozen then shoot at 1/250sec. Flash will freeze, and there will be less ambient blur than at 1/125sec - not that I can see any anyway, as he's hardly moving.

If I had put the flash at the foot of the bed, it would be in the frame.
Click to expand...

Not at the foot of the bed, on the far side. Or even put the flash on the bed next to her, concealed with a pillow. Lots of options, flagged with a bit of black card and BluTack if needs be. I just think the groom would look better picked out from the background with light from below and a little behind.

Usually, personal comments about the models is frowned upon, and larger brides are certainly self conscious.
Click to expand...

It's not a personal comment on the bride at all! It's a criticism of the less than elegant way you have made her look, or allowed her to look, with her dress all hunched up.

But all the same, thanks for your comments Hoppy ;)
Click to expand...

No worries ;) I think it's a great wedding idea, but I don't like the result. Your technical justification and explanation is not 100% right. I don't think you have made the most of the potential.

Why black & white? Unless it is part of the overall wedding theme (even if I personally think that treatment is perverse for weddings) why mono for this shot?

Sorry again :eek:
 
The mono was a personal choice. Mine and the B&G. The vignette was added to increase the voyeuristic look.
I think there were a total of 4 images in the whole album that were B+W (around 300+ images in total).
I have to say, I don't think it fully meets my vision. I wanted the groom higher and flat out. I also wanted to shoot from the bottom of the bed.

Next time maybe.
 
If the idea was to create a voyeuristic view of practising the ancient (and ridiculous :LOL:) art of jumping onto the wife from warddrobes, etc. for copulative purposes then I think it's a pretty good job

I get the idea of 3 flashes all at low power to make sure their flash duration is fast enough to freeze lover boy. I find my studio key even at 2/3rds power is still too slow to completely stop the action at extremities where the child is jumping and/or flapping their arms, so 3 flashes is a good idea IMO. Having them together also avoids any multiple shadow issues

I don't get Hoppy's repeated comment about using 1/250 rather than 1/125 though as it appears to me that even 1/60 would record Sod All ambient in a bedroom with drawn curtains; and I also feel that while scattering the flashes around the room may well have lit the subject differently, more akin to a 'proper' lighting technique use in studio work, such an obviously engineered shot would have spoilt the voyeuristic idea

Having the dress pulled up showing leg/garter is important to the shot showing the chap what he's jumping for :naughty: and I don't feel it makes her look fat either

Forgetting all of the above crit though - the point of these threads is to show/discuss lighting techniques rather than specifically crit each shot, posing etc. The OP to me had a vision and a problem re gaining a high enough shutter (here flash) speed without creating multiple shadows or blur through ambient lit, while maintaining a specific viewer's viewpoint, and I think that's been done well. It's also opened up an opportunity for discussion about the problems and their solution which is great, so while I get the - light it completely differently POV - I think the OP has done exactly what he set out to do

It was an idea for a shot I wouldn't have had, and a solution I probably wouldn't have come up with - so well done OP for that and making me think too (y)

How to position this idea for my next couple :thinking: hmmm...

"Sara & Karl, how about I photograph you having a jump in your bedroom before the speeches???"

I'll let you know their reply :D

DD
 
Dave, you hit the nail on the head with the "Wardrobe" concept, which I failed to mention in the opening comment due to the fact there was no wardrobe in the shot.
Not sure it would make any difference to Hoppy's evaluation, but it's a piece of the original idea I failed to mention.
I've also noticed blurring on longer flash speeds previously, especially if a higher ambient value was present. Hence the chosen settings which to me, were necessary to realise this particular concept.
Given Hoppy's points though, I'm intrigued enough to possibly try it again with his suggestions next time, as I can always switch back if I don't quite get what I want.
Thanks for your input Dave (y)
 
Incidentally Dave, It took me a couple of years to find the right couple to ask to participate in this shot,
The fact the the groom was arrested by a group of Star Wars Stormtroopers and an Imperial Guard before being frog marched down a busy road to the church, pretty much gave me the green light.
 
I did apologise for my comments! It's hard to be critical and not come across as antogonistic but that's really not my intention at all.

My only real 'complaint' is that we cannot see the groom very well and I suggested ways that might be improved.

The other comments are largely subjective but the reason I have mentioned the shutter speed is because the OP talked about needing to kill the ambient light in order to reduce blurring. If that was a problem, then using 1/250sec max x-sync speed instead of 1/125sec would have reduced that by 50% for no penalty.

In practice, I do not think there is too much of an issue with blurring as the actual speed of movement is very low IMO. It is nowhere near the speed of arms and legs being waved as DD says, and the OP is using speedlites with a maximum flash duration of 1/1000sec anyway. (I just checked, it's 1/1050sec with an SB800 on full power.)

Best regards,

Richard.
 
You have valid points Hoppy, and I promise to give your suggestions a go when I next have the opportunity. But trying to convince B&Gs to let me into the bedroom on their wedding night tends to be a bit of a non starter for some reason :thinking:

As it is, I'm happy the result I got was actually what I had envisaged, and the Voyeur look is pretty much there. I just wished I could have gotten the groom with a bit more altitude and flattened out. The view from the bottom of the bed would have been better too.

Ahh well, I'm fairly patient, and can wait another couple of years if necessary :)
 
I've only just found these "copy me lighting" threads, excellent work. I'm getting my hands on a SB600 flash pretty soon so I will be going back over all the techniques and trying them out. I'm loving technique #3 with the veil, looking forward to trying to replicate that one!

Question for you, all the shots you've posted so far are wedding shots, do you do any studio type work as well? If so I would love to see some of those techniques too.

All in all, thanks for sharing :)
 
Michael Sewell said:
To be honest, Karmagarda, I haven't had need for a studio as such (Brides and Grooms don't require it) and the portraits I do tend to be location work. I'll post a studio style shot for the next one, seeing as your asking
(y)
Click to expand...

You're a good man Michael! I'm looking forward to it already :)
 
Don't think for a second I've forgotton this! Have a simple flash setup now so going to get on to these soon.
 
Ok, I don't have an opportunity to do a studio shot for a while, so I decided to try this baby out first. Attempt 1 was a bit unsuccessful, so looking for advice. Kinda went like this:

1. Realised I had only 2 flashes. Not that awfully important I thought, I'll make do.
2. Set up 1 off camera to the right on 1/4 power (I think!) and put another on fill (it doesn't have a manual override on it's power so I dimmed it manually with... let's say... gels.... ahem)
3. Realise I don't have a model to use. Ok, gonna have to do this myself.
4. Get myself into place to do "the jump" thingy
5. Execute attempt 1.
6. Result: 1 broken bed and 1 very over exposed photo.

So any chance you can advise me on a) fixing a bed and b) losing some weight. I'm now off to the mirror to check out my new roundly figure that has caused this havok!

Attempt 2 has been postponed until further notice. *shuffles out to the toolshed*

:LOL:
 
Michael Sewell said:
ok, first things first.
1) toss a neutral item into exposure field (childs teddy etc) and take a test shot.
Click to expand...

Now... If I was as clever as that I wouldn't have spent the last while mending a bed! The simple ideas are always the best ones (y)
 
Ok, I said I'd go for an attempt 2... but this time taking some of your advice... and some of mine too.

1. Toned down the flash
2. Threw a test object into the "position"
3. Took a test shot
4. Returned to step 1. (but messing with iso/flash power)

Next... I decided against breaking the bed again, so just did some faffing about in front of the bed. This is what I came up with!



I pretty much killed the ambient light with the flashes which is roughly what I was aiming for. Possibly over done it though. I think I almost flattened it a bit so I might have a play with different lighting locations see what I can achieve with some better shadows.

Anyway, I must move onto the next one now!
 
Ain't bad at all, conor.
You're restricted due to the size of the room, but you managed it. The low camera angle works well as it gives an impression of greater height.
It looks like you may have relied on the self timer, which is more impressive, as it's damned hard to get the timing of the jump correct.

Last but not least, that SlimFast stuff must be incredibly good!
 
Michael Sewell said:
Ain't bad at all, conor.
You're restricted due to the size of the room, but you managed it. The low camera angle works well as it gives an impression of greater height.
It looks like you may have relied on the self timer, which is more impressive, as it's damned hard to get the timing of the jump correct.

Last but not least, that SlimFast stuff must be incredibly good!
Click to expand...

Thanks! The room isn't the biggest alright which leaves it tight to get flashes in the right places etc.

And yeah, I was relying on the timer! My flash triggers don't like the remote shutter release I use so it was unfortunately the only option. By the time I got this shot I had a fairly good timing in my head of when the shutter was going to pop.

Not sure how I'm going to have a bash at the veil shot, I'll have to try improvise with the equipment I have. Maybe I'll wait until I get a chance to try out studio one instead
 
Ah, you're correct. I didn't realise that "Strofen" isn't actually another strobe! Ok, I'll have to figure out how I can recreate that shot, although it might have to be wildly different. Even though I'm more than willing to don a wedding dress and parade around the house like a crazy cross dresser, I don't actually have one about the house!
 
I'm in the unfortunate position to have a camera shy girlfriend, and in the fortunate position to not have a wife... :cautious: I never said that!

Actually, I might convince her to stand in front of the camera, but I'd be killed if I posted them up here :LOL:
 
I can see the creativty in this type of shot and think it's going to be hard to get every thing right. Although i personally would like to see the shot in colour and post processing in an different effect i can appreicate what look you was going for. good stuff! :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top