Crazy random question, but do you mind telling me the full name of the model, Daphne? It's just that BEFORE make-up, she looks an awful lot like my friend called Daphne, although it's hard to tell because the after photos look radically different.
you could ask your friend Daphne if its her in these photos :-)
2010-08-19 01:11 am (UTC)
If somebody has to hold up the bag of bricks while it's counterweighting the beauty dish, you have put too many bricks in the bag :-) .
If your assistant has to choose between holding the bag of bricks, and making you a martini, fire the assistant.
the idea being that when you print the image you do a short exposure that's slightly out of focus, and then a tack sharp one right on top of it so there's a bit of a diffuse glow coming out of it -- sharp and soft at the same time.
How one piece of a sentence can make me miss the fun of darkroom techniques like nothing has done in 15 years... Mostly because, damn it, I want to go try that now! The chems would probably kill me, though. I realized way too late that even with a respirator and great ventilation I soaked in enough fumes through my eyes that I pretty-much had a permanent migraine all through college. But... my mom has stuff... and I could set up in the basement... and just... deal with it. Argh.
I do wish, however, that there was a good way in Photoshop to replicate what I did with painting Vaseline onto glass and exposing through it. I'd project the image the size I wanted it with the enlarger, and then basically paint along the contours like I was painting the image. Can't remember how I made sure the glass would line up right... Luck, I suppose.
this is such a great post. and the photos are amazing. i mean, the one straight out of the camera is amazing. wow. i love the blue hue.
Jesus, Kyle...not to make you feel bad or anything (and well you shouldn't, because it came out of your camera, after all), but i really like the ooc better than the post-produced version.
but that's subjective, and i tip my hat to an awesome photo, both versions.
Great behind-the-scenes article. Thanks!
Love seeing the before and after--would not have expected that much burning.
What a fabulous post, Kyle.
(My Pen micro 4/3 comes tomorrow, in time to take it to France. I'm so EXCITED. Thanks for the encouragement. Wish I had a fisheye to strap to it!)
(Oh and our class in November only has ONE SPACE LEFT and I have the Truckstop Waitresses, our local Derby team, lined up in case we or Kambriel need models.))
Brilliant post. Interesting and informative. Many thanks! :)
Great post, Kyle! Have you ever thought of doing online/distance ed classes? *yearn, yearn*
no, but i have thought of europe....
Excellent info, thank you.
I've used the tinting technique by setting the white ballance "incorrectly" as well but it only works in certain directions, depending on the lightsource. It would be a lot more difficult to achieve a warm effect from a flourescent lightsource, for example.
occasionally say things like "Oh baby, now shake it."
That cracked me up. :o)
I love working both with amateurs and pro models. While directing the former is rather time consuming, they tend to be more natural.
I don't want to sound too much like a drooling fanboy, but I want to thank you not only for these sorts of posts but the way you've been very open about sharing your experiences and techniques on LJ for the past several years. Your work --along with several of my friends-- was part of the kick-start I needed to go back to photography.
excellent news. (though drooling fanbois are always welcome.)
That martini comment made me crack up way too loud for 4am in a thin-walled house. Came out of nowhere. You slay me.
And agreed, many thanks for the post - I got really overwhelmed by Photoshop at first, and then I started taking pictures I actually liked (and that looked decent) and realized that I probably shouldn't need to airbrush the crap out of bees and geese and flowers; some little tweaks should do. It's good to know that digital photo doesn't need to be overly complicated. This makes much sense.
I "grew up" in the wet-darkroom era; shooting tungsten-balance film in daylight(or vice-versa)was one of the things a lot of us did for deliberate color casts (the rest did it in the enlarger). Digital makes exploring the technique so much easier - two button presses or a dropdown menu click instead of changing out rolls of film!
There are photographers who really do a lot of post work, and they can get some really eye-popping images, but for me, keeping things simple and using tools that extend or add to the basic wet techniques I know works best.
I think it's great when people are willing, even eager, to share what they know. An environment where that happens helps everyone learn new things and try new stuff, inspires new ideas, and brings everyone up to new levels.