A Day in the Life of a Top Model

[Colin Southern]

A quick shoot this morning for my daughter to show off her new hoodie. Fill light via shoot-through umbrella (top) and gold reflector (Bottom). 200mm @ F2.8 (or there abouts).

[CNelson]

Fun series Colin. I like #4 best. A bit of shade from the hoodie helps. You have your hands full for sure.

Chuck

[Donald]

She's a very forgiving and tolerant young lady to allow those images of herself to be seen by the world. But, good on her. She loves a camera. With a dad like that, who couldn't!!

Take care all. Back in a couple of days.

[Colin Southern]

Fun series Colin. I like #4 best. A bit of shade from the hoodie helps. You have your hands full for sure.

Chuck

Thanks Chuck

[Colin Southern]

She's a very forgiving and tolerant young lady to allow those images of herself to be seen by the world. But, good on her. She loves a camera. With a dad like that, who couldn't!!

Take care all. Back in a couple of days.

Thanks Donald,

She didn't have much say in the matter - she signed a model release.

(just kidding!)

[cneedha]

#4 is definitely a keeper. I think even she will enjoy this one someday.

[Colin Southern]

#4 is definitely a keeper. I think even she will enjoy this one someday.

Thanks Chris - I'll keep them all; she'll probably get to choose what rest home I go to one day, and I might need some "bargening power"!

[Radu Dinu Cordeanu]

Be a healthy and lucky girl and You be glad of her progresses!!!!!!!

[Colin Southern]

Be a healthy and lucky girl and You be glad of her progresses!!!!!!!

Thanks Radu. Always

[arith]

#5 is great; #4 is ok but #5 for me.

[Colin Southern]

#5 is great; #4 is ok but #5 for me.

Thanks Arith

[Alis]

Great set Colin. I have a question though: In almost all of them, the most front part of the face or hands are whiter than the rest of the skin, which is more yellowish. Of course this is from flash. I have this problem all the time with my lighting setting, specially when I am close to the subject. And of course it is usually much more strong than this.

Anyway, what do you do to get rid of it, and do you mind having it in a portrait since some people say it is the way people look in real life. I am asking because when I try to fix it I mess up the whole picture. And I do not see it in well lit pictures. Please just give me your opinion. And anyone else is welcome to jump in.

[Colin Southern]

Great set Colin. I have a question though: In almost all of them, the most front part of the face or hands are whiter than the rest of the skin, which is more yellowish. Of course this is from flash. I have this problem all the time with my lighting setting, specially when I am close to the subject. And of course it is usually much more strong than this.

Anyway, what do you do to get rid of it, and do you mind having it in a portrait since some people say it is the way people look in real life. I am asking because when I try to fix it I mess up the whole picture. And I do not see it in well lit pictures. Please just give me your opinion. And anyone else is welcome to jump in.

Hi Ali,

Thanks for the kind words

Probably what you're seeing here is the mixed lighting - I've got a shoot-through umbrella above and to the right right of the subject - but I'm also bouncing a portion off of a gold reflector in front of the subject. As usual, nobody wants to help by holding the reflector, so a took a "best guess" with the angle, and probably didn't get it right.

To be honest, I've been experimenting with gels and reflectors a bit recently, and I'm really not happy with the results - even a 1/4 CTO gel seems to make skin tones too orange - so I might just abandon them.

For more detailed instruction check out Joe McNally's "Shooting with One Light" on www.kelbytraining.com - there's a goldmine of information there.

[Dave Humphries]

Hi Colin,

I like both #4 and #5, if only because they'd be the ones the top model herself might be happier with, obviously #1 - #3 are entertaining for us though

What I have just noticed, especially with the last two, is that you have rotated them for a pleasing and natural looking composition, not leveled on the brick work behind. V-e-r-y interesting, I'm learning all the time

That said; I have not seen your house, may be it really is built with walls at those angles

Cheers,

[Colin Southern]

Hi Colin,

I like both #4 and #5, if only because they'd be the ones the top model herself might be happier with, obviously #1 - #3 are entertaining for us though

What I have just noticed, especially with the last two, is that you have rotated them for a pleasing and natural looking composition, not leveled on the brick work behind. V-e-r-y interesting, I'm learning all the time

That said; I have not seen your house, may be it really is built with walls at those angles

Cheers,

Hi Dave,

Thanks for the kind words

The bricks are level in reality. The camera rotation adds a bit of energy to the shot; just rotate it in the opposite direction to the way you want things to lean.

[Alis]

Hi Ali,

Thanks for the kind words

Probably what you're seeing here is the mixed lighting - I've got a shoot-through umbrella above and to the right right of the subject - but I'm also bouncing a portion off of a gold reflector in front of the subject. As usual, nobody wants to help by holding the reflector, so a took a "best guess" with the angle, and probably didn't get it right.

To be honest, I've been experimenting with gels and reflectors a bit recently, and I'm really not happy with the results - even a 1/4 CTO gel seems to make skin tones too orange - so I might just abandon them.

For more detailed instruction check out Joe McNally's "Shooting with One Light" on www.kelbytraining.com - there's a goldmine of information there.

Thanks, Colin! I was looking at them again. They are so sharp and nice. I don't see any noise in them, at least at this size. Wonderful. I am guessing you did not do much PP on them and they are pretty much out of the camera. Most likely a combination of good camera, excellent lighting, in addition to great knowledge of what to do and what not to do in PP!

[Colin Southern]

Thanks, Colin! I was looking at them again. They are so sharp and nice. I don't see any noise in them, at least at this size. Wonderful. I am guessing you did not do much PP on them and they are pretty much out of the camera. Most likely a combination of good camera, excellent lighting, in addition to great knowledge of what to do and what not to do in PP!

Hi Ali,

Thanks for more kind words I think that with photography, the end result is simply the sum of the decisions you make along the way. The sharpness probably comes from a good lens/camera + correct focus (AF) + appropriate sharpening. They were properly exposed at ISO 100, so noise shouldn't be an issue.

Lighting is always key - for portable speedlite lighting I use shoot-through umbrellas a lot (you can get shoot-throughs closer than bouncing off a reflecting umbrella, which gives softer light), and a reflector is essential for raising levels under chins and in those "hard to reach places" like eye sockets etc.

What lighting equipment to you have by the way (I know you have a 580 EX II, just wondering what else in terms of remote triggers, stands, reflectors, umbrellas etc?)

I didn't do much PP - just tweak the levels & other usual stuff in the ACR - quick sharpen in PS (no crop) - and the usual borders etc. If I'm doing a "proper" portrait I'll spend a LOT more time getting things right (especially the eyes).

In terms of "great knowledge" ...

... don't know about that! In all seriousness, I think that part comes down to investing in good educational materials (and in that respect you really can't go past Scott Kelby's materials). Once you understand the techniques you don't even really have to think about them; they're just part of your arsenal - there to use whenever you want.

[arith]

I like your work; because it shows what is achievable. I don't like your work because it shows what is unachievable.

Without money it is my job to find something I can do, as good.

Using MTF charts I can find lenses that are good for a cropped camera, a light system almost as good as a 580.

But never will I exceed your ability; close is good enough.

Happy new year to you and all your family; including your budding model or photographer, because I just know everyone in your family must be a photographer.

[Colin Southern]

I like your work; because it shows what is achievable. I don't like your work because it shows what is unachievable.

Without money it is my job to find something I can do, as good.

Using MTF charts I can find lenses that are good for a cropped camera, a light system almost as good as a 580.

But never will I exceed your ability; close is good enough.

Happy new year to you and all your family; including your budding model or photographer, because I just know everyone in your family must be a photographer.

Hi Arith,

Thanks, I think!

I'm reminded of something a chap born a couple of hundred yards from where I live once said (Sir Ernest Lord Rutherford of Nelson) (the "father of nuclear physics") "We don't have much money, so we're going to have to think".

Some "case in points" with regards to my "model" shots ...

Camera: Really doesn't make an ounce of difference.

Lens: Something with a longer focal length makes life easier, but not a big deal (I could have done the same thing with a 24-70 range lens). I used L-Series - which looks just as sharp at full resolution, but at the kinds of resolutions posted here any normal lens will be just fine. Personally I wouldn't spend much time looking at MTF charts; proper sharpening will have a much bigger effect on the final outcome.

Lighting: Lighting is the secret - but the good news is that you don't have to spend a lot of money to get the result. You could make a diffuser out of a white pillowcase or sheet, or buy one for just a few dollars - even shoot-through umbrellas can be bought dirt cheap - same for reflectors (you could even make one out of tin foil). Stands are inexpensive - but you can get by by using anything from duck tape and string to a VAL (voice-activated Lightstand) (ie friend/family member).

In terms of "ability" - it's nothing that anyone can't learn. Good example here would be landing an aeroplane; saying it all at once is totally overwhelming and if I put you in that situation you probably wouldn't know what to do - but - if I teach you the effects pulling and pushing on the control column has - then get you to use that to keep the plane a constant few feet above the runway for as long as you can while I reduce the power - and then get you to keep the plane at a constant height a few feet above the runway while YOU reduce the power --- before you know it you've just done what you thought you could never do.

Lots of similarities there with photography - just like aviation - the laws of physics still apply; setup lighting (for example) in the same way each time and you'll get the same results from it each time. Learn different lighting combinations for different situations and they'll perform the same each time - that side of it is very predictable. But - is the "art" side of photography something you can learn, or do you just need to "have the eye for it"? Someone once looked at my gallery and said "you have a fantastic eye", but in reality I'm as "naturally talented" as a dancer with 3 left feet - so once again, it's just the ability to learn what works and what doesn't, and act accordingly.

... in summary, no natural talent required - just an ability to learn when blessed with good instructional sources.

[arith]

Cheers; you certainly had some distinguished neighbours. Rutherford is very well respected around here.