Love Thy Axe

[runnah]

Well, yeah. I was actually picking up on your reference to femininity. I think that might be what Dan's going for here, and I am ok with that. I agree that it's certainly not the only way for men to look vulnerable.

I think Dan might dig blurring gender lines, but possibly I am leaping to a conclusion too far.

I wasn't taking a shot at you.

I don't want to be rude/mean to Dan because he is good at what he does and seems like a cool dude, but I just find the approach very heavy handed.

 

[rexbobcat]

A tripod would definitely help. Hell, even a monopod is better than shooting completely handheld. I don't carry a tri/monopod very often, but any time I have an inkling that I might be shooting natural light in a dark environment I pack it just in case.

It's better to be with than without. There are no penalties for bringing gear you don't end up using. lol

 

[kundalini]

I also prefer not to use artificial lighting. What would you suggest?

Add artificial lighting!


Jack looks like he is being prepared for a funeral. I don't see vulnerability at all. Camera and subject positions just do not work for me in the slightest.

 

[DanOstergren]

I'm afraid this one doesn't really work for me Dan; the double-bit and the shale he's laying on both say to me anything but, 'soft, gentle, etc'. I think a diffused speedlight low and right would have improved the overall image significantly.

For me it's the pose of him lying on his back being photographed from above with the axe being held close to his heart and the expression that translate the softness/ vulnerability, and I like the contrast it has between the vulnerable pose and the hardness of the setting and prop. This is simply what I see though; I'm not trying to disprove or say that your point of view has not merit.

I'm trying to avoid using my speedlite as much as possible these days, especially for personal work. Maybe a reflector for fill would be a decent alternative, and using a tripod so I can get slower shutter speed and aperture?

why on earth are you trying to avoid using a speedlight?!? thats crazy talk man! flash is your friend! you get far more control with a flash than with a reflector. you can do MORE with a flash than you can with a reflector. plus, with a flash, you aren't completely reliant on how much "natural light" is in the particular spot you want to shoot in.
If you already know how to use a flash on and off camera, use it! you have more directional control with a flash, you can soften light with a flash, and you can offset mixed lighting with a flash.

anyway, if you are really set on handicapping yourself for theses shots, yes, a reflector might help a little, depending on how much light is actually getting through there to reflect. you might also try using a tripod to get your shutter speed lower. the only disadvantage there is you cant get as high up. best option? off camera flash and stand on a ladder. dont get all hung up on "artificial" light. light is light. use what you can to get the best result. all light sources look "natural" when used correctly. lighting with a flash will also let you stop down your lens a bit for more DOF.
your only options are: add more light, slower shutter speed, or higher ISO.
best option for lighting is a flash, tripod for slower shutter speed, ISO you said you were already maxed on.

It's simply a matter of personal taste when it comes to lighting. I went a lont time using flash every single time I shot, then to being forced to only use natural light, and it turns out that I dig natural light a lot more.

I definitely need to get a higher angle here and perfect some techniques when it comes to exposure. I just can't rationalize compromising my artistic vision for a photo by using light sources that I don't envision being a part of those photos.

 

[DanOstergren]

Well, yeah. I was actually picking up on your reference to femininity. I think that might be what Dan's going for here, and I am ok with that. I agree that it's certainly not the only way for men to look vulnerable.

I think Dan might dig blurring gender lines, but possibly I am leaping to a conclusion too far.

I wasn't taking a shot at you.

I don't want to be rude/mean to Dan because he is good at what he does and seems like a cool dude, but I just find the approach very heavy handed.

Ahahaha, I actually take it as a compliment that you see me as one who enjoys blurring the lines of gender.

 

[DanOstergren]

I also prefer not to use artificial lighting. What would you suggest?

Add artificial lighting!


Jack looks like he is being prepared for a funeral. I don't see vulnerability at all. Camera and subject positions just do not work for me in the slightest.

I'm going to have to agree with you about the pose, and thank you for the feedback and suggestion. I think I can do it without using OCF though, and I'm going to try what I can to make that work. If all else fails though, I'll try it with the speedlight and see how it turns out. It wouldn't be the first time that I improved by taking suggestions I've gotten from this forum, but when it comes to technique I have my preferences.

 

[kanuski]

First of all, I love this set. This is a style I may try to copy some day.
Here are a few ideas.Could you have the axe in his left hand with the blade on his chest and the handle on the ground? That would look more natural and less like an undertakers pose. Secondly, why not have his right hand behind his head. This would also appear more natural and would open him up to being vulnerable. The pose he is in now seems to be more guarded. And third, to get more light on his face, have him turn his head towards the light.
The one thing that I did not like about this pose is the eyes. They don't look soft and vulnerable, they look half closed and bored. Could you try this with him looking just above the camera?
Just my 2 bits, and Canadian at that.

 

[juggler]

Nice idea. I'd prefer to see the axe and hand in focus since that's where my attention is direction when I look at the picture. Alternatively more light on the face might mitigate this a bit.