When I originally created this composition, I made it pretty clear that it’s a composite. Two images, completely unrelated – but from the same general time and location. This took only a few minutes to make, and that had a few people asking how.
So, for starters: the two images.
 Original Treeline |
 Moon, correctly exposed |
The last post in this series gave you visual examples of making bokeh. What was the key concept?
The more out-of-focus the target, the larger and dimmer the bokeh.
Bokeh behind bread
Now here’s the thing: focus on the background is relative. Let’s say you’re photographing something that’s in front of a Christmas tree. By focusing on the object, the tree becomes a background of bokeh. A perfect example: the monkey bread to the right.
So here’s the thing: if the bread is closer to the tree than it is to the camera, the smaller and brighter the bokeh. Closer to the camera and it’s larger and dimmer.
This is also effected by the overall distances: for this shot, I was maybe two feet from the bread and three feet from the tree. Larger bokeh. Step back two feet, and the bokeh grows smaller. Increase the distances with the same ratio (say, 4 feet from the bread, six feet from the tree): bokeh grows larger still (it’s further out of focus). Tighten your f-stop from f/1.4 to f/2 and the bokeh shrinks again.
Getting the feel? It’s kinda like a dance. Mentally, I tend to associate it with hyperfocal distance, but instead of maximizing sharpness, it’s maximizing the bokeh.
Ok, so last time I wrote about getting traffic for images with the word “bokeh” in them, and I promised a how-to.
After thinking about it, I realized that I don’t really have a strong enough grasp of either optics or physics to pull off an in-depth, highly knowledgeable article on this. For me, doing anything with bokeh is a bit of a crap shoot. Intellectually, I get it – but I can only visualize it by feel, and I only know what works for me.
So, that being said, I’m slightly changing the subject: this is still a how-to, but it’s a “how to get a general feel” for bokeh. Think of this as a training exercise, not a definitive lecture.
So, let’s start. Click to continue »
Photographically speaking, different people know me for different reasons. Some see me as primarily an outdoors photographer (landscapes, wildlife), others as a portraitist (which is actually rare), yet others as a small studio-style (still life) photographer. In reality, of course, there is no delineation – it’s just one person doing whatever he feels like.
Due to my strobist-style activities, however, people do have an expectation that use a fairly professional setup for most shots. So the question came up: what flashes & pattern did you use to create such soft, low-contrast light in the How to Eat Vegemite shots?
The answer: Click to continue »
Orange Beer
“What is wrong with your beer?” he said. “It’s orange!”
And I thought: yes, indeed, why? I mean, beer is usually a yellowish brown. But then I remembered: brown and orange are really in the same family of colors – only brown is darker. Try it: choose a nice brown color in photoshop. Now drop on a curves layer and brighten it. As it brightens, you’ll see it go in stages from brown, to light brownish, to an orangish, to a yellow. Mess with it a little more (darken the shadows), and you’ll get a true orange – even red, if you take it far enough.
When photographing beer, if the strobe hits the bottle dead on (in this case from beneath), it’ll light it up – essentially lightening up the browns in the beer. In beer the browns are already warm & on the orange side, so it lightens them up – to a full orange.
The photo to the right/top of this post is the exact photo that started this. Note the hues of the oranges – the closer to the light source, the more yellowish it is – the higher up, the darker – until the neck of the bottle draws light in to itself again.
Hindsight, 20/20 – as always. A few notes for myself (for next time), and to answer a few questions of readers:
When you look back at the photo, you’ll see that the shadows to the left are nice and soft. This is good, but I don’t think it fits this particular subject. We’re not looking for a soft look – not for some hippie with a beard. A little roughness is just fine. Should have gone with, or at least tried, a bare bulb.
Anyone want to get me a California bounce reflector? I use cheap, and often rigged-on-the-spot reflectors. I should use something better & would love a good-quality reflector. Why? In this case, the eyes kept coming out dark. Too dark, in many. Fixable, but should be better out of the camera.
Bonus: with a good reflector, I probably wouldn’t have needed the flash to camera left at all.
Yes, everyone that you’ll ever talk to will say “don’t use the display to gauge picture quality.” It’s bad – it’s chimping. Well guess what: I didn’t call this blog “photo-chimp” for nothing. People do it, and I do it. If you’re going to do it, check the histograms. I did, so these came out fine. However, by looking on the display, I thought they were much brighter. Some images, including the posted one here, needed as much as a +1.5ev adjustment in ACR, just to get skin tones right.
It’s minor, but could have been mitigated in camera. A pre-emptive responst to the question: why didn’t the histogram tell you it was off? Because of the dark background. This is a very low-key photo, and the histogram only tells me that there is detail in the photo itself.
After reviewing my post on the three-light setup, I have come to the conclusion that I probably should be using a better/heavier duty softbox with my strobing. I even found the one I want. But ouch, the price. Anyone want to get it for me? Eh, the end of my wishlist.
OK, so the reasoning: even choking up the umbrella still left some splashing of the light. It’s fine – the pictures work well and any splash is easily controlled in Photoshop, but to do it right I need flags. Again, hindsight: I could have peeled only half of the umbrella’s black cover back, but that just isn’t how I think. A flag inside, on the flash – that would have also worked. But again, just doesn’t work with my thought process (right now – ask again in a few months!).
So a softbox. Something that nicely stops light in its tracks. I’d love me one of them!
Three lights on Pop
The picture to the right was taken with three lights. Technically four flashes, but only three produced the light in this particular portrait. The fourth worked as the master controller for the other three.
Our goal was to show the beard – a near-year’s worth of growth, which is about to be chopped off. We wanted to show the full size and fuzziness (this is a lot for this guy), so that later photos can accurately show the contrast. There were several poses that we ran through, all of which did pretty well. This was my favorite, I think – it shows that the hair in the back grew (pony tail, yeah!), as well as the beard effect.
So, how it was done: we started by running through the house. We needed a background that would be visually interesting if we chose to light it. It also had to be in a room large enough so that we could use light to isolate details if need be.
In the end, we chose the main living room. It’s large, has dark walls, and a natural-stone fireplace (barely visible in this background). Unfortunately, a few shots in & we realized that the mantle cuts right through an adult’s head from virtually any angle. So, darken it we shall! Take the rear light, turn it around & give the subject rimlight. This was at 1/32nd power. Click to continue »
A photographic lie
Not so long ago, I took the picture to the right. In fact, it was barely more than a month ago. Towards the end of our Hawaiian vacation, I was on the beach, waiting for the sunset. Sunsets are always spectacular there, of course.
Now, the weather had been somewhat interesting – a bit breezier than normal, but not windy by any stretch of the imagination. Looking to the south and north, I could see that breeze blowing clouds out to sea. And as the clouds moved out, the rain started to fall. So to the south, rain falling over the open sea.
So you see my view to the south. I’m thinking to myself: how to capture this? There’s a contrast in action – swimmers frolicking, but a heavy downpour in the distance. To compress this and bring out blues, I used a zoom lens, tightened up the aperture as much as I could (for handheld), used manual white balance (under 5000K), and fired away.
What you’re seeing here doesn’t have much post processing. Some warming on the upper clouds, and a slight tweak to the swimmers to bring out their details slightly. And sharpening.
So what the end result is: a photo that looks like rough seas, with intrepid souls swimming, and a massive thunderstorm nearby. In reality, the light was bright and we were in a hazy sunlight. The clouds were brighter, and the rain was far away. The chopping waves? Just minor ones, actually. The wind was making peaks…
It’s probably the season, but I’ve been seeing in increase in traffic looking for bokeh shots. So here you go: an all bokeh Xmas/New Year tree.
Bokeh Tree