How to achieve fashion-like look like these pics..

tinkerbell50404

TPF Noob!
Joined
Jul 5, 2006
Messages
27
Reaction score
0
I have a digital Olympus SP-500 UZ. Just wondering if it is even possible to achieve fashion-like style photography.

How would I be able to achieve looks like the pictures below?

http://ashlee.us/components/com_akogallery/img_pictures/shoot6_20050519_-187577528.jpg
The light behind her, yet no shadow on her face. Was a flash used?
A reflector used?

http://www.sweetkisses.us/albums/newofficial/05.jpg
Is this all natural lighting here? Is there any special specifications the camera should be on to achieve this? Any flash, reflector?
 
They are very different looks, and personally I think the first one is a bit lacking. Her face is in shadow. It's not bad, but could really use some fill-flash or bounce light. It looks like they had to lighten the image so that her face wouldn't be dark, and this killed the contrast.

In the second one, it's mostly natural light, but that bit of shine on her shoulder makes me think that they may have used a large reflector or softbox on a strobe as fill.

BTW, I believe there's a forum rule not to post images that you haven't taken yourself. It's cool to link to them, though.

And welcome to the board! :D
 
I'm no expert on lighting, but I've been doing some reading lately since it's one of my weak areas. So... I'll make my barely-educated comments.

In the first shot, some soft light, from a reflector or a softbox type deal, would help bring out her features and clothing, and reduce the overpowering glare around her--particularly around her face and hair. I personally think (I think) that soft, even, front-lighting from somewhere near the position of the camera, at least laterally, and possibly from either above or below the camera, would be ideal. As it is, it looks like all the light is coming from directly behind her, with whatever frontlighting is provided coming from reflections from the wall behind the photographer--and, as MarkC pointed out, the image appears to have been lightened to compensate for the extreme contrast. She's underexposed; her legs have no detail whatsoever. If film, this image would have a high-contrast range negative, with the light behind her at near maximum density, and her legs at virtually no density. And yes, a flash could be used, but I'm not sure how just yet, because I'm currently reading up on flash and light ratios and such things.

With the second image, it appears that the light is coming from above, behind, and slightly to the left of the camera. It looks like sunlight to me (especially considering the setting) from a somewhat overcast sky. It's possible that another light source was located to the right of the camera, and probably a bit above the subject, pointed down. If there was, then I think it would have been a large light source, like a softbox, or the overcast sky.

What I've been reading says to try to figure out what lights are used and where, based on the shadows and highlights... their depths, positions, and borders.

Anyway, if I'm wrong, someone please say so, becuase I'm interested in this one, too. Lighting control is my biggest weak area (next to composition).
 
Philip Weir said:
If I was trying to get the above effects. I would use:
Shot [1] Simply a large flash onto the background from the left, maybe a reflector on the front, but I suspect not, then expose for the subject and let the background burn out.
Shot [2] Straight available light on a semi bright day.

I agree, but I'd add that possibly in the second shot, a reflector was used, because her face is very well illuminated, and it might be a gold reflector, because she's pretty warm toned. (although, it IS Jessica Simpson with a major fake tan so)
 
Yeah I would have to agree with a warming reflecter on the second shot.

How would I be able to achieve looks like the pictures below?
With a little bit of imagination, you could achieve pretty good results with your camera. An example of working with very little is Terry Richardson. He will often shoot with a cheap point & shoot and get paid big money for his work.
 
#1 isn't working. #2 was also achieved by shooting wide open.

LWW
 

Most reactions

Back
Top