jzucker - have you seen his site? Nearly every photo on his site is loaded with textures and lighting embellishments. He uses more post than most photographers.
I will give an instance where his lighting, much like mine, is very calculated. I do photo shoots for the entertainment industry - primarily for key art, which consists mainly of film posters. Since this artwork is typically a composite image (using multiple images), I need to have consistent, but neutral lighting so that we are afforded all the options available to us in post production.
An example of this is to ensure that shadows and highlights are minimal so when we put multiple cast members into a composition, we can add consistent shadows to the cast that would appear to have come from the same directional light source. It also allows the ability to use the same photos in low key or high keys settings. Being a commercial photographer for over twenty years, I've had the opportunity to use nearly all the softbox brands available - other than the cheapie brands, that is. And from my experience. I have seen very little distinction between brands. In this age of using a digital lightroom, it is fairly easy to create the effects required to play with light and shadows, and bring it to a place of aesthetic appreciation.
It's important to have proper exposure, but all this talk of feathering light is a tad overrated. All the images I've delivered to clients have always been heavily processed. An artist is not someone who's interested in fidelity to nature. We don't capture the world as it is. We create the world in our photographs that we much prefer to see. That is what gives a photographer his/her distinctive voice.
jzucker wrote:
...The classic portrait photographers used window light. Go take some measurements of window light at the edge of the window, 1 foot before the window, right at the edge, one foot into the window, in the center, etc. It won't be the same reading at all positions. *THAT* is what a big softbox should do (for portraits at least).
The "classic" portrait photographers went to great lengths to ensure even light across the window, up to and including having specially-built studios with windows only on the north side, and with no o0verhangs or other obstructions within the light-lines leading to those windows.
They used curtains, flags, and scrims for shaping the light if and when desired.
jzucker wrote:
...The classic portrait photographers used window light. Go take some measurements of window light at the edge of the window, 1 foot before the window, right at the edge, one foot into the window, in the center, etc. It won't be the same reading at all positions. *THAT* is what a big softbox should do (for portraits at least).
The "classic" portrait photographers went to great lengths to ensure even light across the window, up to and including having specially-built studios with windows only on the north side, and with no overhangs or other obstructions within the light-lines leading to those windows.
They used curtains, flags, and scrims for shaping the light if and when desired.
We can do the same with soft boxes, using barn doors, flags, ports, etc.
BrianO wrote:
The "classic" portrait photographers went to great lengths to ensure even light across the window, up to and including having specially-built studios with windows only on the north side, and with no o0verhangs or other obstructions within the light-lines leading to those windows.
They used curtains, flags, and scrims for shaping the light if and when desired.
yes, I know. my uncle is monte zucker, one of the classic portrait photographers!
BrianO wrote:
Yes, so you've said. (I attended one of his seminars back in the day, in addition to other formal and informal photography schooling.)
i worked for him briefly and attended many workshops and even modeled for one of his workshops with my family when I first got married!
He has a radically different approach to darton but the results are very similar up until darton began incorporating more post processing into his work. They have different views on the masculine/feminine posing and lighting mechanics though the patterns of light they actually used were similar. Monte used up to 5 lights, darton uses just the one big softbox.
