Lighting matters.

[K9Kirk]

Man, what great shots, Ron. I have to say, @10k that had better be a beast of a camera because it's a beast on the wallet.
But wait, Santa's coming soon! (Ha! the kid in me,)

 

[ronlane]

Man, what great shots, Ron. I have to say, @10k that had better be a beast of a camera because it's a beast on the wallet.
But wait, Santa's coming soon! (Ha! the kid in me,)

Thanks @K9Kirk, it is a beast of a camera and probably more than I will ever need. But the opportunity to shoot with it was just too hard to pass up.

 

[AlanKlein]

I think the catch lights in the second are more natural. There are too many in the first especially that big one on the bottom of her iris. Nice shots.

 

[ronlane]

Thank you.

 

[adamhiram]

Very nice work! I recognized the EyeLighter in the catchlights immediately; I'm never quite sure if I like that modifier or not, I think it depends on where the lower catchlight ends up positioned in the eye. Very cool that you got to play with so much high end gear. I'd be curious how much difference the gear made, and if the results would have been drastically different with your 1Dx and some Godox/Flashpoint lights

 

[smoke665]

; I'm never quite sure if I like that modifier or not, I think it depends on where the lower catchlight ends up positioned in the eye.

As I have an Eyelighter on order the curved catchlights on the bottom of the eye were concerning to me as well. Everything I've read, watched, concerning their use don't have that, which makes me wonder if it's a position error. All the tuts seem to use clamshell lighting with a "big" modifier high and down at a 45. They all point out distance as critical, with the reflector both 30" from the subject, and 30" from the light. Guess I'll either be disappointed or pleased once it comes in and I get a chance to play with.

 

[AlanKlein]

; I'm never quite sure if I like that modifier or not, I think it depends on where the lower catchlight ends up positioned in the eye.

As I have an Eyelighter on order the curved catchlights on the bottom of the eye were concerning to me as well. Everything I've read, watched, concerning their use don't have that, which makes me wonder if it's a position error. All the tuts seem to use clamshell lighting with a "big" modifier high and down at a 45. They all point out distance as critical, with the reflector both 30" from the subject, and 30" from the light. Guess I'll either be disappointed or pleased once it comes in and I get a chance to play with.

Catch lights represent the sun and add life to the eye so they don;t look dead. There's only one sun, not two or more. It's best on the iris at 10am or 2pm. If you look at traditional portrait photos and paintings, you'll see this.

 

[ronlane]

Very nice work! I recognized the EyeLighter in the catchlights immediately; I'm never quite sure if I like that modifier or not, I think it depends on where the lower catchlight ends up positioned in the eye. Very cool that you got to play with so much high end gear. I'd be curious how much difference the gear made, and if the results would have been drastically different with your 1Dx and some Godox/Flashpoint lights

Thank you Adam. Yes I could have gotten something very close with my current setup in a similar sized studio. But the files of a medium format camera are different and then you throw in all the Profoto lighting equipment and the eyelighter.

; I'm never quite sure if I like that modifier or not, I think it depends on where the lower catchlight ends up positioned in the eye.

As I have an Eyelighter on order the curved catchlights on the bottom of the eye were concerning to me as well. Everything I've read, watched, concerning their use don't have that, which makes me wonder if it's a position error. All the tuts seem to use clamshell lighting with a "big" modifier high and down at a 45. They all point out distance as critical, with the reflector both 30" from the subject, and 30" from the light. Guess I'll either be disappointed or pleased once it comes in and I get a chance to play with.

The placement of the eye lighter catch lights could be due to holding the camera at a lower angle than I would have with a dslr. On this camera, I was shooting using the rear screen on them.

; I'm never quite sure if I like that modifier or not, I think it depends on where the lower catchlight ends up positioned in the eye.

As I have an Eyelighter on order the curved catchlights on the bottom of the eye were concerning to me as well. Everything I've read, watched, concerning their use don't have that, which makes me wonder if it's a position error. All the tuts seem to use clamshell lighting with a "big" modifier high and down at a 45. They all point out distance as critical, with the reflector both 30" from the subject, and 30" from the light. Guess I'll either be disappointed or pleased once it comes in and I get a chance to play with.

Catch lights represent the sun and add life to the eye so they don;t look dead. There's only one sun, not two or more. It's best on the iris at 10am or 2pm. If you look at traditional portrait photos and paintings, you'll see this.

To me, the eye lighter does add a little too much light in the eye but that seems to be the "in" thing right now with headshots. (Look at Peter Hurley's headshots. He will typically have a triangle of light from his lighting setup.)

 

[AlanKlein]

...

To me, the eye lighter does add a little too much light in the eye but that seems to be the "in" thing right now with headshots. (Look at Peter Hurley's headshots. He will typically have a triangle of light from his lighting setup.)

You're not Peter Hurley.

 

[smoke665]

The placement of the eye lighter catch lights could be due to holding the camera at a lower angle than I would have with a dslr. On this camera, I ws shooting using the rear screen on them.

I'm thinking maybe the upper light was to low, and the reflector angled to steep. I'm really looking forward to experimenting with the Eyelighter, and one of the reasons I also ordered the 7' umbrella. Everything I've read puts the key higher than a normal clam shell setup, much higher and steeper angle at 45degrees, with the Eyelighter down/and angled up, 30" from the eyes, and the back of the reflector 30" from the bottom of the modifier. The silver ones are really specular, the white being much tamer and more what I'm looking for. Here's a little reference from B&H Getting Lit with the Westcott Eyelighter 2 Reflective Panel I'm not a fan of the first photo, but if you go down about the 4th, you can see where it's tamed down with the white cover. https://www.petersphotography.com/ the guy that invented shows how it performs, as does Headshot photography: Studio lighting - Westcott Eyelighter - Tangents

 

[jcdeboever]

Thank you Weepete. Man you have no idea how awesome of a day it was. Tony talking to you about what he is doing as he set it up and then see him shoot it and then you get the opportunity to use the same stuff to get your own images. I've been so excited the last couple of days and have a lot of ideas going on in my head now.

No problem mate, I've no doubt it was a fantastic experience, sounds totally awesome! Your results speak for themselves and I've been meaning to comment on your post since I saw it. Your shots literally stood out to me, so time well spent buddy. Take the advise, learn what you can, implement it and yes please, more shots!

I'm pacing myself with what images are left. (Portrait work that I am very happy with). It's coming soon.

What do you think about those huge raw files? With the GFX50R, I am always stunned at how much dynamic range there is.

 

[ronlane]

The placement of the eye lighter catch lights could be due to holding the camera at a lower angle than I would have with a dslr. On this camera, I ws shooting using the rear screen on them.

I'm thinking maybe the upper light was to low, and the reflector angled to steep. I'm really looking forward to experimenting with the Eyelighter, and one of the reasons I also ordered the 7' umbrella. Everything I've read puts the key higher than a normal clam shell setup, much higher and steeper angle at 45degrees, with the Eyelighter down/and angled up, 30" from the eyes, and the back of the reflector 30" from the bottom of the modifier. The silver ones are really specular, the white being much tamer and more what I'm looking for. Here's a little reference from B&H Getting Lit with the Westcott Eyelighter 2 Reflective Panel I'm not a fan of the first photo, but if you go down about the 4th, you can see where it's tamed down with the white cover. https://www.petersphotography.com/ the guy that invented shows how it performs, as does Headshot photography: Studio lighting - Westcott Eyelighter - Tangents

Yes, the key light was not very high at all, so that may be part of it also. Again, I was at a workshop with Master of Light, Tony Corbell. I was just using his lighting set up to get sample images with the Fujifilm medium format cameras.

Thank you Weepete. Man you have no idea how awesome of a day it was. Tony talking to you about what he is doing as he set it up and then see him shoot it and then you get the opportunity to use the same stuff to get your own images. I've been so excited the last couple of days and have a lot of ideas going on in my head now.

No problem mate, I've no doubt it was a fantastic experience, sounds totally awesome! Your results speak for themselves and I've been meaning to comment on your post since I saw it. Your shots literally stood out to me, so time well spent buddy. Take the advise, learn what you can, implement it and yes please, more shots!

I'm pacing myself with what images are left. (Portrait work that I am very happy with). It's coming soon.

What do you think about those huge raw files? With the GFX50R, I am always stunned at how much dynamic range there is.

The files from the GFX100 took a while to process on my laptop and I had to save the PS files as .psb because they were so big. The GFX50, the images processed about the same as what I am use to, maybe a little slower but not bad. After processing them, I know that I now really want the Canon R5 and it's 45 mpix images.

 

[smoke665]

Again, I was at a workshop with Master of Light, Tony Corbell.

No criticism directed at you whatsoever, I think you did an excellent job with unfamiliar equipment, lighting, etc. I do find it odd that a "Master of Light" didn't have a better handle on the setup though. I've seen a lot of his "one light" setups, seems to lean toward one light with a big modifier 45/45, and a V flat reflector, haven't seen much of him with an Eyelighter, but I haven't taken his courses either. In any case it appears you learned a little, and had some fun in the process, at the end of the day that's all that matters.

 

[adamhiram]

After processing them, I know that I now really want the Canon R5 and it's 45 mpix images.

Do it! But first max out your RAM and get a lot more storage.

 

[ronlane]

Again, I was at a workshop with Master of Light, Tony Corbell.

No criticism directed at you whatsoever, I think you did an excellent job with unfamiliar equipment, lighting, etc. I do find it odd that a "Master of Light" didn't have a better handle on the setup though. I've seen a lot of his "one light" setups, seems to lean toward one light with a big modifier 45/45, and a V flat reflector, haven't seen much of him with an Eyelighter, but I haven't taken his courses either. In any case it appears you learned a little, and had some fun in the process, at the end of the day that's all that matters.

None taken Smoke. We all have our ways of lighting things and our own tastes. Tony does his stuff a certain way and he is very successful doing it. My take is to go try out the equipment and have some sample files and learn something from the person putting on the workshop. Will I light my portraits like his? Maybe, maybe not, depending on what I want to get out of the session. I had a great time and learned some really good stuff during the day. (See the wine bottle and how to light it with one light)

After processing them, I know that I now really want the Canon R5 and it's 45 mpix images.

Do it! But first max out your RAM and get a lot more storage.

My MBP is less than a year old and I use external storage so I am good. Those 50 meg files did not process any slower than my 19 meg 1Dx files.