Thanks Christopher my Dedo brother. It means a lot for me with compliments coming from you. Yes you are right about that nose shadow. I use a 3'x4' Chimera softbox as fill but it is impossible to place it under the camera becuase of the fact I have no space to stand. So the fill is always off camera axis not by choice but severe limitations of space. I always get shadows on the background from the soft fill becuase the model is sitting 1 feet from background so I have to move the fill to minimise that shadows.
Originally Posted by Christopher Nisperos
Whenever I use the monster 14" Elinchrom fresnel, I mount it on a heavy duty cine castor stand, then C-stand for the Arri and stands for other lights and cookies..well I have hardly anyway space to stand. I have to move around in this small jungle of lights like a monkey. I feel like to cry sometimes becuase the space problem works against me all the time. On the other hand Dedo lights really kick arse and works like charm in small space.
Today I use the Dedos and Arri as key for the first time on anothor model. The girl has good skin so I don't use diffusion for the key. I may post the results here after I do some retouching. I am so amazed by Dedo...it is not that hard light if you place it very close to the model face. You know hard light can accentuate bad skins, spots, lines.. and that's something I have to watch out for....but still Long Live to Hard lights!
Last edited by singlo; 05-14-2007 at 07:04 PM. Click to view previous post history.
Hope this is not yours and my imagination becuase I too have noticed that tungsten lights seem to be kinder to skin spots and freckles. I use both strobes and tungsten. I notice the differences. Most strobe users say lots of negative things and bashing about hot lights, but for me hot lights are like Pandora Box.
Originally Posted by RoBBo
Well, the three things that determine the quality of a lightsource are it's size, eveness and spectral makeup. If these can be matched closely, through filters and/or other means, the effect on film will be the same. Tungsten light is considerably yellower than daylight flash, as such yellowish tones will appear lighter with tungsten than with daylight flash, that is, unless you filter the flash appropriately.
Originally Posted by singlo
I have a Century No. Six Studio camera, a Veritas 19" lens and movie lights, and I've done some Hurrell style shots. To claim that indistinguishable results can't be gotten with strobes or with smaller formats is simply wrong, assuming that one doesn't enlarge too much. The advantages of 8x10 are the ability to make very big enlargements, assuming your focus is on! (Many Hollywood Golden Age photographs aren't perfectly in focus}; and the fact that negative retouching is much easier on larger negatives.
here are some tests with the Dedo 150W or Arri 1KW as key lights done yestersday.( No diffusion on the key light and hardly any retouching on her skin.) Again I try not to get the Hollywood look but instead borrow inspiration from their techniques. The previous photos I posted were done with Fresnel strobe attachments. Note the last photo, you will see the inevitable pitfall of fill light creating unwanted shadow on the background when the model sat very close to it.
attack of the Home Depot "Ghetto Bees"
first shoot -- an imaginative depiction of the Director of Interrogations, Abu Gharib prison.
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG have the option to remove this ad.)
I really like a few of these... to my surprise no one ever set up such a flickr group! so I did
Amen. However, note that much of the "publicity portraiture" of the era was not necessarily intended to be enlarged anyway. As already mentioned on this thread, contact printing was the most economical way to go, at the time. Portraits which were enlarged were often just to 11x14 or —more rarely— 16x20. I believe these were called "lobby portraits".
Originally Posted by Peter De Smidt
Originally Posted by singlo
What kind of light source (brand & model) are you using for your fill?
Your compositions seem tight.. Can't you use your light with a smaller softbox or striplight (if you have one), and therefore closer to your camera?
Have you tried simply bouncing a Dedo onto a white card or sheet of styrofoam positioned near or above the camera lens (good lens shading oblige!)?
Lastly, if your light is small & lightweight enough, you could mount it to an articulated arm and attach it to your tripod leg, thereby eliminating a lightstand and freeing-up some space for yourself.
PS - do I understand correctly that you would ordinarily place your fill under the camera, if you could? //cn
Last edited by Christopher Nisperos; 05-20-2007 at 11:41 AM. Click to view previous post history.
hello Christopher brother,
Originally Posted by Christopher Nisperos
For fill, I use Elinchrom BX100 flash head mounted with a small Chimera Super Pro Plus softbox fitted 20 degrees grid and a full CTO gel. The grid here is not to control spill but to cut down the output of the strobe, otherwise it is too powerful to mix it with hot lights. I don't have enough hot lights at the moment so I have to mix hotlights with existing strobes. Ideally I should get more hot lights but I don't have the money.... I have just bought the Dedo projection attachment with zoom lens.
Yeah I can't shoot less tight, if I zoom the lens at wider angle, I get lens distortion of arms and legs at this cramped shooting distance;e.g. making girls arms and legs fat! So I often shoot with telephoto zoom and stand outside my room by the door.
Your compositions seem tight..
I also have a chimera extra small softbox fitted 20 degree grid but it is often used as kicker/hair light. I have also two chimera strip boxes but they are very deep taking up lots of space.
Can't you use your light with a smaller softbox or striplight (if you have one), and therefore closer to your camera?
Also I doubt if smaller softbox would be as effective as larger one for fill. My theory is that the smaller the fill, the harder the shadows it produces on the background.
In your experience with Dedo small softbox as fill, do you find it effective?
Good suggestions. I haven't tried it. Perhaps this is my next experiment. I bought a Matthrews articulate balls arm and Dedo flex arm a while ago and sometimes I mount the Dedo and arm on furnitures with superclamps. I am looking into the Dedo diffusion rounded scrim or the small Photoflex softbox for Dedo.
Have you tried simply bouncing a Dedo onto a white card or sheet of styrofoam positioned near or above the camera lens (good lens shading oblige!
)?Lastly, if your light is small & lightweight enough, you could mount it to an articulated arm and attach it to your tripod leg, thereby eliminating a lightstand and freeing-up some space for yourself.
My fill is not exactly under the camera becuase of space issue.
PS - do I understand correctly that you would ordinarily place your fill under
the camera, if you could? //cn
Hey Chris, have you ever heard of Alan Weissman Film Noir photos?
It seems he is also shooting digital now. He uses large white reflectors for fill by bouncing hotlights. Here is the link:
Hey Guy Catelli, good going, seems you are having fun. Don't joke about that kind of thing, it is politically incorrect. Here is my take of cheesecake taken yestersday . I really don't like and shoot cheesecake (or glamour whatever you call it) normally but the girl asked for it:
Last edited by singlo; 05-20-2007 at 09:37 PM. Click to view previous post history.
In your book, you mentioned about the offending cross shadows in some hollywood portraits. Well they may be considered as mistakes. Guess what Peter Lindbergh have done to actress Milla Jovoich in classic Hollywood style of mood in the currnet issue of Italian Vogue? He deliberately throws the rule out of the window and create five conflicting shadows on the background with fresnel spots as fill! I know it is HMI fresnel becuase he sometimes include the light in the photo.