Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Pentax / Samsung dSLR, K Mount Mirrorless

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Mar 19, 2009, 11:03 PM   #1
Senior Member
 
danielchtong's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 2,890
Default

The light was barely ok and no flash was allowed. I would rather use fill flash if allowed. I could barely cope with the pace on the catwalk


























Daniel
danielchtong is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Mar 19, 2009, 11:56 PM   #2
Senior Member
 
Trojansoc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Hot Springs, AR
Posts: 3,724
Default

Looks like a tough lighting situation, but I might have had trouble remembering to worry about such things. :-)

What lens were you using? I noticed from the EXIF that you were going back-and-forth between ISO 400 and 800 with a +0.5 EV. I might have been tempted to have gone higher on the ISO to up the shutter speed, then worried about noise, etc. in PP.

I really like the last shot. Everything seems to have worked there.

Paul
Trojansoc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 20, 2009, 9:05 AM   #3
Senior Member
 
Goldwinger's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Winter Haven, Florida
Posts: 6,515
Default

Hmmm... Tuff assignment. I feel real bad for you Daniel, not sure how you manage to always get the dirt jobs. :G

Hey wait a minuet... I thought you were only kidding when you said your wife will only let you use a 200mm lens for these jobs.:O well, anyway that's part of the problem, I'd be wanting to use a 50mm f:1.4 or 1.7 on this one. :-)

I'm wondering how it would work if you tried using TAV mode set your ISO to auto/100-1200 then try a few shots to see what works best as far as shutter speed and aperture, then go from there? :-? just a thought...
GW:bye:
Goldwinger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 20, 2009, 10:39 AM   #4
Senior Member
 
Lyrics51's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Northwest Ohio
Posts: 1,954
Default

The last is the best and whatever you did to get the exposure right seemed to work well. I also liked the word you used to describe the lighting. Fits right in with the clothing.

Glenn
Lyrics51 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 20, 2009, 5:08 PM   #5
Senior Member
 
rhermans's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Antwerp - Belgium
Posts: 3,454
Default

GReat shots Daniel, like the last one best, but ... GReat shots.

Ronny
rhermans is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 20, 2009, 5:16 PM   #6
Senior Member
 
danielchtong's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 2,890
Default

Glenn, Ronny

Thanks. I was struggling with the low light at iso 400/800 which was ok for the raving audience.



Trojansoc wrote:
Quote:
I really like the last shot.* Everything seems to have worked there.

Paul
Thanks. I always use AV. It is the first time I played around with the option of TAV.


Goldwinger wrote:
Quote:
Hmmm... Tuff assignment. I feel real bad for you Daniel, not sure how you manage to always get the dirt jobs.

Hey wait a minuet... I thought you were only kidding when you said your wife will only let you use a 200mm lens for these jobs.:O well, anyway that's part of the problem, I'd be wanting to use a 50mm f:1.4 or 1.7 on this one. :-)

GW:bye:
GW

Shooting fashion unlike studio setting with perfect lighting is tricky with low light and ever changing white balance.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_VLzv...eature=related

Tough to squeeze in the media (centre front) section. And no washroom for 4 hours.

Actually a zoom of 70-200mm would be the best.

Daniel
danielchtong is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 21, 2009, 2:09 AM   #7
Senior Member
 
mtngal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Frazier Park, CA
Posts: 16,056
Default

Interesting that you posted these today - I just finished reading a magazine article (one from a month or two ago that I just got around to finishing) about fashion photography and being a pro. Sounds like a complete zoo, and it's surprising that anyone gets a good shot.

The last one is definitely something special. The others are very good for the conditions (better than I could have done), but you set such a high bar with your past photos. The others in this series aren't quite as good as most of your other series (see - I expect perfection from you now!).
mtngal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 21, 2009, 8:11 AM   #8
Senior Member
 
danielchtong's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 2,890
Default

mtngal wrote:
Quote:
Interesting that you posted these today - I just finished reading a magazine article (one from a month or two ago that I just got around to finishing) about fashion photography and being a pro. Sounds like a complete zoo, and it's surprising that anyone gets a good shot.

The last one is definitely something special. The others are very good for the conditions (better than I could have done), but you set such a high bar with your past photos. The others in this series aren't quite as good as most of your other series (see - I expect perfection from you now!).
Thanks
To tell you the truth it was tough shooting fashion show. All the media , public and market people were squeezed in a small tent. I was forewarned not to go to washroom at all at the media section for 4 hours. And the warning was right on. If you are gone you will have zero spot at all. I might be able to get a spot on the side but all models could only be shot sideway.
Unlike a studio session, the lighting was barely ok for photographers and no flash was allowed. The models , all of whom would have been perfect portrait subject, were supposed or taught to be expresssionless - so only the fastion is to be focused. And I know zip about fashion at all.
My whole point is to shoot portrait/glamour on the cheap with close to perfect subjects parading towards you. Imagine the cost of paying the model, MUA , the venue and the make-up. The downside is that they will not pose for you and the pace is geared for showing off the fastion not the models.
A member of another forum (a real fashion guy) commented that the zipper of Canadian fashion is just not up to international standard???? Hello do I care. That only shows we have different take entirely


As far as fashion photography is concerned, I have failed deliberately as my stress was on the models not dresses.

Some fashion show (2008 Ryerson University Fashion Class graduation) actually defaced the model to draw attention to the fashion itself. All models were instructed to be expressionless too.









Here is a good case in last year. I was shooting in a low low end so-called fashion show with zero regard for taste.



Those poor models went in for the exposure. The models paid for and did their own make up.

Yet I turned around and ignored completely their fashion. And I think I did justice by focusing on the models herself – and this particular model rightfully deserves that.



200mm as portrait lens ? - Photo.net Pentax Forum




Daniel
danielchtong is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 7:57 PM.