Knowledge You Can Build On — Est. 1998
photo results
Keith Tompkins
>I took some photos of my recent work, using suggestions from WC contributors. I placed my pieces on a piece of white construction paper folded to a letter "C" shape, near a window. My old Pentax k1000, F stop set to 16. Aluminum foil to reflect light back towards the pieces. This is probably the best shots I have taken.
I have posted a digital shot of the rose before, but not a good image.
Please critique the photo quality, with suggestions.....Thanks, Keith
Re: photo results
Jennifer@Indy.USA
>Keith,
This looks great. No harsh shadows, soft background. Really nice in my eye. I struggle with my photos. I have a table that sits next to a window that I think would work for a setup like this. It's a major ordeal everytime I take pics of my stuff. Lights clamped on the backs of chairs, reflector boards proped up between books, light scrims clothes pinned to the silver reflectors of shop lights and nearly catching fire! It's insane. I dread it actually. Your method sounds much more relaxed....oh yea....the rose is still beautiful.... How do you keep it so fresh?
Jennifer : )
Re: photo results
john Lucas
>Keith
Very well done on both the photo and the piece. I could only make one suggestion. If you look carefully at the source of the light it appears to be directly from the left. Ideally a light should be a little higher so that it looks more natural. If you cover up the bottom 1/3 or so of the window it will appear as though the light were higher which looks more natural. This is just a tip to help you learn to see light and shadow and how it affects the shape of the subject. What you've already done is great. Personally I think a K1000 is all the camera you ever need for this type of photography.
Re: photo results
Keith Tompkins
>miracle grow, of course, miracle grow! LOL
I always dreaded taking shots, I was always disappointed with the results. This is by far the best I've done.
I'm working on a new rose , more elaborate. You will get to see the technique personally!
Re: photo results
Keith Tompkins
>Thanks for all the advise, John. I'm studying the effect of light and shadows, something I never took the time to do before. I need to start a scrapbook of what works and what doesn't.
I didn't expect the shaded grey effect, since the whole background is white. I hope I can duplicate it!
Re: photo results
john Lucas
>Keith
You can enhance the gray affect by placeing a card somewere to cast a show on the background. I would be carful with this for that particular project because you could lose the rose stem since it's dark. You could also use a longer background that would stretch out further from the window. This will also go dark but of course takes up a lot more space.
Re: photo results
George Van in WI
>Thanks for posting Kieth, I learned from your efforts!
Re: photo results
Charles Bjorgen
>Your photo is excellent. Soft window light is one of my favorite light sources for still life/product photography. The gradation on your background from gray to white nicely enhances the overall effect. The slight highlight on the right edge of the blossom is an obvious result of your aluminum foil fill source opposite the window light. Nice going.
Re: photo results
Don Thompson - Cutler Ridge, Florida
>It is very hard to make truly meaningful comments on your photography after the image has been compressed, transmitted, and re-displayed on my monitor. Who knows where changes may have been introduced?
Anyway, the image I have here appears under-exposed. There is a lack of detail on the stem of the flower. At first glance, my instinct would be to say that the light meter (on or off of the camera) locked onto the strong white background.
BTW, I think it is a wonderful piece!
Re: photo results
adrien
>Keith,
When you write "you will get to see the technique personally," are you going to reveal the secrets of how you set about creating that beauty?
Re: photo results
Keith Tompkins
>HI Adrian, well, sorta.....I,m going to Indy to do a two-day demo. I'll get to meet Jennifer, and show some of my techniques.....I'll post a how-to shortly
Re: photo results
gary clarke
>How did you get from the pentax film image to digital? Did you take it to photo processor and have it put on a disc or did you somehow do it yourself? I have an old Nikon and also a digital camera and I much prefer the "old" film images to my cheaper digital camera. thanks
Re: photo results
Gary in Zirconia,NC
>This photo appears at the proper exposure on my monitor. I can't see detail in the shadow side of the stem, but if the exposure was any lighter, it would lose detail in the whites. The biggest problem with the photo is the amount of contrast in the subject. Film is not made to capture that much contrast. It is a difficult subject to photograph and you have done a very good job.
Re: photo results
Jennifer@Indy.USA
>Keith...do you have a date set yet for your demo here?
Re: photo results
RonZ
>Big difference and wonderful results. I just don't have a window where my photo area is. :(
Re: photo results
Keith Tompkins
>HiGary, I went to a photo shop, and had a disc made...I had prints made for my portfolio also, I could use my scanner to convert to digital also.
Re: photo results
adrien
>Thanks Keith, kind of you to reveal the secrets. You make it sound so simple--until one reads the fine print and realizes how much though, time and labor goes in to creating something like that.
Re: photo results
JamieDonaldson
>Good effort Keith- John has already mentioned one of my suggestions, and changing the main light source angle to about 45~60 degrees from L side would open up some of the front shadows. The bounce light(called "fill") from the R side needs to be stronger- try a larger bounce panel, and adjust to taste but show detail in the shadows. Working with available light can be very frustrating because weather conditions are not always repeatable, especially when you need it most! Photo lighting is a creative art/science all to itself- remember they are actually "light etchings!"
Re: photo results
Keith Tompkins
>Thanks, everyone!!
Re: photo results
Keith Tompkins
>Thanks Jamie, it will be fun learning some of the finer points of taking my own shots! Very rewarding....
Re: photo results
Keith Tompkins
>hi Jennifer, the dates are Mar 29 to Apr. 1...see you there!
Re:Keith, are you sure? The club's web site lists
Al Crandall
>Keith, are you sure? The club's web site lists you as demonstrating on April 30 and May 1. I'd hate to see a major SNAFU on your presentation dates. I'm looking forward to meeting you.
Re:Keith, are you sure? The club's web site lists
Keith Tompkins
>Hi Al, oops, sorry. I checked my schedule,you are correct.....you almost got TWO demos! LOL
The dates I listed are the NWA showcase in Saratoga, NY.
