God, that was HARD! - PICTURES ADDED!

The23rdman

The23rdman

Suspended / Banned
Messages
13,582
Name
Dean
Edit My Images
No
Just back from my first paid gig. It was shooting a pilates and personal training studio in Leeds. I found myself outgunned and really struggling to find the right balance for the flash shots.

The trouble was the ambient was metering at around 1/10 or a little less at f5.6. I had to shoot a large studio with trainers on big pilates machines. The studio was tungsten lit from ceiling spots and wall uplighters. I've not checked the photos yet so can't be sure what sort of mess I've made of it!

Saying all this I REALLY enjoyed it. I did find it difficult to direct the trainers though and they often found themselves holding really tough poses when I'd finished shooting. Poor b****r. ;)
 
Did wonder how you had got on with mixed tungsten and flash and people moving. Tricky isn't it? lol

You don't half pick them!
 
A couple of diffrent ways I would go about this will be interested to see what you did
 
AliB said:
Did wonder how you had got on with mixed tungsten and flash and people moving. Tricky isn't it? lol

You don't half pick them!
Click to expand...

Don't I?!

zilly said:
A couple of diffrent ways I would go about this will be interested to see what you did
Click to expand...

TBH, I went with ambient on as many shots as I could get away with. Time was short and they wanted four rooms shot from different angles, trainers on the machines and portraits done. All this while working around classes!

Baptism of fire anyone?

I'll post some shots later.
 
all I can saw is RAW!
interested to see the pics when you get them sorted.
I would have bounced a flash off the nearest wall to get some wide semi ambient light

good luck with the PP!
 
I always shoot raw. bouncing was out of the question due to the colour of the walls and ceiling. The original shoot had casting issues because of this. I felt I really needed at least two flashes or studio lights to do it properly.
 
The23rdman said:
I always shoot raw. bouncing was out of the question due to the colour of the walls and ceiling. The original shoot had casting issues because of this. I felt I really needed at least two flashes or studio lights to do it properly.
Click to expand...


Just make sure you correct the right thing - I spent ages trying to get rid of a green cast on the white walls of a place I did a shoot, only to later discover one of the walls was a sickly "fluorescent" green colour :bonk::lol:
 
Flash In The Pan said:
Just make sure you correct the right thing - I spent ages trying to get rid of a green cast on the white walls of a place I did a shoot, only to later discover one of the walls was a sickly "fluorescent" green colour :bonk::lol:
Click to expand...

Haha! I did that trying to place an umbrella yesterday. Didn't matter when I put it of how I spread the flash I could see the shadow...until I realised it was the shadow from an uplighter! :bonk:
 
Okay, here you go. These are the shots I got from yesterday. Please tell me how I could imporve them and how you might use strobes to make them better and allow me to shoot at a higher shutter speed that 1/10!
1)

2)

3)

4)

5)

6)
 
7)

8)

9)

10)

11)
 
Even thought the shots are good they are all a Little under exposed.

You may need two or three lights to brighten the whole scene. I know the gym has down lighters which do not provide masses of light.

In shot 6 you cannot see where the two pairs of trousers are separated. shot 8 the tee shirt of the lady in the middle just disappears into the 2 tee shirts behind.
 
tiler65 said:
Even thought the shots are good they are all a Little under exposed.

You may need two or three lights to brighten the whole scene. I know the gym has down lighters which do not provide masses of light.

In shot 6 you cannot see where the two pairs of trousers are separated. shot 8 the tee shirt of the lady in the middle just disappears into the 2 tee shirts behind.
Click to expand...


:agree:

You need more lights, a copy of Kirk Tuck's Minimalist Lighting would well worth getting too, it's full of actual scenarios (complete with diagrams) where he has used speedlights to light similar projects.


Click on the pic

 
I know they're far, FAR from perfect. I see faults in all of them. As for exposure, I purposely underexposed them to try and keep some of the atmosphere they have in the place with the low light conditions. If I processed them a stop or two higher it'd look like a fully lit gym. That wasn't the brief. :)

God, I know I needed more speedlights. I've had a poverty wizard and umbrella for all of, um, one week! All I got wasa chance to practice a bit at home then it was straight into the lions ***.

I did learn an awful lot though...

1) Take LOTS of pictures. LOTS!!

2) Take control of the shoot or people end up faffing around.

3) Smile and be courteous.

4) Some people just don't know how to smile. ;)

5) Get more light!

6) Scope out an area for portraits and get your rig setup before calling peeps in.

7) Have fun! It's better than working for a living!

Any more advice??
 
Flash In The Pan said:
:agree:

You need more lights, a copy of Kirk Tuck's Minimalist Lighting would well worth getting too, it's full of actual scenarios (complete with diagrams) where he has used speedlights to light similar projects.


Click on the pic

Click to expand...

Thanks for the linky!
 
They look a good set to me, I see the ambience rather than outright underexposure.

Given the similarity of positions between the subjects in the first couple of shots, you could always try picking one person out with flash and having the others more as silhouettes, mimicking the first. The other thing you can resort to in mixed lighting is mono, although clearly it's not always an option.

The other thing is with the portraits, if you took loads of pics it might be worth seeing if you've got one that reveals the eyes better than in 9 and 10. The poses are fine, and you clearly managed to build rapport and get people on side, just the eyes in those two look too dark.

Decent set, doesn't really betray the fact it was your first paid gig
 
Portraits all need cropped at the top - this framoing may be caused by you using the centre focus area in the camera and not re-framing? the gyn shots could be selectively brighted in PP - would improve them a lot.
 
AndWhyNot said:
They look a good set to me, I see the ambience rather than outright underexposure.

Given the similarity of positions between the subjects in the first couple of shots, you could always try picking one person out with flash and having the others more as silhouettes, mimicking the first. The other thing you can resort to in mixed lighting is mono, although clearly it's not always an option.

The other thing is with the portraits, if you took loads of pics it might be worth seeing if you've got one that reveals the eyes better than in 9 and 10. The poses are fine, and you clearly managed to build rapport and get people on side, just the eyes in those two look too dark.

Decent set, doesn't really betray the fact it was your first paid gig
Click to expand...

Thanks. Yes, I agree about the portraits. Unfortunately I didn't take anywhere near enough shots. (see above!) These are the pick.

I'd love to use a bit of mono, but not an option here really. I did use a very subtle true HDR on the shots of the rooms alone.

awp said:
Portraits all need cropped at the top - this framoing may be caused by you using the centre focus area in the camera and not re-framing? the gyn shots could be selectively brighted in PP - would improve them a lot.
Click to expand...

Yes, true re portraits. I've never done this with lights before and don't really know how they should be cropped.

I was just coming home from picking Wifey up when I had the same thought re the gym shots. I did bring up Jon's face a little, but can see some more work would help.
 
for the shots using the machines, i would have definetely added a flash into there and picked out the demo person. softened, gelled and mixed with the ambient it would have been a definete improvement and been simple to do.

all look very dark in the shadows, but thats probably my work pc monitor.

good effort on the whole though, you seem to have shown off the place great and the poses/frames are pretty great.
 
Thanks, Jamie. Which shots do you mean? Do you mean the ones with the three trainers or the guy and girl on the bench?
 
intresting good attempt

What I would do would be to start by bring the ambiant up

Not going to re write the bible but check out THIS to give you a understanding on how to do it. Problem is thats 5500k flash light which is cold so you could then use CTO's to balance it back to the color of the ambient light.

That may be enough how ever if not you could then look at using another couple of lights to add some highlights and key to the models.

In the first picture you could do this by framming much tighter to give you some space to light from if you shot the frame so that the three machines filled the width of the frame you could then add some fill from the left to really brighten up their shadows.

With the portraiture as people have said read Kirk Tuck's Minimalist Lighting it'll explain everything

hope that helps
 
zilly said:
intresting good attempt

Thank you

What I would do would be to start by bring the ambiant up

Not going to re write the bible but check out THIS to give you a understanding on how to do it. Problem is thats 5500k flash light which is cold so you could then use CTO's to balance it back to the color of the ambient light.

Yes, Strobist.com is my bible. The issue was getting enough light evenly with the angles and equipment I had. Couldn't bounce because of colour casting. Already had my flashed gelled, but had no sheets to bounce into. There is no room at all left of me, but could maye have clamped the other side of a post...if I had a clamp. :)

That may be enough how ever if not you could then look at using another couple of lights to add some highlights and key to the models.

That would have been my first choice, but only have one working flash. Damn, I've only had off camera wireless gear a week!

In the first picture you could do this by framming much tighter to give you some space to light from if you shot the frame so that the three machines filled the width of the frame you could then add some fill from the left to really brighten up their shadows.

Yes, that's a good idea. I was trying to fill the brief and show the whole space in use though.

With the portraiture as people have said read Kirk Tuck's Minimalist Lighting it'll explain everything.

I've a lot to learn there indeed. It's all very exciting. :)

hope that helps

Sure does. Thank you.
Click to expand...
 
Would an omni-bounce have worked here to the left of me?
 
The23rdman said:
Would an omni-bounce have worked here to the left of me?
Click to expand...


One of these?

stofenomnibounce.jpg


probably better if you had a flashgun too :naughty:
 
I was thinking more of one of those thingies that look like a tupperware bowl. ;)
 
The23rdman said:
I was thinking more of one of those thingies that look like a tupperware bowl. ;)
Click to expand...

When you're suffering from a lack of light the last thing you want to be doing is sticking things over your flash...

You need some gels so you can colour match the ambient, a couple of extra (cheap) hotshoe flashes, some cheap ebay triggers and a couple of mini tripods.
 
RicherSea said:
When you're suffering from a lack of light the last thing you want to be doing is sticking things over your flash...

You need some gels so you can colour match the ambient, a couple of extra (cheap) hotshoe flashes, some cheap ebay triggers and a couple of mini tripods.
Click to expand...

Thanks, matey. If you'd read the rest of the thread you'd have seen I did gel. :) More flashes are in the pipeline soon. :)
 
Just a thought... ISO- what settings were you at/ could you have knocked it a stop or two?

At the lower end of the ISO scale, achieve the correct exposure that way and you can expect to get a better quality result than underexposing and recovering in PP
 
The problem with this scene/setting is that the spotlights in the ceiling are creating hotspots and shadows on your subjects, leaving some people or body areas (close to) overblown, while others are underexposed. e.g. in picture #2 look how the woman in the middle is brightly lit, while the other two are underexposed. There is nothing wrong in having some highlighting effect but you need to think carefully about what those spots are hitting, and lower the contrast by adding fill. In the last shot the woman's face and upper body are well lit by the spot but her lower half and the guy are hardly lit at all. You need to add light from the front(ish) to brighten the underlit areas. Those spots are very harsh.

For the portraits you also need to consider the direction of the light to make sure you fill in shadows - e.g. in the eye sockets - wherever it's needed.

I would have thought you could bounce fairly effectively in that room and the tone of the walls, ceiling and floor would automatically warm up the light from the flash. Of course you can still gel, if you want, but you may find you don't need to. I actually think an Omni-bounce may very well work nicely, or you could just try bouncing straight off a wall and see how that works out.

In terms of power, here is an example of what a single 580EX can do - http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=451770.

Also, you should set out to expose the room "properly" or to the right, when you take the shot. You can pull it down in post if you want to lower the mood, but don't start out by shooting "dark" to begin with.

Just my 2 cents :)
 
tdodd said:
The problem with this scene/setting is that the spotlights in the ceiling are creating hotspots and shadows on your subjects, leaving some people or body areas (close to) overblown, while others are underexposed. e.g. in picture #2 look how the woman in the middle is brightly lit, while the other two are underexposed. There is nothing wrong in having some highlighting effect but you need to think carefully about what those spots are hitting, and lower the contrast by adding fill. In the last shot the woman's face and upper body are well lit by the spot but her lower half and the guy are hardly lit at all. You need to add light from the front(ish) to brighten the underlit areas. Those spots are very harsh.

For the portraits you also need to consider the direction of the light to make sure you fill in shadows - e.g. in the eye sockets - wherever it's needed.

I would have thought you could bounce fairly effectively in that room and the tone of the walls, ceiling and floor would automatically warm up the light from the flash. Of course you can still gel, if you want, but you may find you don't need to. I actually think an Omni-bounce may very well work nicely, or you could just try bouncing straight off a wall and see how that works out.

In terms of power, here is an example of what a single 580EX can do - http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=451770.

Also, you should set out to expose the room "properly" or to the right, when you take the shot. You can pull it down in post if you want to lower the mood, but don't start out by shooting "dark" to begin with.

Just my 2 cents :)
Click to expand...

Thanks, Tim, that's all good constructive stuff, mate.

I agree about the portraits. Didn't even notice that!

I agree completely about the spots. I did try bouncing off the ceiling, but it was a case of trying to get as much of the room in the shots as possible to emphasis the space (as briefed). I didn't even consider bouncing off the wall and just simply missed out the opportunity to add some fill to the couple working on the bench.

All in all it was a good experience with enough encouragement and plenty of room to improve.

I think the 580EX is quite a bit more powerful than my little 430ex though. ;) I am looking at adding to my arsenal right now.

Oh, and I've just heard back and they're very happy with the results, which just goes to prove the layman doesn't have a clue. :)
 
Yes, I've got that bookmarked. I'd almost forgotten about it as I've spent the whole week revising on Strobist.com. :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top