Touch of Hollywood

paulwatkinsonphotography

paulwatkinsonphotography

Messages
3
Name
Paul watkinson
Edit My Images
No
A Touch of Hollywood
Can it be done with today’s digital cameras, (yes and no) what we have to look at is how the great Hollywood photographers from the 1920s took their images, they did not have strobe lights or high-powered lighting or even the latest digital cameras,yes they used film.
The greats had to rely on what they had and their knowledge to capture the great images of the 1920s.

What's you take on Hollywood?
 
I like them, I think they look authentic. However, there's something missing or not right with smoking number 2, not sure what though.
 
Yes I do like them - very striking - so a thumbs up from me (y)
 
They're all good but I like the first one the most. I think you've done a fantastic job.
 
Brilliant set of photos that beautifully captures the Hollywood look of the '30's and early '40's, which is one of my favourite styles of portraiture.

Although they are all excellent, if I had to rate them I would put No. 1 first for the sheer drama it invokes, No. 3 second as I really like the way you have framed her head in the parasol against the black background, and No. 2 third as her body is very slightly too square on for my taste.

Having said that, the differences between them are minor and come down to personal taste between three almost perfect photographs.
 
Have to echo everyone's comments here, great set, very reminiscent of Hollywood of the 30's & 40's

Steve
 
I think the styling, posing and processing are spot on.

However the lighting isn't quite there, I can't work out what you've used, but the right 'look' is achieved with a fresnel spot, which is the tool used at the time (light behaves the same whether hot lights or flash). On 1 and 2 you've also managed to let a lot of the hairlight spill onto the models neck.

Without a fresnel spot, the closest you can get is a gridded beauty dish, which isn't perfect but can get you close.
 
I just did some googling of the portraits of that era and would agree with Phil, the lighting on many of the 'classic' studio style images is quite hard and directional, which would point to something like a fresnel. However by no means all and I do like what you have done here as modern take on the style, with a slightly softer diffused look to the light whilst keeping the feel with the posing & styling. If you are aiming to replicate then it could be argued more work is needed to 'perfect' it, but in terms of a modern version of the style, they are rather lovely imo, especially the first 2.
 
Last edited:
paulwatkinsonphotography said:
A Touch of Hollywood
Can it be done with today’s digital cameras, (yes and no) what we have to look at is how the great Hollywood photographers from the 1920s took their images, they did not have strobe lights or high-powered lighting or even the latest digital cameras,yes they used film.
The greats had to rely on what they had and their knowledge to capture the great images of the 1920s.

What's you take on Hollywood?
Click to expand...

I like your shots, you have great control of the light. I think your light is very soft though compared to the style of the time.

Check out George Hurrell: http://georgehurrell.com/

This B&H video is very good: The '40s Glamour Portrait


The presentation is by Robert Harrington. Really nice guy and very worth looking out for, he has done a lot for B&H.
 
Phil V said:
I think the styling, posing and processing are spot on.

However the lighting isn't quite there, I can't work out what you've used, but the right 'look' is achieved with a fresnel spot, which is the tool used at the time (light behaves the same whether hot lights or flash). On 1 and 2 you've also managed to let a lot of the hairlight spill onto the models neck.

Without a fresnel spot, the closest you can get is a gridded beauty dish, which isn't perfect but can get you close.
Click to expand...

Good ideas Phil. I'd use snoots and tight grids. I saw Harrington (vid link previous post) use an opened up snoot to make a really good hair light for this style.
 
Love the first one and I am a big fan of the whole concept of the so called Hollywood look. I think it is the perfect rim lighting that defines the photographs and the first one is truly awesome. 'Lolita' by Stanley Kubrick is one of my favourites movies of all times and you can see that sort of lighting + throughout the whole movie! Give it a watch.
 
paulwatkinsonphotography said:
A Touch of Hollywood
Can it be done with today’s digital cameras, (yes and no) what we have to look at is how the great Hollywood photographers from the 1920s took their images, they did not have strobe lights or high-powered lighting or even the latest digital cameras,yes they used film.
The greats had to rely on what they had and their knowledge to capture the great images of the 1920s.

What's you take on Hollywood?
Click to expand...



So what's changed? Do great photographers no longer need that knowledge any more, or are you saying that they no longer have it? If so.. you inlcuding yourself in that? :)

Also, why make the distinction between strobes and continuous light? The quality of light would be the same from a beauty dish whether it's flash or continuous; the modelling would be identical.


Only the first one is successful and has really captured that 30s Hollywood... Cecil Beaton.. Horst P Horst feel, but it's still too soft. That last one is a million miles off what you're trying to do, sorry.

They don't have the feel of film either, and it's entirely possible to recreate the feel of film digitally if you understand film well enough. Most photographers today don't though.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top