HELP! - How to make images really really pop!

Simon photo said:
You wouldn't catch me with an L lens lol im an olympus guy.
And banging out 10fps? All day to get your shots? Just sounds amateur to me,
No, if i want to make people "pop" (god i hate terminology like that)
I would use medium format.
And the whole melting away backgrounds thing, well yeah i understand but its not just about using fast prime lenses, its about what your blurring!
And without timing, composition, knowledge of light and experience then kit won't do anything for you.
What's the point of pulling focus on one element In an image when that one element looks like crap
Click to expand...

Whatever the Zuiko equivalent fast prime is you could use or get a Canon/Nikon/Sony if you loved fast primes. The 10fps would be pretty handy in a lot of situations, nothing amateur about it. As for using medium format that's a nonstarter, what are you going to use? It's heavy, slow, expensive and lacks very fast lenses.
 
You don't need to spend a fortune either. This was shot on a 150 quid Nikon 35mm f1.8G, which isn't even supposed to work on a D700!

7649257442_c666760ef1_b.jpg
 
For me, images that really pop, you have to look at Guy Collier's work. That's what I call popping!


I'm a big fan of Aleksandras' work. No argument - he's up there with the best.

I've had a quick look at the link that Marcus has kindly posted. To be honest, I think the images here 'pop' mainly because of the quality of the light. It doesn't look to me if the images have been over pp'd.

Most of the AB's work that I have seen is of weddings. You cannot compare the venues that he shoots in to what most of us have to work with over here. UK churches are usually dark places - and like the last one I worked in, the light is primarily provided by horrible electric lights. In contrast, most of the Churches that AB shoots in are flooded with natural light from multiple directions. This alone I suspect will help make an image pop.

I don't believe that buying a 85 1.2 prime will make images pop. Those that have suggested this have misunderstood the results that Marcus is seeking. DOF is not the only contributor to popping / 3d images. Light and PP is key! It's only recently that I have started identifying certain images that given a little help, really pop. One was shot by my second (MsPeep) on a 70-200L F2.8 - and it pops like a good un. Why? The light was good.

Marcus, thanks for taking the time to create this thread. I've enjoyed reading it!

Cheers.

Dav
 
Laudrup said:
Whatever the Zuiko equivalent fast prime is you could use or get a Canon/Nikon/Sony if you loved fast primes. The 10fps would be pretty handy in a lot of situations, nothing amateur about it. As for using medium format that's a nonstarter, what are you going to use? It's heavy, slow, expensive and lacks very fast lenses.
Click to expand...

Hmmm me thinks you need to read up on things a little perhaps.
Medium format is an absolute dream
Heavy? No not really? even an old bronica with prism and winder is about the same as a d4 with something mid range nailed to the front. And the standard 75mm zenzanon is plenty shallow enough, almost as shallow as this thread lol
 
Thanks Dav. Nail. Head. Cheers.

Because others have shared images, I feel obliged to do the same. Do these have pop? In my mind no.... but they possibly have the essence of it and quickly looking through my archive it is the closest I can get to with existing work and will be looking to try and shoot images that pop in the future...


IMG_7902 colour by Marcus Charter, on Flickr


IMG_1470 by Marcus Charter, on Flickr


IMG_0442 by Marcus Charter, on Flickr
 
the 3rd one 'pops' but that is mainly due to the background separation.

the surroundings play a big part in the 'pop' of images.
 
The thing with AB is, he shows great depth in his images and that adds to the sparkle, looks like lots of open shade with a heavy bias of EC added in camera to lift the shadows, a superb websharpening that works.

It will be nice to see the images from Eigthavenues wedding which AB is/was shooing in July near Preston to see if the light there is any better/worse than the Baltics.
 
Good light, generous exposure (ETTR).

Back-lighting.

Light-toned colours (pinks and yellows rather than maroon and navy kinda thing).

Shallow DoF can help, but it's not at the heart of it IMHO and you don't need f/1.4. You can't just buy 'pop'.
 
AB's work is consistently brilliant, every wedding he shoots looks different to the one before. He appears to shoot at the important moments and captures everything going on, the mood, soul and life of the event and people. Add that to his amazing shooting style and knowledge of light and camera then you have a master photographer. There is nothing repetitive about his work which I like.
 
tiler65 said:
It will be nice to see the images from Eigthavenues wedding which AB is/was shooing in July near Preston to see if the light there is any better/worse than the Baltics.
Click to expand...

VERY interesting indeed! :thumbs:

Cheers.

Dav
 
these look fairly ordinary to me not sure what exactly is being looked at, they are just clean and well exposed but normal.
 
mart77 said:
these look fairly ordinary to me not sure what exactly is being looked at, they are just clean and well exposed but normal.
Click to expand...

Really? Are you sure you are looking at the correct images?
 
joescrivens said:
where?
Click to expand...

Apologies.... they WERE on his facebook... but seems he has now removed them.

There were two images... one from the ceremony, one of the confetti shot.

Both typical Aleksandras Babicius style, well exposed, sharp and vibrant.

I too am very interested/excited to see the rest of the photos from his Preston wedding as I know first hand what the weather was like that day in Preston!
 
Simon photo said:
Hmmm me thinks you need to read up on things a little perhaps.
Medium format is an absolute dream
Heavy? No not really? even an old bronica with prism and winder is about the same as a d4 with something mid range nailed to the front. And the standard 75mm zenzanon is plenty shallow enough, almost as shallow as this thread lol
Click to expand...

An old medium format Bronica in 2012? How about no.
 
FlyTVR said:
For me, images that really pop, you have to look at Guy Collier's work. That's what I call popping!


I'm a big fan of Aleksandras' work. No argument - he's up there with the best.

I've had a quick look at the link that Marcus has kindly posted. To be honest, I think the images here 'pop' mainly because of the quality of the light. It doesn't look to me if the images have been over pp'd.

Most of the AB's work that I have seen is of weddings. You cannot compare the venues that he shoots in to what most of us have to work with over here. UK churches are usually dark places - and like the last one I worked in, the light is primarily provided by horrible electric lights. In contrast, most of the Churches that AB shoots in are flooded with natural light from multiple directions. This alone I suspect will help make an image pop.

I don't believe that buying a 85 1.2 prime will make images pop. Those that have suggested this have misunderstood the results that Marcus is seeking. DOF is not the only contributor to popping / 3d images. Light and PP is key! It's only recently that I have started identifying certain images that given a little help, really pop. One was shot by my second (MsPeep) on a 70-200L F2.8 - and it pops like a good un. Why? The light was good.

Marcus, thanks for taking the time to create this thread. I've enjoyed reading it!

Cheers.

Dav
Click to expand...

Is it a coincidence that a lot of these images with pop have come from fast primes? Smoother bokeh and high micro contrast edge to edge always helps to make an image to jump out at you. Add in heavy PP if needed and you're there. Natural light is a truism.
 
Short slideshow of six images here trying to see what, apart from shallow DOF, contributes to pop, mixing up the light/shade and background tone. I don't know whether as an exercise it sheds any light (Hah! Hah!) at all, but I wonder what people think. These were shot with a 5D2 and wide open 50/1.4. No effort put into crafting the shots, just trying out basic lighting variations.

https://picasaweb.google.com/106744949286510089237/Pop#slideshow/5769509929689004242

Do any of the photos exhibit "pop"? I'm not sure that they do, so what is the missing ingredient? No PP on these other than warming the two shots with the subject in open shade.

I'm happy to shoot different lighting combos, so long as we keep it simple with natural light and no faffing about with flash or reflectors. If it matters I could shoot from a tripod too, just to prevent wobbly tog syndrome throwing the focus off a little, which may have happened a bit here. I can also shoot with an 85/1.8 or 135/2 if anyone thinks that will make a difference.



EDIT : I had an idea to improve consistency and sat my wee man at the end of my tripod legs and then just span around firing off shots through a full 360 degree arc. There is a series with the subject in the shade followed by a series with the subject sunlit from all sides. Exposure was in Av mode, spot metered from the chest region at +1. The only edit is to warm up the shots taken in full shade.


EDIT 2 : I repeated the exercise with my 135/2 at f/2, again spot metering the chest at +1 in Av mode. That sequence starts here - https://picasaweb.google.com/106744949286510089237/Pop#slideshow/5769532649360884226
 
Last edited:
Joanne (MSPeep) shot her very first wedding a few weeks ago.

Does this count as pop?

peep2.jpg
 
Last edited:
ernesto said:
Doesn't look like it to me.
Click to expand...

Doesn't look like the image is popping or that it was my first wedding shoot?:thinking:

Having a VERY patient mentor and also someone who is willing to discuss methods of producing top quality processed images will help anyone willing to learn and take critique like myself. 'Popping' images is a new technique to me and one which adds something special to an imagine like mine above. TP advice adds to the personal advice one may receive. I love it!!!!

Shooting a wedding is NOT as easy as one may believe. I have a huge amount to learn, however spotting a shot is the beginning of something special.

:)
 
Thought I may as well have a say :D

Aleksandras does shoot almost entirely with primes. I love the way he shoots from behind someone or something in every shot to give separation from the background but also between the subject and the person/thing in between the subject and the camera. It gives it the feel that you are there and are peering around someone to look at what's going on - just my take.

As far as light is concerned it was a bright day but the venue wasn't exactly flooded with light, especially when he was shooting without a strobe at about 11pm on a near pitch black dancefloor - no idea how, possible ramped up the ISO on his D4 but I'm excited to see them.

I have asked him about editing before and he says he does very little editing in NX (think it was?! - the Nikon software) and just pulls the brightness up and a touch of sharpening.

One thing that made Aleksandras amazing was he didn't stop. He. Didin't. Stop. At. All. He started shooting around 8am and at about 11.30pm was climbing a 6ft wall to get a better angle. At least 10 guests came out with "you're photographer loves me - he's taken so many shots of me" - he was EVERYWHERE. To the point that he has been dubbed 'The Ninja' (a term I think he likes :D)

The thing that makes him so good for me is that he has a knack of seeing a shot that so many others wouldn't. I have a photographer freind that came to my wedding, a seasoned wedding photographer. He's not much into the natural light 'arty farty' photos as he calls it but did see one of the shots, apparently AB has a shot from outside the conservatory shooting through the blinds and has the vast majority of the shot containing negative space with just me and my beautiful wife in focus. Most photographers would never think to shoot from this angle.

To top this off he is an insanely nice guy (as his wife and son were) and even gave us some traditional Lithuanian wedding presents :D
 
Do you know it was worth starting this thread just to read Eighth Avenue's post. Thank you and many thanks for sharing. Can't wait to see the images if they become available to us.

Dav - Yes. For me it does pop!
 
Last edited:
MsPeep said:
Doesn't look like the image is popping or that it was my first wedding shoot?:thinking:
Click to expand...

The question was "Does this count as pop?". To me it doesn't no.

It doesn't pop for me because it doesn't have that feeling of the subject somehow having more light and a removed from background feeling. The couple are merged in with the many people around them and don't particularly stand out. May not be helped by being black and white.

I can only believe it was your first wedding and not sure how or why I would question that :)
 
Why don't we ask Keith, he knows a thing or to about it?

cheggers_plays_pop_uk-show.jpg
 
I gave up with the Action Man, but thought I'd dig out an old snap and see if I could create some "pop". It's with a crop body and a slow zoom lens, but with a little basic PP in Lightroom I think it's close - or am I kidding myself? :D

20120727_082746_000.jpg
 
ernesto said:
The question was "Does this count as pop?". To me it doesn't no.

It doesn't pop for me because it doesn't have that feeling of the subject somehow having more light and a removed from background feeling. The couple are merged in with the many people around them and don't particularly stand out. May not be helped by being black and white.

I can only believe it was your first wedding and not sure how or why I would question that :)
Click to expand...

Thank you for sharing your thoughts. This image, as with all images, catches a moment in time. I understand you feel the couple merge with their guests, however for me it is what I wanted to achieve.

Do you shoot weddings?

:-)
 
tdodd said:
I gave up with the Action Man, but thought I'd dig out an old snap and see if I could create some "pop". It's with a crop body and a slow zoom lens, but with a little basic PP in Lightroom I think it's close - or am I kidding myself? :D
Click to expand...

Gosh, what a difference. Yes that pops.

:-)
 
It's a great image Joanne, it doesn't have the pop we are describing in my opinion, but it does have plenty of punch, emotion, story, context, sharpness, and lovely mono conversion too!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top