Photo Forum / General Photo Topics / General Topics / January 2006
QUESTION: Looking for a certain lighting effect...
|
|
Thread rating:  |
BD - 26 Jan 2006 23:54 GMT Hey, all.
I'm planning a shoot sometime in the next while, and for some of the shots there's a certain effect I want. I know I've seen the effect many times, but don't have a sample to refer people to offhand - so I'll describe it.
Basically, it's an effect wherein the background light (be it sunlight or light through a window) really dominates the image - and casts a glow through the enture image. It's almost like the light is creating a volumetric mist. In images like this, the sky is almost always near white.
I don't know whether this is done by the use of a filter, or whether there's a certain exposure technique at work.
Anyone know what I'm on about? I can try to find a sample image somewhere, but I'm hoping I won't need to. Hopefully someone out there knows how this effect is accomplished.
BTW - I have a 6MP Rebel, several lenses, and access to any version of Photoshop.
Thanks!!
BD
dadiOH - 27 Jan 2006 00:03 GMT > Hey, all. > [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > somewhere, but I'm hoping I won't need to. Hopefully someone out there > knows how this effect is accomplished. Sounds like diffusion and/or soft focus. You need a filter or special lens to do it.
-- dadiOH ____________________________
dadiOH's dandies v3.06... ...a help file of info about MP3s, recording from LP/cassette and tips & tricks on this and that. Get it at http://mysite.verizon.net/xico
BD - 27 Jan 2006 00:21 GMT >Sounds like diffusion and/or soft focus. You need a filter or special lens to do it. Just did some poking around - yes, that's a similar effect. I do see some Photoshop tutorials on that, which I'll try before forking for a filter.
Thanks!
Rob Novak - 27 Jan 2006 15:41 GMT >Just did some poking around - yes, that's a similar effect. I do see >some Photoshop tutorials on that, which I'll try before forking for a >filter. Old trick - stretch a piece of nylon stocking over the lens.
 Signature Central Maryland Photographer's Guild - http://cmpg.org Strange, Geometrical Hinges - http://rob.rnovak.net
Frank ess - 27 Jan 2006 20:00 GMT >> Just did some poking around - yes, that's a similar effect. I do >> see [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > Old trick - stretch a piece of nylon stocking over the lens. Or use a cheap P&S 35mm camera with a dirty lens and high-ISO print film: http://www.fototime.com/05DAEF8123D2E2E/orig.jpg
 Signature Frank ess
Whiskers - 27 Jan 2006 20:32 GMT >>> Just did some poking around - yes, that's a similar effect. I do >>> see [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > film: > http://www.fototime.com/05DAEF8123D2E2E/orig.jpg Serendipity?
 Signature -- ^^^^^^^^^^ -- Whiskers -- ~~~~~~~~~~
Frank ess - 27 Jan 2006 21:27 GMT >>>> Just did some poking around - yes, that's a similar effect. I do >>>> see [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > Serendipity? That works, too.
Oh. I see.
Yup. Indubitably serendipitous.
 Signature Frank ess "I can't sing, but I know how to, which is quite different." -- Noel Coward
Whiskers - 28 Jan 2006 00:13 GMT >>>>> Just did some poking around - yes, that's a similar effect. I do >>>>> see [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > > Yup. Indubitably serendipitous. I like it when that happens.
 Signature -- ^^^^^^^^^^ -- Whiskers -- ~~~~~~~~~~
Steve Wolfe - 27 Jan 2006 05:26 GMT > Sounds like diffusion and/or soft focus. You need a filter or special > lens to do it. Or really bad flare. ;-)
steve
Beach Bum - 27 Jan 2006 19:21 GMT > > Sounds like diffusion and/or soft focus. You need a filter or special > > lens to do it. > > Or really bad flare. ;-) Or really "good" flare. The diffused effect and reduced contrast can be nice. :)
 Signature Mark
Photos, Ideas & Opinions http://www.marklauter.com/gallery
thewurd@usfamily.net - 27 Jan 2006 03:09 GMT BEEN DREAMING OF LIVING THE GOOD LIFE, ON YOUR TERMS? YOU CAN DO THIS!
You will now become part of a Mail Order business. In this business the product is not solid or tangible, it's a service. You are in the business of developing Mailing Lists. You deal with information, and information is power. Many large corporations are happy to pay vast amounts for quality lists. However, the money made from the mailing lists is secondary to the income which is made from people like you and me asking to be included on such a list.
I used to work my butt off for someone else, but not any more. Getting on to the internet changed everything. I came across an article that said you could make thousands of dollars within weeks with a once only investment of $6.00! "Yeah, right, what a scam," is what I thought. I was skeptical to say the least. Still, I was curious. I figured I could stand to lose six bucks, so I kept reading.
I'm pretty glad I did. All you had to do was send $1.00 to the 6 names at the addresses listed in the article. Then, you placed your name and address at the bottom of the list at position #6, and posted the article to at least 200 newsgroups.
I felt pretty silly after I'd sent the letters, and it took a bit of time to post the message to all those newsgroups. To be honest, I pretty much forget about the whole deal there and then. "It's only six dollars. No big deal."
Was I in for a surprise. GUESS WHAT! Within 7 days, I started getting money in the mail! It was amazing! I figured it would end, but it didn't. The money just kept rolling in. I made about $18.00 in the first week. By the end of the second week I'd made a total of over $980. $10,328 in week three, and it just went on and on. This is now my fifth month and I'm sitting on about $273,000. Needless to say I quit my job a while back. (I used to work as a computer software manager)
It was certainly worth the $6.00 and change for the stamps. I've spent more than that on the lottery, without a cent to show for it!!
Print a copy of this article, so you can refer back to it, or cut and paste it to Notepad or Word. The process is very simple and is comprised of 3 easy steps. If you're wondering why I'm letting you in on this, I'll explain it to you shortly. Bear with me. This works.
STEP 1: Get 6 separate sheets of paper and write the following on each;
"PLEASE PUT ME ON YOUR MAILING LIST."
Get 6 US$1.00 bills (or the equivalent in your local currency) and place a dollar and a note in each of the 6 envelopes. Fold the bill into the paper in order to prevent it from being seen, and possibly stolen.
You should now have 6 sealed envelopes, each containing a dollar and the note. Don't forget to add your name and address.
Mail the 6 envelopes to the following addresses:
#1 R. Arambasic, 9 Ashmore St, Brunswick, VIC, Australia 3056 #2 S. Vouge, P.O. Box 5173, New York, N.Y. 10163, USA #3 R. Dumancic, Mlinarska 22A, Zagreb, 10000, Croatia #4 D. Lozina, 128 Nicholson St, Fitzroy, VIC, Australia 3065 #5 B. Spaleta, 39 Stewart Gve, Campbellfield, VIC, Australia 3061 #6 J. Wurdemann, P.O. Box 912, North Branch, MN. 55056, USA
STEP 2: Take name #1 off the list above, move the other names up (6 becomes 5, 5 becomes 4, etc...) and add YOUR name as number 6 on the list. STEP 3: Post your amended article to at least 200 newsgroups. (There's heaps out there) All you need is 200, but the more you post, the more money you make!
********* HOW TO POST TO NEWSGROUPS (It's easy) *********
1. You don't need to re-type this entire letter to do your own posting. Cut and paste this letter to your Notepad. 2. Remember to eliminate the #1
position, move everyone up a spot (re-number everyone else's positions), and add yourself as #6. 3. Save your new notepad file as a .txt file. If you want to do your postings in different sittings, you'll always have this file to go back to.
*** NETSCAPE USERS ***
Step 4. Within the Netscape program, go to the pull down window entitled 'Window' select 'NetscapeNews'. Then from the pull down menu 'Options', select 'Show all Newsgroups'. After a few moments a list of all the Newsgroups on your server will show up. Click on any newsgroup you desire.
>From within this newsgroup, click on the 'TO NEWS' button, which should be in the top left corner of the newsgroups page. This will bring up a message box.
Step 5. Fill in the Subject. This will be the header that everyone sees as they scroll through the list of postings in a particular group.
Step 6. Highlight the entire contents of your .txt file, and cut and paste it the letter into the body of your posting.
Step 7. Hit the 'Send' Button in the upper left corner. You're done with your first post! Congratulations...
*** INTERNET EXPLORER USERS ***
Step 4. Go to newsgroups and select 'Post an Article'. Step 5. Fill in the subject. Step 6. Same as #6 above Step 7. Hit the 'Post' button.
Alternatively, you can use a program like Forte Agent, which you can find on the Web.
THAT'S IT! All you have to do is jump to different newsgroups and post away, after you get the hang of it. It takes about 30 seconds for each newsgroup!
**REMEMBER, THE MORE NEWSGROUPS YOU POST TO, THE MORE MONEY YOU'LL MAKE!! POST A MINIMUM OF 200**
There you go! You'll begin receiving money from around the world within days! You may eventually even want to rent a P.O. Box due to the large
amount of mail you'll receive. Should you wish to stay anonymous, you may use a pseudonym, as the postman will deliver it just the same.
**MAKE SURE ALL THE ADDRESSES ARE CORRECT.**
So, why am I letting you in on this. Let me explain.
Out of 200 postings, say I receive only 5 replies. I make $5.00 with my name at #6 on the letter. Now, if each of the 5 individuals who sent me $1.00 make the minimum 200 postings, with my name at #5, and only 5 people respond to each of the original 5, that's another $25.00 for me. Now those 25 each make 200 posts with my name at #4, and with 5 replies each, I earn an additional $125.00! Those 125 turn around and post the minimum 200 with my name at #3 and receive 5 replies each, I make $626.00 more! Get the picture? Five responses is actually a below norm response rate. The average is about 15 to 25. For example, here's what you can expect to earn from 15 responses:
at #6 $15.00 at #5 $225.00 at #4 $3,375.00 at #3 $50,625.00 at #2 $759,375.00 at #1 $11,390,625.00
When your name is no longer on the list, you just take the latest posting in the newsgroups, and send out your $6.00 to names on the list, putting your name at number 6 again (which is what I'm doing), and start posting again.
The thing to remember is that thousands of people all over the world are joining the internet and reading these articles everyday, just as you are now!!
Can you afford $6.00? I believe so. (I just didn't buy lunch that day)
People have said, "what if the plan is played out and no one sends you the money? Doesn't matter. There are tons of new honest users and new honest people who are joining the internet and newsgroups everyday, willing to give it a try? Estimates are at 20,000 to 50,000 new users daily.
This will work for you. Be honest, be fair. Remember, what goes around
comes around.
BD - 27 Jan 2006 03:18 GMT > Remember, what goes around comes around. Yer Damned Right.
Beach Bum - 27 Jan 2006 19:17 GMT "BD" <bobby_dread@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> Hey, all. > [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > volumetric mist. In images like this, the sky is almost always near > white.
> Anyone know what I'm on about? I can try to find a sample image > somewhere, but I'm hoping I won't need to. Hopefully someone out there > knows how this effect is accomplished. Is this the effect you're talking about?
http://marklauter.com/gallery/Mimi/MimiFieldsSunset
On the off chance it is..
The sun was about 1 or 2 degrees from the horizon. No filters. Just positioning. If I took 1 step to the right or left the sun's effect was completely disrupted. The subject was directly on the line between the camera and the sun. Slightly under exposed for the shaddows but still letting the highlights blow a little for effect. Shaddows recovered with light dodging (about 1/2 stop).
HTH. Good luck on your project. :)
 Signature Mark
Photos, Ideas & Opinions http://www.marklauter.com/gallery
BD - 27 Jan 2006 20:40 GMT >Is this the effect you're talking about? Close - I'll make a point of digging something up this weekend for people to see what I'm on about.
BD - 27 Jan 2006 20:48 GMT Alright, I have to do this the hard way.
There are shots on this site which have the effect I want. The shots are in galleries of thumbnails, which are easy to navigate but which have no direct links to them
So - for those willing to take a moment:
Go to http://www.archerphotography.com/wedding_photography.php
select Wedding gallery 4th column 5 down
select Wedding gallery #2 1st column, 3 down
The lighting in these shots (and others in the gallery) is almost overwhelming in the background, and seems to wash out the edges of foreground objects. As well, the lighting is softened. I'm less confused about the softening than the actual lighting effect, because I can easily see how this can be accomplished in post if necessary. The lighting of the sky in these shots is the head-scratcher for me.
Any comments as to how this effect can be achieved would be MUCH appreciated.
;-)
Beach Bum - 27 Jan 2006 20:57 GMT "BD" <bobby_dread@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> Go to http://www.archerphotography.com/wedding_photography.php > > select Wedding gallery > 4th column 5 down That can be done with either a filter (which one?) or later in Photoshop with "diffuse glow"
 Signature Mark
Photos, Ideas & Opinions http://www.marklauter.com/gallery
BD - 27 Jan 2006 21:04 GMT >"diffuse glow" I'll give it a go. I haven't used that filter; presumably I'll have some control over where in the 'brightness' range the colors merge to white...
The more I can do in post the better - I don't have a _problem_ with buying more filters, but given that I may be using any of 3 lenses with 3 filter sizes, it makes sense for me to find a software process that can give much of the same result.
Thanks much!
Paul Furman - 27 Jan 2006 21:20 GMT Or gaussian blur a copy of the layer then set to lighten mode & adjust opacity.
>>"diffuse glow" > [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > Thanks much! BD - 27 Jan 2006 21:33 GMT >Or gaussian blur a copy of the layer then set to lighten mode & adjust opacity. Yeah, I found a tutorial on that today - gives a similar softness, but it doesn't 'wash out' the sunlight in the same way - unless I dodge the blurred layer around where the sky is...?
Pat - 27 Jan 2006 22:35 GMT I would try the nylon-stocking-over-the-lens trick. As mentioned, an oldie but goody. Slightly different than a filter, though, because it can give a slight star to a point light.
I think you are looking for overexposed shot with a soft filter and a lot of soft backlighting. Try it at home and post it with your comments so we can take a look.
You can't get 100% that shot like a upscale wedding photographer because he/she would probably use a soft-focus lenses.
Another option is to use a clear filter and smear a bit of vasoline (petroleum gelly) around the edge. That can give a soft/diffused outside and a sharp inside. It's another oldie. And you don't need much!
BD - 27 Jan 2006 22:49 GMT I will try some variants - I'll also try some Photoshop work with RAWs I already have, to see what I can accomplish in Post.
I do tend to lean towards the software solution - simply because if I use a physical effect like a stocking or vaseline, I have to get it right 'at the time', rather than being able to work with it slowly until it's the way I want it. And the stocking/vaseline options can't be un-done!
But, that's coming from a guy who hasn't tried these options. I guess I should at least give them a go before writing the notion off.
If anything shows promise, I'll post links.
Thanks for all the assistance!!
BD
Pat - 28 Jan 2006 05:49 GMT I do my fair share of photoshopping, but I learned photography on film so I sort of think "old school".
Here's how I would try this. Find a nice big window with some okay light such as high overcase or facing any direction other than into the sun. Try the nylon and the vasoline. She with a nice bright background and use fill flash with a difuser on the subject. Over expose it a bit. Then take in into photoshop, correct the white so it is dead-on white. Set the contrast by eye to see how you like it and it should be about done. Don't let your blacks get too black.
I haven't tried it to do this image in photoshop, but here would be my guess. I am sure others will opine on this. Doing on the camera will look different than a filter. I don't know the technical term for it, but light bends around any object. With all of the soft light and the bright background, some of the light will bend around the subject and alter the edge detail (just like a setting sun across a horizontal edge bends around the edge a bit. If you do it with filters, you will want to loose some detail along the edges. (okay, now everyone can tell me how wrong I am).
Good luck.
dadiOH - 28 Jan 2006 14:33 GMT > The more I can do in post the better - I don't have a _problem_ with > buying more filters, but given that I may be using any of 3 lenses > with 3 filter sizes, it makes sense for me to find a software process > that can give much of the same result. And/or buy filters that will fit the largest lens and use step down rings. Or use a matte box.
-- dadiOH ____________________________
dadiOH's dandies v3.06... ...a help file of info about MP3s, recording from LP/cassette and tips & tricks on this and that. Get it at http://mysite.verizon.net/xico
dadiOH - 28 Jan 2006 14:43 GMT > Alright, I have to do this the hard way. > [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > Any comments as to how this effect can be achieved would be MUCH > appreciated. The first one (wedding gallery) appears to have been taken with a diffusion filter. But the hot sky in it is a result of an overcast, overexposed sky.
The second (wedding gallery 2) is a straight shot exposed for the shadows. The hot background is because there was too much light differential twixt it and the subjects for background objects to register.
Choice of film can affect the result too. For example, blue sensitive film (or a blue filter) will wash out blue skies.
-- dadiOH ____________________________
dadiOH's dandies v3.06... ...a help file of info about MP3s, recording from LP/cassette and tips & tricks on this and that. Get it at http://mysite.verizon.net/xico
BD - 30 Jan 2006 19:01 GMT >The first one (wedding gallery) appears to have been taken with a >diffusion filter. But the hot sky in it is a result of an overcast, >overexposed sky.
>The second (wedding gallery 2) is a straight shot exposed for the >shadows. The hot background is because there was too much light >differential twixt it and the subjects for background objects to >register. I checked out the Diffuse Glow function in Photoshop. It appears to accomplish both results; 'hot' background, and soft light on the subject. Interesting!
Beach Bum - 31 Jan 2006 01:02 GMT > >The first one (wedding gallery) appears to have been taken with a > >diffusion filter. But the hot sky in it is a result of an overcast, [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > accomplish both results; 'hot' background, and soft light on the > subject. Interesting! Yeah, I got that idea from a photographer in alt.binaries.photography.glamour sometime in 2005. It's a nice trick to have in the tool box. :)
 Signature Mark
Photos, Ideas & Opinions http://www.marklauter.com/gallery
Whiskers - 27 Jan 2006 23:15 GMT > "BD" <bobby_dread@hotmail.com> wrote in message >> Hey, all. [quoted text clipped - 28 lines] > > HTH. Good luck on your project. :) I think the general term is 'contra jour'; some lenses handle the flare 'better' than others, and the atmosphere itself can play a part (mist and dust especially).
Here is another example <http://server3.pictiger.com/img/12082/reality-and-real-world/end-of-road.jpg> (cropped sightly and re-sized downwards from a jpeg produced by a Samsung Digimax V700 on 'programmed auto').
Sometimes the 'natural' flare in the lens goes a little too far <http://server3.pictiger.com/img/12415/reality-and-real-world/the-old-road.jpg>
(I hope those links work; I'm trying out a new image hosting service as well as gaining a feel for this camera).
 Signature -- ^^^^^^^^^^ -- Whiskers -- ~~~~~~~~~~
aussie bongo - 27 Jan 2006 23:23 GMT >> "BD" <bobby_dread@hotmail.com> wrote in message >>> Hey, all. [quoted text clipped - 43 lines] > (I hope those links work; I'm trying out a new image hosting service as > well as gaining a feel for this camera). The page you are looking for is currently unavailable. The Web site might be experiencing technical difficulties, or you may need to adjust your browser settings.
Whiskers - 28 Jan 2006 00:23 GMT snip
>> Here is another example >> <http://server3.pictiger.com/img/12082/reality-and-real-world/end-of-road.jpg> [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > might be experiencing technical difficulties, or you may need to adjust your > browser settings. They seem to work OK from here; perhaps there was a temporary blip?
 Signature -- ^^^^^^^^^^ -- Whiskers -- ~~~~~~~~~~
BD - 27 Jan 2006 23:23 GMT >I hope those links work Yes, they work fine - very nice!
Whiskers - 28 Jan 2006 00:29 GMT >>I hope those links work > > Yes, they work fine - very nice! Thank you. You don't think 'The Old Road' has rather too much flare? The ferns in the fore-ground particularly are lacking both detail and contrast - although pictorially that could work, in a small print.
 Signature -- ^^^^^^^^^^ -- Whiskers -- ~~~~~~~~~~
|
|
|