Pages: [1] 2   Go Down

Author Topic: Nice light question  (Read 7403 times)

kevs

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 439
Nice light question
« on: May 29, 2013, 04:35:41 PM »

here is a nice new shot by Chris Anderson.
what do you think the light scheme used it?
Logged
Imac 27"
PS CC

kikashi

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5374
Re: Nice light question
« Reply #1 on: May 29, 2013, 05:53:55 PM »

here is a nice new shot by Chris Anderson.
what do you think the light scheme used it?


Don't know. Don't care, save to avoid it.

Jeremy
Logged

Slobodan Blagojevic

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 9363
  • When everybody thinks the same... nobody thinks.
    • My website
Re: Nice light question
« Reply #2 on: May 29, 2013, 06:22:41 PM »

Looks like someone dug that one out of a trash bin?

TMARK

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1841
Re: Nice light question
« Reply #3 on: May 29, 2013, 11:01:04 PM »

Could be a single light and reflector(s), or a key and a strip box placed low and slightly camera left for fill.  Simple and effective.
Logged

theguywitha645d

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 970
Re: Nice light question
« Reply #4 on: May 30, 2013, 07:11:31 PM »

It could also be natural light. If you look in Al's eyes, it appears to be a sunlit room. The other thing that may be part of the quality is the process. It could an old wet/dry plate process which would mean the spectral sensitivity of the image is very limited and confined to the blue.
« Last Edit: May 30, 2013, 11:21:41 PM by theguywitha645d »
Logged

TMARK

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1841
Re: Nice light question
« Reply #5 on: May 31, 2013, 12:21:31 AM »

It could also be natural light. If you look in Al's eyes, it appears to be a sunlit room. The other thing that may be part of the quality is the process. It could an old wet/dry plate process which would mean the spectral sensitivity of the image is very limited and confined to the blue.

It may be the sub, but it would have to be really bright.  It looks to me like strobe, but it certainly could be daylight.  It seems stopped down, which is one reason I guessed strobe.  I would have lit it with a big key high and camera right, boomed over the subject, reflectors or a strip light for fill.  Bam.  Bob's your uncle.
Logged

theguywitha645d

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 970
Re: Nice light question
« Reply #6 on: May 31, 2013, 12:35:42 AM »

I agree, it could be done in a studio with strobes. I was just adding some possibilities. Although it was hard to top the great advice in the first two posts.
Logged

TMARK

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1841
Re: Nice light question
« Reply #7 on: May 31, 2013, 09:32:01 AM »

I agree, it could be done in a studio with strobes. I was just adding some possibilities. Although it was hard to top the great advice in the first two posts.

I dig it, although it looks like a proof from a laser printer used at a magazine for rough proofs.
Logged

theguywitha645d

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 970
Re: Nice light question
« Reply #8 on: May 31, 2013, 11:23:37 AM »

I an not sure of the printing. There is something going on there--the example looks like a scanned magazine page because of the text bleed through. The skin however has that blue-only "tintype" quality of very textured. And that could have come filtration or some work with channel mixing.
Logged

PeterAit

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2546
    • Peter Aitken Photographs
Re: Nice light question
« Reply #9 on: May 31, 2013, 11:33:36 AM »

Why are you posting a pdf that we have to download? Come on, learn how the forum works! And, what the hell is a "light scheme?"
Logged
Peter
"Photographic technique is a means to an end, never the end itself."
View my web page
View my Facebook page

theguywitha645d

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 970
Re: Nice light question
« Reply #10 on: May 31, 2013, 12:05:58 PM »

Peter, another insightful comment. Very helpful. No one every accused LuLa of being friendly and supportive.  ???
Logged

Slobodan Blagojevic

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 9363
  • When everybody thinks the same... nobody thinks.
    • My website
Re: Nice light question
« Reply #11 on: May 31, 2013, 12:12:56 PM »

Peter, another insightful comment. Very helpful. No one every accused LuLa of being friendly and supportive.  ???

God helps those who help themselves. ;)

theguywitha645d

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 970
Re: Nice light question
« Reply #12 on: May 31, 2013, 12:19:59 PM »

You mean like going out and asking questions to people who might know?
Logged

Slobodan Blagojevic

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 9363
  • When everybody thinks the same... nobody thinks.
    • My website
Re: Nice light question
« Reply #13 on: May 31, 2013, 12:57:27 PM »

You mean like going out and asking questions to people who might know?

No, learning how to post an image in a thread after almost 300 posts.

theguywitha645d

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 970
Re: Nice light question
« Reply #14 on: May 31, 2013, 02:51:28 PM »

No, learning how to post an image in a thread after almost 300 posts.

Didn't know we had to apply for planning permission from you. Guess what, people don't need or care what you think might be minimum requirements to join this group. When everyone thinks the same, then no one thinks.
Logged

Martin Ranger

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 186
    • My Website.
Re: Nice light question
« Reply #15 on: June 01, 2013, 01:20:07 PM »

It may be the sub, but it would have to be really bright.  It looks to me like strobe, but it certainly could be daylight.  It seems stopped down, which is one reason I guessed strobe.  I would have lit it with a big key high and camera right, boomed over the subject, reflectors or a strip light for fill.  Bam.  Bob's your uncle.

+1
Definitely a fairly large key camera right. I first thought natural light, but the windows would have to be above the subject, plus the above.
The reproduction looks like a scan from a magazine to me.

Also, seriously, what is wrong with you people? Someone asks a questions and all he gets is smart ass comments (TMARK an 645d guy excepted). And the question was not even about Digital MF   :D
Logged
Martin Ranger
Seattle, WA

www.martinrangerimages.com

Slobodan Blagojevic

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 9363
  • When everybody thinks the same... nobody thinks.
    • My website
Re: Nice light question
« Reply #16 on: June 01, 2013, 01:36:48 PM »

... Someone asks a questions and all he gets is smart ass comments...

In addition to a question, the OP actually started with a statement ("nice shot"). I am certainly entitled to debate statements and opinions in a public forum, no?

Since I think it is actually a crappy shot (whether due to poor photocopying or photographer's intent), and its "effects" do not seem to stem from a particular lighting setup,  but from some form of HDR (or photocopier running out of toner), I did not see the point in debating the lighting.

Telecaster

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1673
Re: Nice light question
« Reply #17 on: June 01, 2013, 02:33:32 PM »

I like it. Looks to be a proof of some sort. All the better...anything that bugs the "photos must look real" dogma peddlers gets my Thumbs-Up.

-Dave-
Logged

Martin Ranger

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 186
    • My Website.
Re: Nice light question
« Reply #18 on: June 01, 2013, 05:08:05 PM »

I am certainly entitled to debate statements and opinions in a public forum, no?

I don't recall anyone suggeting otherwise.

Since I think it is actually a crappy shot (whether due to poor photocopying or photographer's intent), and its "effects" do not seem to stem from a particular lighting setup,  but from some form of HDR (or photocopier running out of toner), I did not see the point in debating the lighting.

Photography is all about light, and I do not see how one can argue that the particular lighting setup does not influence the look of an image, irrespective of the post-processing. In this case, the lighting setup leads to the far side of the face being brighter than the closer side. If the photographer had taken the photo into the lighter side of the face, the result would have been completely different. Some of the look of the final image may be due to HDR, or local contrast enhancement or rather high levels of sharpening (at least in the digital version of the image), but this is all on top of the lighting setup.

By the way, the pdf seems to be a copy of New York Magazine.
Logged
Martin Ranger
Seattle, WA

www.martinrangerimages.com

kevs

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 439
Re: Nice light question
« Reply #19 on: June 01, 2013, 11:16:25 PM »

THANKS, sorry for delay, did not have email notification checked.
I ripped this from New York Mag, and scanned it on a flatbed.

I think the lighting is quite mysterious and nice, that's why I'm posting it. You all have confirmed we don't know how it's lit. But thanks for the input.

This guy is shooting regularly now for New York.

I do agree that the first commenter, Kikashi, gives a bad vibe to this thread and should not be posting.

PS I don't see a way to add images inline on this forum.
Logged
Imac 27"
PS CC
Pages: [1] 2   Go Up