Self portrait fail

[Josh66]

If the light is the same power as the front light, it should be the same right? And you'll be blocking most of it...Hopefully someone helpful jumps in!

I think that helped, or at least gave me an idea, lol. If I can make the flash power the same as the lantern (one 580EX II for flash, BTW), and block it from the view of the camera - that should work, right? Or does the flash power need to be more than the lantern since I'll be blocking most of it?

edit
I like your new avatar. :thumbup:

 

[Bossy]

Hah thanks I like yours, I need to do one that actually includes my face relatively soon :/ haha.

And I *think* It should be equal or less than, since you only want to be lit a little bit, and not like your coming out of a tunnel of light, right? You also might think of side lighting from the same side you're holding the lantern, so the lantern seems like the light source but it should highlight you a bit more...

 

[Josh66]

Meter for the continuous light (the lamp) and then have a flash set to about -2 to -3 stops below that (or -2 to -3 TTL mode). The remainder of the light will come from the lamp itself. Don't forget to flag your flash so that it doesn't hit the lamp.

And that's with the flash behind me, right? Not in front?

Just asking because it *sounds* right to me with it in front, but too weak with it behind. I have no experience in this though, so it's very possible that I am wrong.


What I am going for is basically the same as the picture I posted in this thread (but with no motion blur), but with some rim lighting around my upper body/head.

 

[Josh66]

OK - I think I'm starting to get it more now.

I like the idea of having it a little to the side that the lantern is on.

What about height? Should the flash be about the same height as the lantern, or higher/lower? Initially, I was thinking higher... Not sure if that's 'right' though.

 

[bentcountershaft]

I think you should be wearing a hooded robe.

 

[o hey tyler]

I see you're doing the promotional concepts for the new Da Vinci Code film. Cool!

 

[cgipson1]

I think you should be wearing a hooded robe.

Damn.. I was going to suggest that! Do the MONK think... lol!

 

[bazooka]

I think you should be wearing a hooded robe.

Damn.. I was going to suggest that! Do the MONK think... lol!

Seriously... monk with candles way in the background..... maybe some hint of stone pillars.... not sure how you could do that.

 

[tirediron]

Meter for the continuous light (the lamp) and then have a flash set to about -2 to -3 stops below that (or -2 to -3 TTL mode). The remainder of the light will come from the lamp itself. Don't forget to flag your flash so that it doesn't hit the lamp.

And that's with the flash behind me, right? Not in front?

Just asking because it *sounds* right to me with it in front, but too weak with it behind. I have no experience in this though, so it's very possible that I am wrong.


What I am going for is basically the same as the picture I posted in this thread (but with no motion blur), but with some rim lighting around my upper body/head.

My thought is this: Place your flash behind you at about 45 degrees. I would meter it for about the same level as you main light (but be cognizant of the distances of light-to-subject; think: Inverse square law) and have a reflector on your left side (or which is the opposite of the side the lamp is on) so that you get just a LITTLE detail there.

 

[Derrel]

Paste in a dim,dark sleeve,arm, and a hand grasping a poorly-defined pistol, and the shot's a winner! Seriously! I think that would help convey a really sinister,creepy vibe, and make the shot work. As-shown, that bottom right area is just useless,empty space...if there were to be a weapon there, it would definitely be entirely different!

 

[Josh66]

Paste in a dim,dark sleeve,arm, and a hand grasping a poorly-defined pistol, and the shot's a winner! Seriously! I think that would help convey a really sinister,creepy vibe, and make the shot work. As-shown, that bottom right area is just useless,empty space...if there were to be a weapon there, it would definitely be entirely different!

How would a P38 look? LOL.

 

[Derrel]

Nope...no P38...I'm thiunkin' that you'd want a BIG, flat, slab-sided auto, like a 1911, preferably a chrome-plated one. I suppose lacking that, a cheap Beretta copy,made in South America, would also work (you know, some Taurus model).

 

[Josh66]

Sold my 1911 a couple years ago (wish I didn't)... I don't have very many handguns anymore... P38, Glock 22, Ruger MkII, and a Ruger Super Blackhawk Hunter with scope.

I'm thinking that stainless .44 would look pretty good if I took the scope off. (It's also the only 'shiny' gun I have - and it's really big, lol.)


.44 by J E, on Flickr

 

[shortpants]

Meter for the continuous light (the lamp) and then have a flash set to about -2 to -3 stops below that (or -2 to -3 TTL mode). The remainder of the light will come from the lamp itself. Don't forget to flag your flash so that it doesn't hit the lamp.

And that's with the flash behind me, right? Not in front?

Just asking because it *sounds* right to me with it in front, but too weak with it behind. I have no experience in this though, so it's very possible that I am wrong.


What I am going for is basically the same as the picture I posted in this thread (but with no motion blur), but with some rim lighting around my upper body/head.

Hmm yeah I would say -2 stops would be too weak, I would think you should have the same output as the lamp, maybe even slightly more. I'm not much help though, I've only used my flash on manual for rim lighting and I'm shooting digital, so I just took a few shots and adjusted.

 

[Derrel]

Well, as you know a "bright piece" really,really has presence in low light situations...and yeah, I agree, the Blackhawk, minus scope, would look pretty good..it has a long barrel, and the cylinder fluting would probably catch some light and create a very strong "weapon" presence, even in low, dim light lighting in a dark part of the frame...