We completed our full photo-shoot with model on February 5th. Around 8.30am the ambient light from the large window in the back of our shot was considerably dimmer than it had metered in our pre-light but by around 10.30am, although there were significant differences between the highlights and shadows, it was back around the levels of our initial test. Despite our pre-light, we were still faced with a number of challenges posed by the location chosen by our client, primarily the difficulty of balancing mixed light sources and colour temperatures (see the initial post). We also needed to resolve the issue of whether to light the whole area or just part of it and to what degree we were going to use available light.
Another unanticipated factor came into play during the shoot. Our client had requested a 'paradigm shift' for this particular cover shot. Our 'model' and 'Businessperson of the Year' was a young music entrepreneur who at first did not fit our idea of what a cover shot should be. However, after working with her what we saw was an admirable, highly intelligent and defiant woman who had broken through in an extremely tough business. It was these no-nonsense qualities that we tried to incorporate in our final shot.
As a result of our second visit to the location and in consultation with the client, we arrived at a different composition. This also allowed for a simplified lighting setup:
The modified setup shown above reflects our decision not to light the whole area but to light for the model only. We removed one of the Profotos and switched the exposure to 1\200th sec (max sync speed) to put the emphasis on the strobes and to cut out the complex ambient light. We brought our ISO down to 200 (a positive decision) but maintained our f-stop at 2.8, a factor that was to bring its own problems. We were aiming for a very narrow depth-of-field in order to limit the distractions in the background. Since it was essential to provide the best possible product for the client, we also covered ourselves by bracketing the composition without the model in order to provide other exposure layers for compositing.
We felt that our final shot was adequate but that it suffered from several elementary mistakes. However, this made the experience more of a lesson in what to do next time! The RAW image we brought back was one that would only be up to standard with some considerable editing in post. This was not our intention during the shoot. We felt that there was a general lack of lighting control and that attempts to deal with the mixed daylight, tungsten and florescent sources had only been partially successful. Also, our approach to dealing with the distracting background through the use of depth-of-field had overcompensated in the wrong direction. We had shot had f2.8 when f5.6 or even f.8 should have been the minimum for the shot we chose. This was our initial, uncropped shot, with room for the 'Time' layout and the left-side bleed.
Additional working files: 1) grey card reading. We were not sure about the source of the aberration on the model's chin. Possible flare?
Our final shot was an attempt to reconcile the problems brought by mixed lighting and also the environment chosen by the client. For the layout text we chose the yellow alternative text colour (pixellated in this case) that the magazine uses occasionally (see the Ann Coulter issue in post 1 above). All in all we learned a lot and the urge to throw our cameras out of a tall building only lasted for a few hours afterwards.
No comments:
Post a Comment