kerfree Loc: Sebago and Sanibel

Thank you JR1. I have big dreams and few cooperative models :), so far!

rpavich Loc: West Virginia

Great! and don't forget...email me if you have questions...I don't have a life so I'll be monitoring the email :)

kerfree Loc: Sebago and Sanibel

Thank you Radioman for both the encouragement and for showing me what photoshop can do. Photoshop is another this I still need to learn...

kerfree Loc: Sebago and Sanibel

I totally agree Andrea! I guess I need to find a more discrete way to hide the trigger : )

kerfree Loc: Sebago and Sanibel

:thumbup: :thumbup:

ole sarg Loc: south florida

IMO the most difficult is portraiture. One has to really get to know the subject they are shooting in order to bring out their qualities.

The technical stuff will come with practice, the skill will come with studying your subject.

rpavich Loc: West Virginia

There is a LOT of truth to this....have you seen Peter Hurley's videos?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nF-y8xjR9HE

Take 5 Cinema Loc: Canoe BC

Everyone has an idea of what is good. Personally, I would NEVER use flash - hate it with a passion. Bought a flash 15 yeras ago and rarely used it.

I do movies now, but it all boils down to lighting - that is the master stroke. Some of the greatest cinematographers use only 3-4 lights or turn their subjects to get that lighting right. I am a live view, shallow DoF (wide open aperture type) get it right from the get go with available lighting type of guy.

Despite what others talk about metering - I suppose it has some merits, but try to keep it simple and for now at least, forget about metering. Sounds crazy - it isn't. Stick with live view mode and what you see is what you will get. Set your shots up so that they give you warmth and good vibes. All of these were taken with available lighting - it is all about positioning and expression on the subject. The is the story really. And the right background - so many backgrounds can either make or break a good picture.

It is NOT about all this techno wizardry, light meters, fancy cameras - that is almost a crutch. Good cameras and optics will make a fine picture truly outstanding and give you some nice tools to work with, but the truth is that most don't really know how to take good pictures - thinking that a hot camera and $4,000 will make you a super photographer. Might help about 5%.

Hell, any of these could have been taken with a smartphone!! that is IF and only IF you know HOW and WHEN to take that picture - that is the secret. that is the secret.

Don't have your subjects act for you - never really works - people try too hard. Get them natural and real - not artificial as most portraits tend to do. The pictures you posted were not that good (hey - I am honest, not nasty - you want to improve, then you need to listen to honest answers so you know WHAT NOT to do) because she tried waaaay too hard and it looks unnatural.

All of these were taken in the moment - not one was 'posed'. And they look wonderful.

Cheers,
Take 5

A happy biker at a rally - took maybe 4 shots and deliberately positioned him to have a black background and strong side lighting - all natural NO FLASH, no additional lights. Then I waited for that exact moment on his face - kept talking to him to loosen him up, unwind, be natural and laughed and joked with him while I have my canon 5D with Hoodman live view finder stuck on my face. Live view is the only way to go. BTW, these lenses are all Zeiss MANUAL lenses. Not one aspect of this picture was automatic. Nada.


These newly weds are having a nice moment together. The lens was a longer focal length to give them some 'privacy' so they have no idea they are being photographed. The snow background is ideal and the subjects to the far left do something wonderful for the picture. You are drawn to it.


The Tuba Player. Zeiss 180, f2.8. Fully manual. Unposed - a candid run and gun shot. I was supposed to be playing my trumpet, but during a rest break, I shot both my first trumpet player and the Tuba further away from my chair. Put it down and resumed playing my part!! I took 2 shots only within 5 secs. Cool, eh? This was edited in LightRoom 3 and gave it a vignette background to give that portrait look. Pretty much unedited outside of B&W.

BobHartung Loc: Bettendorf, IA

Have a look at this on demand tutorial from the Sekonic web site. Many others are also available. Good luck!

http://www.sekonic.com/Classroom/Webinars/live-control-light-part-3-studio-portrait-lighting.aspx

Bob

rpavich Loc: West Virginia

Thanks for posting that...that new-fangled-techno-gizmo-wizardry-crutch-hocus-pocus-voodoo stuff...lol...

rpavich Loc: West Virginia

I certainly hope after this amazing verbose spewage that the OP isn't too bummed about doing the right thing and buying a meter or trying to create good portraits....

Wow....

rgcarter9284

I agree with Andrea ( fingers cut off and hand chopped off right at the joint) and with those who praised the response from rpavich. It's rare for someone to take the time and effort to really help someone with details, precise steps, etc. Responders mean well, but explanations are usually not expressed clearly. By the way, kerfee, adding a hair light will, I think, improve your portraits appreciably. That's a light above subject's head level, and behind the subject, which illuminates the top back of the head/hair. The first 2 portraits were fine, I thought. I was expecting portraits which were clearly flawed, but no, except for the underexposed one (the third one). You might also reconsider cutting your subject so close to crotch level. The general rule is to not cut through joints, but it's generally OK to cut through the middle of a limb. Regarding the dark areas between your cheeks and hair, you might add a touch of light there, just enough to bring out a hint of detail. Lightroom, among other apps, can do this. I, meanwhile, will reconsider my vocabulary: too much cutting and chopping. Not so comfortable with it. Yes, I'm from Texas, but I'm not related to Leatherface ("Texas Chainsaw Massacre"), and I have nothing to do with that clan. "Truncate" might work, but maybe I should just stick with the even more euphemistic "crop". I'm Rusty (That's my name, too), and I have no reason to hide as I'm in the ATX (Austin, TX). I don't even know how to insert a smiley face, so I can't account for it. I certainly wouldn't have placed it adjacent to the word "massacre", as if that were a thing to be happy about.

Take 5 Cinema Loc: Canoe BC

Cameras have built in light meters. All a light meter does is tell you what the exposure should be - whether it be avearged, spots, selected areas etc. What you do with it is entirely to you. For instance, you can measure everything from the darkest to the lightest and find out it can be way above the dynamic range of your camera. So what you do with it means either you can clip the highlights or shadows OR adjust the lighting to make sure the blacks aren't too black and soften the hightlights. OR you can put on filters to reduce the contrast, OR a polarizer to reduce the glare, OR leave it alone and let the blacks get blown out. That is the techno wizardry stuff - and ya, sure it is important.

But the bottom line, is that if your subject looks like crap, then no matter what exposure setting you have, you will still have a crappy picture - just exposed right!!

What I am saying, is to focus on the essentials first and foremost - getting the right pose and the lighting to match. The camera can expose it perfectly. In live view, it is ALREADY set properly when you can see it properly. Knowhadimean? Don't be offended - but instead work on the lighting and the subject. Keep it simple. Make sure the background is going to complement the picture, get the aperture right, get rid of clutter, keep the subject natural and 'unposed' so to speak, tell a story in the expression of the face - that is the hardest part of all.

I once had to transfer 112 pictures of a family reunion to a disk for a senior friend of mine. He had just bought a Canon 7D and expensive zoom lens etc. NOT ONE picture was any good. They were awful. I didn't have the heart to tell him. He did not know how to take good pictures. The camera has all the techno stuff built in. But he relied on that stuff and simply did not take good pictures. Few can - I mean really outstanding stuff. The kind that your friends will want to look at over and over again and make them emotionally moved rather than squirm and quickly go through them because they are bored. Happens way too often.

What I am trying to tell you is to focus on essentials - then you can advance later in if you need to, but with all the techno stuff already built into the cameras, you are 99% there. Sekonic wants to sell lightmeters. I am saying you need to put your priorities where it counts first.

Another thing I might add - not trying to piss anyone off with their addiction to lightmeters, but the reality is that you need to tell a story and they come in fleeting moments - few and far between. You must be ready in a heartbeat to capture it. KNOW WHEN to take that picture. This takes practice. I keep my camera pasted on my face and wait, like a sniper for that right moment and then - POW, got it. You have NO time for lightmeters - really! See it, wait for it, shoot it.

Cheers,
Take 5

Here is a 'portrait' of a singer. I deliberately put his eyes in the shadows, the rim light is perfect, he is moving his guitar quickly - so shows action, his expression tells a story. 2 powerrful stage lights from the front l and r only. Background was as black as I could make it. (no house lights at all and high contrast settings). Zeiss 180 at 2.8, 1/60. See: keep it simple and natural, it always works best. BTW, this is live view. I rarely use optical VF anymore. And in order to get crystal clear LV, I use a Hoodman magnifier that attaches to the camera and flips onto the LCD - magnifies about 3X. It is not as sharp as the Optical, but I see EXACTLY what I want to shoot - exposure is already set automically - thus negating any need for external lightmeters.


I have used this before and is worth repeating: The Trumpet Player. Zeiss 180, f2.8. This was taken about 5-6' away, but the image is razor sharp, super clean, and has a warmth about it that is hard to explain. The DoF is razor thin. The bright backgrounds were too distracting, so I opened that lens WIDE open to 2.8 and blurred out the background thus giving a wonderful effect. I had to quickly reset the !SO to 1250 and the shutter to 1/60 to get the exposure right - did it all in about 5-7 secs. NO Flash, NO extra lights, NO lightmeter - ALL in liveview. See - it works. Should mention that this was 'developed' in Lightroom 3. Not much, just a bit of contrast and B&W. What you see here is pretty much out of the camera. see - it can be done. What I am trying to illustrate is that you need to tell a damn good story in 1 shot. That is where it takes skill. The story here is a trumpet player playing hard, his cheek muscles, taught, concentration is high, focus is in the playing, the age and character is obvious. It draws you to the picture. That is what you want to attempt. Get your audience to look and relook at the picture.

rpavich Loc: West Virginia

I know all that...I was just wondering why, in a thread where a person was asking for help on how to use her newly purchased light meter, you clogged it up with 10,000 words that were off topic and didn't help her to use her meter one bit better...

That's all.

Take 5 Cinema Loc: Canoe BC

Simple - because she was on the wrong track. I was trying to steer her back on course. People can get caught up in this techno stuff and it completely throws them off. IMHO, she was being thrown off. I aimed to set her priorities right, scrap the light meter, and do the right thing in well thought out, detailed, understandable explanation, far less than the alleged 10,000 cluttered words. I might be wrong, but I doubt it.

Take 5