ADVANCED STUDIO PORTRAIT LIGHTING FOR PROFESSIONALS

It took me 20 years as a professional photographer to learn that it’s not about how many lights you use it’s about using the fewest number of lights to create truly dramatic results. I learned early in my career the basic 5-light set-up from Monte Zucker (at his week long, hands-on West Coast School for Professionals at the Brooks Institute). His light placements and equally important subject poses were marvelous and I still use some of his techniques today. What I found difficult was using the standard 5-light set-up (Main light, Fill light, Hair light, and two background lights—or one background light and one kicker) in a very small camera room. You see the more lights you use in a small studio the more bounce you get—which creates more fill-which flattens out the lighting. And flat lighting really sucks the dram out of your subject. It took me a long time to realize that slavishly adhering to lighting convention—doing what everybody else was doing—was why my lighting lacked three dimensional drama.  And the reason, the culprit, was the FILL LIGHT.

My epiphany came at a professional photography seminar in San Francisco taught by Will Crockett.  He showed us his lighting technique using the Elinchrom, six foot, soft box with NO FILL. It was then I realized that the only reason for a fill light was to compensate for too small a main light. He showed us that with a large Main Light as close to your subject as possible its wrapping effect made fill unnecessary. The results were stunning!

So, I got an even bigger soft box! When I built my new studio here in Idaho I partitioned it so that my camera room was the biggest room in my reinvented photography studio. So, I got the Photoflex, 7 foot, Octadome and permanently banished my fill light to its case—as my back-up mono-light.

Here’s an example of the big light without fill…

 f11.0 @ 1/200 sec., ISO 200

The key to using a large soft box—and not needing a fill light—is to place it in close and move it across the set (nearly in front of your camera) so the you get light in the subject’s far eye.  I want the big catch lights in both eyes!  And by deleting the fill light (usually back behind the camera) you eliminate those ghastly tiny catch lights (I call them ice-pick catch lights!) in the middle of your subject’s pupils.

This lighting technique produces a nice shadow side on your subject(s) creating the three dimensional quality of light that traditional artists have always sought. Depending on the number of subjects—because with more subjects I must move my main light away from them—I may add a white or silver reflector opposite the main to decrease the lighting ratio; but I never eliminate the shadow completely.

Here’s a group portrait using this technique….

PPA (Professional Photographer of America) International Print Competition Loan Collection winner 2014

This image was my PPA (Professional Photographer of America) International Print Competition Loan Collection winner 2014.  And, here’s the studio I designed around that 7-foot soft box...

Store Front Studio - Eagle, Idaho

You’ll note that my main light is on wheels—it needs to be easy to move. On the left is my white reflector on an adjustable arm.  Overhead is my hair light on a Bogen boom.  I have three other lights: two for background illumination and a kicker with a snoot.

Just one more…

This close-up shows just how sweet a very large soft box will “wrap” the face creating a very smooth transition from highlight to shadow.  I didn’t even need a reflector on this portrait and of course none of those “ice-pick catchlights” for this little cutie.

As usual, should you have questions please don’t hesitate to ask….’Til next week.

Author:  Jerry W. Venz, PPA Master Photographer, Craftsman

Training site:  http://www.LightAtTheEdge.com

Client site: http://www.TheStorytellersUsa.com

JUNKYARD PHOTOGRAPHY AS ART

Photographers just love old, rusted, weathered things. I’m no different—I’ve always been drawn to old decaying artifacts wether they be man made—like cemeteries, junkyards, ghost towns—or natural made like the slowly eroding sand stone structures in Canyon Lands and Arches National Park or the ancient bristlecones or Jeffery Pine trees in the west or the ultimate in weathered erosion the Grand Canyon.  These things draw us like moths to a flame!

Unlike a lot of photographers though, I am extremely picky about the quality of light that I use to photography my subjects. And, that quality comes down to one thing—the time of day, because I use “The Best Light Money Can’t Buy—Natural Light!” 

I DID THIS IMAGE 1 HOUR BEFORE SUNSET…

f8.0 @ 1/320 sec., ISO 400

I used very directional, direct sunlight, to pick up detail and texture and create shadows to show three-dimensionality. I love this scene because of the primary color contrast of these tractor differentials. I moved my camera position to the right to Layer the red one against the blue one.

THIS NEXT IMAGE WAS DONE 30 MINUTES BEFORE SUNSET…

f11.0 @ 1/160 sec., ISO 400

This image illustrates that besides time of day it’s equally important that you move your camera position relative to the subject to create the most dramatic lighting. I used a skimming back light here, it really picks-up the texture in this rusted tractor. If I can’t get in a position to get this dramatic light or there is NO Directional Light On My Subject—I Move On.

THIS IMAGE WAS TAKEN 20 MINUTES BEFORE SUNSET…

f16.0 @ 1/50 sec., ISO 400

This scene was one that I had earlier walked on by—with a mental note to revisit because it was in direct flat light at the time. I don’t waste my time using flat light with great subjects like these.  

Watching the sun’s direction of travel I knew this scene would develop nice texture close to sunset.

THIS IMAGE WAS TAKEN ABOUT 5 MINUTES BEFORE SUNSET…

f11.0 @ 1/80 sec., ISO 400

This was one of the last images I did on this location. The sun’s last rays were peaking between a large combine and stacks of tires creating a spot light effect on the “skin” of this small tractor.

For me this is what photography is all about—using dramatic light to create shape and texture. If I don’t have great light I don’t even take my camera out of it’s bag when I am in total control of the decision.

As always, should you have questions or comments leave them in the comments section.  ’Til next week…

Author:  Jerry W. Venz, PPA Master Photographer, Craftsman

Training site:  http://www.LightAtTheEdge.com

Client site: http://www.TheStorytellersUsa.com

WHY PROFESSIONAL PHOTOGRAPHERS RARELY “SHOOT” WIDE OPEN

I’m appalled at the number of newbie “professionals” I see talking on the photo-forums about buying and using the 85mm f1.2 (or 1. anything) lens wide open for portraits.  Using your lenses widest aperture (f2.8 or otherwise) is unwise in most circumstances especially when doing portraits of paying clients! I expect amateur photographers’ cavalier attitude of wide open apertures just due to their general lack of technical knowledge, but so called professionals must be aware and educated about what their tools can and cannot do. As professionals we must deliver exceptional quality in our images on every session we do—no excuses!

Even when I’m doing fine art photography, just for myself, I’m very careful about depth-of-field and mindful of all the variables that affect it. One of the most important variables that has a huge effect on the depth-of-field, that your selected aperture will yield, is the distance between your camera and the subject. 

To illustrate this effect the following images were exposed at the same aperture (f8.0), but at different distances….

f8.0 @ 1/250 sec., ISO 800; Distance: 24:; Lens @ 84mm

Even at f8.0 you can see that the depth-of-field is very shallow when in this close. By using f8.0 I got nice sharp blossoms on just he nearest vine while everything else went nicely out of focus.

Using DoFMaster.com’s depth-of-field calculator ~

With my DLSR’s sensor: APS-C Nikon

• at f 8.0
• lens@ 84mm
• at 24” from subject
• the DOF is .56” (just over 1/2 inch) Just what I wanted!

If I had gone wide open:

• to f2.8
• the DOF would be .2” (only 2/10th of an inch)

So, let’s try really wide:

• to f1.2
• the DOF would be .08” (only 8/100ths of an inch!)

Virtually nothing would have been in focus with that little depth-of-field.

f8.0 @ 1180sec., Iso 800; Distance 8 ft.;Lens @ 44mm

So, at this distance (8 feet) my aperture of f8.0 gives me a depth-of-field of 38.2” which was plenty to keep the vines in front of the tree trunk and the tree trunk sharp. Note:  This works the same when photographing groups.

Other reasons not to “shoot” wide open:

• Most lenses are not very sharp wide open; they’re often sharper stopped down a couple stops.
• Many Lenses Vignette wide open creating dark corners around the image.
• Some lenses induce chromatic aberrations when wide open…(look it up).

So, in summation, we as professionals must know how to get the most from our tools in order to create the best product possible for our clients on every session. That’s why I don’t “shoot” wide open.

’Til next week…

Author:  Jerry W. Venz, PPA Master Photographer, Craftsman

Training Site: http://www.LightAtTheEdge.com

Client Site: http://www.TheStorytellersUsa.com

What is Chromatic Aberration?

Chromatic aberration, also known as “color fringing” or “purple fringing”, is a common optical problem that occurs when a lens is either unable to bring all wavelengths of color to the same focal plane, and/or when wavelengths of color are focused at different positions in the focal plane. Chromatic aberration is caused by lens dispersion, with different colors of light traveling at different speeds while passing through a lens. As a result, the image can look blurred or noticeable colored edges (red, green, blue, yellow, purple, magenta) can appear around objects, especially in high-contrast situations.

PHOTOGRAPHY OF A BUILDING’S DECONSTRUCTION

One of my favorite things to photography are buildings being torn down (de-construction) or in the process of being built. When they are being built, I like to start when it’s early in the construction. I’m looking for the building’s bones—the framing and rebar—before you can tell what it’s going to be. When my subject is the demolition of a building I often wait until late in its deconstruction to simplify the composition. I may visit a site several times during construction or demolition to get that special composition. These visits are also necessary to determine when the best dramatic lighting will strike the subject—it’s usually in the morning or towards sunset. I’m looking for a skimming side light to bring out texture and three dimensionality—so I’m looking for shadows.

Here’s an example of the lighting I’m looking for…

f13.0 @ 1/640 sec., ISO 400; lens Canon 15mm Fisheye

You have to be on your toes with residential demolition. They can tear down houses very quickly! I caught this one at just he right time—most of the house was down except this front corner with its “picture window”? seeing it’s last view; Our view being the home’s interior remains.

I used my 15mm fisheye to move in close and use the lens’ distortion to wrap the trees around the remains of the house. 

This image was taken at 9:45 in the morning the second day of its demolition. When I cam back the next morning they had already hauled all the house debris away—even the trees were gone!  I’ve learned that trees are not sacred here—and they call Boise, Idaho, the City of Trees!

Author:  Jerry W. Venz, PPA Master Photographer, Craftsman

Training Site:  http://www.LightAtTheEdge.com

Client Site: http://www.TheStorytellersUsa.com

INFRARED PHOTOGRAPHY—THEN AND NOW

Before there was Photoshop and  digital cameras the film we choose determined the look and style of our photography. One of the ways that you can set yourself apart creatively from other photographers is to do something they aren’t doing. Show people a vision (your interpretation) of things in the world they have not seen before. So, anytime I could push the boundaries and alter reality I would chose a film of alternate wavelength (infrared!) in either color or Black & White. 

For B&W infrared I used Kodak Professional High speed infrared film (HIE) in 35mm format. It covered the visible spectrum, some ultra violet radiation, and to about 900nm in the infrared region. Kodak suggested using a No. 25 red filter on the lens and 50 ASA while bracketing exposure four or five stops.  Because of its sensitivity you had to load the film into the camera in total darkness.  

Here’s an example from a series I did in 1976 of the famous “freeway interchange to nowhere” in San Jose, California…

Kodak HIE film 1/60 sec., @ f8.0 with 16mm fisheye lens using its 056 (orange) filter

I liked using my Minolta 16mm fisheye lens when doing infrared because of its tremendous depth-of-field kept everything in focus (you can’t focus your lens for the infrared spectrum) and this lens has several built in filters, on a rotating bezel, that made it easy to use with B&W or Color infrared. The only filter it was lacking was the NO. 25 red—that’s why I used the 056 (orange) filter when doing B&W infrared. 

What I really liked about using film for infrared photography was that beautiful grain! The grain gave the image a texture that I don’t see these days using digital techniques.

By way of comparison here’s a modern digital infrared image my son created using his converted DSLR….

Canon EOS T4i with enhanced IR (665nm filter)

My son, Alex, had his camera converted to capture infrared by Life Pixel. What’s nice about his modification is that his camera will create both B&W and Color infrared images. In the old film days we had to change films to do that. I guess the bad thing is that once converted that camera will ONLY do infrared capture.

I think Alex created a fabulous artistic vision here (at the Japanese Hakone Gardens in Saratoga, California) that rivals any modern infrared I’ve seen to date. (In my totally unbiased, humble, opinion!)  What strikes me first about these digital IR converted cameras is the smoothness of their images. There’s no apparent grain and the hard clarity they produce is often hard to look at. I guess I’m just old school—I miss the look of grain in B&W films like Kodak Infrared, and Later T-Max 3200 (pushed at least 1-stop). Sadly, these films are long gone—yes we still have Tri-X, but for how long?

That’s it for this week….Let me know if you have questions or would like me to write something you have issues with.  ’Til next week…

Author: Jerry W. Venz, PPA Master Photographer, Craftsman

Training Site:  http://www.LightAtTheEdge.com

Client Site: http://www.TheStorytellersUsa.com

THE DELIGHTS AND DANGERS OF CROPPING YOUR DIGITAL FILES

Whenever I discover an interesting subject for my fine art portfolio I usually cover it well. Photographing it from multiple angles and using different focal lengths—carving it up into detailed sections. It’s interesting that no matter what I see at the moment when I photograph the actual subject when I revisit my images (months, sometimes years later) I always see another way to create a new—often better—version of the image by simply cropping it differently. And then I kick myself for not doing that crop in camera!  Why? What’s the big deal about simply cropping that image file?  Well, if you ever want to print that image as a wall print, say larger than 11x14”, how many pixels can you afford to loose and still make a stunning print?

As an example here’s the resulting cropped image from one of the “record-shots” of a cool old truck….I photographed 6-years ago…

f5.0 @ 1/1250 sec., ISO 400; Lens @ 200mm

After I reworked the rather boring record shot over in camera raw and with some tone mapping in Photoshop this crop made the image far more compelling. (albeit a bit cliche´.) 

Here’s the original record-shot….

You can see why I passed over this image and concentrated on several other unique images (of the hundreds I took) that did not need cropping.  So, back to file size in our digital world. Unlike in our medium format film days we can’t just willy-nilly crop away half or three quarters of our image area and expect to make a quality wall print. It all depends on what you’re starting with. Since our film has been replaced by a digital sensor it’s not just how many pixels your camera has…it’s the size of the sensor—don’t expect a four/thirds sensor to perform like a full-frame sensor! That’s why just carving-up a small sensor to make it 25 or 30mp’s is currently folly, because when you reduce cell site size you increase noise.

My Pro-DSLR produces a RAW file of, on average, 30MB. When converted to a jpeg the resulting file is 15 to 25 MB.

So, this is how my jpeg evolved from capture thru editing and cropping…

1. The original CR file was: 26.88MB
2. The converted CR to Jpeg was: 15.99MB
3. TheCropped Jpeg was: 9.43MB
4. The edited Jpeg with tone mapping is: 11.75MB

The cropping I did (not quite half the image area) really reduced my file size. Fortunately, I’m starting with a pretty healthy file size (but I could really use a 50MP sensor!) and my Photoshop edits with the tone mapping increased my final file size to a usable 11.75MB.  So, this post capture crop worked for me—this image looks good at 200% in Photoshop—but it would have been even better if I had moved in closer and created it like my crop!  

’Til next week….

Author:  Jerry W. Venz, PPA Master Photographer, Craftsman

Training site:  http://www.LightAtTheEdge.com

Client site: http://www.TheStorytellersUsa.com

MORE NATURAL LIGHT SENIOR PORTRAITS IN THE PARK

We love getting our high school seniors outside for their portraits. It’s been a long, hard record breaking, winter here in Idaho, so I was happy to see that by the end of April one of our favorite parks—Merrill Park in Eagle, Idaho—was back to life!  We take a lot of our Eagle High School Seniors to Merrill Park because it has a surprising number of good areas for portraits for such a small park and I love the split rail fences that surround this park. 

So, with our sunset at 8:40pm we had mom and her daughter meet us a the park at 6:30pm—our usual two hours before sunset start time. As is my style when doing pure natural light portraits I keep the setting sun behind my subject to create a nice glow in the background for subject separation and visual interest. The only light I let strike may subject is natural sky light—the sky is my soft box! 

And our cute young lady of this session….

f4.5 @ 1/320 sec., ISO 400; lens @ 182mm

This image was one of the favorites from her session.  It illustrates why I use the most telephoto I can along with a modestly wide aperture. With my lens at or near 200mm I can get a nice soft background even with the f4.5 aperture while still getting nice depth-of-field on my subject. This image was in the last set-up of her session—one hour before sunset.

Earlier in the session…

f4.5 @ 1/400sec., ISO 400; lens @ 200mm

With the sun higher—two hours before sunset—we put her in the shade of the monolithic rocks that march across the back of the park. That kept the harsh sunlight at bay giving her nice, soft, sky light as her main light. 

Then at my favorite split rail fence….

 f4.5 @ 1/320 sec., ISO 400; lens @ 200mm

We started here about an hour and a half before sunset doing several poses. As you can see with proper placement of your subject, using only a large patch of blue sky as the main light, there’s NO need for ANY reflectors and certainly no reason to wreck this beautiful light with the superfluous addition of flash (YUCK!).

Let me know if you have any questions…’Til next week….

Author:  Jerry W. Venz, PPA Master Photographer, Craftsman

Training Site:  http://www.LightAtTheEdge.com

Client Site:  http://www.TheStorytellersUsa.com