HOME | DD
xBashtonx β Break the Chains That Bind
Published: 2009-04-28 23:07:17 +0000 UTC; Views: 2398; Favourites: 40; Downloads: 55
Redirect to original
Description
...Related content
Comments: 9
I like this series mostly I suppose for its gay theme and how tastefully you did.
I see from your gallery that you a lot of low-light work, which is rather challenging.
In this shot there is a lot of blowout, which means you used flash. If I might be so bold as to give some pointersβ¦
You want to avoid two things in flesh tones and hues. You do not want shiny or muddy. Shiny is from overexposure and muddy is from underexposure. Even worse is blowout, and to a lesser degree, burnout (depends on circumstances).
As you can see in this photo, exposed skin has almost no detail or texture.
It would be better to not use flash at all and use a studio light source with a diffuser instead. Even if you use a flash, secondary lighting will reduce blowout problems.
Since you do a lot of close-up work, I would recommend a Ring Flash, since it will give you flash along the same axis as your lens. Try to avoid using an overhead flash. If flash has to be used, used flash off to the side and use an umbrella, reflector or diffuser.
From a professional standpoint, blowout is really bad and basically renders most images with it as commercially unviable. I have been paid to repair blowout in critical photos for an ad campaign and it was very expensive, not that I am particularly expensive, but because the blowout regions have to be hand painted, dithered a bit, noise, blending magic, etc to make it look right.
Why? To begin with, blow causes reduction in Tonal Quality, as well as loss of detail in highlights and shadows. Marketing studies show that it is displeasing to most viewers, as it is glaring.
In print media, across the board from magazine, poster board, art books, newsprint, etc, you get blowout and burnout recruitment. When art is screened for printing, highlight tones closest to blowout will drop-out to zero (paper color) or blowout. Shadow tones closest to burnout drop-in to black (burnout).
When ink contacts paper, it absorbs and bleeds, spreading out. This is reduced by using engineering surfaces, such as clay, but it comes with a cost.
So it is really important to have as high a tonal quality as possible, because tonal quality drops when printed. It is best to avoid subtle shades of deep shadow, because it will all go to black anyway, or very subtle shades of very bright highlight.
One thing Professional Photographers will do in their workflow, is keep a copy of the work with unadjusted Dynamic Range. This is because it is temping to push dynamic range for web posting.
Anyway, all of this is only meant as a 3H, Hopefully Helpful Hints, LOL. As I said, your typical shots are of the very challenging kind, technically speaking.
π: 0 β©: 1
Thank you again for the great advice. The day of this shoot was my first shoot with studio lights. Before that I used neon bulbs, bathroom light and any source I was lucky to run across. Many of the shots taken were completely experimental. I have been working with them for a year now and feel i have made some improvement however I still find myself with the blowout.
I will look into the flashring you suggested and a reflector and see if this will help out my lighting issues.Ha.
π: 0 β©: 2
Although the advice given by ~xinspiredcreativity here is good, I like this particular picture exactly the way it is, blitzed above normally desirable range and high contrast. The contrast, particularly, fits the subject matter and heightens the sense of drama. There are times when the "rules" need to be broken to be creative, and this I think is one of them. Rather than a ringflash - which I don't have one of, although I've been shooting professionally for 30 years, 25 of them with studio flashes - I'd recommend bouncing your flash(es) off the ceiling, a wall, or a large white flat (like a chunk of foamcore). This will tame the blowout, greatly soften the highlights, reduce the lighting contrast, and improve the tonal range. In short, with this particular picture, it'd be totally "professionally" lit and totally boring. -J:
π: 0 β©: 0
I am really happy to hear you are experimenting. That is what will make you a step above the fray.
When I critique, it is always really dry. I do not like to give opinions on content or anything subjective. In my view, you are the artist and your choices of content, subject and in large part composition, are part of who you are.
But i can say that as a body of work, I like the quality of your work, and how you present your subjects. There is nothing ordinary about your work, which is saying something.
I see that Canon finally increased the photosite size on the sensor plate of the Canon EOS DIGITAL REBEL XTi. this improves the ISO performance, as well as color performance and Dynamic Range. Nikon and Canon were pushing the Megapixel game, with resulting loss in image quality. Nikon and now Canon are finally moving to remedy the problem. However, the XTi's t bears mentioning that XTi''s measured and visible image noise is still significantly worse than that of the CCD-based Nikon D80 for any given ISO speed.
When the time comes to upgrade cameras, consider photosite size as a prime consideration. They are the collectors of light and color information. Other than the lens, it is the most important thing about a camera.
Here is an example comparison of some SLR's:
Camera . . Photosite Size (microns) . . Smallest Optimal f/
Canon EOS 5D (12.7MP) . . . . . . . . 8.2 . . . . . . . . . f/13
Canon EOS 1D Mark III (10.1MP). . 7.4 . . . . . . . . . f/9
Canon EOS 1Ds Mark III (21.1MP) . 6.4 . . . . . . . . . f/8
Canon EOS 40D (10.1MP) . . . . . . . 5.7 . . . . . . . . . f/6.3
Nikon D3 (12.1MP) . . . . . . . . . . . . 8.4 . . . . . . . . . f/14
Nikon D700 (12.3MP) . . . . . . . . . . 8.4 . . . . . . . . . f/14
Nikon D300 (12.3MP) . . . . . . . . . . 5.5 . . . . . . . . . f/6.3
Nikon took the D300 and put the larger sensor plate of it Flagship D3 in it, to create the D700 at a fraction of the cost of the D3. I am sure Canon will be doing something similar soon, if not already.
Notice how the 21 MP Mark III has a relatively large drop in photosite size, compared to the 10MP. This is because if you hold the size of the sensor plate fixed, but have to cram more MP into it, the photosite size has to go down to make room for the added MPs.
Of course it is only a matter of time when you can get 20 MP at the higher performance, as sensor technology improves.
All the best,
matthew
π: 0 β©: 0
^^ good then hez legal
π: 0 β©: 0