Hey Paul, I totally agree, but wanted to give Walt specific instructions that he could easily replicate. For the examples that he showed, they were most definitely shot in "available" or "natural" light in late afternoon, and in open shade (ie. The shadow cast by the buildings that she has her subjects against). There has been no light modification in these shots except for the angle of the subject to achieve side/backlighting etc, which is more what I was trying to emphasise in my explanation.
The contrast that you speak of (ie. How the light differs from shadow to highlight) as it is seen in those shots, is most easily achieved in the conditions that I explained above. The textures of the walls, wood etc that she has used only highlight this contrast which is what gives the "depth" to these images. Particularly in the shot of the little girl out the window, you can see there are very subtle catchlights in the top half of her eyes and dark shadow under her chin/eyes. This is most definitely achieved by late afternoon light, if there were any fill added to this, the shadows would have been softer and the catchlights brighter/lower. I completely agree with your final sentence - ie. " The most difficult part of photography is learning what the camera will see and how it will differ from what you see." Being able to predict the final outcome is the whole object as far as I am concerned. It is something that has taken me almost 10 years to get a hold of and I still get curve balls thrown into the mix that make me think. I am getting much more accurate these days though, and rarely rely on meters, or numbers to get me my results. I just know now that I can look at a scene and turn a dial to the left or right a few notches and it will give me what I want. I hate the techo stuff anyways, I leave that to you guys on the PDML, so that I can just wave my little "damsel in distress" flag when I need to and not have to boggle my mind with more than it can handle! Lol. Tan.x. -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of paul stenquist Sent: Monday, 13 December 2010 12:19 PM To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Re: OT: Photographer Monique It's not about whether the light is "available" or provided by the photographer. It's about the direction of the light and how much it differs from shadow to highlight. Subtle shadows and texturing may frequently require some fill light in addition to what nature or room lighting provides. The texturing you see is the result of a mix of shadow and highlight. Getting the right mix takes practice. The camera tends to make the difference between shadow and highlight much more extreme than does your eye. That's because your eye and brain combine to balance he difference. The most difficult part of photography is learning what the camera will see and how it will differ from what you see. Paul On Dec 12, 2010, at 8:49 PM, Walter Gilbert wrote: > Thanks so much for the wonderfully informative answer, Tanya! > > Not only did it tell me everything I need to know, but everything I wanted to hear. I much prefer to use available light whenever possible, and I was afraid it was going to turn out that I'd need to use external flash with a Fong diffuser, and all manner of gewgaws and whirligigs to fully achieve the look. And, yes -- the style is really similar to yours, save for Monique's lower-key rendering. I can see where both would be beneficial, depending upon the actual skin tone of the subject. > > What I loved about the contrast/depth in the third image is that it seemed to make the shot more expressive by a long shot, and that's a quality I've noticed in a lot of shots that really "grabbed" me. But, I was never able to put my finger on the particular quality until now. And, now that I've discovered the virtues of shooting in RAW, I just might stand a chance of achieving that quality. > > Thanks again for the helpful reply. Now, if I can just get some cooperative weather and subjects ... > > Best, > > Walt > > > > On 12/12/2010 7:23 PM, Tanya Love wrote: >> Hey there Walt, >> >> I know the effect that you mean, and it is very easy to do, in fact, >> it is almost my style exactly. The key lies in the light and the texture. >> >> Firstly, it must be shot with available light, in full open shade, >> and late in the afternoon, with the child facing into/toward the sun, >> or with the sun to the side of the child, depending upon where you want the shadows to fall. >> Don't add a reflector to fill shadows. You must also shoot RAW >> because in the post-processing, you will need to increase the dynamic >> range by reworking the shadows/highlights to achieve the depth that you need. >> >> Next, you have to make sure that the image contains a good mix of >> textures, that way, when you do your post on it, it will have a lot >> of contrast and that "depth" that you speak of. >> >> I can only see one shot of Moniques on that page that looks as though >> she may have added some artificial light to it, and that is the one >> with the violin, but even it may have been shot with available light >> too, depending what the original location/backdrop was, it is hard to >> tell with that shot due to the post production work (btw, I LOVE that shot!). >> >> Here is a quick example that I just did up for you. I processed it >> to achieve a similar feel in the sepia to the example that you showed >> (although the skin tones are a bit more high key as I prefer them >> this way), but also included a colour version as that is how I >> originally intended it to look when I shot it. >> >> http://www.lovebytes.com.au/files/waltsexample.jpg >> >> I do all of my main post in Lightroom, and then tweak the final >> levels/curves in PS CS5. >> >> Hope that helps! >> >> Tan.x. >> >> >>> >>> ----- Mensaje original ---- >>>> De: Walter Gilbert<[email protected]> >>>> Para: Pentax-Discuss Mail List<[email protected]> >>>> Enviado: dom,12 diciembre, 2010 04:53 >>>> Asunto: OT: Photographer Monique >>>> >>>> Hi all, >>>> >>>> I stumbled across this link the other day looking for something >>>> interesting to post on my Facebook page, and was just struck by >>>> some of the images. There are a few that really stood out to me >>>> and I was hoping someone might be able to tell me how to go about >> approximating the effect: >>>> http://smashingpicture.com/photographer-monique/ >>>> >>>> Here are the particular images: >>>> >>>> http://smashingpicture.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/12/moni4.jpg >>>> http://smashingpicture.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/12/moni5.jpg >>>> http://smashingpicture.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/12/moni7.jpg >>>> >>>> I just love the overall tone of the images, and especially the >>>> skin tones -- the third image being the best exemplar of what I'd >>>> like to accomplish. There just seems to be so much depth to it. >>>> Any ideas how I might go about achieving that? >>>> >>>> Thanks! >>>> >>>> Walt >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >>>> [email protected] >>>> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net >>>> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above >>>> and follow the directions. >>>> >>> >>> >> >> -- >> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >> [email protected] >> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net >> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above >> and follow the directions. >> >> > > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > [email protected] > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
