I have always shot mostly people on 35mm. I had a LF camera for a couple of years before I figured out that LF was different in so many ways, and the biggest was that time moves differently. When I'm setting up a shot, I tell people that they really need to find a way to not move, because once I focus the distance they can wobble is [shows fingers 1/2 inch apart]. I always give them something to lean on and let them find their own position. Then I focus, continually warning them not to move from this point on. I'm using strobe, but by the time I get to actually shooting the picture, it doesn't matter---they're frozen in place. Most people can handle it if you keep telling them what you're doing and have explained why they can't move.
I find it helps a lot to give people something to use as a spatial reference so they know when they're moving. My favorite studio accessory is a cast iron drafting table where I replaced the top with a 18" square of plywood and have a dark grey cloth draped on. I can elevate it high so that people can lean on it, or I can spin it vertical and it goes invisibly behind to lean back on. If I'm not using that, I use a chair. If you're shooting outside, perhaps you can find something similar to give your subjects added stability.
The result of all this is a totally different kind of picture from what I was doing with hand cameras: much more intense and solid, less about action. I think that's appropriate to the medium, but it took me a couple of years to catch on and learn how to manipulate things within the boundaries that a large camera imposes. Check my flickr links below, and you can see how differently I work in 35mm compared with 8x10!
Thanks, but I'd rather just watch:
Large format: http://flickr.com/michaeldarnton
Mostly 35mm: http://flickr.com/mdarnton
You want digital, color, etc?: http://www.flickr.com/photos/stradofear
This is a good discussion, thanks everyone for your input.
It seems like the consensus is just "tell your subject to hold still". I guess I am not really excited about that strategy since: (1) it lowers your changes of getting a non-blurred exposure (either by motion blur or the subject moving out of focus), so you use up more film and take multiple shots, and (2) it significantly limits the types of poses and facial expressions available - many expressions don't last long, so you are limited to what they can hold for the exposure and not end up with a bunch of smiles that don't show it in the eyes.
Looking at Avedon at work in the American West, (image image image image), it seems like he wasn't using flash, and typically set up his subjects in the shade or in overcast sun. So he probably was doing the same thing - "hold still!". It also explains why there is often motion blur in his work.
That's a good point. I would have to light the entire scene with flash, or let the background fall to black as so often happens in portraiture. Or, just use a little flash to help things "snap" - there might still be motion blur, but perhaps not as much.
I did some test exposures using my Nikon SB-910 last night and full manual settings on my Fuji X100s. In a very dim room, measured at about 1 EV, and settings at f/16, 1/125, ISO 400, the flash is plenty bright to fully light a space to make a good exposure. I didn't even have to use full flash power. And that's with the flash bounced off of the inside of a reflective umbrella. So I think if I need light, one or more SB-910 is probably going to be enough to brighten things up.
This seems fine for a head and shoulders type of portrait, but for a wider-angle, environmental portrait, I would have to light the entire scene. I have plenty of gear for it, but pretty soon I'm setting up four light stands, four umbrellas, and four flashes, messing with radio triggers or PC sync cables going everywhere, etc. Maybe it's worth it to have full control of the light and a nice sharp image. I dunno.
-Adam
As stated from a previous post - aperture determines strobe power, shutter speed controls the ambient.
Rule of thumb from Corbell...
a) 30% strobe contribution your strobe is a fill light
b) 50% strobe contribution you have a 1:1 ratio
c) 60%-70% strobe contribution your strobe is the main light
d) 100% strobe contribution, your shutter speed is irrelevant.
"Sex is like maths, add the bed, subtract the clothes, divide the whoo hoo and hope you don't multiply." - Leather jacket guy
Don't discount how still people are--it's amazing what you can get with a 1/2 second shutter speed. I personally dislike using strobes--I have enough to worry about with the camera and all that goes with it.
With some practice you'll know when you have a sharp exposure and when you don't. It's a matter of watching the person you're photographing, observing their breathing, and knowing when to press the button.
all that said, it shouldn't be too hard to get a 1/30 or 1/60 with 400 speed film on a cloudy day if you're willing to shoot wide open.
Use a faster film/developer combo. ... Every little bit helps.
“You often feel tired, not because you've done too much, but because you've done too little of what sparks a light in you.”
― Alexander Den Heijer, Nothing You Don't Already Know
Thanks, but I'd rather just watch:
Large format: http://flickr.com/michaeldarnton
Mostly 35mm: http://flickr.com/mdarnton
You want digital, color, etc?: http://www.flickr.com/photos/stradofear
flash
I am willing to do the necessary things, but I want to explore my options first!
Here is an interesting one - underexposing Portra 400 three stops and using it as ISO 3200 film. Now this might be worth trying. The images look pretty good actually, better than I would have thought.
http://canlasphotography.blogspot.co...-beach-fl.html
-Adam
Bookmarks