Ollie "Hood"

pjm1

pjm1

Messages
4,182
Name
Paul
Edit My Images
Yes
Just a bit of fun - messing around with a different light setup. Also encountering the "fun" that is shooting someone wearing glasses! Annoyingly, the shots I took of him without glasses weren't posed as well.

Comments on how to improve the setup would be welcome.

34340925425_6c53de14bd_b.jpg
 
I find the shape of the light behind him a little unusual but I love everything else about this shot.
 
There is a lot to like about this image. The position the shot was taken from is working, and I like the idea that you've done something interesting with the lighting. The choices you have are many and in this shot, quite a lot of what comes across is about the background and the prominently lit area and the shaping of that light. On the down side the light fall off is very stark and giving rise to a big variation in how the colour saturation is delivered throughout the images while at the same time there are areas bordering on burn out. There are also areas where the subject has little or no separation from the background to the extent that on of the subject's legs appears have some of the leg absent in the shot. You also have some colour from the floor bouncing onto the lower part of the background.

I'm wondering how this would have looked, had the lighting isolated your subject from the background more and had the subject been lit with a more graduated fall off in light, if what you have is what you were after then yes you have it. Personally I'd have made the shot more about the subject and less about everything else that's going on in the image and tried to have avoided the colour interference in the lower areas of the subject's clothing and been more definite if wanting to create shadow which is actually shadow rather than the under exposed look.

Regards

Tim
 
Thanks @TrueLee478 - the shape of the background light is particularly odd. I was just using a monolight with a snoot fitted (ungridded) so not sure why it threw such a strange shape. That's normally my job on the dance floor!

Tim / @Phrasemaker - thank you so much for the detailed crit, which is exactly what I was after. I'll concede to being reasonable pleased about certain aspects of the shot, but if I did it again, I'd think about adding a rim light from frame left to separate his body better.

You're spot on with spending "too much" time and effort on the background rather than the subject. I took inspiration (aka. attempted to copy) from this setup, the effect of which I really liked:
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_sMNd1s6Bds&index=1&list=PLxmPaqiQlFjnn83nnDqX4-Uj3xwSBoliB


The fall-off of the light is a really interesting one and tells me I shouldn't just default to "big softbox, very close". Since I'm after a more contrastly look, I think the shot would have worked with the softbox (which was as big as Ollie) being maybe a foot or two higher up, which would have given a far more subtle fall-off as it travelled down his body. It was gridded so I should have been able to avoid too much spill behind.

It was fun to do and best of all gives me loads to learn from - so thank you for the feedback and suggestions, all of which are taken onboard (y)
 
pjm1 said:
Thanks @TrueLee478 - the shape of the background light is particularly odd. I was just using a monolight with a snoot fitted (ungridded) so not sure why it threw such a strange shape. That's normally my job on the dance floor!

Tim / @Phrasemaker - thank you so much for the detailed crit, which is exactly what I was after. I'll concede to being reasonable pleased about certain aspects of the shot, but if I did it again, I'd think about adding a rim light from frame left to separate his body better.

You're spot on with spending "too much" time and effort on the background rather than the subject. I took inspiration (aka. attempted to copy) from this setup, the effect of which I really liked:
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_sMNd1s6Bds&index=1&list=PLxmPaqiQlFjnn83nnDqX4-Uj3xwSBoliB


The fall-off of the light is a really interesting one and tells me I shouldn't just default to "big softbox, very close". Since I'm after a more contrastly look, I think the shot would have worked with the softbox (which was as big as Ollie) being maybe a foot or two higher up, which would have given a far more subtle fall-off as it travelled down his body. It was gridded so I should have been able to avoid too much spill behind.

It was fun to do and best of all gives me loads to learn from - so thank you for the feedback and suggestions, all of which are taken onboard (y)
Click to expand...

Haha
 
I like it a lot. There are minor tweaks you could make to the lighting but I think bigger gains would come from a different setting. It's a bit odd in a studio setup but maybe doing something similar outdoors could be a bit special? e.g. lit like this but in woods at sunset?
 
juggler said:
I like it a lot. There are minor tweaks you could make to the lighting but I think bigger gains would come from a different setting. It's a bit odd in a studio setup but maybe doing something similar outdoors could be a bit special? e.g. lit like this but in woods at sunset?
Click to expand...

Thanks Simon. Cracking idea to replicate something outside. Not sure what could be used as a background to get the light effect... unless we had smoke!! Which is another good idea...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top