Guidance for Shooting Basic School Portraits Please

robp

robp

Messages
423
Name
rob
Edit My Images
Yes
Hi,

I shoot thousands of action shots of children's footy each year and, because I do so and 'have a good camera', the pre-school group where my wife works has asked me to do their school photos. I would love to do this - A. for them, and B. to broaden my experience - but feel a bit lost (if only the kids were out on the grass kicking footballs around!).

All they require is basic portraits but I still want to do them as well as I possibly can.

I would be looking at a very basic set-up. Probably off-camera Speedlight at 45 degrees to the subject triggered by my D90 pop-up flash and a plain background.

Is this suitable?

Should the Speedlight have some sort of modifier fitted? Should the background be lit with a separate light? What distances should I be looking at between everything? What settings should I be looking at? Should I use a reflector? Is one light source sufficient? There is a broad range of skin tones. Would this affect the set-up?

As you can probably tell from all of the above I am blimmin confused and would very much appreciate any advice received.
 
robp said:
Hi,

I would be looking at a very basic set-up. Probably off-camera Speedlight at 45 degrees to the subject triggered by my D90 pop-up flash and a plain background.
Is this suitable?
Click to expand...

I use 4 studio lights and a hilite backup. Fast and plenty of power.
Issues you have is with one speedlight is speed - Shooting kids you need a fast refresh rate. Shooting with your speedlight will slow down especially as the batteries deplete - speedlights are not really recommended. Also one light is not great because what if you have an issue with it? You really need backups. Further, shooting with one light doesn't leave much scope for the kids moving around. You would need a decent sized modifier and with the flash far enough back you may get enough to get a fairly even exposure but then you need more power from the flash - slowing things down further. Also you need radio trriggers. Using the pop up flash is not really a good idea. It's a lot of work to take on.

robp said:
Should the Speedlight have some sort of modifier fitted?
Click to expand...
Yes - Something large to keep the light soft. Maybe something like a 36" brolly

robp said:
Should the background be lit with a separate light?
Click to expand...
Not necessarily - Depends on the look you want. Highkey is out of the question without more lights.

robp said:
What distances should I be looking at between everything?
Click to expand...
Depends on the light and modifier and background. I have my subjects 4-6 feet from the background and the light about 4-6 feet from the subjects. But I have vbery different kit.

robp said:
What settings should I be looking at?
Click to expand...
You need a decent depth of field to allow for movement of the kids. But f8 maybe ISO400 would be a start with a speedlight. Higher ISO to conserve battery power.

robp said:
Should I use a reflector? Is one light source sufficient?
Click to expand...
Reflector is hard because the kids move around -0 pre school is not normally like a school where they sit in one place. I'd say one light is not enough and you would need to invest in radio triggers too.

robp said:
There is a broad range of skin tones. Would this affect the set-up?
Click to expand...
No - You need to shoot with everything in Manual and you want to keep the lighting consistent.

robp said:
As you can probably tell from all of the above I am blimmin confused and would very much appreciate any advice received.
Click to expand...
Get reading, asking questions, and look to buy some addidional kit., It's not easy and you will need to get at least one or two more lights and a modifier
 
I've done 2 shoots for the nursery my wife works at. The shoots I did were graduation shots so the kids were about 4 years old.

On the 1st shoot I did flashgun and 60cm softbox camera right and reflector camera left.

On the second shoot I did flashgun on camera with bounce only.

Both scenarios were based on equipment available at the time plus the location.

Both shoots had to be indoors due to weather otherwise my plan was to do them outside and maybe only use a touch of fill flash.

With your current setup I would be looking for a modifier of sorts or bounce flash if the ceiling is low enough and not coloured of any sort.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Jim - Thank you so much for your very detailed reply. There's a lot of stuff there (for example, gear breaking down, suitable depth of field to compensate for kids moving and refresh rates) that I hadn't even thought about. On the point about lighting the background, I assumed this had to be done to avoid shadows. And I thought I'd be seating the kids close to it. Is the shadow problem solved by having them 4-6ft away from it? Or is that all down to positioning the lights correctly?

Stuart - thank you for your advice. Sounds like a very similar situation to mine. Which shoot gave the best results?
I think bounce will be out of the question because the ceiling is rather high. However, I'm going there over half term to check the room out and so I can test that then.

I would like to take this side of my photography further and also think that this particular shoot will become regular and so want to put a bit of money into it. Is something like the Interfit EX150 Mark II - 2 Head Kit a suitable and sensible first step into studio stuff? http://www.jessops.com/online.store...50-mark-ii-2-head-kit-int182--74367/show.html

Also, there's a large window in the room but it's frosted. Is the ambient light from it something I should experiment with during my half term visit or is it advisable to stick with camera operated lighting?

Thank you again for your time

Rob
 
Sorry, another question.

Should I set the WB to flash or Auto?
 
Out of the two shoots I did the one with bounced flash came out better but that was due to clean background and a low white ceiling.

If I was to do it again I would rock up with the lencarta heads and bqckground kit for best results.

Check out the ambient light first, you might find it will serve your needs without flash intervention.

The interfit kit is a good way into studio flash the only limitations will be modifiers. Interfit do not use standard s-fit or elinchrom adaptors so when you want to shape the light more than just softboxes or umbrellas you end up buying into more interfit products.

As for white balance. If you shoot RAW it makes no odds as you can change in post.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
robp said:
Sorry, another question.

Should I set the WB to flash or Auto?
Click to expand...

Shoot in raw and that will give you more flexibility regarding WB. Also useful, if lighting is staying constant. to take a shot of a grey card and use to sort WB in post.
 
stupar said:
The interfit kit is a good way into studio flash the only limitations will be modifiers. Interfit do not use standard s-fit or elinchrom adaptors so when you want to shape the light more than just softboxes or umbrellas you end up buying into more interfit products.
Click to expand...

Are you sure? I was under the impression their EX range stuff was s-fit pre mark 2 and Elinchrom after that.
 
I could be wrong and maybe getting confused with the Mk1's
 
stupar said:
I could be wrong and maybe getting confused with the Mk1's
Click to expand...

The EX mark 1's use s-fit (it's why I eventually ended up with Bowens kit o_O), I think both mark 2 and 3 use Elinchrom's fitting (but don't hold me to that). It's one of the things I like about their kits that they let you cheaply enter into more... robust equipment. I don't mean to detract from your point though, making sure you're getting a standard fitting is important.
 
simonbarker said:
The EX mark 1's use s-fit (it's why I eventually ended up with Bowens kit o_O), I think both mark 2 and 3 use Elinchrom's fitting (but don't hold me to that). It's one of the things I like about their kits that they let you cheaply enter into more... robust equipment. I don't mean to detract from your point though, making sure you're getting a standard fitting is important.
Click to expand...

As far as I can see from the interfit webpage the Mk1, 2 & 3 heads all use an EX fitting meaning interfit only accessories. Certainly the Mk2 description confirms that. I think it is the stellar and venus models that uses the S fit.

Both statements below lifted from interfit website

Model
EX150 MKII
Fuse rating
6.3 amps
Bayonet fitting
"EX" Type enables all the current EX fittings accessories to be used

"Using the tried and tested EX Bayonet fitting, the EX150MIII allows a wide range of accessories to be used such as Softboxes, Beauty dishes and many more light shapers to obtain that perfect moment"
 
Last edited by a moderator:
robp said:
Sorry, another question.

Should I set the WB to flash or Auto?
Click to expand...
As was already mentioned... shoot raw... but shoot a grey card so you've got a reference point in post.
 
One of my Professional photography jobs was with two 'School Photography' firms 'H TEMPEST' of St Ives in Cornwall then 'Chapcolor' of Coulsdon , Surrey. 'H Tempest' had an AGFA enlarger set up and did all the Groups on 6x9 format cameras -- I was not allowed to 'take' photos as I had to go around schools trying to 'Book' them for the regular blokes and as I was not very successful with 'chat-up' lines didn't book enough so 'got the boot' -- then on answering another ad for 'Outdoor Photographers' it turned out to be another School Photo outfit !! -- Well, they had a lab in Coulsdon, and Mr Chaplin ( no relation to Charlie) and his wife ran it -- they had a 'technician' permanently
'hidden away' in a darkroom which was 'off limits' as Mr Chaplin said it was all 'Secret' what they did -- well they had a huge Glazing machine outside and everyone was breathing in the FORMALIN FUMES from the prints as they dried off the glazer as 'Resin - Coated Paper' was not invented then -- I had to drive all the way up to SCOTLAND where they had most of their business except ONCE where I had to go to a very small HEATHROW Airport, park my Austin A35 car for about 5 shillings and walk to the turbo-pop aircraft which took me to Edinburgh where I was met --- Chaplin had a 'Home-Made' Camera with Meccano parts on it taking 50 feet bulk 'Gevacolor' negative film a 75mm ex-RAF lens and a huge Langham Flash which was mounted on the top -- when you took a photo of a Scottish kid -( we lined them up 800 at a time ! ) it went 'FLASH ' !!! and almost exploded then you wound on the Meccano Set winder and it went 'CLUNK' ready for the next kid !
One time I was sent to GLASGOW -- well they had a 'Hotel' in a terrace they used and I would see Sailors with 'Young Ladies' knocking on the door in a 'special way' and let in BUT I never saw them at Breakfast -----
 
sunnyside_up said:
The OP isn't a PRO schools photographer.
Click to expand...

I know that otherwise they would not be asking here. Anybody that shoots volume for a living has no choice but to get it right in camera and if they can not do that they should not do the job. It is all a case of time and money as the prices you can charge do not make a RAW workflow wothwhile.

Mike
 
mike weeks said:
I know that otherwise they would not be asking here. Anybody that shoots volume for a living has no choice but to get it right in camera and if they can not do that they should not do the job. It is all a case of time and money as the prices you can charge do not make a RAW workflow wothwhile.

Mike
Click to expand...
Perhaps... But the OP doesn't shoot volume for a living. We're only talking about giving him the best options for a successful outcome.
 
I still think you're missing the point.
 
I agree with Beth.
The OP has not mentioned workflow and the nature of it sounds like it isn't going to intervene with any other job they may have on in which case if they want to shoot RAW and batch edit afterwards because time allows then I don't see what the problem is.
 
robp said:
Jim - Thank you so much for your very detailed reply. There's a lot of stuff there (for example, gear breaking down, suitable depth of field to compensate for kids moving and refresh rates) that I hadn't even thought about. On the point about lighting the background, I assumed this had to be done to avoid shadows. And I thought I'd be seating the kids close to it. Is the shadow problem solved by having them 4-6ft away from it? Or is that all down to positioning the lights correctly?
Click to expand...

The shadows will be the opposite dirtection of your light - If they are sitting (I think you will be lucky to get that) then easier - Light at 45 degrees, fill light on camera axis (behind you high) and you should not see the shadow behind. Practice this before you shoot it. Light distance to background will affect how bright the background is.

robp said:
I would like to take this side of my photography further and also think that this particular shoot will become regular and so want to put a bit of money into it.

Is something like the Interfit EX150 Mark II - 2 Head Kit a suitable and sensible first step into studio stuff? http://www.jessops.com/online.store...50-mark-ii-2-head-kit-int182--74367/show.html

Also, there's a large window in the room but it's frosted. Is the ambient light from it something I should experiment with during my half term visit or is it advisable to stick with camera operated lighting?

Thank you again for your time

Rob
Click to expand...

One thing I wioll say though is get some training first - You really need to know what you are doing. How would you deal with the direct sun streaming through that window? Sure we can give advice here but really get some training in first (before you throw away money on kit).
 
velonoir said:
The problem is that OP isn't a professional school/nursery photographer and this irks some PRO photographers. How dare he tackle something new and try to learn from the experience.:runaway:
Click to expand...
Odd, all I've seen from pro photographers offering advice and help.

The 'debate' over whether the OP should be expecting to handle the job 'professionally' wasn't started by a 'pro' but by someone who thought they were being helpful (and almost certainly weren't).

What 'irks' pro photographers, is when someone comes to to ask for advice of 'pros', and non-pros feel the need to stick an oar in for the sake of 'entertainment' or an argument.

There's a right way of doing the job and the OP has been given great advice from pros, in the OP's words he wants to make a good job of it and get repeat work, and it's a direction he wants to move in. Why is it helpful to suggest he should waste time on an unnecessarily complicated workflow.
 
Not sure if what any of phil has said is directed at me or not (hard to tell)
If so I apologise and retract any advice I gave.
 
mike weeks said:
I know that otherwise they would not be asking here. Anybody that shoots volume for a living has no choice but to get it right in camera and if they can not do that they should not do the job. It is all a case of time and money as the prices you can charge do not make a RAW workflow wothwhile.

Mike
Click to expand...

Can you offer some advice for how to get it right in camera. I'm interested how its done, guess so would OP. Are we talking setup (studio on location) shoot grey card set custom WB on that. Then shoot Jpeg? Or something more complicated?
 
velonoir said:
The problem is that OP isn't a professional school/nursery photographer and this irks some PRO photographers. How dare he tackle something new and try to learn from the experience.:runaway:
Click to expand...

Imagine an amateur brain surgeon trying something new and getting it wrong, that would irk professional brain surgeons, but that is not the way that they do it. They get advice and practice where it will not cause an issue. I often tackle new areas of photography, but what I do is make sure that when I need those skills in a professional environment that I have already learnt them. Shooting in RAW and getting it right in Photoshop is not a professional approach.

I have taught a lot of photographers many aspects of photography and continue to do so and one of the things that I find is that many want to be a full time professional before they actually understand their camera - you break it down in to manageable steps and each photographer has different sized steps. Explaining that the photographer should be achieving this in camera is known as target setting - a teaching technique.

I have shot pre-school and one thing you can guarantee is that the shots you like are not the ones the parents like. If you have to do lots of conversion work you are wasting time. If you have to ask if you need some form of reflector on a speedlight you are a long way from being prepared for this type of work.

1. You need a quick recycle time and soft light i.e. a studio light
2. 1 light will not be enough
3. Good lights have good colour consistency, pre-set white balance before first image
4. Lock Aperture/shutter speed
5. Use a lightmetter and learn how that relates to camera setting (you may need to under or over expose) and allows you to repeat much easier
6. Pre-school often relate to women much better than men
7. Express way to learn this is to do a course with Daryl

Mike
 
Thank you very much to everybody for your technical advice. There’s lots here that I hadn’t considered and that I wasn’t even aware of.

Just to qualify my position, I am not a pro photographer in that the bulk of my income is not from photography. However, by doing this particular shoot I will not be taking any work from a pro photographer. The pre-school would not even have bothered if it wasn’t for the fact that they know me, I am friends with the boss, they know I’m into photography, they reckon I ‘have a good camera’ etc.

As I mentioned at the start, they simply fancy getting me in to do some basic shots. It’s me who a. wants to do it as well as I can (because that’s in my nature) and b. wants to learn from the experience with a view to maybe branching into this type of photography in future.

The RAW debate is interesting. Thank you for bringing this up. It had never crossed my mind to use RAW. I feel that the RAW v JPEG issue comes down to available time more than anything else. As Mike said: workflow. I always use JPEG due to time limitations. I shoot a couple of hundred action shots of kids’ footy each Sunday. I normally stick around 70 per week on my website for parents to view/purchase, send five or six to the local rag and make them all available to the local kids’ league. JPEG is the only way for me because of the deadline at the local rag and the fact that I have a day job. Therefore the whole shemozzle has to be sorted after tea on Sunday and after work on Monday.

Oh, and please don’t get me started on the old pro v amateur debate. Photography isn’t the only trade in which that’s an issue, believe me!

Thing is, we’ve all got a right to (legally) earn a living. Even those less qualified than us, those who have fewer overheads cos they still live rent free with mummy and daddy, or who buy inferior cheap gear and therefore have lower costs even though the gear will do a s***e job in their s***e hands. Oh dear, a feel a rant beginning. I’ll shut up now lol.

All the advice is much appreciated, thank you, and has given me lots to go on. I’ve got a month to play with so I’ll be experimenting between now and then and am also taking my kit to the pre-school this week to check out the angles etc.
 
Last edited:
lol. tummymude. I like that. Oops I forgot there was an obscenity filter in action.
 
mike weeks said:
Imagine an amateur brain surgeon trying something new and getting it wrong, that would irk professional brain surgeons, but that is not the way that they do it. They get advice and practice where it will not cause an issue. I often tackle new areas of photography, but what I do is make sure that when I need those skills in a professional environment that I have already learnt them. Shooting in RAW and getting it right in Photoshop is not a professional approach.
Click to expand...

That's probably why you need to spend several years training before they'll let you be a surgeon while anyone can pick up a camera and get paid for it. Not to mention there's plenty of pro togs running around who for as much as they know also spout total crap on some subjects (and no that's not a jab at anyone on here).

For whatever it's worth, I agree wholeheartedly with the rest of your post though.
 
Tintin124 said:
Can you offer some advice for how to get it right in camera. I'm interested how its done, guess so would OP. Are we talking setup (studio on location) shoot grey card set custom WB on that. Then shoot Jpeg? Or something more complicated?
Click to expand...

Light correctly, meter correctly, job done.
 
Oh dear, I appear to have ruffled some feathers. Phil you are entitled to your opinion and I broadly agree with your perspective. You should note that I said "some" Pro photographers, not all. I wasn't making an especially serious point just an observation of the attitude some people take on this forum when speaking to others who are less knowledgable or experienced. Maybe you've never noticed it but I have, frequently.
As for comparing the learning prior to application aspect of brain surgery to photography Mike... Well I just about choked on my tea. Really...Brain surgery... Photography... I fear you have made rather a stretch. The consequences of having a longer workflow due to shooting in a more cumbersome file format/not having things spot on in camera aren't even comparable to a car mechanic using the wrong engine oil let alone an untrained surgeon prodding around in someone's brain.
I fully agree with the point though. Learning as much as you can in a safe environment before doing something in an important one is usually the most sensible approach. That said I dare say that many successful photographers have learned plenty from working well outside their comfort zone.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top