What type of modifier do you think was used here guys? Its a hard source of some sort... my guess is a larger beauty dish like a Mola 28" Setti or 33" Euro - that or bare bulb.
Given the amount of post processing typically done on images its difficult to say with any certainty.
Given the area of coverage and character of the shadows created by the key light I'd guess a large parabolic modifier on the key light, in part because they are quite popular lately. The level of shadow detail and size of the specular reflections on the details in the shadows like the buttons would indicate a large fill source.
^ See thats an interesting response as I thought about a larger para modifier too at once, but I feel the shadows on the models faces are rather hard and beauty dish like. Very hard. Same with the shadows behind them. Making me think its a beauty dish like the Mola Setti or a bare bulb...
This one photo in specific makes me really wonder what was used. If you look at the wall of the building, you can see the rim outline of the modifier. Its a rather hard line too. I doubt you would get this with a large modifier as they tend to have a gradual fall off.
m.shalaby wrote:
This one photo in specific makes me really wonder what was used. If you look at the wall of the building, you can see the rim outline of the modifier. Its a rather hard line too. I doubt you would get this with a large modifier as they tend to have a gradual fall off.
It creates a focused beam of light when the source is located at the focal point. If you have a small parabolic reflector you get a small focused footprint. The person taking that shot was likely using one which was 7 feet in diameter, which would create the type of pattern you are seeing on the wall.
I own a PCB PLM, while not a true Para, I get the essense of them. If he used a hi-end TRUE para - which cost upwards to $5K each (I doubt it from following this photographer (Lachlan Bailey)... he may of rented one though. Not sure. I just highly doubt Lachlan used a $5K para. Most of his work is natural light, or with softboxes.
Also everything leads to a smaller light source to my eye. A 22" Mola Demi can create a hard line like that as well... I guess there's no definitive answer here. Just guessing.
Not sure which reflector, but it looks to me like they are catching the guy closer to the feathered edge ... the central portion aimed at the background.
It creates a focused beam of light when the source is located at the focal point. If you have a small parabolic reflector you get a small focused footprint. The person taking that shot was likely using one which was 7 feet in diameter, which would create the type of pattern you are seeing on the wall.
There's little chance of a 7 foot parabolic being used as the variation in shadows on the stonework illustrate a small source close to the wall, not a large one at any sort of distance.
5" or 7" reflector at the most. BD's would be too soft and large.
Maybe even mounted on a pole and held by an assistant
dmacmillan wrote:
I'm still trying to figure out why we care how they created that nasty highlight on her nose.
Maybe because somebody cares to find out... and as a wild guess - I'd say the subject was clothing and the nose was incidental and far less important in the scheme of things..
I'd guess too that the AD was happy, so job done - otherwise we'd never get see the images.
