How is this style of shot done?

Hair Bear · Dec 12, 2006

This is not my work but fasinates me

http://img147.imageshack.us/img147/6594/296911408c3268ce4e9ozy3.jpg

The guys full set can been seen here and its worth a look. I find all of his images very very good.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/all_the_names_are_already_taken_pfff/296911408/in/set-1705874/

I have emailed him to ask but got no response.

I'm not sure if he is digital but I did see a tag on one pic for 30D but others have neg boarders?

I'm interested in how you get so much contrast in the shots, is it done in PS after or captured on the image?

Can anybody help or know how its done?

Flash Harry · Dec 12, 2006

this effect is very similar to UV photography results I did at college, if memory serves correct. Other than that its probably on a grade 4 paper and an overexposed (enlarger) overcooked normal portrait.

Hair Bear · Dec 12, 2006

Hi Flash

Are you suggesting this is done by filter or by processing onto a specific paper ie grade 4?

fmw · Dec 12, 2006

He made a photograph of a man with a dirty face.

ndroo · Dec 12, 2006

Maybe the Dragan action was used. Not too sure but you can try this

http://www.atncentral.com/download.htm

Look for Dragan. Might be the monochrome version.

Hair Bear · Dec 12, 2006

fmw said:
He made a photograph of a man with a dirty face.

Clearly a technical observation there thanks, but that doesn't tell me how to get that sort of tonal quality and range.

Look at the balance between the skin tones and hair

If you look at his shots they are all very similar in style and its not just because they all have dirt on their faces

Hair Bear · Dec 12, 2006

ndroo said:
Maybe the Dragan action was used. Not too sure but you can try this

http://www.atncentral.com/download.htm

Look for Dragan. Might be the monochrome version.

Thanks, I just had alook at that and ran it on an image taken by a supplier. It puts out some interesting results. Not sure if its the answer but thank you

myopia · Dec 12, 2006

fmw said:
He made a photograph of a man with a dirty face.

you win the most-helpful award hands down.

fmw · Dec 12, 2006

Come on, guys chill out. It is simply a low key high contrast image of a human face. There wasn't anything special about the way it was shot. It was worked carefully in the darkroom and some effort was made to reduce dynamic range through the use of PS or through burning and dodging. I fail to see any magic in it. Don't mistake me, I think it's a good image but I don't understand why people see some mystery in the way it looks.

Alex_B · Dec 12, 2006

actually i go along with Fred here ... that looks just like some play with levels and curves to increase contrast without blowing too much of the highlights.

It is a great image though and the effect works really nicely!

Mad_Gnome · Dec 12, 2006

That guy has had his nose broken pretty severely at some point in his past.

sigmuh · Dec 12, 2006

I would also have to agree. There's nothing worth praising in that photo.
We're all talking about that B&W photo of the man with the broken nose, right?
If you slap it into greyscale (or do it a better way by changing your Levels and then using the Channel Mixer or Gradiant Map), then jack up the contrast.. you'd get that image.

Hair Bear · Dec 13, 2006

fmw said:
Come on, guys chill out. It is simply a low key high contrast image of a human face. There wasn't anything special about the way it was shot. It was worked carefully in the darkroom and some effort was made to reduce dynamic range through the use of PS or through burning and dodging. I fail to see any magic in it. Don't mistake me, I think it's a good image but I don't understand why people see some mystery in the way it looks.

The magic, too me, is that I don't know how it was done.

What is low key high contrast and how is that done?

And frankly I don't see anybody who thinks this style, and the way the picture is taken, actually showing examples of how 'they' have done or would do similar.

In order to be able to adjust the contrast on an image like that you need a very good base.

You also need to get close to get that detail, very close I think.

Did any of you, who think this is easy, actually look at his photo stream? It seems most of the images are of people on the street. They are hard to shoot, you have to be carefull and sensative.

Remember you are stood infront of somebody who sleeps on the street with £?k worth of kit in your hand and probably cash in your pocket. They have nothing to loose, you do.

Not withstanding the fact that I like the style and I am instersted in how it was actually done. And given they are street shots, they are well composed, balanced, sharp and interesting. Can we all say that our shots are the same? < thats a not aimed at anybody, just a general question to us all.

Hair Bear · Dec 13, 2006

sigmuh said:
I would also have to agree. There's nothing worth praising in that photo.
We're all talking about that B&W photo of the man with the broken nose, right?
If you slap it into greyscale (or do it a better way by changing your Levels and then using the Channel Mixer or Gradiant Map), then jack up the contrast.. you'd get that image.

Sigmuh, post some of your work up for me to see.

Frankly anybody who thinks there is nothing worth praising in that photo is clearly a genius and I would love to see his photos so I could lash an equal amount of praise on him.

Digital Matt · Dec 13, 2006

I'm pretty sure this is digital, and not film here, so I think it's safe to end the discussion of graded paper and burning. It's just natural light. Look into his eyes. It's a very simple vignette added to darken the edges and draw your eyes to the center. You don't need to be very close to get detail in skin. You just need to have a good lens, and sharpen the photo very well in photoshop. Also, yes, the contrast was maximized. By low key, Fred meant that the image overall, contains a lot of contrast and shadow tones, as opposed to high key, in which the photograph would have a lower contrast and contain mostly highlights.