 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| PhotoKB HomeDiscussion Groups Digital Photography Digital PhotoDSLR CamerasZLR CamerasPoint & Shoot CamerasFilm Photography 35 mmLarge FormatMedium formatDarkroomFilm and LabsOther EquipmentPhoto Technique Nature PhotographyPeople PhotographyTechnique GeneralGeneral Photo Topics General TopicsAustralian PhotographyUK PhotographyDirectoryPhoto Clubs |
Photo Forum / Digital Photography / DSLR Cameras / February 2007Some basic lighting setups
http://www.pbase.com/mcmomo/le_coin__mcmomo Gives the relative lighting for each light in stops. A good primer. You can basically offset the "stops" and conserve the difference and get the same ratios. Cheers, Alan  Signature-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm -- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm -- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin -- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch. > http://www.pbase.com/mcmomo/le_coin__mcmomo > > Gives the relative lighting for each light in stops. > > A good primer. You can basically offset the "stops" and conserve the > difference and get the same ratios. That's a GREAT page, Alan. Neat to have images, together with the setup map used for each effect. Bookmarked... :) SignatureImages (Plus Snaps & Grabs) by Mark² at: www.pbase.com/markuson Better information can be found here: http://jzportraits.home.att.net/ This is the basis for professional portrait lighting. > In article <S8Wxh.55831$AK1.11...@newsfe11.phx>, Mark² < > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > This is the basis for professional portrait lighting. Bullshit--once again you prove you don't know what you're talking about. > Bullshit--once again you prove you don't know what you're talking > about. The images Joseph Zeltsmann's site may appear dated, but the concept contained therein are the basis of professional portrait lighting. On Feb 7, 12:49 pm, Randall Ainsworth <r...@nospam.techline.com> wrote: > In article <1170774564.963198.72...@k78g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>, > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > The images Joseph Zeltsmann's site may appear dated, but the concept > contained therein are the basis of professional portrait lighting. You mean: http://jzportraits.home.att.net/chapter-13.html ???? I checked this page out, and it must qualify as the worst attempt at an educational presentation I have ever seen. I can't imagine wading through that much text (and, frankly, *awful* (and sometimes fudged) images) to cover what are relatively simple concepts. Agonisingly bad. Alan's discovery is an excellent resource, has very good examples, and the setups are clearly explained and *shown*. I know which one I have bookmarked. http://www.pbase.com/mcmomo/le_coin__mcmomo > I checked this page out, and it must qualify as the worst attempt at > an educational presentation I have ever seen. I can't imagine wading > through that much text (and, frankly, *awful* (and sometimes fudged) > images) to cover what are relatively simple concepts. Agonisingly > bad. The images are from back in the late 70s, but the concepts remain valid. If you want to try and reinvent the wheel, be my guest. But I doubt that you'll discover the proper ways to light and pose people on your own. > Alan's discovery is an excellent resource, has very good examples, and > the setups are clearly explained and *shown*. I know which one I have > bookmarked. Flashy and trendy looking, but it's gimmicky portraiture. You won't sell that kind of stuff to the general public. And just some pictures of where to put the lights gives no understanding of why they're put there. >>I checked this page out, and it must qualify as the worst attempt at >>an educational presentation I have ever seen. I can't imagine wading [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > of where to put the lights gives no understanding of why they're put > there. But that's the key difference. In Zeltsman's page there is little about where and how the damned lights are actually placed and the metering and ratios. That's what makes the effect. Zeltsman's site is very guidance on the posing of traditional poses. However, as I said in my other reply, there is more to portraits than repreating standards. The referred page is certainly not "Gimmicky". Signature-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm -- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm -- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin -- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch. > In article <1170774564.963198.72...@k78g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>, > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > The images Joseph Zeltsmann's site may appear dated, but the concept > contained therein are the basis of professional portrait lighting. Sure, if you work at Olan Mills... > Better information can be found here: > > http://jzportraits.home.att.net/ > > This is the basis for professional portrait lighting. I do like Zeltsmans page, and it's been in my bookmarks for a long time, but it certainly is not the only iron in the bag. Further it is quite limited in scope and does not get into metering and lighting in a clear and concise manner. (Ratios). The posted page gives a graphic and the meter setting. The meter settings can of course be increased or decreased while keeping the same lighting ratio (which is important). And there is never only one way or set of ways to do things. That's okay for people who want 1 year of experience repeated 40 times; 40 years of experience means 40 years of doing different things, falling ones a.s from time to time or often, but always keeping on keeping on. Cheers, Alan Signature-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm -- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm -- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin -- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch. > I do like Zeltsmans page, and it's been in my bookmarks for a long time, > but it certainly is not the only iron in the bag. Further it is quite > limited in scope and does not get into metering and lighting in a clear > and concise manner. (Ratios). I would not recommend using a meter if you're in a studio using repeatable, predictable situations. Back in the film days, you had to test your lights with film tests to determine the optimum shadow density. Similar tests could be done with digital. > And there is never only one way or set of ways to do things. That's > okay for people who want 1 year of experience repeated 40 times; 40 > years of experience means 40 years of doing different things, falling > ones a.s from time to time or often, but always keeping on keeping on. Ya gotta know the rules before you can break them. >>I do like Zeltsmans page, and it's been in my bookmarks for a long time, >>but it certainly is not the only iron in the bag. Further it is quite [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > test your lights with film tests to determine the optimum shadow > density. Similar tests could be done with digital. You really have no idea how it works, do you? With changing lighting setups, nobody is or was making film tests other than a polaroid. Some product shooters would do an actual film test and come back and adjust. But not for portraits. Get real. Signature-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm -- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm -- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin -- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch. > You really have no idea how it works, do you? No, I only ran a portrait studio for 16+ years. > With changing lighting setups, nobody is or was making film tests other > than a polaroid. Some product shooters would do an actual film test and > come back and adjust. > > But not for portraits. Get real. The principle is to nail down your fill light so that it's a predictable value, then adjust lighing ratios with your main light. To get the proper value for your fill, you had to do film tests, and then use a densitometer. Kinda hard to stick that compact flash card into a densitometer. But the same principles apply. > The principle is to nail down your fill light so that it's a > predictable value, then adjust lighing ratios with your main light. To > get the proper value for your fill, you had to do film tests, and then > use a densitometer. Kinda hard to stick that compact flash card into a > densitometer. But the same principles apply. The "idea" is lovely, the reality is far different. And I assure you that your favourite website "Zeltsman" never did anything like you propose. Signature-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm -- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm -- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin -- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch. > The "idea" is lovely, the reality is far different. And I assure you > that your favourite website "Zeltsman" never did anything like you propose. It was Frank Cricchio who taught the film tests, but ol' Joe advocated "nailing down" the fill so that it put out a predictable value. I know...I studied with both. > http://www.pbase.com/mcmomo/le_coin__mcmomo > > Gives the relative lighting for each light in stops. Wow, cool site! Thanks. On Feb 5, 6:35 pm, Alan Browne <alan.bro...@Freelunchvideotron.ca> wrote: > http://www.pbase.com/mcmomo/le_coin__mcmomo > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > Cheers, > Alan I want more! This is a nice site with a group of outstanding pictures. It never ceases to amaze me what can be done with a relatively simple setup in the hands of someone who knows what they are doing. -Karl I am a novice and this is great! Thanks! blah > http://www.pbase.com/mcmomo/le_coin__mcmomo > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > Cheers, > Alan |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2009 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.