advice needed on these 3 model shoots...

[whopub]

Hi.

I have a small home studio and I'm trying to improve the quality of my shots. I'm putting a few pictures up so the experts can go through them and, hopefully, deliver some hints on how to achieve better results.

Of course getting better gear usually helps too, but I must get by with what I have right now, so I'm listing all the gear, all the settings, the studio setup, the distances, etc, so it's easier for you to point out what I'm doing wrong/right.

Of course I'll be interested in knowing stuff like 'better camera means better focus' and 'maybe getting another strobe will help', but mostly what I'm after are corrections I can do with my current setup.

I used the following:

Canon 400D with 50mm 1.4 USM (with B+W 58mm MRC UV and ES-71 II Lens Hood)

Sekonic Flash Master L-358

Walimex CY-150CR Strobe with Walimex Softbox 75x150cm (2.5x5 feet)

Walimex CY-100MR Strobe (bare for high key white or gelled for color)

Roscolux Gels (full range) on White (120050) Tetenal Savage Wide Tone Background Paper

CyberSync Trigger Transmitter and AC Receivers

For each of the 3 pictures I put up, there's 3 different versions. The first is what came off the camera (resized, though), the second is the same pic but with directional sharpen, and the third is my final image after all the post production work is done.

I'm also adding the original histogram for reference.

Each picture has its own page with all shots and info, to avoid overloading this post... I hope that's ok.

Here are the 3 pictures:

http://www.esthesia.org/post/picture01.htm
http://www.esthesia.org/post/picture02.htm
http://www.esthesia.org/post/picture03.htm

Each page has the complete settings, but I'm mentioning them here too, so they can be easily quoted on this thread:


Picture 1
-----------

http://www.esthesia.org/post/picture1c.jpg

Camera Settings:

Shooting Mode: Manual Exposure
Aperture Value: 4.0
Exposure Time: 1/200
ISO Speed: 100
Lens: EF50mm f/1.4 USM
Metering Mode: Partial Metering
AF Mode: One-Shot AF
White Balance Mode: Custom
Noise Reduction: Off
Picture Style: Portrait
Sharpness: 2
Image Size: 2592x3888
Image Quality: Fine (JPEG)

Strobes:

Key Light: Walimex CY-150CR Strobe with Walimex Softbox 75x150cm
power: f/5.6

Background Light: Walimex CY-100MR with Roscolux 16 Light Amber Gel (68% transf)
power: f/2.8

Distances Between:

Softbox and Model: 115 cms (3.7 feet)
Model and Background: 200 cms (6.5 feet)
Reflector and Model: 50 cms (1.6 feet)
Camera and Model: 290 cms (9.5 feet)


Picture 2
-----------

http://www.esthesia.org/post/picture2c.jpg

Camera Settings:

Shooting Mode: Manual Exposure
Aperture Value: 4.5
Exposure Time: 1/200
ISO Speed: 100
Lens: EF50mm f/1.4 USM
Metering Mode: Partial Metering
AF Mode: One-Shot AF
White Balance Mode: Custom
Noise Reduction: Off
Picture Style: Portrait
Sharpness: 2
Image Size: 2592x3888
Image Quality: Fine (JPEG)

Strobes:

Key Light: Walimex CY-150CR Strobe with Walimex Softbox 75x150cm
power: f/5.6.3

Background Light: Walimex CY-100MR with Roscolux #2001 Storaro Red Gel (12% transf)
power: f/2.8

Distances Between:

Softbox and Model: 115 cms (3.7 feet)
Model and Background: 200 cms (6.5 feet)
Reflector and Model: 50 cms (1.6 feet)
Camera and Model: 200 cms (6.5 feet)


Picture 3
-----------

http://www.esthesia.org/post/picture3c.jpg

Camera Settings:

Shooting Mode: Manual Exposure
Aperture Value: 4.5
Exposure Time: 1/200
ISO Speed: 100
Lens: EF50mm f/1.4 USM
Metering Mode: Partial Metering
AF Mode: One-Shot AF
White Balance Mode: Custom
Noise Reduction: Off
Picture Style: Portrait
Sharpness: 2
Image Size: 2592x3888
Image Quality: Fine (JPEG)

Strobes:

Key Light: Walimex CY-150CR Strobe with Walimex Softbox 75x150cm
power: f/5.6.3

Background Light: Walimex CY-100MR (no gel - just white high key)
power: f/8.0

Distances Between:

Softbox and Model: 115 cms (3.7 feet)
Model and Background: 200 cms (6.5 feet)
Reflector and Model: 50 cms (1.6 feet)
Camera and Model: 100 cms (3.3 feet)


Common to all these shots:

Used the flashed white background as reference for the custom WB.

Always use the finest JPEG format, since I didn't got into RAW yet...

Used White (120050) Tetenal Savage Wide Tone Background Paper (without gel on pic 3).

In all shots, the key light is almost in a frontal position (relative to the model), just a bit to the right, so I can be stand right in front of the model (see diagram).

The background light is also a bit to the right of the subject and it's protected with a huge black 'flag' I put together, to make sure no background gelled light catches the subject directly and, at the same time, to make sure no direct light from the key strobe messes up the gelled light hitting the backdrop paper.

There's a big white foam reflector (200x100 cms) on camera left, to bounce back some of the key light.

This diagram shows the setup:

http://www.esthesia.org/post/diagram.jpg


These were just some test shots taken to see how the gels worked with that backdrop (just got it).

So, with this camera, lens and lighting setup, should I expect the pictures to look better off the camera?

Is my post-production ok?

What can I do during and after the shoot to improve the images?

For those with properly calibrated monitors, are my tones any good? Or completely off?

There's no need to comment on the model, the poses, the clothes, or any sort of 'artistic merit' of the pictures. I'm only concerned with the tech aspects, including tone, light and focus. I want my pictures to be as close to technically perfect as possible before I start worrying with what I shoot...

I also have a EF 35mm f/2.0 and the kit lens (EFS 16-55mm f/5.6). I should buy the EF 85mm f/1.8 USM next, to shoot outdoors, but what matters here is shooting indoors with the 50mm I used for these shots.

Some of the gear I'm considering buying:

Digital Calibration Target
http://www.photovisionvideo.com/store/CTGY/DCT/

A monitor calibration device (Eye One or Spyder)
http://www.northlight-images.co.uk/article_pages/eye_one_display_2.html
http://www.northlight-images.co.uk/article_pages/spyder2pro.html

Eyepiece Magnifier D2
http://www.brightscreen.com/eyepiecemagnifier.html

Altough I'll have to wait until I get a new camera, since this eyepiece can't be used on the 400D. Well, maybe some cheaper option that I can use on the 400D is available or comes along in the meantime...

I really miss manual focus. Back in my Canon F1 days everything was manual and not a single pic was out of focus. But with a digital SLR (at least this model/range) it's almost impossible to do it.

Well, bring on the comments and the tips... :)

[tonydee]

Sorry... haven't read through everything you said above... pretty tired today... few points - trying to keep to tone, light, focus as you request - if they're still not what you're interested in please ignore....

#1: This looks pasted on, partly the flat lighting, and partly because it's over-sharpened: look at the edges of her left arm... see the dark line separating it from the bright background, and the bright line separating it from the dark top?

#2: her left chest region & stomach look blown enough to hide any curvature

#3: forehead and left of face look a bit bright to me...DOF/focus look pretty good, but perhaps her chin's getting a touch soft? Don't really need her forehead sharp - and of course having such a bright area at the top can lead the eye out, but not sure if you consider that "light" or pose/artistic-merit critique.

Good luck with it,
Tony

[mjmackinnon]

Either my eyes are totally off, or your colour balance/white scale is way off. The images are all rather pink.

From your light diagram, I would consider using a black reflector as the contrast from the lit to shadow side doesn't seem right. It looks too bland or washed out.

I like the layout of shot #3.

As for the first two, I'd try angling the models shoulder more towards the camera to give a bit more depth and feel for the model.

Matt.

[whopub]

#1: This looks pasted on, partly the flat lighting, and partly because it's over-sharpened: look at the edges of her left arm... see the dark line separating it from the bright background, and the bright line separating it from the dark top?

So what would be the best way to deal with this: using another strobe as fill light in that side (thus replacing the reflector), or moving the key light further to the right (it's in an almost frontal position)? Maybe by doing this the reflector will become more effective and, as a side effect (pun intended...), the image will look less flat.

#2: her left chest region & stomach look blown enough to hide any curvature

You're right, I gotta experiment with that one. I like well lit shots, but the white dress makes it hard to have both the model and the clothes come out right. Maybe I can diffuse the bottom part of the softbox a bit, to make sure more light hits her face than the dress, but there's still the arms and legs to consider...

#3: forehead and left of face look a bit bright to me...DOF/focus look pretty good, but perhaps her chin's getting a touch soft? Don't really need her forehead sharp

I tend to resist altering the depth of field in PP, though sometimes it does improve a shot.

and of course having such a bright area at the top can lead the eye out, but not sure if you consider that "light" or pose/artistic-merit critique.

Well, it's often hard to separate the two, as we see a picture as a whole.

Thanks for the input Tony.

[whopub]

Either my eyes are totally off, or your colour balance/white scale is way off. The images are all rather pink.

That's partially why I'm posting these. Not having a calibrated monitor it's hard to tell. Is your monitor calibrated, or is it just a case of yours being a bit more off than mine?

From your light diagram, I would consider using a black reflector as the contrast from the lit to shadow side doesn't seem right. It looks too bland or washed out.

That's a great suggestion, and I have 2 black flags that are perfect for the job. I'll try to test them tomorrow. First with the white foam, then with the black flag, to see the difference.

As for the first two, I'd try angling the models shoulder more towards the camera to give a bit more depth and feel for the model.

Like I said in my answer to Tony, do you think moving the key light more to the right will also accomplish that? It's just that I'd like to have to have a setup that didn't depend so much on the pose itself, though, of course, adjustments have to be made constantly during the shoot.

So maybe moving the key more to the right and replacing the reflector with another strobe (100W would be more than enough for fill) would solve the flatness issue?

I'll need to test all that, of course, but the more input I get before I even start the better.

Thanks for your suggestions Matt.

[tonydee]

So what would be the best way to deal with [flat lighting]

Truth is... I'm no studio lighting expert... I tend to shoot buildings, statues, landscapes, gardens etc. under sunlight. I can see what's wrong - be a fresh pair of eyes as I know it's sometimes hard to be objective with your own work - and I'm fairly sound with the tech. side and post-processing, but I can't tell you much about how to fix studio lighting....

I like well lit shots, but the white dress makes it hard to have both the model and the clothes come out right.

Great to get as much right via lighting as you can, but if/when that doesn't quite work, got to balance "brightening" a shot in post-processing (as long as you were close enough that it won't introduce much noise) vs blowing highlights and risking an unconvincing recovery attempt. Shooting RAW certainly helps, but I think "Image Quality: Fine (JPEG)" means you're shooting JPEGs? RAW has more dynamic range and bit depth... often gives you a second chance without reverting to the studio.

I tend to resist altering the depth of field in PP, though sometimes it does improve a shot.

Me too... was suggesting being a bit more careful when taking the shot.

Thanks for the input Tony.

Welcome. Nice to see someone getting really stuck in seriously. Best of luck with it.

Cheers, Tony

[whopub]

I can see what's wrong - be a fresh pair of eyes as I know it's sometimes hard to be objective with your own work

Yep, that really makes the threads in this section a great learning tool.

was suggesting being a bit more careful when taking the shot.

That's always harder to do during the shoot than it seems. I always did this sort of (amateur) portrait/fashion work. When I shot outside, in the film days, I never had a problem. Then, when time came to move to digital (also outdoors), the LCD was just too damn small to have a clue, so you usually only knew how it went after it was over.

Now that I'm adapting to working indoors, and that I shoot with the camera connected to the PC, so the pics are instantly sent to the computer, I find it's still not that easy.

Sure, you see how the first few shots go. Then, when everything seems ok you start shotting more and checking less. But poses change and sometimes what was right may no longer be...

I still pause to check (with the model) every so often but, like you said, and especially during the actual shoot, it's very easy to miss a lot of details.

When shooting people like this the goal is to get THE pose, so once the setup seems ok something like critically judging the setup on each picture really becomes hard.

That's why I'm looking to improve the whole thing, so my starting point is the best I can achieve.

And right now the most important aspect seems to be flatness and how to avoid it, key llight positioning and the need for a fill light to replace the reflector.

Where are all the portrait experts?

[Mark1]

That's partially why I'm posting these. Not having a calibrated monitor it's hard to tell.



I would say getting a calibrator would be the best advice. If you are going to do this caliber of work, why not do it justice. Sure, calibrators are kinda expensive, but will help more than you think it will. They are definatley worth the money it costs.

As far as the images.... To me it looks like you are over-lighting her. At least in the small images here. The white dress has no detail at all. And the skin is washed out a bit in all of the images. I like the images other than that. Decient pose. Interesting outfits. Pretty good job for me, You just need help in the post. And the calibrator will help there.