Luminous Landscape Forum
Equipment & Techniques => Medium Format / Film / Digital Backs – and Large Sensor Photography => Topic started by: Bevan.Burns on March 02, 2008, 03:20:21 pm
-
I guess this question isn't strictly related to DMFBs, but I'm not sure which other forum to post this in, and most of the architectural shooters seem to hang out here. I was just wondering what sort of lighting setups you guys use? I'm most interested in how strobes are used in the context of shooting architecture. Are they used in place of existing lights, or just to complement them? What sort of modifiers (umbrellas, softboxes) do you use?
Any and all comments appreciated!
Bevan
-
I guess this question isn't strictly related to DMFBs, but I'm not sure which other forum to post this in, and most of the architectural shooters seem to hang out here. I was just wondering what sort of lighting setups you guys use? I'm most interested in how strobes are used in the context of shooting architecture. Are they used in place of existing lights, or just to complement them? What sort of modifiers (umbrellas, softboxes) do you use?
Any and all comments appreciated!
Bevan
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=178698\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Please don't take this the wrong way, but maybe you should work as an assistant to some architectural photographers if you want to learn how to light. Your questions would take a few volumes to answer.
Maybe if you were more specific?
-
I do myself interiors... so I think I am use to do it, though there is always something to learn, and I am far from accomplished in that domain. And some client would require some kind of feeling, some others and there is your personal taste...
Let say that you can use strobe, continuous, kino flo, daylight only, mixed of all, to support daylight or to fill some part of your frame.
You can use softbox from small to large... umbrellas... rarely direct except to ceiling...
That is just a huge domain to go through. Look at the place, figure out the focal point of the room... and play with your light...
For interiors none of them are the same...
the advice to start as an assistant is the best road to go...
keep us posted
-
I guess this question isn't strictly related to DMFBs, but I'm not sure which other forum to post this in, and most of the architectural shooters seem to hang out here. I was just wondering what sort of lighting setups you guys use? I'm most interested in how strobes are used in the context of shooting architecture. Are they used in place of existing lights, or just to complement them? What sort of modifiers (umbrellas, softboxes) do you use?
Any and all comments appreciated!
Bevan
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=178698\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I use flash, between an on camera little one (generaly bounced backwards) to up to 6 elinchrom heads usually with softboxes and maytbe improvised flagging to keep the light off the ceiling
It depends on your camera, the ambient light, room size, whether you can control your access time (do you have to shoot it now or can you hang around til the light gets perfect) the DR or the scene and a host of other stuff
Mostly I am trying to make the scene look as it looked to the eye but am trying to close the DR in the image by lifting the shadows
With multiple exposures and blending one could argue that this is not required and could therefore say that the answer is -dont light at all !
S
-
When you use extra lighting you will mess with the lighting design which I feel is an integral part of the overall design, therefor I will use only a softbox strobe if there is not sufficient light coming from a window or so. With the way I shoot is that I want to show the place as the designer or architect intended it, 'au naturel' I find that a lot of interiors are looking too fake due to the over-useage
of strobes and other lighting methods.
I would rather use either a good time of day to use the right kind of natural light coming from outside or choose to shoot at night with longer exposures.
Even if there is no direct sunlight coming into the interior the feel is totally different from when you shoot on an overcast day, try it in your own home and you will see the difference
On the assistant issue; you do not have to be an assistant to learn and asking questions here is certainly a very valid way of learning things. Other than that you can buy a couple of books and try some set ups. You can be an assistant for a while and see how some people shoot but you will only really learn when you will develop your own style and systems. I certainly come from the 'jumping into the deep end school'
good luck
Marc
-
i do same than marc. i work in 95% without additonal light.
sometimes i wait till the mix of ambient light and built in light looks good, or i stack exposures.
very rare that i use additional light,- even in very dark environments the light usually is enough to shoot without added lamps. i.m.o. the results looks more natural than perfectly lit interior shots.
[attachment=5370:attachment]
-
When you use extra lighting you will mess with the lighting design which I feel is an integral part of the overall design, therefor I will use only a softbox strobe if there is not sufficient light coming from a window or so. With the way I shoot is that I want to show the place as the designer or architect intended it, 'au naturel' I find that a lot of interiors are looking too fake due to the over-useage
of strobes and other lighting methods.
Marc
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=178783\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Marc,
In this part of the world, AD's and editors will most often specify for domestic houses; NO house lighting to be used. All to be done artificially, to make the room seem as if lit by only natural light.
Now, really, I'm just satisfying the client, but I do agree with your general premise about making the place looking fake is a bad thing.
The other factor perhaps, is that here, people generally don't spend a lot of money on lighting design, the way they do in the US (and I'm sure other areas as well).
J
-
A long time since I shot interiors for money. I did quite a few stately Homes, these were designed in a time when artificial light was a bunch of candles, so max use of daylight was built in, however the ceilings were very ornate and needed to be seen. I was shooting film then, I would often have nearly 20,000j of Broncolor just pointed towards the ceiling with softboxes from the window direction just to lift the ceiling from deep shadow and keep them a natural colour. Now I suppose I would stack exposures and save the expense and effort of all those heads and power packs.
Kevin.
-
Marc,
In this part of the world, AD's and editors will most often specify for domestic houses; NO house lighting to be used. All to be done artificially, to make the room seem as if lit by only natural light.
Hi Jon
Which part of the world do you mean?
But it is true what you are saying when i was shooting for magazines in Australia,
they specifically mentioned no artificial light. I always thought it was because of
the hassles of combined light sources. But it was also easier as the architecture in
Australia is somehow more focused on the exterior than here in the East where it is all about
the interior and consequently there is a lot less natural light that comes in.
cheers
Marc
-
I was just wondering what sort of lighting setups you guys use?
Bevan
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=178698\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
It usually varies depending on the client's requirements, and how much of your time they want to pay for. I use a couple of softboxes with elinchrom floor packs and have a couple of bowens prolights, which I may use with a honeycombe to fill dead spots. I like to bring the light in from as far away as possible so I don't get that feel of having the edges of the scene bright falling off towards the centre of the image. I like to make the interior vibrant, but with believability. In some situations the natural light is nice and just needs a bit of gentle fill to help the shadows, while in other situations the natural light may be dismal and I may go with the flash as key and ambient as fill, but not so as to be obvious that the lighting is artificial.
I don't always get the time to light like that, and feel that a lot of interiors lighting is often not called for in architectural photography where the emphasis may be more on the design and construction of the building than creating beautiful interiors that nicely show off the texures of the furnishings etc.
It depends on what you are shooting, what is important to your client and the style you may want to signature your work with. Even with interiors magazines, there are some that like a bright lit feel with vibrant colours which needs some lighting and others which cultivate a moody natural light look, which don't appear to have any additional lighting.
David
-
An avenue of study for you may be in books on cinema lighting. I got my start in lighting from studying to be a cinematographer before I became a still photographer. When you study cinematography in a good film school, the first thing they teach you is lighting, not cameras. As we all know, the light is what makes a photograph great.
As still photographers we have the choice to use continuous or strobes. I have used both depending on the situation.
-
@Marc
UK; it's not always the case, but very often. I find in Northern Ireland here, that lighting design does NOT play a major part in the design process when building a house, barring having a very expensive light fitting hanging from the centre of the ceiling! It's just down to the clients requirements; better be prepared to use candles if asked!
@ KevinA
20000J of Broncolor; I hate to think of how much that cost (either to hire or buy!) but I can imagine trying to fill those huge spaces.
@ David WM
Just curious; how do you find the colour of the Bowens and Elinchrom lights together? I have Bowens, but might like some Elinchrom, hence the question.
Thanks to all
J
-
Being far from an expert on the field ( I do interiors, but as a complementary part to culinary photos now, to set the atmosphere of the restaurant for the magazines ), one thing I learned is that, when you're inclined to using natural lighting, the time of the day where you shoot is a big part of the result.
-
@ David WM
Just curious; how do you find the colour of the Bowens and Elinchrom lights together? I have Bowens, but might like some Elinchrom, hence the question.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=178829\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I have the Bowens Prolite120 (1k) which are designed as a fairy short duration unit (2 flash tubes with large electrodes). They are quite blue and I use a warm gel to balance with other flashes. I also have an espirit 500 which doesn't have the cool characteristic. The elinchrom (3 k heads) is pretty much neutral. I have some of the short duration heads as well as some normal ones, but the output seems consistent regardless. I don't have any Elinchrom monoblocks. I do have a 3 old Profoto heads which I use in a Northlight 6'x3' softbox in the studio adapted to run off an Elinchrom 6k pack. They are very warm (and slow), but I gel them to neutral.
I think it would be good to have matching lights, but if you are not buying a complete set in one hit then I imagine even different models in the same brand will have variation, so its a matter of being aware of what your lights do and how to use them.
David
-
I have the Bowens Prolite120 (1k) which are designed as a fairy short duration unit (2 flash tubes with large electrodes). They are quite blue and I use a warm gel to balance with other flashes. I also have an espirit 500 which doesn't have the cool characteristic. The elinchrom (3 k heads) is pretty much neutral. I have some of the short duration heads as well as some normal ones, but the output seems consistent regardless. I don't have any Elinchrom monoblocks. I do have a 3 old Profoto heads which I use in a Northlight 6'x3' softbox in the studio adapted to run off an Elinchrom 6k pack. They are very warm (and slow), but I gel them to neutral.
I think it would be good to have matching lights, but if you are not buying a complete set in one hit then I imagine even different models in the same brand will have variation, so its a matter of being aware of what your lights do and how to use them.
David
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=178837\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Thanks for the detailed reply, appreciate it. My mainstay is 8x500J Esprit heads, and there is some variation between the heads, but not enough to cause great concern, Sounds like Bowens and Elinchrom could be mixed successfully.
Profoto; Spent some time on their stand at the big trade show here, last week, and as soon as I collect a spare GBP20000 (or so) I might be inclined to switch over! Seems to be 'better' than Broncolor (Probably going to get slated for some for that remark - feel free to point out Broncolor's advantages if you wish... I'm all ears.)
Thanks
J
-
Lightning interiors is supporting the existing light IMO. The available light can be enough in most cases but extra strobes can help to reveal details or to clear uncomfortable shadows.
There's a chapter in "The negative" by Ansel Adams dedicated to interior lightning. It's a must read.
-
Lightning interiors is supporting the existing light IMO. The available light can be enough in most cases but extra strobes can help to reveal details or to clear uncomfortable shadows.
There's a chapter in "The negative" by Ansel Adams dedicated to interior lightning. It's a must read.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=178873\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
things changed a lot since digital, esp. with our hiend equipment, in terms of dr and sw possibilities to compensate dark shadows and hilights e.g. in windows.
also there is a change in the common reception what looks nice and what not. it was absolutely nomal in the 70/80/90s to lit churches till they looked even and completely illuminated,- using therefor even very complicate setups. nowadays (nearly) everybody will see a natural lit church shot better than an even illuminated one.
further in big environments its another thing than in smaller rooms, and ofcourse its imporant to know wherefor the shots are.
a higlossy interior magazin with nice(?) arranged flowers, coffee- cups and newspapers on the tables wants another look than architecture magazins or books. here sometimes( often) i remove all this stuff as far as possible before shooting. how far one goes here depends also on the personal style of the photographer and there will not be a better or a worser way.
[attachment=5375:attachment]
[attachment=5376:attachment]
-
Rainer,
What software are you using to stack photos? Photomatix or Enfuse? or ???
Thanks,
Eric
i do same than marc. i work in 95% without additonal light.
sometimes i wait till the mix of ambient light and built in light looks good, or i stack exposures.
very rare that i use additional light,- even in very dark environments the light usually is enough to shoot without added lamps. i.m.o. the results looks more natural than perfectly lit interior shots.
[attachment=5370:attachment]
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=178791\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
-
Rainer,
What software are you using to stack photos? Photomatix or Enfuse? or ???
Thanks,
Eric
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=178890\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
photomatix
-
Thanks everyone for your feedback. Ranier, you have a really wonderful website. I really enjoy all your images. It's inspiring photographs like that that keep a young student like me going. Thanks!
Bevan
-
Thanks everyone for your feedback. Ranier, you have a really wonderful website. I really enjoy all your images. It's inspiring photographs like that that keep a young student like me going. Thanks!
Bevan
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=178926\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
thank you .....
very nice
-
i always Lighting interiors in the way i think its beautiful , its very depends and also shows the value of the photographer.
do whatever you think is beautiful but make sure you got the paycheck
-
Thanks for the detailed reply, appreciate it. My mainstay is 8x500J Esprit heads, and there is some variation between the heads, but not enough to cause great concern, Sounds like Bowens and Elinchrom could be mixed successfully.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=178850\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I forgot to mention that the 20cm elinchrom reflectors are the same outside diameter as the Bowens 20cm, so you can swap honeycombe, barn doors, etc between the two.
Natural light is good to work with, but for example, with the attached photo, I would have needed to shoot it early morning to get light streaming into the room. The location was 200km away and I needed to shoot 3 floors of the apartment on the one day. I have a warm gel 3k head hanging out over the edge of the balcony with ockey straps and ropes on the base of the light stand. Shooting into large windows makes it hard to hide reflections of lights inside so you can't always put them where you want them anyway.
David
-
I forgot to mention that the 20cm elinchrom reflectors are the same outside diameter as the Bowens 20cm, so you can swap honeycombe, barn doors, etc between the two.
Natural light is good to work with, but for example, with the attached photo, I would have needed to shoot it early morning to get light streaming into the room. The location was 200km away and I needed to shoot 3 floors of the apartment on the one day. I have a warm gel 3k head hanging out over the edge of the balcony with ockey straps and ropes on the base of the light stand. Shooting into large windows makes it hard to hide reflections of lights inside so you can't always put them where you want them anyway.
David
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=178985\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Even better re the interchangeability.
I think the main message for Bevan here is that simulating the look you want is the name of the game. Then it's just execution!
-
There is allot of good experience being shared here. Lighting interiors is a complex subject and difficult to explain verbally. I spend a whole semester on it where I teach and just cover the basics. Having said that.......personally I am self taught, in that I never assisted anyone or took a class, but I don't recommend it. Assisting is the best way to learn and shortcut the process. It is true that digital reduces the need for lighting, but far from eliminates it. With film we were lighting interiors 95% of the time (sometimes just to clean up the light so it matched the balance of a particular film), with digital we are around 30-40%. With film we carried 6-7 powerpacks (4-2000 watt and 2-3 800 watt powerpacks and 10-12 heads). With digital we carry four powerpacks (2-2000 watt and 2-800 watt) and rarely use them all. Of course with film we were lighting so that the transparency was the final product, with digital we are making files so that we have all the information we need to do the post production work.
-
What is natural looking to one person, is not necessarily natural looking to another. My own preference is the use of nice lighting techniques. My own personal view most rooms just using natural light look flat. The fabrics, walls and furture just don't have depth.
(http://www.johngibbel.com/Inside.jpg)
-
What is natural looking to one person, is not necessarily natural looking to another. My own preference is the use of nice lighting techniques. My own personal view most rooms just using natural light look flat. The fabrics, walls and furture just don't have depth.
John, I think the lighting is great. Just wondering how long it takes you to light a room like that and if you get it all in camera or use some pp to achieve it.
David
-
Hello since we are on the topic of lighting I thought you all may be interested in taking a look at an informative article that Jeffery Totaro has written for out latest version of our newsletter. It is about a multiple strobe pop for interior lighting technique that he has used and prompted him to have a device designed that allows him to achieve this (available through Capture Integration) .
Also in the newsletter are a Wide Angle Test comparison and a primer on using HDR in Capture One 4.0, RAW developer comparisons and more.
Here is the url to take please take a look at : http://tinyurl.com/32l9jy (http://tinyurl.com/32l9jy) .
If you are not already subscriber and you like it please subscribe.
Enjoy,
Lance Schad
Capture Integration - Miami/Atlanta
305-394-3196 cell | 305-534-5702 office
Capture Integration , Phase One Dealer of the Year (http://www.captureintegration.com)
lance@captureintegration.com
-
with the attached photo, [a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=178985\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Not wanting to criticise specific work or individuals - but to cause more useful chat
With the attached image I am wondering 'as a casual observer' how come the fronts of the chairs are so bright when they are facing away from the window - it doesnt make visual sense
I think part of the art of using flash needs to be to subtely lift the room (ie lower the DR in the image but not intefere with the actual balance) or create an impression of a pretend window on the other side of the room that we cant see in shot.
The image must still be 'plausable' to the viewer
SMM
-
Not wanting to criticise specific work or individuals - but to cause more useful chat
With the attached image I am wondering 'as a casual observer' how come the fronts of the chairs are so bright when they are facing away from the window - it doesnt make visual sense
SMM
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=179624\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I was disconcerted by the chair casting a shadow from the window light but the towels casting one in the opposite direction. OTOH I was VERY impressed with the balance achieved between the inside scene and the outside view.
-
Its takes about 2-3 hours per shot. The image is 3 shots if I remember. 1 main shot for the room, 2nd shot for the fire place and tv exposure and the 3rd shot for the glass window on the right to remove reflections. With out the use of light, this room would just look flat.
Some people might think I am crazy for using so much light and I also think I am crazy for using so much light but I just like the look.
John, I think the lighting is great. Just wondering how long it takes you to light a room like that and if you get it all in camera or use some pp to achieve it.
David
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=179562\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
-
The image must still be 'plausable' to the viewer
SMM
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=179624\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Yes I think the light off to the left could be backed off. It was a 1m sq softbox without any cutters etc and I don't like dead, flat areas. The more it is backed off the darker right side gets, and it has plenty of light on the right still so it could be dropped. I would have preferred to cut the spill into the left foreground, but had to move on to the next shot. I do like to bring out textures and I think if you left the towels in a muddy shadow, they would not appear inviting.
I don't have a problem with the direction of the light as the viewer does not see what is off to the left, so why couldn't light be coming from that direction, whether ambient or interior lighting.
I think that interiors for advertising purposes need to be bright as opposed to moody as I think that is what appeals in this market. I appreciate moody ambient light photos (and the speed you can shoot at if not lighting) but don't think this is the market for them and a bit over on the fill is probably safer than under.
David
-
Yes I think the light off to the left could be backed off. It was a 1m sq softbox without any cutters etc and I don't like dead, flat areas. The more it is backed off the darker right side gets, and it has plenty of light on the right still so it could be dropped. I would have preferred to cut the spill into the left foreground, but had to move on to the next shot. I do like to bring out textures and I think if you left the towels in a muddy shadow, they would not appear inviting.
I don't have a problem with the direction of the light as the viewer does not see what is off to the left, so why couldn't light be coming from that direction, whether ambient or interior lighting.
I think that interiors for advertising purposes need to be bright as opposed to moody as I think that is what appeals in this market. I appreciate moody ambient light photos (and the speed you can shoot at if not lighting) but don't think this is the market for them and a bit over on the fill is probably safer than under.
David
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=179658\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Yeah I want really having a go at the picture - one never can really comment on another piece of work when one wasnt there - client pressuring for speed, wanting to show thier products or whatever - I take it this is a hotel room and the 'end punter' (the hotel customer) will want to know 'what they are getting etc
Probably IMO that light needed to be more diffuse and a little less powered
It is interesting that judging by the comments in this thread the higher the budget /better the building and more 'visually literate' the customer the less lighting seems to be required!
This shot (again in a real hurry) has a million flaws but what do you think of the lighting ratio maybe the darker look goes with the old property..
I think the 'chessboard' optical illusion is really important to consider with lighting against windows, A and B are the same colour
SMM
-
This shot (again in a real hurry) has a million flaws but what do you think of the lighting ratio maybe the darker look goes with the old property..
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=179671\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I think the fill is good, kids look natural. The LR is soft enough to allow you to adjust in pp too.
Would I be right in assuming that the window light is quite subdued? I often have quite severe light from windows, not a chance of seeing flames in fireplaces, which means if I want to preserve the window it takes a fair bit of light.
David
-
some more shots without additional lights:
some digital, some with film + drumscan.
[attachment=5475:attachment]
emotion22
[attachment=5476:attachment]
e22 / 2frames stitched
[attachment=5477:attachment]
e75
[attachment=5478:attachment]
4x5" slide
[attachment=5479:attachment]
4x5" neg.
[attachment=5480:attachment]
4x5" slide
-
some more of mine
no additional light either
One of the main reason why i would not add any more light is that it just takes too long to set up
2-3 hrs per shot is usually the time i spend in any of the places shown here, I do about 50 set ups in that time and the client might choose about 20 shots with an additional 10 min post pr. per shot.
So all by all including file management shooting and pp I spend 1 day on a regular size apartment.
This is mainly due to not using extra light to still come to a satisfactory result.
cheers
Marc
-
marc, nice pics - and an amazing speed! what camera-setup do you use when you work that fast?
stefan
some more of mine
no additional light either
One of the main reason why i would not add any more light is that it just takes too long to set up
2-3 hrs per shot is usually the time i spend in any of the places shown here, I do about 50 set ups in that time and the client might choose about 20 shots with an additional 10 min post pr. per shot.
So all by all including file management shooting and pp I spend 1 day on a regular size apartment.
This is mainly due to not using extra light to still come to a satisfactory result.
cheers
Marc
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=179714\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
-
The bottom line, you have to shoot the style you like. My clients would never hirer me if I shot available light, they want the look that I give them. Some space do look good without light and some spaces look bad without any light. I would love to show up with just my camera, take 5 shots and be done by noon but that is not the market i am in.
[attachment=5490:attachment]
-
marc, nice pics - and an amazing speed! what camera-setup do you use when you work that fast?
stefan
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=179726\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
to Stefan
thanks!
I use the hasselblad H3D either with the 35 mm or the 50 -110mm lens.
Before that I worked with a Nikon D2x but the files were too small to cover double page spreads.
So my digital shooting system actually came from the nikon set up, which was a radical change from my pentax67.
I think I also go fast as i do not like my client to be present and look over my schoulder all the time
to check every angle,
to John
You are also absolutely right, shooting with or with out lights really depends on so many factors like client's need, personal style etc
The thing though is that I rarely see any cutting edge designed interiors shot with lights like you do, only the more conservative ones, so I for me I quickly equate that shooting style as conservative. But again it all depends on who pays your bills and what they want.
cheers
Marc
-
marc, that the same way I work, fast - lots of set ups - no lights.
which is the reason I didnt go with a cambo... but with the zd. I get by with the limited lens-selection for interiors but find it to be more of the problem for exteriors.
how do you shoot your architecture? all just PS-corrected?
stefan
to Stefan
thanks!
I think I also go fast as i do not like my client to be present and look over my schoulder all the time
to check every angle,
-
I do like to bring out textures and I think if you left the towels in a muddy shadow, they would not appear inviting.
David
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=179658\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
That point is well taken. Thanks for the "fill in" on the technique. With your descriptions we don't need a lighting diagram. I also acknowledge the time, and client, pressures leading to: I don't want to say compromises but you know what I mean. Perfection is a very expensive
in time and money.
-
Talking about perfection.
How to deal with reflections in windows? Has anybody a good tip to remove this? I tried it with pol filters but you can’t remove all of the reflections.
-
Talking about perfection.
How to deal with reflections in windows? Has anybody a good tip to remove this? I tried it with pol filters but you can’t remove all of the reflections.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=180561\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
after taking the shoots with flash, I always take one without flash. than overlay the two frames in ps and remove any reflections.
stefan
-
^^ Thanks. That’s what I also do. But sometimes you see yourself even on daytime in the window or other horrible reflections from the furniture.
-
some more of mine
no additional light either
One of the main reason why i would not add any more light is that it just takes too long to set up
2-3 hrs per shot is usually the time i spend in any of the places shown here, I do about 50 set ups in that time and the client might choose about 20 shots with an additional 10 min post pr. per shot.
So all by all including file management shooting and pp I spend 1 day on a regular size apartment.
This is mainly due to not using extra light to still come to a satisfactory result.
cheers
Marc
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=179714\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I'm intrigued by the maths here. If your client chooses 20 shots, and you spend 10 mins on pp per shot this amounts to 200 minutes.
You mention 2-3 hours per shot. So I assume you must mean per 'shoot'. You then say 50 set ups. Which to me means variations in styling, angle... etc.
I like your pictures but your arithmetic confuses the hell out of me!
I can only assume that you have a stylist that operates at the speed of a tornado, or that the owners of these palaces have a retinue of maids who have been hard at work before you arrive.
-
I see the bigger picture. I might take 2-3 hours per shot, and you take 2-3 hours to shoot the whole project, but I get 5 - 8 days of work to your 1 day.
some more of mine
no additional light either
One of the main reason why i would not add any more light is that it just takes too long to set up
2-3 hrs per shot is usually the time i spend in any of the places shown here, I do about 50 set ups in that time and the client might choose about 20 shots with an additional 10 min post pr. per shot.
So all by all including file management shooting and pp I spend 1 day on a regular size apartment.
This is mainly due to not using extra light to still come to a satisfactory result.
cheers
Marc
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=179714\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
-
the second shot was done with daylight
the first was done at night no light at all, I didn't want to have any tungsten light around so it was dark the only light was the laptop and sure flash in the window and one bounce to the ceiling.
the set up is different but it the same spot in the room
-
sorry for the confusion typo; indeed it should be a 2-3 hrs shoot instead of shot
so
2-3 hrs shoot
50 set ups
client buys 20-25 shots
10min per shot for pp
so all by all one day
Everything is set up before I arrive done by either the owner, designer or maid and I might move a piece of furniture in or out of position or other tiny detailing
to pix john
While you work for 8 days I also work for 8 days as I work virtually non stop here in Asia.
There are just too many projects here to document and allthough I also would like to take longer per shoot there are so may clients knocking on my door just because I can deliver this fast.
When shooting this much I also end up with an enormous amount of stock which hopefully will return a passive income over the following years. I am not trying to pull one over you as I know we just work in different styles which both work for us. I would probably get bored with an 8 day shoot in the same place with while you might get absolutely frazzled if you had to work the same way I do.
cheers
marc
I'm intrigued by the maths here. If your client chooses 20 shots, and you spend 10 mins on pp per shot this amounts to 200 minutes.
You mention 2-3 hours per shot. So I assume you must mean per 'shoot'. You then say 50 set ups. Which to me means variations in styling, angle... etc.
I like your pictures but your arithmetic confuses the hell out of me!
I can only assume that you have a stylist that operates at the speed of a tornado, or that the owners of these palaces have a retinue of maids who have been hard at work before you arrive.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=180705\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
-
Marc, Your right on the fact we both give what our clients demand. If my clients wanted available light photography, I would give them what they wanted. In the long run I might have to modify my work if the housing market continues to take a bigger dive. I think most of the market has gone available light or small lighting set up purely on financial numbers not just artistic look.
-
Here's some recent work of mine. The interiors and exteriors are the same house taken about a week apart. My style of working seems to be a combination of the two styles most recently shown. I take about a hour and a half (on average) to shoot an interior with anywhere from 30-90 minutes in post. I thought I was working pretty fast, apparently I'm not. My approach is to compliment the existing light whenever possible, open shadows, dark woods, etc. The living room overhead was dead so I placed a 1000 watt lamp outside to emulate a setting sun. I think it helped. Again on the stair shot, a 1k to the left to highlight the plant and cast a few shadows. Then lots of clean up, straightening and layer blending. Jim
-
sorry for the confusion typo; indeed it should be a 2-3 hrs shoot instead of shot
so
2-3 hrs shoot
50 set ups
client buys 20-25 shots
10min per shot for pp
so all by all one day
Everything is set up before I arrive done by either the owner, designer or maid and I might move a piece of furniture in or out of position or other tiny detailing
Ok, thats interesting. I think that there are some good aspects to working like this in terms of the variation you get.
You are fortunate I think that you have places of such richness as your subject matter. Too often I find myself asked to make one of the ugly sisters look like cinderella. Of course that takes a lot of time, and then... it just looks like the ugly sister with a smart frock.
I think that the fact that the client picks the number of shots gives them a feeling of ownership as well. I see that as an advantage.
-
Here's some recent work of mine. The interiors and exteriors are the same house taken about a week apart. My style of working seems to be a combination of the two styles most recently shown. I take about a hour and a half (on average) to shoot an interior with anywhere from 30-90 minutes in post. I thought I was working pretty fast, apparently I'm not. My approach is to compliment the existing light whenever possible, open shadows, dark woods, etc. The living room overhead was dead so I placed a 1000 watt lamp outside to emulate a setting sun. I think it helped. Again on the stair shot, a 1k to the left to highlight the plant and cast a few shadows. Then lots of clean up, straightening and layer blending. Jim
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=182255\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Hi Jim,
Lovely images. I was wondering did you use your Mamiya 28mm lens on any of these images.
Cheers
Simon
-
Here's some recent work of mine. The interiors and exteriors are the same house taken about a week apart. My style of working seems to be a combination of the two styles most recently shown. I take about a hour and a half (on average) to shoot an interior with anywhere from 30-90 minutes in post. I thought I was working pretty fast, apparently I'm not. My approach is to compliment the existing light whenever possible, open shadows, dark woods, etc. The living room overhead was dead so I placed a 1000 watt lamp outside to emulate a setting sun. I think it helped. Again on the stair shot, a 1k to the left to highlight the plant and cast a few shadows. Then lots of clean up, straightening and layer blending. Jim
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=182255\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Nice images. Gorgeous house. Do you use strobes as well?
-
Yes, I did use the 28mm on the majority of images. I've found it to be indispensable on shoots like this. Also, I use strobes for fill, usually popped into the ceiling or a Chimera to the side of the camera. My assistant has been with me eight years and is pretty quick, still I can't come close to the fifty different shots in 3 hours, I'm very impressed with Marc's photography and approach. Jim
-
Yes, I did use the 28mm on the majority of images. I've found it to be indispensable on shoots like this. Also, I use strobes for fill, usually popped into the ceiling or a Chimera to the side of the camera. My assistant has been with me eight years and is pretty quick, still I can't come close to the fifty different shots in 3 hours, I'm very impressed with Marc's photography and approach. Jim
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=182360\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Jim,
Awesome work. I too prefer to go with minimal lighting, but to supplement where necessary. It all depends on so many factors, really. But it seems that the architect clients put so much time into their own lighting (for interiors) that it can interfere with "the look" they've created to bring in too much external lighting. Sometime you can't help it though. But then again, there's bracketing and layer masks for a lot of those issues...
I'm curious to know what back you're using? What I wouldn't give to be able to trade in my CamboWide for a 28mm lens.... Seems that's the way to go.
Dave
-
I'm curious to know what back you're using? What I wouldn't give to be able to trade in my CamboWide for a 28mm lens.... Seems that's the way to go.
Dave
Why is that? The Cambo Wide has a nice 24XL Schneider. Or you can go for the Rodenstock 28mm if you want to spend a bit more than the Mamiya!
Just curious.
It would be interesting to share tips for rapid use of the Cambo Wide. Here are two of mine that may be obvious... any others?
1) I bought separate voigtlander viewfinders for each of my lenses and keep them with the respective lens. But mostly on interiors I leave the 47XL on and only use a wider one when I can't find a solution on the 47.
2) I keep a separate shutter release cable attached to each lens so that I don't need to do changes.
3) I keep a lee filter adapter on each lens, fitted with the white overcaps. At a push I can shoot a white balance shot through this as well.
-
I use the P45 which last time I checked had over 33,000 captures on it. The Mamiya 28mm for the 645 is a tremendous piece of equipment. I do find it exhibits some barrel distortion but very little compared to the 35mm and is easily corrected. I do consider getting a digital view camera because there aren't any really wide lenses in the 645 format that shift or tilt but so far the need hasn't been that pressing. Hopefully someone will make a 28-35 that does shift and tilt, at that point, from my point of view, view cameras will be obsolete. Jim
-
I guess for me, the Cambo Wide is very clunky. For every shot, I have to pre-create a custom gain file (to remove color cast); often two files if I shift right and left. Of course to do all of that, you have to be tethered which presents slowdown problems of it's own. So by the time you get everything set, you might have missed the the light dropping down behind the horizon; or severely limited the number of angles one could capture in that magic window when the light is at it's best. Interiors are a little better fortunately.
I guess what I'm saying is that I'm finding that the Cambo is "technical heavy" and robs serious time away from the "art". It just appears to me that a 28mm on the 645AFD would again allow for maximum on "art", minimum of "technical". And with PS stitching, it makes it even that much better. Does that make sense?
I don't own any glass for the Cambo, just the body/mount, so I'm not heavily invested yet. But it's always a pain to rent.
Jim - on your P45, have you experienced any color cast issues? How is that back on longer exposures for the architectural work? Thoughts of upgrading to the P45+?
Thanks
Dave
-
I guess for me, the Cambo Wide is very clunky. For every shot, I have to pre-create a custom gain file (to remove color cast); often two files if I shift right and left. Of course to do all of that, you have to be tethered which presents slowdown problems of it's own.
You don't need to be tethered if you want to shoot the custom gain, but you do have to then post-process the custom gain files after getting back to base.
You are right about the technical issue though. Unless you become very adept with a camera like this, its possible to lose the intuitive feel.
I've spent quite a lot of time becoming familiar, often testing extensively just to become 'one with the machine' so I don't have to think about it in a hurry.
-
I'm getting my threads mixed up, I just answered some of the above questions in Recent Works. Oh well. Anyways, no I haven't had a color cast problem with the Mamiya lenses. When I shoot with the Flex-adaptor and wide lenses it is an issue but certainly can be resolved in Capture One. I wasn't interested in the upgrade to the P45+ because the main advantage was live preview and that isn't that important to me. A larger sensor (or more pixels) would get my attention, although file size hasn't been an issue either so far. A really wide, tilt-shift lens would also be on my wish list. Jim
-
A really wide, tilt-shift lens would also be on my wish list. Jim
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=182803\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
How technically challenging is this combination? I'm thing of image circle, distortion, CA etc.
I wonder whether it is something that might be designed and made in 6 months, a year, or never at all. So what's the likelihood of it ever happening? Are there any other lens / adapter combinations which could be practically used to the same effect, ideally without spending hours in PP?
(I'm just looking at compact view cams for interior PC / Scheimpflug, but a 28mm Mamiya lens would be a bit cheaper)
Thanks for any suggestions / answers.
J
EDIT: One thing I meant to mention: The 24XL was mentioned for the Cambo, but it only has an image circle of about 60mm at f11, so wouldn't really allow a lot (if any) shift on the Cambo, if you are using a 49x36mm sensor, which also requires an image circle of about 60mm. I had been looking at the 35xl, since, while it has a narrower field of view, should allow much greater usable shift (and tilt). The downside would be the field of view not being so wide.
Please correct me if this thinking is incorrect. I've not used view cameras, but am trying to understand their practical use. Thanks
-
There was another recent thread discussing the options and from what I recall there aren't any other than a view camera. The 28mm works great and certainly is easier (quicker) to use on location then the view camera. I've got the 50mm shift and use it often but still I'd like something wider. The Canon 28mm tilt-shift works well but the files from my 1DSMk2 aren't as sharp as my P45. Perhaps the Mk3 would help, but again, the need (8,000.00) isn't pressing. Jim
-
"The Canon 28mm tilt-shift works well......."
I think you mean the 24 T/S? I find it and the 45 T/S and 90T/S adequate for magazine and low end client work. After lugging around a 4x5 for the last 30 years, these Canons are allot of fun.
-
Kirk, Your right, I meant the 24mm tilt-shift. Have you worked with the Canon 1DSMk3? I'm curious about how the files compare to the Mk2. Jim
-
No I have not, aside from playing with some at trade shows. I have been planning to upgrade this year, watching the threads on issues with the 1DS3 (most of which don't relate to how I wuld use them anyway) etc. I will make a decision in a couple of months.
-
Kirk, Your right, I meant the 24mm tilt-shift. Have you worked with the Canon 1DSMk3? I'm curious about how the files compare to the Mk2. Jim
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=182853\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I have tested the 1DsIII and compared it to my 1DsII. I bought one, tested it then sent it back. I would not see it as a backup to my A75. It is better (more detailed than the 1DsII) but you only see a difference with really good glass. I think its an incremental improvement and that a 22Mp back would be a better backup and would show more 'MF' resolution than the Canon.
Having thought this through I decided to continue viewing the DSLR's very much as an alternative to a 35mm SLR, though obviously with better resolution, the chief benefit is speed and small file size. For this purpose the faster firewire connectivity and smaller files of the 1DsII are for me an advantage over the 1DsIII. Overally the mk3 is a much nicer camera, but there is a place for a 16mp FF SLR in my kitbag. I'm looking forward to a 5DII as a possible upgrade to the 1DsII now as the live view capability is 'to die for'
-
Thanks for your impressions of the Canon. It makes sense to me to have another MF back, I just checked and it looks as though a refurbished P25 is around 12,000-13,000.00. I better get busy! Jim
-
Thanks for your impressions of the Canon. It makes sense to me to have another MF back, I just checked and it looks as though a refurbished P25 is around 12,000-13,000.00. I better get busy! Jim
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=182945\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
The only thing I'd say is that you may want to do a test and decide for yourself as my opinion may not be shared by others. In the end it's the lenses and lack of anti-aliasing filter that I think give MF the edge, but its an opinion.
On the positive side the DSLR has considerable advantages in operational speed and in terms of ISO. Sometimes that high ISO can get you out of a hole.
-
Jim,
Do you shoot tethered or not with your 28mm lens? Or does it just depend?
Dave
-
I shoot tethered whenever possible (studio, etc), on location it's usually to a CF card. Jim