How to do this incredible technique

Home · Register · Search · Software · Hosting · Software · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Steve Tinetti, Fred Miranda

FM Forum Rules
Wedding Resource List

FM Forums \| Wedding Photographer \| Join Upload & Sell
1 2 3 4 end

qwyjibo
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.4 #1 · How to do this incredible technique

^ I actually think that Eyeball illustrated that it's actually pretty straightforward. He needs an angle angle more like the one in the diagram above and a second flash to light up the face, and then I think it would look really close. And no, this doesn't explain the glasses but perhaps that's not DOF but more a function of imperfections in the glass or the incident angle of reflection being a bit too acute.

Jun 25, 2012 at 03:51 AM

XPO239
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.4 #2 · How to do this incredible technique

It's single exposure. Pretty easy to do. :-)

Jun 25, 2012 at 05:45 AM

JonMold
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.4 #3 · How to do this incredible technique

Tony Hoffer wrote:
lisy78 wrote:
Tony Hoffer wrote:
No reflections or double exposure even necessary for these... JM, You show me light painting in January and I'll show you this

are you saying that there's a way to:

1. do this in camera

2. without some ridiculous trickery like "the city is actually a print shot at F32 prior and printed"

3. without multiple exposures

4. without relfections

that would result in this:

This image is copyrighted by the owner

Yes, that is exactly what I'm saying. There's actually two ways that I can think of. Neither of them are a double exposure or 5D3-type trick. We'll do one at the Genesis reunion.

YES, knew there was a reason for going back to the reunion :

Jun 25, 2012 at 09:49 AM

Eyeball
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.4 #4 · How to do this incredible technique

Jon-Mark wrote:
Cool attempt, but this technique would not work for a shot of a couple with a gap between them, as you are hiding the reflection of the camera in your silhouette. It must be a double exposure.

The subject/silhouette was not hiding the camera. The camera was neither in front of nor in back of the subject. The only thing hidden by the subject was my flash facing the wall behind her but I could have side-lit the wall behind her just as easily if I had the time. If there happened to be another window or open sky behind the subject, the flash would not even be necessary.

If you take a look at the diagram I posted earlier, I used exactly that setup with the only difference being that the "V" between the camera and the subject was much narrower than shown. The camera was almost next to the subject. I used the narrow "V" in my case because that is what I needed to match the line-of-sight to my window and a relatively open space of white wall for the subject backdrop. The "V" though can be as wide as you like though following the angle of incidence/angle of reflection rules and within the limits of the window and background sizes and positions.

Jun 25, 2012 at 11:17 AM

Eyeball
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.4 #5 · How to do this incredible technique

qwyjibo wrote:
^ I actually think that Eyeball illustrated that it's actually pretty straightforward. He needs an angle angle more like the one in the diagram above and a second flash to light up the face, and then I think it would look really close. And no, this doesn't explain the glasses but perhaps that's not DOF but more a function of imperfections in the glass or the incident angle of reflection being a bit too acute.

I actually tried to throw some light on the front of the subject with a reflector but it wasn't enough to be noticeable. I was losing the light and too tired to set up another flash but, yes, I think that would have done it. Honestly, I can totally imagine a roof-top set-up where this could be done pretty easy. Think about an observation deck with an open top but with glassed-in sides. Something like that would do it.

Difficult to be sure what method the photographer used. The online articles are not consistent. What is funny is that anyone seeing these images will think they are done in Photoshop anyway, so I'm not sure it matters.

Still, I thought the experiment was interesting and I think it demonstrates that reflections can be a powerful tool for wedding photographers. I was reminded of the beach house reflection photo that was posted a while back and the the one where the backlight projected a shadow of the couple onto glass between them and the camera. When the couple knows you did it "live", it probably has more of a "wow" factor when they see the print.

Jun 25, 2012 at 11:33 AM

brett maxwell
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.4 #6 · How to do this incredible technique

To frame these subjects with a 150mm on full frame, your focus distance would be 4-5 feet.

This image is copyrighted by the owner

I just checked this, and here's what your background would look like at f32.

This image is copyrighted by the owner

Just maybe a tiny point-n-shoot sensor and a tiny aperture could pull this off with acceptable sharpness of the background, but I think we can be pretty confident these aren't done that way, and it still wouldn't account for the shallow DOF on the glasses.

Jun 25, 2012 at 08:00 PM

1 2 3 4 end
FM Forums \| Wedding Photographer \| Join Upload & Sell 1 2 3 4 end