Photo fun

[Rick Markham]

I have been messing around with photography since I have been taking a photo class, and I wanted to see what you guys thought of these photos. I've posted these turnings before, but they were handy, so I used them as my subject again. I really kind of like this effect and I am going to play with it some more. I wanted to see what your honest opinion about the photos are. C&C appreciated
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v295/Rick357/IMG_1468.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v295/Rick357/IMG_1455.jpg

[Philip Duffy]

The turnings are beautiful and so are the pics. The black background does a great job in making the items look distinctive but the edge of the turnings is a bit hard to differentiate- - for these old eyes. Looking forward to the next rendition. Phil

[Rick Markham]

Phillip, thanks! taking that into account I decided to try something different. (All of these are just exposure, no photoshop, I'm playing with the light) I really think this one is a cool shot, but probably a bit overkill in the other direction :D

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v295/Rick357/IMG_1479.jpg

[John Keeton]

Rick, I think black can be a dramatic background, but for a piece that has contrasting elements like the burl/finial piece, it is difficult to get good lighting. With the vase, and the proper lighting and exposure, I think it could really work. Part of the problem with that image is that it is 533x800, and 40.55 KB - pretty small image with not much resolution. Can you resize to 1024x800, and compress to 107KB? The compression will not degrade the pic as much as having a smaller image size. Just a thought.

As to the white, I don't care for it. Lack of any shadows makes the image appear flat, and the finial gets washed out.

[Rick Markham]

Yeah, it's photo bucket hosting it. Hmmm, I'm pretty sure I can resize it, but I don't know how to compress the file.

[Rick Markham]

Oh and by the way, I'm lighting all of this with a $1.99 flashlight with tshirt taped over the lens :D

[Rick Markham]

Ok this is supposedly resized to that seems super tiny though LOL

230188 (edited to add the correct photo)

[Dennis Ford]

The version that you added at 6:02am is my favorite of the bunch by far; very nice. The piece is great and the dark background shows off the finial very well.

[Jay Rasmussen]

The version that you added at 6:02am is my favorite of the bunch by far; very nice. The piece is great and the dark background shows off the finial very well.

Agree with Dennis, stunning photo Rick.

[Mike Cruz]

Rick, I really like the first one, although the stark dark background accentuates that the finial is out of focus, even though the form is in focus.

I really like how the second one turned out, but the form itself looks like it could use a little brightening.

Bottom line is that I really like the dark background and how the pieces look in contrast to it. The extra white one is a little...blaring.

That's my honest opinion...and we know what that is worth...but you asked for it. :rolleyes:

[John Keeton]

Ok this is supposedly resized to that seems super tiny though LOL Rick, I am not sure how you are doing your resizing. The image you reposted is less than 80KB, and the image info states 683px × 1,024px (scaled to 312px × 467px) and then compressed to 46%. That resulted in a small viewable image, but one that has a little better detail. When I resize an image, I don't "scale" it, so I am not sure why this happened.

Usually, an image of 1024 x ?, compressed at about 65% will come within the 107KB image restriction - depending on the lightness of the image.

[John Beaver]

Hi Rick
I think the black bg flattens out your images and makes the pieces look 2 dimensional. If you are going to work with black you need a light coming from behind the piece to give it a rim that seperates it from the black and gives the piece 3 dimensions. The reason the graduated backdrops work so well is they give the image depth. Black requires a lot more effort to accomplish that effect. A plain grey bg does the same thing because you can see the light falling off on the grey. The black just doesn't show that.

Try moving the light around to the side of the piece and using a white card to reflect the light back onto the other side. This will help give the piece shape and seperate it from the background.

Keep up the efforts.

JB

[Rick Markham]

JK, I'm not sure how to resize the way you describe, what program do you use?

John, I'll give the back lighting a shot. All of these photos are using "light painting" where they are taken in complete darkness and the shutter is held open (in this case for 30 seconds) and I'm running around frantically in that time with a cheap flashlight "painting" all the areas that I want to show up, When it gets dark again tonight, I will try and take a few more to see if I can capture a more 3 dimensional image. I've been playing with self portraits for a class project, and kind of wondered what kinds of effects I might be able to get using my turnings. It's all a big experiment, The one with the white background is actually a flash going off behind a frosted shower curtain hanging on the wall (hence the bright halo around the piece) but IMHO it's a little better, because I had to move the subject farther from the background. I will try it from that distance with the black background tonight, it will also give me room to get behind the piece and illuminate it from behind, and maybe that will give it some more dimension. All of this is complicated because it is dark, so the aperture is on f 8 which limits the depth of field (hence the finial being out of focus)

Yes, I enjoy the ridiculousness of trying to do this :D

[Rick Markham]

Ok, here is another try JK, the program was automatically rescaling the photo as I changed it. Maybe this is better?

230213

[John Keeton]

A bit better, Rick, but I think John Beaver has some good points on back lighting. With the light colored finial, it is going to be difficult to get this one to have dimension, I am afraid.

[Bill Wyko]

Very cool turnings but I feel you loose a bit of definition around the edges. I do however like what it does for the finial.

[Rick Markham]

This one has been a bit tricky using this technique, I think there's some merit here though, and it's worth continuing to explore. I'm going to run out an get a real version of CS5 (I'm a student so I get it "cheap" I've just been putting it off) I'm also going to get a brighter incandescent flashlight and see if I can close the aperture a bit and get some more depth of field. Maybe if I can find a "smoked" showercurtain and play with it as well.

[David DeCristoforo]

This last image is getting there for sure. I'm no pro but I'm thinking you might need to "zoom out" a bit to get the piece more into the "middle" of the focus range. The front of the piece is sharp but the finial is blurred. Also, you need to rotate the image about a half a degree counter clockwise. Then crop so as not to leave so much "air" at the top and a bit more on the sides and bottom. I'll leave the lighting issue to those who actually know what they are talking about!

[Jamie Donaldson]

Rick- there are all kinds of rules and schools of photo lighting theory, but as a rule you don't place dark objects against dark backgrounds, or white objects against white backgrounds. The general idea in tabletop or product photos is to create separation and contrast between subject and background, to emphasize the object rather than the setting, yet high key and low key lighting are other styles that carry those rules to the extreme. The more important consideration is how an image is to be used, and that guides how an object should be illuminated. For display of our turnings we want to be able to see profile, details such as grain, and interior of an open form, etc. so extremes of lighting style are not as productive as would be their application in styles such as portraiture.

[Rick Markham]

David, Those all sound like great suggestions. I'm using a 60mm macro lens, I will try using one of my other lenses that allows for some more options in zooming in and out. This one is fixed focal length. I agree, the depth of field is too shallow on this I will probably try adjusting the focal point to about 1/3rd of the way back from the front of the piece, theoretically that should throw all of it into focus (if the depth of field is wide enough) Otherwise I am going to have to make the aperture smaller, and use more light (I just went and bought a "brighter" flashlight :D)

[charlie knighton]

very nice Rick

[Alan Zenreich]

The black background is fine, but you need something to separate the subject from the background. Some edge lighting or backlighting would work, even if they are accomplished by some wimple reflectors. You need to show the roundness of the subject, and currently the lighting is very flat.

[Rick Markham]

Ok so I got a few minutes the other night to take about 50 more photos using the suggestions on here. I'm still waiting for my serial number from adobe (after they approve my student status) so no photoshop fun for me yet. In the meantime I think I have figured out the resizing thing with this program (I hope these are better) These are again done with lightpainting. I increased the depth of field by closing the aperture, and added some behind lighting. (I also moved the subject farther from the black felt background. I think these are much better, but I've looked at so many it's hard to tell anymore. Regardless this has been a fun experiment playing with light.

This one is about as good as I can get it using a black background and a flashlight for lighting, the dark wood and light finial are a tricky match without an 18% grey background.
230370
Here is lighting from more of traditional angles, with lighting from behind as well, the brand new "krypton" bulb flashlight really shows off the chatoyance, I kind of like the effect. I will be playing with this technique in the future and hopefully I will be able to achieve some better results.
230371

This one is for Alan :D I can do shadows... and I know this isn't what you meant, but it's a cool photo none the less :cool:
230380

[Mike Cruz]

Rick, I really like the second pic now. Very nice. The third pic, while it doesn't really "show the piece" totally, is GREAT photograph. Personally, that is one I would frame...

[Alan Zenreich]

Rick,

Painting with light can be great fun. Sometime in the late 1960's I assisted a photographer while he made a photo of a banquet in the Grand Ballroom of the Plaza hotel.

The camera held a sheet of 8"x20" B&W film... we had one shot at it.

Had all 900 people at the tables turn towards the camera, and the photographer painted the room with a spotlight (took about 2 minutes).

This guy had been doing this for decades, and really had it down pat.

We then rushed back to his studio, developed the film, made a couple of contact prints, returned to the banquet and tried to take orders from the guests.

I only did this once... but it was quite the experience.

[Rick Markham]

That's a BIG negative! Pretty cool now that the picture just shows up right away on the camera. It doesn't involve the same amount of "praying" that it used to! :) Pretty incredible to only take one pic, and have it work right, that guy definitely knew his stuff! I bet that was a stressful experience.

[Rick Markham]

Mike, I like that third one too. It's just plain cool