Canon 50mm f1.4 v 85mm f1.2

[William W]

"personally" etc . . . I can't see any advantages in you using a prime; there will be no real-world difference in sharpness - any difference in max aperture you won't be able to use due to DoF considerations - and of course you'll be limited to only 1 focal length. . . . etc

"Personally" -
For the outcomes requested and to adhere as best as possible in all manners to the strict and well articulated criteria given by Adrian:

 It is a ‘jatz crackers’ idea using LEDS for the Stills Portraiture Shots
 It is a even more so a ‘ridiculous’ idea, considering using ANY Prime Lens

WW

[Adrian]

OK, I decided we need to move on and stop dithering about. It is all capex and tax allowable. Online order has been placed this morning for a strobe kit consisting of 2 Trinity 600W heads with various add ons (you can get much more powerful than this but 600W seems OK to me - can always swap them), two cheapish soft boxes that I am dubious about for space reasons but they are inexpensive, plain roller background with black cloth and white cloth, 17-40 2.8L and 70-200 2.8L which is an enormous heavy beast really, and because I want to see what it is like 85mm 1.2L. We will keep the 50mm 1.4 as I have grown to quite like it.

New screen also on order should arrive next week. Final cut pro ordered too. New graduate full time graphic designer with some photo and video experience in products and fashion (so nothing remotely like what we do!) was hired last week and starts next Monday. Second 5DIII body or 6D body is likely to complete the set up so I get my own gear back! We went for full CS6 for teams (cloud version which is good value) and I have purchased DxO Pro 8 because it speeds things up and anyone can use it.

We are also offering a photography / graphic design intern role for the summer and it will be interesting to see what that throws up.

Hopefully by the summer we will have a room suitable to use as a full time studio. Fingers crossed.

Adrian

[William W]

Good for you. Good luck with it.



. . . simply out of curiousity, which 70 to 200/2.8?

I expect that "17 - 40 2.8L" is a typo?

WW

[Colin Southern]

Good on ya - no mucking around!

Unfortunately, 600 WS lights will be grossly inadequate. Just kidding

I think it really needs to be a multi-step progress - first up, you can't make a silk purse from a sows ear (which is what I think you were trying to do before), so with gear on order, you'll have the raw materials to "get on with the job". Next step will be to work out which setups work (regardless of how much space they take) and then (and only then) begin "phase 3" which is to fine tune and refine it (including setting up and stripping down the setup).

It'll be a whole new ball game - and yes, it'll probably make your head hurt for a while (while you climb the learning curve) - but - the beauty of it is that (a) you get to take your skills to a whole new level and (b) once you know what works and what doesn't, it's actually very much repeatable.

After a while you can do lighting like this - pretty much - with your eyes closed. Same soft-box - same relative position to the face - same power - same camera settings - same background strobes settings - same background strobes placement - same reflector placement - same result. Cookie-cutter portraiture.



and a week later (or was it earlier?) ...



Some more things to think about ...

- Strobes need to be triggered, and cables are generally a pain. Something like a couple of PocketWizard Plus IIs for the strobes and a Plus III for the camera works well.

- a Light meter makes lighting setups much faster

- Not sure why you went for a 17-40/4.0 (if that's what it is) - it'll leave you with a gap between 40 and 70 that's probably right where you'll need to be shooting, unless it's more of a group shot.

- You'll need light stands for the strobes (unless it comes with them) - and preferably a couple of sand bags to weight them down. Boom arms can be advantageous too.

- Not sure why you'd get DxO - everything you need to process a RAW workflow is already in CS6 - and bridge/ACR is ruthlessly efficient at batch processing. DxO will take you out of that workflow and slow things down, and really doesn't offer any real-word corrections that aren't already in ACR. Ideally you'll need a colour passport too, and a photospectrocolorimeter for monitor calibration and profiling.

- Dedicated studio / room makes things far easier.

You might like to post a few photos of the areas you're working in so we can get more of a feel for how your lighting needs to be setup. And by the way, you'll probably need to add at least another strobe or two - especially if you're after truly white backgrounds.

[Colin Southern]

Good on ya - no mucking around!

Unfortunately, 600 WS lights will be grossly inadequate. Just kidding

I think it really needs to be a multi-step progress - first up, you can't make a silk purse from a sows ear (which is what I think you were trying to do before), so with gear on order, you'll have the raw materials to "get on with the job". Next step will be to work out which setups work (regardless of how much space they take) and then (and only then) begin "phase 3" which is to fine tune and refine it (including setting up and stripping down the setup).

It'll be a whole new ball game - and yes, it'll probably make your head hurt for a while (while you climb the learning curve) - but - the beauty of it is that (a) you get to take your skills to a whole new level and (b) once you know what works and what doesn't, it's actually very much repeatable.

After a while you can do lighting like this - pretty much - with your eyes closed. Same soft-box - same relative position to the face - same power - same camera settings - same background strobes settings - same background strobes placement - same reflector placement - same result. Cookie-cutter portraiture.



and a week later (or was it earlier?) ...



Some more things to think about ...

- Strobes need to be triggered, and cables are generally a pain. Something like a couple of PocketWizard Plus IIs for the strobes and a Plus III for the camera works well.

- a Light meter makes lighting setups much faster

- Not sure why you went for a 17-40/4.0 (if that's what it is) - it'll leave you with a gap between 40 and 70 that's probably right where you'll need to be shooting, unless it's more of a group shot.

- You'll need light stands for the strobes (unless it comes with them) - and preferably a couple of sand bags to weight them down. Boom arms can be advantageous too.

- Not sure why you'd get DxO - everything you need to process a RAW workflow is already in CS6 - and bridge/ACR is ruthlessly efficient at batch processing. DxO will take you out of that workflow and slow things down, and really doesn't offer any real-word corrections that aren't already in ACR. Ideally you'll need a colour passport too, and a photospectrocolorimeter for monitor calibration and profiling.

- Dedicated studio / room makes things far easier.

You might like to post a few photos of the areas you're working in so we can get more of a feel for how your lighting needs to be setup. And by the way, you'll probably need to add at least another strobe or two - especially if you're after truly white backgrounds.

[Adrian]

Typos, tipos, typs...

What Lauren actually ordered for me is the EF 24-70 f2.8L II USM, which I hope is the latest version.

The 70-200 is the f2.8L IS II USM, which seems to be the latest version of that as well. I have never seen one in person - all the big grey lenses look a bit alike on-line.

All three lenses are returnable and I am going to buy a macro lens as well when I have researched it a bit. Probably the 100mm L - this is mainly for taking pictures of flowers by my wife.

Colin - every time you post, I have to buy more gear! I bought the strobe units from Elementals as that is where we got the LEDs from for video and they gave us good service before. The deal includes a kit to fire the lights and the camera remotely. I have also had to buy heavy duty rubber safety pads to cover the wires that go across the floor - very expensive (but less than a heath and safety claim I suspect!). They also supply stands, The ones that came with the LED lights are pretty good and I suspect these will be similar. They have said that if the lights are not powerful enough we can return them within 30 days and trade up. But I am hoping this will be enough.

All the gear will be here by next Wednesday so I might post some results towards the end of the month of they are not too embarrassing. We have paid for a web subscription site to share photos internally (Phanfare) which seems quite good and allows us to upload and store raw files.


The perfect white background in your shots is also what we are seeking for video. We have looked at a couple of "how to" web sites on how to get this "Apple style" clean background. Seems doable, but the background is necessary.

I had not even thought about a light meter, as I assumed the camera metering would do the job. I will have to investigate that. What I do at the moment is a bit trial and error. My experience of the 5DIII is that it is prone to underexpose a bit. So I tend to +1 the exposure and then check the rear screen including the histogram and if I can I tether as well (not always possible as it is fiddly with the cable). If the shot is too dark (it is hardly ever overexposed) then we just shoot it again with adjusted =EV and maybe adjust ISO. This is only really a problem wit stills - less of an issue with video usually.

If I can find someone good, I will book a professional for a couple of days to come and teach us some tricks of the trade. But I would rather we have our extra floor, and hence studio room, first.

Thanks you everyone for all the help. I am very much an amateur and will make amateur mistakes. I do love it, but it is also incredibly frustrating to get on the screen what I "see"in my head. The team at work is remarkably enthused by our do it ourselves approach, as they are having fun and feeling creative. All of them are very IT savvy and very attuned to media and imagery in daily life, so this is an interesting extra skill for them.

Adrian

[Colin Southern]

What Lauren actually ordered for me is the EF 24-70 f2.8L II USM, which I hope is the latest version.

- Ah - yes - much better!

The 70-200 is the f2.8L IS II USM, which seems to be the latest version of that as well. I have never seen one in person - all the big grey lenses look a bit alike on-line.

Yep - good choice! My strong suggestion is to fit a high-quality UV filter to these to protect the front element (I use Heliopan SH-PMC UV filters).

All three lenses are returnable and I am going to buy a macro lens as well when I have researched it a bit. Probably the 100mm L - this is mainly for taking pictures of flowers by my wife.

I'd be very surprised if you EVER wanted to return them

Colin - every time you post, I have to buy more gear!

Lol -Ali used to say the same thing! Just the nature of the beast I'm afraid.

I bought the strobe units from Elementals as that is where we got the LEDs from for video and they gave us good service before. The deal includes a kit to fire the lights and the camera remotely. I have also had to buy heavy duty rubber safety pads to cover the wires that go across the floor - very expensive (but less than a heath and safety claim I suspect!). They also supply stands, The ones that came with the LED lights are pretty good and I suspect these will be similar. They have said that if the lights are not powerful enough we can return them within 30 days and trade up. But I am hoping this will be enough.

The power will be fine. I use 5x 1200WS heads, but it's not often I need to use them at full power -- and yours will be only 1 stop down (per light). It just means you'll be pushing them a bit harder, but since you're not going to be using them "all day, every day, they'll be just fine.

All the gear will be here by next Wednesday so I might post some results towards the end of the month of they are not too embarrassing. We have paid for a web subscription site to share photos internally (Phanfare) which seems quite good and allows us to upload and store raw files.

Hope you have a fast internet connection and a good plan!

The perfect white background in your shots is also what we are seeking for video. We have looked at a couple of "how to" web sites on how to get this "Apple style" clean background. Seems doable, but the background is necessary.

Unfortunately - if one wants it to be truly white (eg a highlight tone) then one HAS to light it separately (because light falls off with the square of the distance, thus any light that's illuminating your subject will be a lot less when it hits the background). In my studio I run up to 7 zones of light (5 lights and 2 reflectors), but for white backgrounds you'll probably find you need at least 2 lights for an even background, and one for the subject (for key), plus a reflector for fill. I usually use another light for fill plus another for a hair light ... and on occasions could even do with more (eg kicker lights with a white background would need a total of 7).

I had not even thought about a light meter, as I assumed the camera metering would do the job. I will have to investigate that. What I do at the moment is a bit trial and error. My experience of the 5DIII is that it is prone to underexpose a bit. So I tend to +1 the exposure and then check the rear screen including the histogram and if I can I tether as well (not always possible as it is fiddly with the cable). If the shot is too dark (it is hardly ever overexposed) then we just shoot it again with adjusted =EV and maybe adjust ISO. This is only really a problem wit stills - less of an issue with video usually.

Um, no - the camera doesn't know the lights exist, as they're manual power and not ETTL integrated. It's possible - with experience - to judge lighting when shooting to a tethered screen (I use a 40" TV), but much much harder to judge it on the camera screen (you just can't see lighting ratios correctly on a 3 inch screen). With 2 lights it won't be too bad (bit of trial and error), but with more lights there are just too many combinations (eg to get contrast ratios between key and fill correct, and then to get the background correct) (even the background isn't as easy as it seems -- it's just a highlight, but some people say (arrrgh) "expose it a couple of stops over what you're using for the subject" (wrong wrong wrong -- all that'll do is blow out fine hair detail) - but if it's not bright enough then you won't be able to get a true white without blowing skintones (or at least getting hot spots on them). So not essential, but makes life a LOT easier. I use a Sekonic 758DR, but the 358 would be fine for what you want.

If I can find someone good, I will book a professional for a couple of days to come and teach us some tricks of the trade. But I would rather we have our extra floor, and hence studio room, first.

PROVIDED they know what they're doing (many "professionals" wouldn't know a strobelight from a flashlight, unfortunately) then that's a good course of action - you really would find it advantagious to work though some of the Kelby Training videos though -- most will be oriented around shooting "pretty girls", but the principles are the same. The Frank Dornhoff videos would be a good starting place.

Thanks you everyone for all the help. I am very much an amateur and will make amateur mistakes. I do love it, but it is also incredibly frustrating to get on the screen what I "see"in my head. The team at work is remarkably enthused by our do it ourselves approach, as they are having fun and feeling creative. All of them are very IT savvy and very attuned to media and imagery in daily life, so this is an interesting extra skill for them.

You're very welcome Actually it's quite refreshing - often we get folks who are after a professional result but don't have a budget for professional equipment (ie "the mum with the Canon 300D and 18-55 lens who wants to take photos of their children playing soccer at night, from the grandstand") - and it just doesn't work. Just be warned though that there is a steep learning curve to all this. It's a bit like getting a Formula One car -- it's an incredibly powerful and fast car, but it makes a complete idiot out of anyone who hasn't driven one before - even if they're very experienced drivers. I fully expect that in a weeks time you'll be thinking (and shouting) "WHAT HAVE I DONE" followed by "THAT'S THE LAST BLOODY TIME I LISTEN TO COLIN SOUTHERN!" - but in 3 weeks time it'll be "OK - we're closer to getting this to work than we were when we started" (but still not close enough) - but in a few months you'll be a lot closer to what you want to achieve. Having the right tools are a prerequisite, but knowing how to use them is the other essential ingredient.

[William W]

Thanks you everyone for all the help. I am very much an amateur and will make amateur mistakes. I do love it, but it is also incredibly frustrating to get on the screen what I "see"in my head. The team at work is remarkably enthused by our do it ourselves approach, as they are having fun and feeling creative. All of them are very IT savvy and very attuned to media and imagery in daily life, so this is an interesting extra skill for them.

Adrian

As mentioned, you're welcome.

I would NOT use the word 'amateur' to describe you, nor to describe your Photographic Skills.
I'd suggest that your Photographic Skills are 'developing'.
I’d further suggest that you, yourself, are very far removed from 'amateur' – that is indicated by your approach and especially the manner in which the continuum of your threads, were developed by you.

WW

[William W]

. . . I fully expect that in a weeks time you'll be thinking (and shouting) "WHAT HAVE I DONE" followed by "THAT'S THE LAST BLOODY TIME I LISTEN TO COLIN SOUTHERN!" - but in 3 weeks time it'll be "OK - we're closer to getting this to work than we were when we started" (but still not close enough) - but in a few months you'll be a lot closer to what you want to achieve. Having the right tools are a prerequisite, but knowing how to use them is the other essential ingredient.

Adrian:

Repetition and review is going to be very valuable to the learning and the progress.

Make small and SINGULAR changes and learn what each changes mean – this is especially so with the lighting – the idea of small and singular changes, also applies to the operators: I’d suggest that only one or at the most two people manage the shoots in the beginning stages and let those one or two stick with it even if the results are way off the mark.

The fact that you are setting up and working in an already existing, work environment, is a great leverage.

If the gear is out and set up and part of the everyday work-life, the learning curve and the results curve will be much quicker; and the enthusiasm will be exponentially greater and will last longer – I am sure of that.

I mention this specifically because I recall that you have spoken about ‘lack of space’ and ‘set up and pull down’.
If I were running your ship, I would make space to have a permanent set-up from the get go.
It is the very most efficient system for any training exercise to have a permanent, ready to go training set up available 24/7.

Whilst some of my ‘advice’ previously was simply to get you motivated to get up off your bottom make a move, for full disclosure, the advice above is straight-up: and I trust you will consider this point very most seriously: and then move mountains to apply it, to your endeavours.

Good luck.

WW

[Adrian]

Yes - I do realise that having a permanent set up is desirable. At the moment we are using either my office, a meeting room near it (which is used a lot for private meetings) or one end of the main boardroom. We are a very busy company and we use all the space we have, often having clients visiting. Leaving equipment out creates a health and safety hazard unfortunately, and these days we have to be careful with such things as cables running across the floor.

I am taking another floor - but the lease has yet to be signed. This will give us a studio as well as lots more office space. However, we will have to have partitions etc constructed. It all takes time. Another option is a basement room we have, which is helpfully painted white and has a high ceiling. However, I am not sure that sending my young team dow to the basement is ideal as normally we use it as a changing room.

As regards skill. It is clear to me from this site (which is excellent - not full of arguing poseurs - I was attracted originally by the focus on real skill ad the superb gallery) that I have quite a lot to learn. I would love to be able to achieve certain kinds of shots. Our (external) web guys have ben surprised by and pleased with some of the imagery we have produced to replicate their ludicrously expensive Getty images, and we are exceptionally lucky to have some very photogenic and enthusiastic staff. However, I know that we can do much better. There are three limitations: imagination, the technical skill to deliver the shots and the equipment. The latter is the easy bit!

Thanks for the advice about limiting the participants. I agree: there will I think be two that we try to train, of which one will be our new graphic designer. (Plus me). I run the company so I can't turn my personal interest into a company hobby: a balance has to be struck. The demands from the business for a constant supply of imagery etc for on-line brochures are unending. This is why we have tried to go it alone: it delivers flexibility if we don't have to work with third party lead times. The compromise is the learning curve we face.

A pleasing side script is we have had lots of requests from staff to use our images for their linked in and facebook pages, and even for prints to give to family members, so I think we are starting to get some usable results.

Adrian

[William W]

Good oh.
Carry on, break a leg.

WW