Check out my 365 portrait album on flickr. I’ll be the first to admit, some photos need work, but it is a cool project to try and complete!

It was behind the scenes in Snowwhite rehearsals. Even as long time friends
this was an awkward shot as there was a lot of emotion going on. Dave was struggling with his lines and i was brought in at very short notice as one of the cast had dropped out at last min.
This was one of 3 shots but the other two i haven’t used as you can see the utter dispare in his face. I asked if i could use this photo for its rawness. We do amateur dramatics with no payment except the joy of the audiences faces but it is draining.

And then they turn the spot lights on.

Does anyone really know themselves?

Can you really expose hidden elements of a subject’s personality, or are you merely presenting an image that your audience may colour with their own pre-conceptions and cultural assumptions?

Keeping that in mind, here’s a portrait of a total stranger of whom I know nothing other than she seemed to be doing some shopping on a Sunday.

Bravo!

Adorable child.  The colors of the turquoise figures against the warmth of her skin are a great accent and activity.  I’m wondering if the shot would be stronger if the focus was on the eyes instead of the figures if we would connect with her a little faster and for longer.  I think so.  Kids can be great performers in a portrait shoot – usually for short duration – and often are uninhibited and camera savvy.  The right kid and the right toy can open a wonderland of fantasy photos.

The make-up shot is more of a portrait because he is working with you and is cognizant of you shooting.  Documents of a performance are not really portraits because it’s not a collaborative effort with the camera.  Its a document of a performance and you are not the director.  A portrait is when the artist is in control to direct the subject, design and effect the lighting, and guide the process of the shoot to a point where something significant is captured that says something insightful about that person.

If you analyze your own behaviors you can apply what you learn to your understanding of everyone else.

If you study photography you will learn the distinction between a street grab shot and a portrait session where you have a dialogue with a subject.  More importantly the subject is a willing collaborator in a process of making a revealing statement in visual terms.

Thanks for your reply Rob

I wasn’t sure what type of photo the stage shot was. i added it as an indication that the portrait wasn’t the norm with regards to the first shot.

Thinking about your other comments on other shots.
I suppose although shot in a portrait, it technically isn’t a portrait. Although Dave new
i had a camera. I don’t think he was expecting the photo. If so his expression may have been different and something i would have had control of.

The story goes that he sensed a certain sadness about them, but when they sat, they were too formal. So, knowing that they were animal lovers, he told them that his dog had died (or something similar). He then caught their reaction.

Now, does the image (particularly without the story behind it) tell us anything about the couple? Has Avedon done anything else than to foist HIS interpretation of his subjects upon us?

I will agree that a good portrait will tell us a lot about the photographer, and it can probably give the questioning viewer some insights into themselves, but I don’t think it can say much about the subject.

And a casual picture of my Mom, which I felt has brought out her personality.

Though now I see a scope of improvement for both.

The story told by Diane Arbus, is that Avedon had a preconceived agenda when he photographed the Duke and Duchess in 1957.  He told them that on the way to the session his taxi had run over a dog, a lie, to elicit a response.   There had been suspicion about their ungracious familiarity with Adolf Hitler and the Nazis, leading up to WWII.  They lived in an elegant Paris home provided by the French Government on a lavish income provided by the British Government and made pro-fascist remarks to the press and disparaging remarks about their host countries.  Avedon once remarked that the Windsors loved dogs more than they loved Jews.   There is much written about their opulent life style and peculiar indulgences.  So it is probable that Avedon had an agenda in this famous case and they were pretty accurately cast.
(The Duke and Duchess of Windsor: We Are Not Amused, October 9,2009 by Lisa Waller Rogers)

The shot was a big news event and widely controversial at the time.  But not really a great example of what we are talking about here.

That is an unusual condition.  The overwhelming majority of portraits are made with the open cooperation of the subject with the intention of finding some flattering likeness or something insightful to reveal about the subject.  A mutual collaboration.

This is a Supervisor/Longshoreman in the Port of Sacramento.
He’s Creole, which I have never knowingly photographed someone that was.

This encouraged me to look a bit at  your phtostream where I say a couple of others that I liked too because of the light quality that did magic things.

To my eye, this one is a lot stronger because of the super dynamic light blasting through here. All these radial lines and the framing of the guy in the blast zone of this doorway make this a powerful winner.
It is empowering the guy as well as illuminating the shot. This is strategically well seen and well executed.  (Personally I love this one.)

I think everything content wise works here pretty well to support the emotional moment. I might want to see the rail a bit softer ( less depth of field) because it competes with the focus on her, and could be a bit more stylistically romantic as softer shapes than the iron rail that it is. However, it’s providing a sense of place and a degree of environment that works with her lovely smile.

I took the liberty of trying a softer out of focus rail version. Maybe the rail could go even softer. What do you think?

This is a really nice shot. It’s a photographically appropriate subject and all your instincts about the wide angle and the close cropping support the concept very well. The only little item I find a bit distracting is the position of the hose behind him on the left. The hose is close in color and scale to his muostache and competes graphically just a little. Maybe a slight camera move to the left might have separated his head from the hose. Small point but, when you have it this good and a guy willing to pose, it’s worth shooting around the space to reduce distractions and investigate other angles.

You seem to be getting a lot of good use out of your D750, especially in India. This is only one of many very nice portraits you did there showing the amazing rich colors and textures of Indian culture. You have a great street journalistic style. Your use of color and light direction is consistently very appealing. You use a range of focal lengths very effectively too. It’s great to see how you engage your subjects in such a comfortable way. You explore a lot of the world through your camera. Good instincts. Practiced skills. Work on a book. Thanks for joining the discussion. Show us more.

Thanks very much for your comments. The hose bothered me too. There probably is a better angle, but when I was there I couldn’t find it.

Yes, this trip was the best chance I’ve had to put the D750 through its paces, and I was very happy with it. When I first bought it, I was skeptical about the tilting screen, but I used it a lot — for candid shots, for low angles when I didn’t want to kneel or lie down in filth, for high over-their-heads shots in crowds, etc. The low-light performance and dynamic range were also excellent.

A book may be coming.

I went off with a friend early in the morning to shoot birds. We were unlucky and couldn’t find any bird to shoot. However while returning my friend was driving the car and I was sitting next to him, windows open and with camera in my hand when I saw this bird. It was there only for a sec but got it in that sec. This shot made the entire trip worthwhile.

While below shot could be common shot but I did not plan it. Was shooting some other bird I saw this bird passing my frame through my viewfinder when I shot it.

As I sat at my little table, I watched a bald eagle perch on this old, weather-worn pole outside the window of the dining area. Suddenly, a raven showed up and started making pass after pass at the eagle–dive bombing him. My jaw hit the floor. My eye knew it could produce a moment I’d want to hang on to. Heck, it was one of the first times I’d ever seen a bald eagle in the wild and I wasn’t expecting anything so dramatic. I dashed upstairs to get my camera and lens, but when I came back down the raven was gone and the drama had ended. I sat there waiting and wishing and waiting. Nothing. I was down to my last spoonfuls of oats when the raven reappeared and renewed the acrobatic tension. I bolted outside. Thanks to the speedy 7 fps of the D300s I was carrying (I’ve wondered if my current body would have secured this shot at 4 fps), I got one of my favorite shots of the whole trip. The sky sucked and came out flat white, but the moment was just what I never knew I’d always wanted. It’s now on the wall in my office.

Carrying a camera with you always is the best preparedness.  Every time you walk out the door you ask yourself, ” What does the light look like?  Where is the sun?  Is my camera set up for the most likely happenstance?”  Then you can act on opportunities like this, no matter what your subject matter.

Personally I like the white background.  You couldn’t have gotten that any better in a studio or in Photoshop.  It’s such a great moment it hardly looks real.  Great story.  Better than your expectations.

The first one is of Sonny Del-Rio who is a well known rock n roll sax man in my part of Canada. His onstage kitsch is Hawaiian patterned shirts and red running shoes. I felt it was time to elevate him to elder statesman status.

The second is a young lady I brought in to play with lighting. It turns out she has a penchant for and the look to pull off older style poses.

Crap! I think I used the wrong size settings when I grabbed the links. Sorry about that.

In any case, this is a really nice portrait of Saxophone Sonny Del-Rio. The lighting really highlights the guy with his sax in a classic but still relevant way. This has some of the qualities of the single light Irving Penn portraits. It’s got a lot of very appealing qualities. The rendering of textures and skin tones and the dynamics of the light and dark almost black shadow gives this strength.

The female model has got a cute playful quality, and some of that is the success of the bright key light. The eye contact is connective, but moreover, I think you arrived at a style of shot and controlled capture quality that you don’t get in most of you performance images.

These are really nice – a big step in exceeding your expectations, especially Sonny with the sax.

Shooting with ambient light, mostly. Having a toddler makes set-up photography tough. (Heck, it makes picking up a camera tough!) Granted, I can throw on the speedlight and still “discover” a shot rather than plan it out, but those moments are rare and rarely seem “artistic” according to my own sensibilities.

How do I define them?

You did it far better than I could. I just try not be defined BY either one of them individually. (You know what I mean. The person whose photography website says that they only shoot or prefer to shoot in natural light. I might prefer natural light too, but I better be able to use artificial light well if I’m going to advertise my skill-set through a website.)

This originally caught my eye because of the way the water was falling on the kids. I think it was a pleasant surprise when the water came from the other direction (Sunshine only)

I have on many occasions used the hybrid approach. This woman is a bartender in a club. the tattoo and bare shoulder was interesting. I set the flash on the bar so it would bounce off the ceiling and then called her name. The glance over the shoulder worked for me. (One strobe) This is more taking advantage of the existing situation (one you really do not control) but manipulating the existing light.

I do sometimes get the time to, as you put it, “plan” some in the studio, However, in my case (even if I know what I want) it is more accurately known as “Trial and Error”. This was done for our Halloween Card one year. (4 lights and modifiers – creating images)

The found or produced distinction is not necessarily about lighting – studio or available light. I think it’s more about how much you participate in the planning and construction of an idea as opposed to searching with your photo seeing mechanism in gear to find something that already exists. A portrait is a produced shot. You have to direct the subject, choose the background and control the affect of light on the subject, even if you have to say, “Come stand near this window so the light hits the side of your face.”

The found shot can be just as much a search with or without a speed light. The speed light just gives it a style and effect – filing the shadows of what you have discovered, providing a snap shot look, or an electronic zap to a street image.

This distinction helps the photographer know what the approach, discipline, process will be.

I know the reference to available light, or natural light is semantic at best. I have all kinds of lights available to me. Sometimes the sun is one of them. It feel quite natural shooting with studio lights. I do it everyday. Of course I am being facetious and I know what you mean. Can I say one is discovered and organically unencumbered, untouched or influenced by the hand of the photographer. The second – the produced shot – is deliberately constructed whether inside or outside and arranged to fit a concept rather than to be discovered and applied to a concept.

I think whenever you aim a camera at a toddler you are in for some kind of a test. They will either perform for you or run and hide. Even if your deliberately tying to set up a portrait of a toddler, you may end up searching for your reluctant subject.

The “found” stuff is searching or waiting for that opportunity. Some of it is digging and reframing and recomposing until you arrive at the essence of the shot that works for you. But that is all part of the found shot. It is looking for a rare opportunity as you say.

You’re hybrid shot in the bar is a good example of how to set up the opportunity for something to happen. If you’re using flash at an event or speed light outside at night, and your approach is still looking for something special to happen for that good visual opportunity, it’s still “found” more than produced except that you lit it.

You’re right that we should leave a loose window open even in the strictest studio situation, to allow for something unexpected to happen. Most of my best studio images were accidentally derived – or at least, within the zone of light and range of possibilities something beyond what I was imagining happened as worked. The dancer jumped higher, the laugh was bigger, the expression was more believable…

The sword got stuck in the case forcing Devon to yank it a little harder and swing enough for her hair to fly sideways and make a better shot.

Your Zombie Bartender is definitely all concept and production. Although I like the shot, especially the colors together, I won’t be having what he’s having.

Nice to hear from you again.

The theme was ‘Gone with the wind’, and I decided not to go for the movie association, but to show wind blowing.

For the theme ‘Alien’ I took a picture of me with my Zambian ‘Aliens registration card’.
Both photos are conceptual, they existed (more or less) in my mind before I took them.
On other occasions I just take my camera and see what comes along, for instance wildlife in the garden:

or the expressive faces of my students:

I would call this type of photography opportunistic rather than conceptual. Now that I think about it, it would perhaps be good to combine both approaches. One aim of my photography (and work) is to show Zambia to the people that support projects here. Maybe I could take ‘Zambia’ or ‘poverty’ or ‘churches in Zambia’ as a theme, interpret it, imagine the shot beforehand and then make it, to get a clearer image of what I’m trying to convey…

“Alien” is pretty witty as well. There are all different kinds of aliens for sure. One of my favorite genres of photography is the street photographers urban alienation images – Lee Friedlander – and a hundred others who observe without participating. They are solitary outside observers to the point of defining their own alienation against the rest of the activity surrounding them.

The wildlife in the garden is a found, or discovered image requiring a search process instead of a construction process.

The reason that this distinction is important is that we as photographers need to establish rules or boundaries for what our process will include. Do we shoot what we see and keep it there? Do we ask people to pose? Do we only quietly observe? Do we build everything from the ground up and shoot a concept that is in our head?

Then as you have asked yourself – Do I try to use the faces of my students and interpret what I see with a message that I am trying to tell my audience?

At that point you are telling a story, being a photojournalist, and communicating a message. This is exactly why I posed this question here. What are the boundaries you define to use your skills. How far do you go to get your message across?

Some of the most renown street images had a little adjustment in them to make the point stronger. We have so many tools at hand now to influence the impact of a shot. Photojournalists are under a strict code of conduct not to alter the content of an image – not manipulate in any way – to tell a true story. But when you choose a lens to distort the perspective or telescope in on action it alters the story. Action within the frame does not tell the influences of whats going on outside of the frame. If the bodies on a battle field are shot in B&W does the blood look less real than if the same shot is in color and the red is saturated to be dramatic? Just the act of shooting and framing and capturing a given moment is a different story than the one before if and after it. It is our own attitude and intention that makes our images tell the story we want to tell.

In the studio the same thing happens. If I shoot a model performing in front of the camera, I tend to pick certain subtle gestures and expressions that appear recurrently in my portfolio. I like models fending off danger in a moment of jeopardy – hands up, hair flying a touch of wildness in their eye. I do that shot habitually over and over. I have to be aware that I am falling back into my habits. Another photographer with a different attitude will capture the same model, with her hands down at her sides, calmly gazing into space. We choose different decisive moments.

What I asked her to do. What she think of what I asked her to do. The way she normally poses for other people.

This is a book, not a reply. In the process I had a chance to visit your photo stream which I really enjoyed and I suggest anyone else visit too. You are documenting so much of your life in Zambia with a skillful and beautiful approach. I encourage you to join in the discussion here as I begin another season at NDLC. Thanks.

In response to one of your challenges, I took this shot to demonstrate that you could get an image at the fastest flash duration, in this case 1/41,600 sec.

You can take your studio tools into the field to capture shots like this with gels and multiple speedlights at 1/8000sec.

One of my favorite ways to hone in found photography skills is in the museum working with available lights and exploring the power of a fast prime. My favorite museum lens is an old 50mm F/1.4 AI from the 1970s. Many photographers use AF to find shots, but it’s amazing what you can find when restricted to manual only and then taking that thought process when using AF lenses.

Museum lighting also hones in your skills when trying to achieve a certain look in your everyday images. The power of metering gives a skill set that comes in handy in a fast pace shooting environment.

So when you are taking your next pet shot, the same principles apply.

Or using the subtleties of light and shadows in your photojournalistic shots.

Don’t forget about playing around with your camera’s features. Sometimes, very cool shots can be found (or produced) with a change of settings.

Nikon has some interesting new offerings that are tweaking my next creative directions. For produced images, which could render gallery sized shots, will pair the D810 with the 105mm f/2.8. For wandering about and seeking that elusive as of yet unknown shot, the new D750 (having a tilt screen on an FX is a nice creative tool) and hooking that up with the 85mm f/1.8G.

This one is in a way a combination of ‘found’ and ‘produced’ since I know this was going to unfold and used flash to augment the lighting.

The others were when doing interviews with bounce flash:

Or shooting weddings using bounce flash ‘in situ’ without any backdrop.

Or none at all:

For me it is all about reacting to the light, finding the right composition and getting the feel for the tonalities and texture in the scene. With and without flash are options I always explore and more often than not, I try to augment ambient light with or overpower it when possible.

When shooting I am always reminded to think of tonal rendition by Ansel Adams, whimsical subjects by Elliott Erwitt and Garry Winogrand and the everyday object transcendence (‘more than a pepper’) of Edward Weston.

Some of my photos are lucky finds, but many come from waiting for the right moment to shoot. Maybe a moss covered rock would look cool in the fog, or maybe that lone tree will drop all of it’s leaves in a perfect circle on a windless day. Sometimes I wait for years after coming up with the concept.

This past week I was hoping that a butterfly would land on one of my sunflowers with some decent light hitting it. Yesterday I got my wish:

Shooting apparel in motion for Reebok, I did a bunch of these images. These dancers and athletes were moving faster than I could anticipate, but I knew they would be playing to the camera. We planned to have them play to the camera and be on camera. That provides a deliberate connection with the models. From then – it’s about what millisecond I can anticipate and capture.

This hybrid place does require some technical skills and through practice becomes second nature and works in harmony with good instinct.

I understand your comment about older manual focus lenses. I too have been putting an AI 85mm F 1.4 manual lens on my D800. Initially I used it because of the longer “pull” of focus shooting video. Then I was challenged by watching the focus change subtly and slowly shooting faces close up.
There is a control in the choice of focus targets that reveals other focus options slowly. It was a fun experiment. I got some very nice shots. But for 99% of what I do, and with my eye sight, Auto Focus is going to get me there more confidently and sharper.

Zero – Nice to hear from you. I think your approach is from the “found imagery” school. You are on a search even at a wedding. The fact that you may fill with a Speedlight is only a technical way to reveal more of what you find. The light is not a conscious subject in the shot. Luckily I think you usually find what you are searching for. When I look at your NYC street images, I think I might be walking right past you – that other guy staring at the Brooklyn Bridge with a Nikkor 14-24mm.

So the question is how do you translate this ‘found imagery’ approach in the studio? I guess this is done by conveying to the model the concept and creating a background story to anchor to?

Yeah we are lucky to live in a city that never sleeps and everything is always changing and every section dynamic. I do always love walking across the Brooklyn Bridge and maybe one of these days I’d bump into you!

The process is to set up a light zone, and construct a set where the action can take place. Light the area where the subject will be. If it’s a shot requiring motion and movement, pull the lights back and make the zone a little bigger and looser. Even if the action is as small as the turn of a head and the bouncing of hair with a fan, this is the way I think of lighting a shot.

This way there is a stage set, the area is lit and the subject can move within a given area so you can shoot pretty loosely and allow good accidents to happen.

BTW I could not see the video above

It’s always about the concept. If you have a good idea, you have to be true to the idea and create the shot wherever it best supports the concept.

Sometimes art directors have an idea of a place, a football field or a mansion, something big, and that’s harder to build in the studio. One time I got a job for a lingerie company that required building a complete Caribbean house including bedroom furniture in the studio. It took a couple of days – everything came up the freight elevator and looked like St. Barths on a sunny day. It was easier and cheaper than sending 10 models, crew and gear to St. Barths and renting a location. Those are the practical considerations that come to play sometimes.

It’s surprising how little you need to pull off a convincing illusion of another place and time. Suggestion is a powerful tool.

And then as you said, you build the zone, and create the moment. You might retry and take the moment 1000 times. That is pretty common. I use a process called shoot and review. Shoot 50 or a hundred, then review picking the 5 best. Define the attributes of the 5 best, then shoot 50 more of just that preference. Continue unto I’m happy.

From the video it looked you were using continuous lights or was that flash packs/monolights with modeling lights?

There is no working with amateur models at that level. They don’t have the chops or the command of their movements to get it right every frame. There is also no protection from liability or usage rights without a proper contract with an agent. I’ve been working on a series of fashion shoots in Miami for about 8 months. The models are all really great. Top professionals, They hardly ever miss a frame, and if we get out of step, they apologize for missing one frame out of 100. They are just that constant. It’s like the dialogue between a choreographer and a dancer.

Lighting in the video. I almost always use studio strobes in my studio work. I prefer Dynalites and almost always use them. (There are some instances where I am shooting fast and need only a little fill light on camera and use a Nikon Speedlight.) Most of what I do has multiple flash heads and the positioning and tuning of the lighting is very crucial to the concept of the shot. The studio strobes have 2 lights in them – modeling light for reference of where and what it will look like, and the flash tube which goes off at the moment of exposure. The modeling lights are tungsten and the flash is 5100K. The flash is vastly brighter than the modeling lamp and also is a very fast duration providing stopped action and sharpness not attainable with continuous light.

The video frame rate was slow and sometimes missed the flash going off. You can hear the pop and the recycle beep signal which I use to confirm that the flash has gone off and recycled. If I am using 3, 4 or 5 flash heads, the different beep tones will confirm that all of the heads are working. Most of the flash looks like a white bar across the frame because the video camera shutter missed the full blast of flash. You can hear the beeps. It is a very different process and a bit more complicated than most people realize. So much is done digitally and with radio transmitters to trigger the lights and wifi the images to the computer too. Most of the time now I am shooting with a camera tethered to the computer. It’s a very dependable workflow and is fast. Fast is key.

So with the amount of Art Direction and project needs, how much creativity does the photographer have in the input specially if the concept is restrictive? Does this mean getting the money shots and then doing some experimental fun stuff and rely on serendipity or go with the flow and see what evolves. Dancing can be both choreography and improvisation, I guess it is a matter of degrees i which one contributes more in the end.

Also how much has digital changed the way you work? I mean there is not more polaroid backs or instant slide films to check setups but are you shooting more now than when you were shooting with bricks of film?

Client/photographer creative balance. The photographer has his finger on the button – ultimate control. When it’s a job, the client is trying to get the shot that will market his product or brand the best. The photographer is trying to fulfill his job and get the coolest shot within those boundaries. The photographer is hired for his particular style usually. The client sees something in a shot that fits the vision for his company. The photographer has an advantage at that point because the photographer knows how to get that shot. At that point the clients tend to recede to their role as observers and watch the monitor as images file in.

Good point about a shoot being part practiced choreography and part improvisation. Very perceptive of you. That is definitely the game. Shoot the safe stuff for the layout and then stretch it out and see where we can take it beyond the layout. It could be finding a different point of view, different lens, lighting or just random action, but usually it’s directing the model to go beyond what the layout dictates, with something that is unexpected and special.

The digital workflow is much better than the Polaroid preview days. Polaroids weren’t very accurate. We now have instant monitor feedback from the group who monitors the monitors. The whole team can comment in real time about how it looks. We can check highlights and shadow density to ensure a perfectly plotted file, and composition. More importantly we can see the position and attitude of the model, the fit of the clothing and the drape of the fabric. The finished shot comes right up. There may be cosmetic things to fix in post production but those determinations can be made right at the shoot as well. We know how much time and money we need to allot to retouching. In the film days we had to overshoot and hope we got the shot. Now we know when we have it and get on to the next one. Clients are more at ease, and photographers sleep a lot better knowing they have the shot, and don’t have to wait until tomorrow to see the film.

Since we can see the actual image on the LCD or monitor, does this means that the use of flash meters have stopped? If so even for establishing lighting ratio? Chimping or looking at the monitor is the norm now?

For shooting for end use that goes to the Press (web offset/CMYK), do you compress the tonality (the 4 stop limit) via lighting or is this now done via post production?

I love this subject, it gets to right where I am living at the moment. As for which method I am using, it became at times a studio like environment, other times photo journalistic .

I do not think I have the image available as a frame of reference, except it is stored in my archives, which I will try to locate and when I do I will come back as post it for you.

The image was created to mimic the look, texture and feel of hot molten lava, and it was produced by shooting a liquid emulsion inside an amber medicine bottle which was back-lighted. In this insistence, it was more photo art than anything else. The point I am making is that a produced image as in a studio can be made anywhere. A studio can be as well equipped as Rob.s New York studio, or a spare room in ones house. It might have a “set” as large as a Broadway stage, or as small as a small cocktail table.

I had the opportunity to shoot some professionally, but the vast amount of my photography has been for my own consumption, pleasure and use. In the past year due to health issues I have done little shooting, and when I do break out a camera I stage no lights, often it means shooting daylight photos or with a single strobe. Even so one can gain a unique vision and perspective from a limited role.

I admire the expertise of Rob, and his team shooting in the busy fast paced world of New York shooting Ads for the industry he has there. Rob has a wealth of knowledge and can create from concept to finish using such variables as lighting, and more importantly a whole team of pros who in turn has their own world they influence. To be able to direct so many players to produce one musical concert is no small feat.
We may not have a team, we may not have a studio, or even a single flash, but we can improvise, we can use a coffee table as our stage, or we can use the Grand Canyon, and visit the scene as Ansel Adams did, at various times of the day to get that shot, or to create the moment that we envision.

Here is a CD cover concept which will probably be adopted for the back cover. I intentionally brought the artists to this location where I could carefully set up these seemingly candid shots and still fit within the project specs. I just asked them to kick up the dust as they were walking.

I do tend, probably because my primary shooting is in ambient concert lighting, to seek out ambient light even for found shots such as this ‘I was there’ shot with the female singer and an admirer.

I can still goof around though with portable lighting. Here we are at an outdoor BBQ party and the theme was, what else? rock stars. I set up 2 speedlights high and far behind and then used an Aurora Firefly modified to act as a beauty dish as the main light to emulate hard stage lighting. The kids had fun with it.

I suppose one could say that I shoot contrived found situations?

Unless of course I’m shooting a show where I have to take what I am given.

I am very likely to use the histogram first. That is pretty safe, and insures that images shot back to back for a catalog or ad usage will be consistent.
The only time I have used a meter lately is to check the even distribution of light when trying to get a background lit evenly. But still I go to the info eye dropper to read the measured light levels in Nikon View NX2. I usually keep the blacks between 4-8, and the highlights below 250 – 253. I try not to max out the highlights to 255 ever.

As far as shooting to include the compression – no. I shoot the fullest file I can, the most inclusive amount of zones, so that retouching and post processing has the smoothest transitions and max amount of colors to blend. Then I let the printer make the conversation to CMYK based on their ink, paper, color preferences etc. The most successful color renditions I have had, are from first making a good ink jet soft proof print from my file, and asking the printer to match that print generated by my file. If I can get it really looking good on an ink jet print, the printer can’t deny that it’s not in the file.

So the next question then becomes how do you deal with matching swatches when dealing with fashion work? Is the majority of it done in post or in situ (WB,lighting, filters etc) while making the photograph?

You’re totally correct that a produced image can happen on the kitchen counter or on the basement workbench. The studio is where you find it. I have a pretty well equipped studio. That just means I have been doing this for a long time. Setting up an off camera speed light in the garden to catch a butterfly as they land on your prize sun flower is a produced shot. It doesn’t have to be Hollywood. Thanks for all your input Dr. Strader.

You can very simply use a grey card and get it very close with the grey eye dropper in Lightroom or Photoshop too. That will get the white balance correct, but will not profile each separate color the way the Color Checker will.

Model holding the Color Checker for a calibration frame, at the beginning of a shoot after the lighting is all tuned in and ready to go.

This is a subject for a completely dedicated topic. But this is the color workflow I use at this point at this point.

So do you never go light and portable ever in a project? What I mean is doing it the McNally/Strobist way (multiple OCFs) and shooting only with portable flashes? Of course there is less control this way overall.

This whole threads is now reminding me of George Hurrel vs Weegee or even Avedon in the Studio vs Avedon doing ‘In The American West’

There are times when I do want to shoot looser and leave the lighting and timing open for blurs, flares, and random action to make a shot more spontaneous. That’s why it’s always fun shooting subjects in motion and especially outdoors. I do often shoot with portable lights, speed lights and portable location flash. I shoot a lot of frames and I like to shoot fast. Speed lights are great for the Creative Lighting System solutions to control and accuracy. Other times I need something a lot more robust with really long battery life. It’s fun to shoot with less control and see what happens by instinct and even by accident.

Speedlight

Battery powered Flash with receiver.

Using the sun to create flary back light and filling with contrasty flash.

Flash head with diffusion over a warm reflector.

Then the cotton candy girl looks like a discovered situation with no input or involvement. This is not a portrait. It’s a found moment. Richard Avedon said, “A portrait is a picture of someone who knows he is being photographed, and what he does with this knowledge is as much a part of the photograph as what he’s wearing or how he looks.” In this case the girl is not aware or participating, so it’s a found image.

Most people gravitate to one pole or the other. What do you prefer? And – how do the two approaches merge in your shooting style?

One thing however I did not fee restricted by working with a single flash since it worked with the concept. Surely adding more flash would also have worked but that means needing more assistants because placing tripod/lightstands would have necessitated a photo permit.

So I guess for some people being in a studio gives more freedom/control of the workflow vs those needing to work on location or outdoors. I guess the end result is the most important thing in delivering for what is needed.

“…the end result is the most important thing…” Yes. The end result justifies the means. In most cases the end result can be accomplished with various degrees of complexity. Usually the engineering of a fancy fashion or advertising shot can be simplified and done gorilla style. If it’s for myself or editorial, with little budget, there is a way to pull it off and make it work. That may mean there are fewer options, less time to play, smaller gear with batteries instead of generators and big lights… Sometimes compromising the actual optimum camera settings, like leaving the shutter open for a looonnng time can create some very nice effects too. If there isn’t enough light, see what else can be done with higher ISO and slow shutter speed.

As with your guy with Brooklyn Bridge. You could have done with less flash, and more shutter speed and it still would have worked – looked different but would have been good. Mirrors make good 2nd lights. Bounce the flash into a mirror for a fill light or back light- or just reflectors make good fill lights. I saw some very nice images of a girl with her Harley at sunset, lit with car headlights.

Here’s a new one from the weekend. I used one flash to fill her face while shooting into the sun for backlight and flared highlights. It was a warm time of day but I raised the white balance a little more to give it even more yellow. One portable light. I needed more diffusion on the flash and found a white plastic bag to put over it. No filters. One D800, one lens. One CF card. That’s pretty small scale. Small scale acting comp.

Dragging the shutter would have resulted in a brighter background BUT thanks for the mirror/reflector tip I shall try that next time!

Yes as you said if there were more resources for this shot it would have been different, I would have had a permit, closed off a section of the street, get a million dollar insurance and treat it more like a studio/set and setup flashes on lightstand.

Sometimes it is not easy to decide between the controlled possibilities of the studio and the openness of being on location.

I have started building up kit. I now have an sb700,soft box, umberella defuser and small reflector. I have done some outside setup shots and now include fill flash in some of my shots.

I am not a photographer in my line of work but not sure if I developed it I would lose the love of it. Would also love to do a course but as I have no defined style. Which one. Not a question just a muse.

Thanks for reading.

I do like it when i get shots like this where the lighting was all from the window and no setup

Or just a hap hazard shot

I did recently try and do a shoot for a friend daughter. She had made a dress for collage and needed pictures.
As i had no experience at all with this i read a lot of magazines and went online for idea’s and setup.
I agree a rapport with all aspects of a shoot are vital for the shot. My shoot was a prime example of no rapport to start with.
I had arrange for the Model to have makeup done but the Model was addiment she did her own
only to turn up that day with no makeup on. Fortunately my daughter was there.
I had someone set up the props and with mind on other things I realized after two shots he had faced it all into the sun which was the opposite of what i wanted.

with everything setup I started to get at least some close to good.

I know they are not fantastic but for a first time i was happy.

The dog and plane shot i would imagine are found images and the shoot a hybrid as there were a lot of random factors coming into play.

The only thing i have with regards to produced is this one as i don’t have a studio.
This was shot in my kitchen table on a glass chess set in pitch black. The illumination was the light on my led key ring shone down a rolled up £20 note as a snoot to painted onto the scene.

I apologies if my spelling and grammar are bad. I am dyslexic

I can’t say I have a favorite as the amount of work that goes into all of them makes them all interesting and satisfying to achieve.
Even the found images don’t just jump out at you. You have to know your camera settings and that itself takes a good degree of work.

These set up shots you have done, are a different approach. You are designing the opportunity instead of hunting for it.

Taking a course, is a great idea. That’s one of the ways to expand your vision, be exposed to a variety of styles and dabble enough to see what path appeals to you. I think you have to try all these different kinds of shot styles to know what fits for you. Finding a style is not key to progress and learning. Style comes with experience. A style will find you while you are learning to shoot, becoming second nature with your camera, watching and looking at other peoples images. I think I shot every type of photographic style there is from food to landscape, medical procedures and fashion.
My favorite organic search is street shooting which I still do on my day off. I find shooting fashion and beauty challenging creatively and from a managerial point of view and that is most of my professional work. These styles found me when I was out shooting pictures. I lay all the prints out on the bed and said, This makes me happy and this one doesn’t. That’s how a style evolves. Slowly and deliberately for me over many years.

As for gear, there is a saying I read recently again.

An amateur photographer thinks about his gear.
A professional photographer thinks about his lighting.
A master photographer thinks about his concept.

There’s some truth to this over simplification.

I think of going through this early period when I was concerned about what camera I had, or what lens and how many lenses and having every possible item available.

Then I began to develop skill at lighting and learned to create a variety of moods by seeing and understanding lighting,

Then it was all about the good shots created by illustrating a strong concept. Only as good as the idea.

That may be a good way to think of the major points in the path.

It’s all about learning something new. That’s what you seem to be enjoying.

Think i will be searching for a long time as its such fun.:-)

Thanks for joining the discussion. RVP