First Ever Studio Shoot - C&C

[ThornleyGroves]

Hi everyone, so i recently bought a gemini 400/400 studio travelkit, and a 6x7 lastolite background with floor vinyl. I had problems lighting the vinyl, but think i did it the best i could with the equipment i had. The model (olivia) is a friend of mine, and she has never modelled before, so it was new for both of us and i just used the time to really experiment with the studio kit and background etc.

What do you lot think of these pics?! Would really appreciate some comments.

1

2

3


4


5


6


7


8


9

Thanks!

 

[RauschPhotography]

I think your WB is off... I'm getting a blue tint on the whites in every picture.

 

[mandrew]

Your white balance is definitely a little off... Second... Does your friend know you can see her "chest" through the white shirt before posting it on the net? Just a heads up...

 

[ThornleyGroves]

right, okay, so i'll change the wb settings on my camera next time!!! and yes she does!

 

[gsgary]

The lighting looks very flat with no seperation, the model is to close to the background with light coming off the background and over exposing the shots

 

[oldmacman]

Aside from what others have posted:
- were you going for flat lighting on the model?
- I like the shots where you are at or above eye level. The ones below eye level are not as flattering
- except for the last shot, there isn't much going on with the poses as she is square to the camera in all the others
- I know you wanted to test the lights, but it's hard to shoot when there is no goal in mind. Having a goal will help with directing your friend.

 

[Steve Reddin]

Hi,

OK, WB already mentioned. The good thing is that, if you are shooting within a consistent environment, i.e. the same place each time such as your own studio, it'll only take once to get the balance correct and then you'll know it for ever more, so that's not a big issue really.

I'd use the opportunity of your first few shoots to see the effect of lighting positions, rembrant, short, broad et al; the above images all look like the same set up so you might have lost a bit of an opportunity here.

It's not all negative however, there are some very nice poses here, #5 in particular is very nice.

My advice would be:

1. Correct your WB. Get someone in to where you will normally shoot and get the setting right.

2. Have a look at the different lighting effects you can do with your set up, taking note of the effect of lamp height, direction and strength etc.

3. Study some of the classic poses, fashion magazines are usually a good source, pick images you think work really well and see if you can work out (a) how they were lit and (b) how they were posed. From these draw up a list of potential poses for another shoot.

4. Get Olivia back and do another shoot.

Hope this helps,

Steve

 

[oldmacman]

right, okay, so i'll change the wb settings on my camera next time!!!

People are just trying to help. No exclamations necessary, especially three. You don't need to wait for next time especially if you shot RAW files. Here is what I did with the second shot (my fav) from the set. Not only corrected the WB, somewhat, but sharpened the eyes and tried to help the lighting along. Again, you may be able to do more with a RAW file in that regard. Learning a little PP will help when you don't nail the shots.

Original:

PP

 

[ThornleyGroves]

Cheers oldmacman, i always use exclamation marks! ahah it wasnt a sign of me getting annoyed, it was a sign of frustration at myself for not noticing it at the time

i didn't go in with a plan of what i wanted to achieve which is probably obvious now, i just got her over, to try and get some shots and see what i could get etc, however if i wanted to go for a special theme etc, then i would have maybe acclompished it better i think, as i would be directing to achieve a certain style... the more i realize, the more i notice the WB is way off...

lastly, would me playing around with the iso settings achieve anything better? i want to achieve shots such as those of zeckson's in a post that was done near mine... where the sking is jsut perfect etc, i know i've got a lot to learn in a studio but im prepared to, and i want to!

Thanks!

 

[Steve Reddin]

lastly, would me playing around with the iso settings achieve anything better?
Thanks!

Hi,

Basically no, changing the ISO would not have helped or detracted from the images above. ISO is a measure of how sensitive your camera sensor (or more correctly, the photosites within the array of your camera sensor) are to light, you can increase their sensitivity so they absorb more light. However, this usually isn't necessary within a studio, if you need more light you increase the power of the lamps, generally keeping the ISO down to decrease grain.

That's not an absolute rule of course, there are more advanced shooting practices where you will increase the ISO to balance a smaller aperture where you want a specific lighting ratio or such, but that's outside the scope of this post.

Hope this helps,

Steve

 

[oldmacman]

i want to achieve shots such as those of zeckson's in a post that was done near mine... where the sking is jsut perfect etc, i know i've got a lot to learn in a studio but im prepared to, and i want to!

Thanks!

I took a peek, those are some nice shots. He is mixing natural light with some artificial light to get those shots. Nice detail in the shadows and the highlights. Having those shadows helps create volume. It also looks like a lot of PP for the airbrushed look.

 

[mandrew]

If you want you can try this...
1 Satin white umbrella set up on the left at 1/2 power
Camera settings:
Shutter speed 200
ISO 100-200
F/5.6

Adjust if necessary

 

[FishDracula]

I think you have really good model and I like some of the shots. However, as somebody also mentioned the lighting looks kinda "flat" and there is little (almost none) separation...
May be next time you can try some basic (really easy) portrait studio lighting techniques like Rembrandt Lighting and Butterfly Lighting.
What does your studio lighting kit includes?