This set represents the third nude photo shoot in my career as a nude photographer, which was done at my home studio in Prague. I did not have a lot of experience in regards to ideas or styling at the time. Due to a lack of self-confidence, I was not networking or schmoozing either.
Despite all of this, I did have the guts to approach Marketa and asked her to model for me with the hopes that shooting her would help build my portfolio. In the end though, the shoot did not benefit me how I had planned.
No Concept, Great Body
As I previously mentioned, during this period my concepts were quite weak and this photo shoot made that all too clear to me. There was no storytelling, no emotions, no seduction, however the lighting was not bad. Just a great face and body (I’m not complaining).
It is Ikea and Marketa and me – in this order.
Wanting to be different, I choose to plaster Marketa in make-up for this shoot, because most photographers were taking very natural, simple shots of her then.
The Good:
- Lighting
- Model (more than OK)
The Unpleasant:
- Storytelling
- Lack of posing & expressions
The Matter of Taste:
- Make-up
Tech-Sheet: Lighting & Settings
- 3x 400 Ws Monoblocs
- Key light: as a key, I used a generic 60x80cm (24x31.5″) softbox from front left
- Background light points directly to the model, shining through the Ikea shelf.
Modifier: generic square softbox 80x100cm (31.5x40″) - Volume light: bouncing a head with a standard reflector towards the wall left behind the model
- Camera: Nikon D2X
- Lens: 28-85mm, @70mm
- White Balance: 5100K
- F-stop: 10
- Shutter: 1/125
- ISO: 160
Set-Analyses 3D
Lighting Diagram
Conclusion
This early shoot is not my best but it is a good showcase as an example of what is okay and what could have been improved upon.
Support for You
Start out with valuable knowledge right from the beginning. I’ve created some inspirational education guides for photography enthusiasts:
Hi Dan, let me start by saying that it’s refreshing to see a professional photographer like you share this set, knowing that it’s not your “best.” That takes a lot of courage, and confidence… just to show others how to learn from earlier experiences.
I wish that I could say that my early glamour set had such good overall results, but I can’t!!! I was struggling with a poor understanding of studio lighting (2 light sets that ended up flat because I didn’t understand main/fill ratios) working with inexperienced models (expressions were too flat, poses were static) and set designs/wardrobe/styling that were cliche. All my fault… and have been frustrated learning the hard way.
MARKETA – Love her look, and understand your motivation to differentiate your images with this model, but I think you over-compensated with the lips mostly, eye makeup is fine, IMHO. I like the costume/wardrobe, and that’s very well done. Sadly it’s true her expression and pose is static and one-dimensional, just as you have lamented…
LIGHTING / SET DESIGN – Your use of the Ikea bookshelf is ingenious!!! It serves not only as a background set prop, but is also effectively an enormous egg-crate grid for the backlight softbox. This is a very clever idea, the prop becomes a light modifier. Bravo! I am going to steal… um… adopt this technique! (I own the smaller version of this shelf). Also, thanks for taking the time to reproduce the lighting scheme in the rendering software, that really helps me see what you where doing.
QUESTION: CAMERA SETTINGS – Coming from the old-school of B&W film, I find myself using “standard” ISO settings from what used to be available for film (e.g. 100/200/400, etc.). I’m curious… Why ISO 160? Why not 100 w/ smaller aperture, or some other combination within the exposure triangle? I have read some discussions about digital sensor noise being reduced at certain camera body “native” ISOs (and multiples thereof). Was that the motivation, or is there some other magic that happens with a Nikon D2X at ISO 160?
Hello Dana,
thanks for your detailed comment and questions.
I really do not have a problem to explain shots that went not that great as long the overall result is still somehow convincing;) That’s a part of BLOG+; glad you like it.
It’s necessary to say that I was already experienced in lighting as I shot before for years commercial. Just the posing/expression-thing slipped through in this Marketa-shoot. And this annoys me quite a bit…
LIGHTING/DESIGN: well this was a long before planned concept and very well executed, LOL.
Fact is that this shelf was one of few things standing around that time in the flat. I just rented the place and nothing was delivered yet. But the gig with Marketa was before the door and she was very busy at time. Not a good idea to postpone. So I chose to implement the shoot with whatever I’ve had.
ISO: Exposure triangle..hmmm…. – Well I confess I do not think much about that triangle. Other triangles: yes. ISO settings are (mostly) based on the set’s lighting mood. A higher ISO incorporates the area/volume light better. Same could be done with a longer exposure time. But on this shoot I had a lot of natural light “around” and a longer exposure would have been a risk.
I chose 160 due to my indecision…200 I didn’t like that time (in fact 160 is an underexposed native 200…). I also shoot a lot with 320. Don’t ask me why but I just don’t like the “normal” ISOs like 100/200/400/800 etc.
What is basically true is that one should not shoot on the lowest possible ISO a camera offers (manually expansion to e.g. 50 ISO). Not 10 years ago neither today. Lower ISO (in DSLRs) leads to a “non-trival drop in image quality”.
If one want to shoot “native” ISO: 200 is very fine.
PS: Well I surely use the “exposure triangle” but as said I don’t think much about. The starting point is always like: what DOF do I need? Do I want to capture a lot of existing natural light?
If I want both (open aperture & higher ISO) I probably need to work with ND filters for compensation.
Thanks for the feedback and detail on your thoughts and process, Dan. Now I think I am going to experiment with some higher ISO settings and see how it goes.
Hi Dan, The only problems I’ve found with this shoot, was Marketa’s lipstick and static pose. I have an idea for you, produce an ebook or paperback book, featuring set analysis, lighting diagram with final images. I know there would be some interested takers out there.
Hello Roy,
retrospect: posing/expression is weak (non-existent) for sure; lipstick, well, I can’t get a final conclusion about that myself.
“Analyses Guide”: I did the first attempt with “Drama” (/photo-light/visual-photo-lighting-guide-edition-drama-by-dan-hostettler), a successor is in production.
For a compiled guide (with a lot of different shots) I need to dig in my HDs first. And probably collaborate with another photographer?
Thanks for a brilliant idea!
I like Roy’s idea/concept, too. I hope it makes it onto your list of things to do.
Hi Dan
I just wanted to let you know that I’m enjoying reading through your articles and viewing your photos. Well done on a great blog!
Best regards
Paul
Hey Paul,
thanks for your comment and compliment! Glad you like the insights and imagery on BLOG+.
I am very happy for getting feedback and discussions in the comment sections all over the place. The exchange for the community is really great. More to come 🙂
Best from Prague,
Dan