Creativity With Ambient and Flash (Mac)

I thought I would share a fun technique that I used while shooting a a recent wedding reception. This image was created with an on-camera flash with the Black Foamie Thing bounced into the ceiling and a slow enough shutter speed to allow the ambient light to register while rotating the camera.

I arrived with these results using the knowledge that a subject that is lit predominantly by flash will be sharp and "frozen" in an image with a slow shutter speed. The exposure for this image was manual f2.8, 1/3 sec. @ ISO 640 and flash set to TTL. I was already shooting at f2.8 and ISO 640 simply because I was indoors and bouncing flash so I needed settings that would be "easy" for my flash to out put enough light to give me proper exposure and not work my flash too hard since I was shooting quickly.

Flash exposure is not influenced by shutter speeds less than the camera's sync speed so when I am deriving my initial settings for a flash dominant scene I am concerned with aperture and ISO. The larger the aperture and the higher the ISO the less light the flash has to put out. Once I have those settings to my liking, I will adjust the shutter speed to obtain my results as far as ambient is concerned. The slower the shutter speed the more the ambient light will contribute to the image. Of course aperture and ISO influence ambient exposure as well, but indoors when I am using flash as the main light source I am not overly concerned with those settings unless they don't allow me to control the ambient with shutter speed alone.

With my aperture and ISO set I simply slowed the shutter speed down until it was slow enough to allow me to rotate the camera during the exposure in order to make the room and DJ's lights streak in the image. I just snapped away and adjusted my shutter speed until I had the desired effect. It so happened that 1/3rd of a second shutter speed allowed this to happen. Let's say I couldn't get a slow enough shutter speed to allow enough time to rotate the camera without over exposing the ambient I could have lowered the ISO or increased my aperture since those settings not only influence the flash exposure they influence the ambient exposure as well.

So let's say that I needed at least 1/3 of a second in order to rotate the camera, but the image was over exposed. If I changed my aperture to f4 or my ISO down to ISO 320 I would have reduced the ambient exposure by one stop, but still giving me the time to rotate the camera before the shutter closes and the beauty of using my flash in TTL is that the flash will automatically compensate for the change in aperture or ISO by putting out one stop more light.

I hope this all makes sense. Combining flash with ambient especially with a slow shutter speed can produce some fun results. This same technique can be used and instead of rotating the camera you can zoom your lens in or out to produce interesting results or just move the camera sideways - experiment. Since the subject is exposed by the flash they will remain decently sharp - depending on how slow your shutter speed is. Remember, the slower it is the more the ambient will record on your moving subject and that motion will begin to record on the sensor for an interesting effect should you choose to let that happen.

Softening Speedlights (Mac)

I need to vent here a little bit about devices that are meant to diffuse or soften light that comes from speedlights. Let's get a couple things straight right off the bat. When we are talking about softening or diffusing a light source we are talking about the shadows the light creates. Shadows with sharp, defined edges are said to be hard and they are created by a hard light source. Shadows that are soft and feathered around their edges are created by soft or diffused light sources.

Now here is where the confusion for most people sets in. A hard light source is a relatively small light source such as a bare speedlight, a light bulb, or the sun on a cloudless day. Yes, the sun is a small light source relatively speaking and even though it is huge the sun so far away it is just a point of light in the sky. A soft light source comes from a relatively large light source like a 48" softbox or the sun on an overcast day which really just acts like a massive softbox or diffusion panel. Do this little experiment for me. Observe shadows you see on a bright sunny day and compare them to the shadows on an overcast day - if you can find any. The entire overcast sky is now the light source and it is apparently much larger than the bare sun. The only way a light becomes softer is to make it larger in relation to the subject. Let's repeat that: the only way a light becomes softer is by making it larger in relation to the subject. In fact, I want you to take out a pen and piece of paper and write that statement out 100 times.

With those facts in mind can you all PLEASE stop thinking that the goofy little plastic "diffuser" that comes with many speedlights or the likes of the Stofen Omni Bounce, Gary Fong's gimmicky Tupperware, or pretty much any other plastic add-on to the speedlights do anything to make your light source softer or in other words LARGER. These devices do not make the speedlight appreciably larger than the speedlight itself and if the light source doesn't get apparently larger it doesn't get softer - period.

What these devices do is simply scatter light around the room which fills in the shadows created by the still relatively small light source and they do very little to change the quality of the light or shadows produced. In order to create softer light we need to create larger light. If one were to bounce the flash off the ceiling or wall then the ceiling or wall now becomes the light source, and they are both massive compared to the area of a speedlight, the resulting light is now much softer than the bare speedlight or one of these pricey pieces of plastic. All these devices do, besides lightening your wallet, is to effectively turn your speedlight into a fancy, TTL capable lightbulb - nothing more. They flood the room with light which merely acts to make the hard shadows lighter in appearance. This may be a desirable outcome, but let's not confuse a lighter, hard shadow with the soft, diffused shadow created by a large light source.

I have taken a series of photos that will show the results from a single Nikon SB900: bare, with Nikon's plastic diffusing dome, a 24" shoot-through umbrella, a 24" bounce umbrella, and a 30" softbox. The camera was set up on a tripod and the SB900 was fired via Radiopopper set to TTL with a one stop exposure increase about 3' from the subject in all cases.

Here is the bare speedlight. Notice the very clear and defined shadow edge. Also notice the deep shadow tone and the sharp, specular highlight. The speedlight was zoomed to 24mm which is as wide as the beam goes without the wide angle diffuser down. Had I zoomed the head to say 200mm we would be dealing with an even harder, and deeper shadow and a very specular highlight.

Here is the speedlight with the plastic diffusing dome. The shadow edge is a little feathered compared to the bare flash, but it isn't very soft relatively speaking. The shadow depth is a little less due to more light scattering around the room and filling the shadows and the specular highlight is still sharp. This specular highlight would represent the dreaded hotspot on your model's forehead.

This is the result from a shoot-through umbrella which is considerably larger than either the bare flash or the flash with the plastic dome. You will immediately notice the change in shadow quality. The shadow is now substantially feathered and lighter. The highlight is also softer and larger without the clipped area in the center. You can clearly see all the detail in the highlight area thanks to the much larger and thereby softer light source.

This photo shows the results from the bounce umbrella. The shadow is still feathered and soft, but a little deeper and this is because the shoot-through umbrella bounces some light backwards out of the umbrella fills the room which lightens the shadows. However, the highlight and shadow quality are very similar.

This last photo shows the results from a 30" softbox. The light and shadow quality is very similar to the bounce umbrella and in fact there isn't much difference between the two which is why I purposely chose a similar sized softbox to the umbrella. Had I used a 60" softbox we would have seen even softer shadows. I wanted to show that there is not much difference in the quality of light produced by the two modifiers.

I use softboxes in the studio because they come in many sizes and shapes and they can be gridded to help control spill, but when I am out shooting on location for weddings or what not I will use bounce umbrellas because they are much easier transport. The light quality is so similar I think it when it comes to using them one needs to decide on what fits one's budget (softboxes can be very pricey) and shooting style. The catchlights in people's eyes are obviously different and in many cases that is the only way one can tell if an image was lit via softbox or umbrella. So don't think you need sofboxes to create quality light - an umbrella will often do just fine.

So there you go. I hope you can now see that the only way to get a softer light is by making it larger. That can be accomplished by making the light source physically larger by bouncing it off a wall or modifying it with a large device like an umbrella or softbox. A $160, 8" plastic bowl* on top of the flash is nowhere near as large as the same flash with a 60" umbrella. The light can also be moved closer to the subject which increases its apparent size in relation to the subject. So a 24" umbrella placed 2' away from a model will be much softer than the same umbrella placed 8' away.

One thing I would like to say about the plastic dome diffusers is that I do use them on my speedlights when I have them in a softbox or umbrella. The diffuser spreads the light out to fill the modifier and this helps to avoid the hotspot that a bare speedlight produces especially when shot through a sofbox or shoot-through umbrella.

*Yes, I own one. I was duped by the slick marketing when I was first starting out and looking for the ever-elusive, quick fix. Save your money or if you insist on buying one I'll sell you mine ;-)

The Making of a Photograph (Mac)

The photograph I am presenting today is probably one of my favorite I have ever made. I absolutely love the tones, the textures, the model's curves, the flattering feminine pose and the simplicity of this photo - it is a classic presentation of the reclining, female nude. The photograph didn't quite look like this as it came out of the camera though and I will share what I started with and how it became the final photograph.

The first image shows the light setup. I placed a medium softbox on a boom to camera left and about 7' off the ground. I pointed the softbox at the middle of the model to feather the light down her legs and up her torso. I have a 60", gold umbrella sitting right beside the camera as close as I could get and the bottom of the umbrella is at the camera level. That's it for the lighting - nothing too fancy. I'll also mention that the fabrics on the floor are simply a canvas painter's drop cloth and some burlap (used for covering plants for the winter) both purchased from Home Depot.

This next image shows my fill light which I generally set up first. I do this because this basically sets how dark the darkest part of the image will be no matter what happens. In this instance I just eyeballed the levels until I got a shadow tone I was happy with. One could meter it for a specific f-stop and ratio the main light accordingly, but for me the actual f-stop wasn't important to me since I wasn't looking for a certain shooting aperture. I chose a gold umbrella to keep the tones warm to aid in the painterly feel and I also tend to like warm images. My white balance is almost always set to "cloudy" as that renders a slightly warmer tone than if I used a "flash" or 5000-5600K white balance.

I then turned on my main light and noodled with the power until I got the look I wanted. Sometimes I am just too lazy to bust out the light meter and with the D3's LCD being so much more accurate than the D2x's I don't mind using a visual reference along with the histogram to get a working exposure. In this case I settled on f9. After playing around with a few poses this is the photo that made the final cut.

And this is the photo straight out of the camera. Not overly exciting is it? They usually aren't. We need to do some work here to get us to the final image. Unfortunately, I can't describe in detail what I did since I spend a lot of time just playing around with various things to see where I want to take the image, but in general there has been a lot of dodging and burning. The background was burned down and existing highlights were enhanced. One method I like to do to achieve this is to duplicate the layer and change the blend mode to multiply. I add a mask to it and then simply paint back in the areas I want brighter, varying brush opacity as I go. Almost all of my images have this component done to them especially my black and white work. I also added a texture to the background to give it a little more interest and color.

There is no way this photograph could have been achieved straight out of the camera and by showing you this I hope that you embrace post production work - if you haven't already. I didn't rely on Photoshop to make this image because I already had the components set up with lighting, the pose, fabric, etc. I simply used Photoshop to enhance what was done in camera. In other words, the good raw material was there I just prettied it up a bit. The important thing to remember is that you have to start with good material. As the old saying goes (or a variation at least!), a retouched turd is still a turd.

I hope this helps people understand a little bit about digital photography these days. If a novice photographer had asked me how I made this, how was it lit and I simply said it was a softbox at camera left and an umbrella beside the camera for fill I would have done a disservice to that person because when they attempt the same setup they will fall woefully short of my final photo and end up with something very similar to the original image. Frustration the soon sets in or at least it did for me when I was first starting and asked those better than me how they achieved an image and got the "lighting answer". The light is only the starting point, but it isn't the only aspect that is responsible for the final image. If you aren't doing some sort of good post work then your images are not all they can be.

Props (rob)

I just wanted to quickly mention a local photographer in our area who is doing his best to make a difference any way he can.

I met Al Del Degan a bunch of years back, when I could count on one finger the number of photographers in Calgary who seemed interested in figure studies... me. lol.

He is certainly a person who has shown commitment to growing, expanding and sharing his passion with the world. It seems that not only is he still involved in photography, but he has started a modeling agency here in the city, and also a blog, and a podcast...

which he was nice enough to talk about the raw files on.

Thanks Al for that very much!

You can see all Al's info here;

http://aduro.podbean.com/2009/11/14/

On-camera Flash (Mac)

Two posts in one day...yes, I am that bored today :-) I am a fan of Neil van Niekerk's work. Neil's work is very clean, stylish, and just simply beautiful photography - no over the top post production work here. Neil relies on finding the best light to make his photographs sing and if he can't find it he makes it. How he makes a lot of it is nothing short of amazing - speedlights. Yup, the good old fashioned, camera mounted flashes like Nikon's SB-900 or Canon's equivalent except for one little difference: the speedlight is on the camera.

When I first saw what Neil does with a camera mounted speedlight I was in awe. The quality of light is what one would expect with studio lighting not a small, on-camera flash. Neil "simply" bounces his flash off of almost anything to create a directional and larger light source and masterfully blends the flash with the ambient light to achieve his goal of producing photographs that do not look like they have been lit with on-camera flash. There is one little trick Neil has up his sleeve when he bounces flash and it is what I was missing when trying to achieve great results with bounce flash - The Black Foamy Thing (BFT).

This simple little device is the "trick" to producing great results with bounce flash. The BFT flags direct spill from the flash from falling on the subject thereby producing a completely directional light source. When I made one of these little units my bounce flash results took a leap and a bound forward in terms of quality when using on-camera flash. The other bonus of using the BFT is that it helps to block light from blasting innocent bystanders when your flash head is turned to bounce. I won't go into any more detail on bounce flash techniques as Neil is a master and I highly recommend visiting his blog if you would like to learn more about this technique. Neil is also pretty mean with off camera speelights although he doesn't use Nikon's CLS to any great extent.

Here are some photos showing what the BFT looks like. It is simply a piece of thin foam that I picked up at an art store and attached some Velcro to the ends so I can attach it to my flash head which as you can see is covered in Velcro. I am not afraid to plaster this wonderful substance all over my gear. I attach gels, flags, ring flash, and my Radiopoppers to my speedlights with Velrco - wonderful stuff.

I parked my "cooperative" little boy on the kitchen island and took a series of photos. The first one shows what the ambient light provided to the image without the flash firing. The exposure settings were manual f2.8. 1/80th, and ISO 400. I chose these settings to give me a shallow depth of field and allow a hint of the window light coming from the left to register on the camera left side of his face. I could have slowed my shutter speed a bit more or increased my ISO if I wanted more ambient light to register. The flash also has an easier time providing proper exposure at f2.8 and ISO 400.

This next photo shows the results of the flash. I turned the flash head about 45 degrees to my right and tilted it up slightly and bounced the light off the nearby white pantry doors. The flash was set to TTL with no flash compensation. As you can see the flash bounced off the doors and over exposed the left side of his face and the spill coming from the flash lit up the rest of his face, obliterating any ambient light much like the point-the-flash-at-the-victim and fire away type of method. Clearly, bouncing the flash here did not produce very good results and it is because there is too much spill coming from the camera. I could have dialed in some flash exposure compensation to deal with the over exposure, but the flat spill light would still be there. I also could have swiveled the flash head behind me, however, that produces a flat light and I wanted the light to come from the side to create short light scenario.

Here we have the exact same set up with the only difference being the BFT added to the flash to block any spill from coming from the camera's position - a world of difference. The quality of light looks very similar to a softbox, but it was achieved much more simplistically with an on-camera flash. Neil's site is full of stunning examples of what can be achieved with this technique and little modifier as he has been doing this for years. I still have a long way to go using bounce flash and flagging the light, but this isn't too bad for a quick, short lit portrait with a camera mounted flash, no less, done in the kitchen - go figure.

So there you go. Amazing light from what has traditionally been an "awful" light source. Mosey on over to Neil's site if you'd like to learn how to do this in much greater detail than I can provide. I would like to thank Neil very much for sharing his knowledge freely and allowing photographers like me to discover and learn new and better techniques to take our photography to the next level.

What Can be Achieved With Speedlights (Mac)

I have been using speedlights for much of my outdoor nudes these days and I just wanted to share a few images that were lit with unmodified speedlights (except for the maternity photos which used a softbox or umbrella) and either Nikon's CLS system or enhanced with Radiopoppers. I will hopefully get to a review of my Radiopoppers and my mounting modification this week and with some photos of the wedding I photographed using these for the fist time.

Clear? (Mac)

Without a doubt one of the words that is most commonly use to describe my work by viewers, photographers and lay people alike, is sharp. I received a comment about my work today and the woman said my work was "clear" which I am taking to mean sharp. I am gobsmacked by the amount of people who are impressed or surprised that my photographs are sharp or as I like to say, in focus.

Shouldn't a photograph be in good focus? I like to think so unless of course the focus is soft on purpose for artistic intent. My work is sharp simply because it is in good focus. I use a tripod when ever I can, I make sure that my images are in good, solid focus by focusing on a point with high contrast like the edge of a body part and I often take several shots of the same pose to make sure I indeed have a good sharp image captured.

I can also nail focus with extremely shallow depths of field. I often photograph mothers and their newborns with my 50mm f1.4 wide open and can routinely get the baby's eye(s) or other important subject in good, sharp focus while allowing the f1.4 aperture to turn the rest of the image into a soft, blurry mush. A solid, hand-holdable shutter speed of at least 1/250th or a tripod helps as well as taking multiple frames re-focusing each time helps to ensure sharp photographs. Proper sharpening in post production is a key factor as well.

I don't think the technique is difficult to master, however, I find great amusement and a little bewilderment at the amount of people that comment on the sharpness of my work, yes, it is in focus. I thought I'd share this curious little thought with you ;-)

**Edit**
A comment from Justin sparked me to add that gear does play a role in attaining sharp images. I believe high quality lenses most certainly help the most in terms of gear. Pretty much any lens with an aperture of f2.8 is going to be top notch glass. All my lenses are f2.8 and I have invested heavily in terms of dollars in lenses.

When I moved from the D70s to the D2x years ago my images suffered big time. I thought it was the camera because how can moving from an amateur camera to a pro camera make your photos worse?? Having top quality gear does not necessarily guarantee great results - it often makes your images worse. How can this be? If you have a 12mp or higher camera with a top notch lens your technique is going to be very apparent. If you have good technique then you can expect great results and if your technique is poor, well, you will be left with less than satisfying results. Well, my technique was apparently not very good at the time but with practice I learned to get the most out of my gear.

video - yikes (rob)

I am opening up a new can of worms here...

the idea of photographers doing video.

I know that this issue polarizes photographers, and there are a number of reasons why;

staying true to one genre, and not picking up any new gimmick the camera companies throw at us is one.

My motivations for exploring video is to create 'moving photographs.'

Photography is two dimensional.

We as photographers try to input the idea of a 3rd dimension (depth ie shadows, and depth of field) into our shots, and the good ones try to go beyond, and tell a story as well... ie the 4th dimension (a stretch, I know, but useful for this example).

Video already has the 4th dimension right away. Movement through space and time with artistic, photography quality light is something I have been envisioning for ages.

My intent is to create very short, moving photographs that put movement through the space (and light) I have created, to create new nuances to the textures and details of the shot.

I think it will be both easier, and harder, and definitely dynamic and exciting.

It will be easier, because as I said, inputing a story and a sense of movement and drama is already a part of video.

It will be harder because I can do much less in the line of post processing (ie hiding flaws),

and of course because it is a new medium.

So, anyway,

I bought a nice decent quality video camera in the summer, and have been playing around.

I am also waiting (STILL!!!!) for Nikon to come out with and FX DSLR that has full HD video. I love Nikon because they are patient, and try not to rush things and put junk in their cameras,

but it also pisses me off that I have to wait.

But what it does, is make me have to push through and be creative.

So with my regular video camera, I don't have the luxury of creative control, so I have to/get to, keep things simple and focus on composition and light.

I also plan to use my D700, downsize it to the DX option, and shoot low grade jpegs. With that, and my battery pack, I can shoot at 8fps.

Regular video shoots at 24 frames per second.

I am planning on researching software that can turn that into video, and I will attempt to use the two cameras to create a short video.

With the DSLR option, I can try something creative, limited and challenging, and hopefully very interesting.

As of right now, I am working on my second short model video put to music.

I will post a link when I am done.

I am certain it will be somewhere in the line of terrible, but I plan to go full throttle into it, and work through the process, until I am half decent.

Rob

ps, these are just a couple of images I took recently that I am happy with. Lol.

just standard stuff, but I thought I'd add them too.

The Spider Holster Review (Mac)

Ok, so I used my Spider Holster for the first time this weekend gone by for a two day wedding event I photographed in Banff. I have one word to say and it is WOW! I have said good bye to my camera straps and will now be using my Spider Holster as the dedicated way I carry my camera(s) around with me. I won't go into all the details of the product since the website has an enormous amount of information on the system.

Let me explain that my current gear when shooting a ceremony/reception consists of two D3 bodies one with a 24-70mm f2.8 and the other with a 70-200mm f2.8 and both bodies are outfitted with SB-900's including SD-9 external battery packs. This is a very heavy set up and I was easily able to shoot from 4:30-10:30 without a problem whatsoever. The load is distributed around the hips thus freeing my upper body from all that weight that traditional straps put on the shoulders. What a difference!

The holsters themselves worked flawlessly, the build quality is top notch, and I was able to easily grab either camera to shoot and put them back in the holsters in a flash. The cameras hang very nicely with the lens pointing backwards and the flashes downwards so I maintain a relatively low profile and I had no problems maneuvering around. No more cameras flopping around when I bend forward or move around quickly.

Now, everyone is different and most everyone dislikes new things and by some of the reviews I have read online about the Spider Holster echo those statements big time. It is so different I am sure people won't even give this device a chance and the main reason people seem to be balking at the holster is that without the traditional neck strap it seems as though we will all drop our cameras. Please. I haven't dropped my gear in four years of shooting. Grow up. Pay attention to what you are doing. Good grief. What a silly argument against a fantastic solution to carrying a camera or cameras.

I have to say that the Spider Holster is worth every penny and it works for me and my style of shooting perfectly - thank you Shai! It is on the pricey side, but it is very well built and with loads of thought put into the design by allowing the use of a tripod quick release plate and accommodating vertical shooting. They are also working on accessory devices which I am curious to see because if they are anywhere near as well designed, well built, and useful as the Spider Holster these accessories will be fantastic.

yo ho ho (rob)

mac and i have used 1% of our total blog space.

that means we only have about 188yrs left of space..!!

we better be careful!

i took this photo last week with a model who i am considering using for my raw files model next year.

as is typical with me, we didn't have a huge agenda. we got together to shoot, and just began experimenting and playing around.

i have a bunch of fabric i bought in india, and at a fabric store in my studio that i enjoy playing around with.

for this shoot, i had her tie a wrap around her head, then we created a skirt out of a stretchy piece of lacy fabric, and finally placed a 3rd piece of fabric over her head, and draped it around her neck like a scarf. pretty simple.

i have always enjoyed accessorizing the body this way, i think with some practice, and luck it can create very a very lovely and classic look.

i also enjoy experimenting with the way my camera can access light.

in this shot, i pulled a piece of white ladies nylons over my lens. i then pulled it as taught as i could, and re-attached the lens hood, which (as i hoped) both created runs through the nylon, and held it tight to the lens.

i then lined my models face up with a spot on the lens that was completely exposed by the run in the nylon, so that her face would be clear (focus on the eyes) and the rest of her body would be unpredictably softened.

that was it. really simple stuff that can change a basic nude into something with some personality.

for lighting, i aimed two lights directly at the backdrop, however they were in line with the model, so some spill (purposely) came from those lights on to her.

i also aimed two lights at her from the back, also for rim-lighting/spill.

as i have said many times in the past, i work from a place of understanding light as best as i can, then giving into a playful nature. i typically have a concept in my head of the light i want, and know enough about it to get really close, but i follow very few pre-determined rules.

for post processing, i tried to use some very minimal exposure checking, and experimented with artificially affecting the contrast in the softer part of the frame to see what would happen, but in the end i liked the exposure very close to the way it came out of the camera, and mostly i just worked the white backdrop to make sure the white was consistent in the final image.

for the model herself, i created a new layer, and touched up her blemishes first.

i usually don't like to get rid of blemishes altogether, as that creates a look that is far to polished for me, so i use the layer to blend back a bit after getting rid of the blemishes (although some do have to go completely).

here specifically, i toned down the dark lines under her eyes, and some skin blemishes.

i then merged that layer, and created a new layer, where i used the portrait plug in to smooth skin tones. i also faded this out a bit for the same reason. i do this AFTER i touch up the skin to make sure that my artificial touch-ups are blended into the image.

next, i took the history brush, and painted the portrait blur out of the eyes, as i always want them as sharp as possible. i may paint it out of some other areas as well, depending on how they were effected.

after that, i merged that layer, and create another layer to dodge the eyes a bit brighter.

in this image, i also selected her right eye, feathered the selection, and used the transform tool to make it about 20% bigger.

then i copied that eye layer, flipped it on it's horizon, and pasted it over the other eye...

and voila, perfectly symmetrical, big beautiful eyes.

that's it.

i have attached the before image, and the after for you to compare.

rob

The Mystery of White Backgrounds (Mac)

Shooting on white is a difficult task for many photographers. I certainly struggled for a long time to try and get the background white in camera as opposed to spending countless hours in Photoshop trying to whiten grey floors. I have the technique down to a science and I now spend no more than a couple tablet taps (or mouse clicks for those of you still retouching with a mouse) worth of time on the floor and background. I will share my method with you so you may have whiter whites straight out of the camera.

The first thing people need to understand is that shooting on white background paper will always give you a grey floor - always. If you attempt to light the floor to make it white you are almost guaranteed to over expose your subject. Lighting the background is the easy part - you just put some lights on it. The floor on the other hand is the challenge. The trick to getting your floor white is to use a shiny surface like plexiglass. The shiny surface then basically mirrors the white background and voila! a white floor. I use something called puck board which I believe is just shiny white plastic type stuff. It comes in a 4x8 sheet and I usually use two of them to give me an 8x8 white floor area. Alternatively, you could use a clear plexiglass over the white paper to achieve he same results.

I also use bookends to block the spill of the background lights from hitting my subject in this case Jenn's dogs (she didn't want to get naked for me that night lol). I have the background lights set two stops over the main light to make sure the background goes white. I usually meter the lights for f16 and set my subject main light at f8. I have done this so many times now I just eyeball it on my camera's LCD. The farther away you place your subject from the background the less spill you will get on them from the background. Experiment to see what you like. The other nifty thing about this set up is that you are all ready to go for silhouettes. Just leave out the main light and away you go. Simply move the subject back and forth to change the amount of spilled light on them.

So there you have it. White backgrounds made simple and the key is a shiny surface on the floor. I have attached some photos of the schematic setup, the actual setup, and what the picture looked like straight out of the camera and my final, retouched image (at the beginning of the post) that took no more time than a quick levels layer with the white eye dropper placed at the floor beside the dog's feet (not on the shadow!) to make sure the floor is white and then a white paint brush to clean up the stray background elements, a little contrast boost and all done - two minutes at most.

The first two photos are without the studio lights firing and just the modeling lights with my overhead fluorescent lights. The other studio shot shows the strobes firing:

The Spider Holster (Mac)

Being the slight gear geek that I am, I have my eye constantly on the lookout for gadgets that make my photographic life simpler, more convenient, and less painful. When I shoot weddings I use two cameras - one armed with a 24-70mm f2.8 and the other loaded with a 70-200mm f2.8. Both lenses have unique attributes that lend themselves to different effects in a photograph and I think that range of focal lengths is perfect for a wedding. Using one body and swapping lenses is not an option for me as the process takes too much time and the constant swapping would make my sensor look like the Sahara. Some photographers, including Rob, will use one lens for a wedding, but I feel the attributes of both lenses are absolutely necessary to produce the best work possible. There are wonderful and magical things you can do at 200mm at f2.8 that you just can't accomplish with any other lens.

Carrying two cameras around is a pain in the ass at the best of times so I have been searching for a decent solution to the issue. This summer I found and purchased a CameraSlinger. Now this device most certainly did a much better job than carrying two cameras each on their own strap and dealing with all the grief that entails. This strap is relatively comfortable and did the trick, but there are problems with it. First, I am a relatively stalky guy and even for me carrying two D3's with flashes is a heavy rig and by the end of the day I am dead from it. All that weight on the shoulders for 8+ hours is no fun. The second issue I had with the strap is that the cameras are free to dangle and swing everywhere. If I lean forward there are cameras flopping all over the place - not fun either. I have a CameraSlinger for sale if anyone is interested :-)

One day last week I was searching around for an alternative solution and found a snazzy product called the Spider Holster. The product was not even on sale yet, but it looked so promising I contacted the company and asked a few questions about the unit. Shai responded very quickly and was a great help. The Spider Holster went on sale on November first and I was probably the first to order one :-)

I just received it today no thanks to Fed Ex not being able to find my house yet again (I wonder why UPS has no problems finding my place - ever) just in time for a wedding I have in Banff this weekend. I put the rig together and strapped on the the device and loaded it up with my cameras. Well, first impression is wow! Super comfortable having that weight distributed on the portion of the body designed to bear all our body weight - the hips. Having all that weight at the hips as opposed to the shoulders is going to make for a much more comfortable and pain free work day.

The construction of the holster and belt is top notch and the cameras slip in and out with ease and I love the two position locking mechanism. The plate that goes on the bottom of the camera fits snugly and easily allows me to shoot comfortably while holding the camera vertically - thank you!. The designer also allows us to slap on a quick release tripod plate with no problems - thank you again!

So far the Spider Holster seems to be the answer to my prayers when shooting with two cameras. I might even ditch my regular strap altogether and just use the holster even when using one camera. I will get to test it out this weekend and I'll post back here with my findings after a real field test. I will also get to put my Radiopoppers through their paces including my mounting modification.

Yup, We're Naked (Mac)

So, Rob and I have been wanting to change up the main photo for a while, but have never gotten around to doing it until this weekend when we all got together for some family photos (I shoot Rob's family and he shoots mine). This was Rob's idea and I didn't think it was too bad since I am just starting to shoot myself in the buff. Since the majority of my personal work involves nudity as the primary subject matter I have no problems with that nudity being my own. There are not very many art nude photographers out there that shoot males let alone themselves so I am on the rare end of the scale.

Self portraiture is difficult at the best of times never mind trying to create some manner of nude art. This coming winter I will be exploring the idea of self work as well as incorporating a model and myself into the mix - something Rob has experimented with in the past. I will more than likely use Karolina for this experimenting when she joins us here in April.

Karolina is an incredible model being that she is so involved in the process of creating with me and she takes her role in front of the camera very seriously. I pitched the idea of posing with her and she didn't even bat in eye at the idea. The fact that we are comfortable enough around each other to pose together is a great and rare thing indeed. It is difficult to find a person that is involved in the work for the sake of the work and posing with the nude photographer is just part of that work, as quirky as the idea may be, and not the big deal most people think it to be. I am very fortunate to have a muse like Karolina some photographers go their whole lives without ever finding one.

Anyhoo... I was going to post some family photos of Rob that I made, but I am not sure how he would feel with those photos on here. So I have included some work Karolina and I did this afternoon. Until next time...

good photograph vs good photographer (rob)

In light of Mac's previous post, and my post before it, I thought this might be an interesting topic.

It seems pretty obvious (maybe),

however, sometimes writing it down shows patterns that were not noticed before.

Mac's comment before alluded to his concern over a standard that he had learned (harsh shadows being evil), and held close to his heart, and how he chose to break free of that.

I think it all bottles down to this...

The photograph you took... did you accidentally take it, or were you in control.

The scientific process (arguably the greatest philosophical standard yet) states that a sound theory, study, whatever is only reputable if it is duplicatable.

That is;

can you replicate what you did before, and show that the theory (etc) exists in more than one context (it's much more complicated, and much simpler at the same time, but it's a bit tricky to map the concept here, so hopefully this makes sense).

I think this same standard can be applied here.

A 'good' photograph can be a million different things.

I think one primary prejudice for a good photograph is that it must be challenging...

ie elitist.

If Joe or Jane Blow can take it accidentally, it might not be considered a 'good' photograph.

This standard is typically propagated by photographers...

especially the photographers who have spent a million dollars, and a million hours developing their technique. They couldn't possibly accept your technique if it didn't cost you millions in equipment, or take you hundreds of hours to develop your technique also.

The public could give a shit. They just like something that captivates them. They enjoy art without concern for how much you slaved over it. They only want to be moved.

I dare you to attempt to define the art factor. It's different depending on so many factors, including era's, culture etc.

As for technical prowess, I think that you can have a million different standards...

but I think we can narrow it down to this question.

As a photographer, did you do it on purpose?

Can you replicate it.

Did the creation of the image have at least some kind of moderate technical maturity?

I think beyond this, we are arguing for no reason at all.

Find your voice in your art. What is captivating to you. If you have that, then you have at least a small chance of sharing a unique and sincere view with the world.

Then take a bit of time, and use some technical knowledge of your craft to translate that image for an audience.

Good for you if you stumbled upon it. You may have great artistic vision, however you will always struggle to translate that into an image, because you only accidentally capture it with your lack of technical knowledge.

Or you may be a technical master, but no idea what is a captivating image.

I write about this topic often...

I guess it's something I am still working out.

That's all.

Rob

Harsh? (Mac)

When I first started in photography I learned or perceived that shadows were bad. People always talked about "filling in shadows" and "watch the harsh shadows". Shadows are bad they'd say. So I spent several months avoiding shadows like the plague. That was a mistake--shadows are great. You need to learn to understand and control your shadows to create the specific looks you want. One of the biggest misconceptions I was lead to believe is this term "harsh" to describe shadows that are "hard". The term "harsh" has a negative slant to it and I believe is the wrong word to use when describing a shadow quality that is indeed hard. The term "harsh" most certainly dissuaded me from using hard shadows and I consequently spent much time agonizing over whether my shadows were soft enough.

Just what is a hard shadow? Well, if you are accustomed to using a point & shoot camera with an dinky little on-camera flash you will have no doubt seen hard shadows. These are shadows which have a clear and defined edge i.e. the transition between the diffused highlight (the properly exposed portion) and the shadow is abrupt and well defined. The light that creates this type of shadow is often called "harsh" and more often than not negatively describes the light quality. Too many photographers are afraid of hard light and generally hard light is unflattering, but when you use it effectively the images can be fantastic. Many of the speedlight gurus out there these days use unmodified speedlights which due to their small size create hard shadows and nobody seems to be knocking their work.

The image above is an example of hard light or hard shadow - which ever term you prefer. I purposely chose this style of lighting to create a matching contrast between the shadows and her black shirt with the lightness of her skin. The two work to help bring attention to her skin and hair. I have attached the lighting setup for this particular shot below. Learn to use your shadows for effect and if you intentionally use a hard light source and some one tells you to "fill in your shadows" or "you should have used a more diffuse light source" you can now stand proud knowing that you chose to use a hard shadow on purpose an it isn't necessarily a bad thing. And it certainly isn't "harsh" as the word would imply.

Radiopopper (Mac)

So, continuing on with my speedlight kick my Radiopopper TTL radio trigger system arrived yesterday. I am not going to go too deep into a review here as I plan on doing that a bit later after testing a mounting modification that I did and a more thorough review of these babies. I'll just give my first impressions as they came out of the box.

The first thing I noticed about them was the battery door is VERY easy to open - to the point I am worried it is going to fall off and be lost. I'll have to figure out something for that. The other thing I think that could be better is the control panel. The buttons are awfully small and too close together. Other than those two gripe these things are pretty slick upon first examination.

I tested them out briefly with the new plastic mounting device they have and the units worked great - high speed sync and all. Woo! No more worrying about where to orient my lights so they can 'see' the master unit on the camera. I quickly decided, however, that I don't like the mounts because of the bulk and the issue of mounting them to everything that I already have that accepts the foot of the flash. The mount is similar to the one that comes with the speedlights but with the addition of being able to hold the receiver in the proper position. It is quite a bulky arrangement and one more thing between the flash and the stand that I'd rather not worry about. However, I am not afraid of Velcro :-)

All of my speedlights have Velcro on all four sides of the heads so I can attach gels and flags so a little more Velcro isn't going to hurt. I will show what I did in a future post. As I was seating one of the receivers onto the flash I inadvertently pressed too hard on the control panel and the unit would no longer turn on. Bummer. I sent an email to Radiopopper yesterday explaining my story and if I they had enough in stock that I could order another one and have it shipped ASAP. They have been out of stock on these things for months now so I was hoping to be able to buy another one quick.

A support guy called me this morning and I explained the situation and they emailed me instructions on how to send it back. Radiopopper even offered to pay for shipping. Of course I wouldn't hear of it since I am the goof that damaged the unit, but I am impressed they even offered. Great customer service is a rare thing these days and Radiopopper has just earned a life long customer because of how they are handling this for me. I need to know I am in good hands with the gear that I am using and I am very loyal to companies with exemplary customer service. Kudos to you, Radiopopper!

I am trying to find some time (i.e. get off my ass) and finish revamping my studio for the looooong winter shooting season and then I will test these babies out for real and do a review of them and my mounting method - including photos.

salt and vinegar (rob)

a couple topics to cover today.

first, i was talking with Mac about some of the photographers we admire (so many of which are from eastern Europe) who seem to have a mastery of light and skin tones that we just can't seem to replicate.

so, i thought it would be a worthy thing to focus on.

some of the things i have learnt up to now in regards to that are;

-soften your light.

you can do this a number of ways, including;

move the light source further away.

use a large diffuser (like a soft box, umbrella, etc)

-use a great fixed focus lens (less glass to mess with the light) and a tripod & trigger to get tack sharp images.

-use a model with good skin.

-moisturize the skin (but not too much... this can lead to shiny skin which causes blown highlights).

-use (but don't abuse) a softening plug in (like portraiture in photoshop).

-practice photoshop... then pull back.

a lot of Mac and my conversations revert back to people who 'misuse' or 'abuse' photoshop. i am sure we also misuse it (or abuse it) in the eyes of master photographers. the point is, photoshop is most powerful and effective when is used subtly to enhance a photo. this is an important piece of information that i can't stress enough. think about how the photography masters in the past used a dark room. if you are using photoshop past what they could do in a darkroom (ie dodge, burn, touchups) there is a good chance you are abusing it....

*unless you are truly great at photoshop, and trying to create digital art.

but DO NOT mistake an obnoxious photoshop job with digital art!!

-unfortunately, i also found that the larger sensor size also helps to render skin tones, and reduce blown out highlights. stupid expensive photography crap!!!

i took a stab last night at focusing my full effort on getting a classic image (in my style of course) that focused on skin tones. i am very happy with the results. i will certainly be doing a lot more of this.

what i did in these photo's here is... exactly what i said above.

in addition;

for lighting, i used a boom to place a light directly above and a tiny bit to her front, and my right.

i also placed a light to my left of her, and slightly behind her.

post processing was pretty simple... a bit of healing brush, a bit of dodging and burning, and the black & white function in Capture NX which i love.

in the image where the model is looking directly at the camera, i copied her left eye with the clone tool, then flipped and pasted it on the right side of her face, because there was no catch light in her right eye. at first i tried to just place a catchlight in her right eye, but it wasn't working.

i also ALWAYS make sure that one major line in EVERY photograph is compositionally/symmetrically sound.

this can mean a lot of things. the main line is obvious in these pictures... but it drives me crazy in sooo many peoples pictures. some kind of symmetrical/compositional meaning is vital to me.

it isn't always obvious (because the major line isn't always straight vertical or horizontal... but i always try to base it on phi (or the rule of thirds as it's dumbed down to).

if you didn't know that the rule of thirds is based on a very old greek ratio called phi, and how that ratio works in an image (and in almost all great art, including music and architecture, and random objects in nature that we as people gravitate towards as beautiful)... do yourself a favour, and look it up.

it is the most important compositional theory in (art) photography, and the rule of thirds is the kindergarten, dumbed down version of it.

on another note,

the raw files model portion of the year is mostly complete. my friend, and model Jess was very upfront with me about halfway through the season that she was not feeling up to modeling. Her reasons are her own, and i would have loved for her to share them, however, personal reasons are called personal for a reason.

the point is, it happens.

i am completely fine with it happening... it is inevitable in a project like this, and actually an interesting point to explore, which is what this project is about. a model has to bare a lot of herself, both physically and emotionally. i think that is a beautiful, and very draining thing.

Jess made absolutely the right choice to take care of herself first.

as a photographer, i believe i need to try to be in touch with the people i work with, and i can certainly say i felt Jess pulling away even before she told me... all i can hope is that i made it easy for her to make the choice to stop.

so,

thanks Jess for being a part of the project this year!

thanks for bringing your diversity, and talent to share with me for as long as you did.

snoot-y (rob)

I have been happily inspired by an old trick lately.

I've been playing with body-scapes, and loving it.

Basically, I have always loved one light systems.

I think they create beautiful dramatic lighting.

I've had a snoot for some time, but recently decided to get a second to see what I could do with that.

I started out with putting both snoots on either side of the model, and snooting from different angles, but I had a revelation the other day, and decided to use two snoots side by side. This allows me to keep the light nice and focused on one side of the body, however, get even light across the body.

In other words, the point of light is the same, but it is spread out better.

I had wished for some time that someone would invent a snoot that was more linear, instead of a spot light, so I created one.

I also began turning the power on my lights way down, in order to play with depth of field. Depth of field is not something that I typically play with in studio, but why not? When you decrease the power to your lights, you can increase your aperture without blowing the entire image out.

The last thing I did was shoot the body with a wide angle.

I struggle with my wide angle in studio, because my studio is small.

When I open up too wide, I lose my backdrop, which is difficult to manage.

However, with a snoot, it doesn't matter.

There could be a circus going on behind the model, and you wouldn't know it.

The wide angle, shallow depth of field, and spread out snoot lighting allowed me to begin seeing body scapes in a whole new light... so to speak.

I am super-D-duper excited by this, and will continue playing with it more.

One last thing I have done a few times, is to shoot symmetrically.

However, a body is never truly symmetrical, so I have used photoshop to select one side, and flip it to the other to create perfect symmetry.

Try playing around..

All you need is a snoot to start, and a model, and a sense of adventure.

What Does ISO Mean to You? (Mac)

For me the awesome capabilities of the D3's ISO not only allows for shooting in lower light, but the main benefit for me is being able to shoot with a higher shutter speed if I am hand holding the camera. I was emailed a question regarding obtaining sharp images and my number one recommendation is without a doubt shutter speed assuming of course the camera/lens are in good working order and the camera is focused properly.

I rarely ever get soft photos when using a shutter speed of 1/250th which is where my camera lives most of the time. I will go down to 1/125th here and there and only lower if I absolutely have to. I will gladly bump my ISO up to 800 to keep a shutter speed of at least 1/125th and 1600 if I need to. The photograph accompanying my last post was shot at 1/100th, f2.8 at ISO 800 hand held. I reserve 3200+ for emergencies :-)

My D2x was terrible by comparison at ISO 800 so the D3 is a blessing. I can keep hand holding long after the D2x bottomed out on me and forced the use of a tripod. I do use a tripod for much of my work, however. Especially for group formals, and nude work that is very static in nature i.e. we are working on several shots centered around one theme where we are exploring poses and such. A tripod here allows me to step out from behind the camera to give instruction or make adjustments and not lose my compositions and gives me sharp focus.

I can only imagine what successive cameras are going to be like in the ISO department. Being able to shoot at 1/250th most for the time would be great since I can't seem to be able to hold my camera very still and I like to shoot wide open :-)

Photography is Art (Mac)

Photography as an art form has been a contentious issue for me. For the most part I view myself as an artist especially as it relates to my personal work. I use the camera and digital editing tools along with nude bodies as my form of expression. I strive to create unique pieces - individual moments in time capturing the beauty of the subject I am working with in that particular moment.

Jenn and I were texting today trying to come up with a time to shoot and she mentioned she liked some of my recent studio work and wanted to do the same. I have had this happen to me on a number of occasions which is what lead me to post about the subject today i.e. some one contacting me to have photos made of themselves like ones I have already made.

My general response to such requests is no, I am not interested in repeating an image, but you are more than welcome to pose for new work perhaps even exploring along a similar idea if I feel it is worth pursuing further. Most people are happy to do that, however, I have had subjects stop communicating with me after I decline their requests to reproduce my work with them in it. This is really where my beef lies.

I am an artist. I am not a Walmart, cookie cutter, portrait studio - I shoot for myself first, my subject second, and the world third. I am not sure people necessarily view photography as art or the process as an artistic endeavor. Why would I want to reproduce a perfectly fine piece I have already made? What purpose does that serve other than getting the new person a cool photo of themselves. I wind up with nothing. I don't need two versions of the same photograph thank you very much. Are they going to pay me for my time and effort to reproduce an image? Not likely. Would a painter put forth the great deal of effort to reproduce a painting for someone without compensation? Not likely. My compensation for the first image is that very image - it has value to me and hopefully to the model, but on the second go around what am I getting for my efforts?

My work is just as involved as a painter's or a sculptor's - in fact much of my work is inspired by classical nude paintings and sculpture. It takes time, energy, skill, materials and vision to create my photographs. I believe people have a misconception about artistic photography as though I just press a button like they would on their own little cameras and because I have a big, expensive camera my images magically happen. It is this lack of understanding of the process involved in creating that I believe prompts people to ask "Ooh, can you make one with me, too?". If all I had to do was push a shutter button like a Walmart photo center employee and had no passion for the work nor the desire to create anew then I probably would.

I wish people could understand that it isn't that camera that makes the work any more than the chef's pots being responsible for his cuisine. I suppose one of the purposes of this blog is to educate people on the process - it is misfortunate that the majority of our readers are photographers who I hope for the most part know what I am saying here. As a photographic artist, I am interested in moving forward and creating and exploring new ideas not rehashing old ones - not even for money.

I am glad Jenn texted that today as I have had this post simmering in the back of my head for a while and now it finally came out. My brain is like an old attic - there is a lot of stuff in there and it is difficult to find sometimes. We are looking at getting together next Wednesday for a kick at light painting and what will be our last shoot together on the Raw Files. I am then model-less as far as the Raw Files goes until next April when the next phase of model shooting begins from April to September 2010.

The photo accompanying today's post is my model for next year, Karolina. This photograph was made yesterday in the foothills southwest of Calgary. Karolina is lit with a single SB800 in manual mode bounced into in a 60" silver umbrella just out of frame to camera right triggered with an on camera SU800.

Expose Yourself (Mac)

Not like that...I am talking about using manual exposure mode. You know the little "M" beside your "A", "S", and "P" or the Canon equivalent. I am almost always on "M" because I like to think I am smarter than my camera and I like to be in control of my exposures. Even when I shoot weddings I keep my camera on manual exposure. I also use a manual a white balance setting. I don't like auto anything except for auto focus :-)

One of my two main reasons for using manual exposure mode is for the consistency of exposure between a series of images. If you let the camera ride on one of the auto exposure modes like "A", "S", or "P" the camera is going to make some decisions for you based on the scene it is "seeing" and the metering method you have chosen. I am not going to rehash how a camera determines exposure because the topic is all over the internet and I am assuming that you know how a camera determines "correct" exposure. If you don't, simply do some reading on exposure via Google.

So what is the point of this post you are wondering? Well, I am hoping to persuade you to step into the scary realm of manual exposure. Where you decide the aperture and shutter speed based on what you want the exposure to be. For the photos attached I wanted the background ambient light to look a certain way and I wanted to keep it consistent as I was running around after kids all afternoon. The background consisted of dark bushes and bright sky (I was actually shooting into the sun hence the flare) so setting the camera in manual mode was the only way to keep the background consistent. The subject illumination was handled by an off camera SB900 speedlight in a softbox, running on TTL and triggered by an SU-800.

These photos were made at 1/2500th at f2.8 with a 70-200mm lens and are straight out of Lightroom with not much done to them at all. The shallow depth of field was made possible with the aid of high speed sync. By using a shutter speed of 1/2500 I could open my lens up to f2.8 and being on manual I could adjust my shutter speed to change the ambient light without the camera adjusting the aperture on me as would be the case if I was using an auto exposure mode.

Stepping away from the comfort of the auto exposure modes takes some getting used to, but manual is where the control is and creativity lives in terms of exposure. I encourage you to put your camera on "M" and start shooting. You may find your photography takes off on a whole new direction.

Mac attack. (rob)

I shot what is likely my last wedding of the year yesterday.

It was just a quicky, but the couple was great.

I was planning on bringing my alien bees to the shoot,

however, it looked like rain, so I opted instead to use my speedlights.

I have used them in the past, however, I have been re-inspired by portable lighting by Mac,

so I brought them with a different intent this time.

The wedding went well, and we wandered off to find some unique shots, when I noticed this log off in the distance.

It was near sunset, and the sun was under the clouds, however, it was also glaringly harsh, and unpleasant.

In this shot, I have a random wedding guest holding my SB-900 just off, to the left of the frame, directed straight at the brides dress, which acts as a fantastic reflector.

My SB-600 is on a stand, also to the left of the shot, pointed at their faces for some fill.

For post processing, all I did was pump up the colours a bit in nikon capture, and used the point control to darken the grass a bit in the foreground... It was very bright from the flash, and a bit distracting.

I think that Mac is onto something with the speedlights.

If I don't have too far to go, and/or am shooting a very patient model, I think that the power of the Alien Bees is fantastic, and I am happy I bought them. They are the equivalent of 'car camping.'

However, I will likely invest in one more speedlight, and a remote system for next wedding season.... one of the reasons I had to set up both lights to the left, is that is what side the sensor is one. It worked fine here, but was annoying plenty of other times.

I really enjoyed the absolute portability of them; while using them in a creative lighting situation. They are also very quickly moved about, which is very important during weddings.

My next post will be about my new vision regarding "body scapes"... you can see the beginnings of my vision on twistedfigure.com under 'scapegoat' category.

rob

Wet Bride (Mac)

I finally found a bride that wasn't completely attached to her dress - emotionally speaking. Jodie whole heartedly agreed to a "trash the dress" photo session which we did this past Sunday and a month or so after the wedding. Normally I would have brought out my trusty studio gear and lugged the lights, stands and batteries to the location, proceeded to set it all up, and then spend way too much time running around adjusting the lights to suit. Instead, I used my speedlights and Nikon's CLS for this photo session.

I have to say, being able to carry five lights in my camera bag is a lovely treat. Had I used studio lights I would have only brought two. In this photo I used three speedlights - SB900, SB800, and an SB600. I set my camera to 1/250th which is where I usually always start and then selected an aperture off the top of my head which happened to be f5 and took a photo with no flash. The ambient looked about right and then I took another with the flashes firing. All the lights were set to TTL with the SB600 in the rocks to camera left set to -3 EV, the SB900 to my right and in front of Jodie, and the SB800 camera right and behind her as you can see in the BTS image below I remembered to grab. Yay me. I triggered the lights with my new SU800 commander which is a lovely little unit for two reasons 1) it is lighter than a speedlight and 2) it frees up a light to use off camera.

I am really looking forward to getting my hands on some RadioPopper PX's so I can have unlimited control over these lights. I am patiently waiting for them to be in stock as they have been out for quite some time now. A recent email assured me they should be shipping by the end of September.

As usual for this type of image there is very minimal post processing done on it in terms of Photoshop actions or pluggins that seem to be so popular with wedding photographers today. I am a photographer and I like my images to look like a photograph not some over-saturated, unworldly cartoon, but my rant on that is a topic for another post :-)

burningman (rob)

hello all.

i recently applied for a media pass for the burning man festival.

for those of you who don't know what it is,

i am going to do a piss poor job explaining it.

imagine you go to a place that at first glance makes you think you've stepped into a post-apocalyptic desert landscape.

imagine that at second glance, you think you are at disneyland on acid.

the most important part however, is,

imagine that you are at a place packed full of amazing world class art,

and surrounded by 50,000 people trying for one week to be more conscious than they are every other day of their lives.

that's the best i got.

other than that, you can look at my pictures,

but i just recommend you go.

http://www.burningman.com

so,

i got to go down with my gear, and take pictures that i can post in galleries and here (that's what the media pass gets you).

it was a photographers dream,

and i was worried that i would struggle to put down my camera long enough to experience it.

funny enough, i found the opposite to be true.

by day 3, i had yet to pick up my camera at all.

i ended up dedicating myself to one sunset, and one sunrise.

i brought tons of gear, including my new alien bee's, however, i barely used them.

all the images posted here, and on my website were shot with my d-700, and my 17-35ml. all shots were hand-held.

from a photographic perspective, the most interesting part of this experience was the extreme weather.

for a number of hours every day, this desert landscape has windstorms.

imagine being exposed to a jet engine in a baby-powder warehouse.

most photographers plastic wrap and gaffer tape the shit out of their gear.

i brought plenty, however, i never took it out.

i was lazy. so i refused to change my lens in order to reduce exposure, and the d-700 has pretty good weather seals.

you can see evidence of the dust storms in a few of these shots, but really, you have to experience it to truly understand.

also, i didn't shoot much during the dust storms, as there isn't much to shoot. i just hunkered down and waited them out.

during post processing, i had to touch up about 6 spots on the photos taken near the end of the week.

not bad at all! i was very impressed with how the seals held up.

finding some kind of balance between experiencing life, and photographing it has been an ongoing conversation for me.

photographers are by nature voyeurs, however, i really enjoy living my life too.

when i travel, i often sit down quietly for about 15 minutes in an environment i plan to shoot.

i enjoy this for a number of reasons, first of which is that i get to enjoy the place and have an actual memory of it.

i also like to do that, because it lets me look around, and truly 'see' the space.

lastly, i like to do it, because inevitably there are other photographers around.

some of them are shooting the same things, so i look for something new to shoot, or a new perspective. some of them are being assholes, and so i try not to be that either.

at this event, i think i would have shot more had i travelled lighter.

i had my battery pack on my camera, and during my first sunset i had all my gear in a trailer i rigged to my bike.

it was a pain in the ass, and i got tired of it quickly.

the sunrise day, i threw my camera in a backpack, and away i went.

much easier, and enjoyable.

shooting events like this is certainly a joy.

it is 'easy' to shoot such interesting things.

however, there are 50,000 people, and a ton with media passes, so how to you find something interesting.

it certainly helps knowing what you like to shoot, and knowing how you 'see' the world.

i didn't do much stopping and looking during these shoots, as the weather changed so quickly. also, i was primarily shooting sunset and sunrise which only last a few minutes.

i had to cover about 50+ acres worth of land, and hundreds of art pieces in that short amount of time.

so the days leading up to shooting, i was doing my looking, and seeing.

while i was shooting, i was racing around on a bicycle, trying to put together the ideas in my head, with the reality of the lighting, and the weather.

it was bliss.

a few years back, i hosted a photography challenge, all based around unpredictable circumstances.

it's one thing to be a good photographer in a predictable situation,

however, can you 'get the shot' when the world is a bit chaotic.

i truly enjoy shit like that. but the more prepared you are, the better you will fare.

anyways, this is getting long.

i don't often talk as much technical stuff as mac...

something i will try to do more of,

however, i realized that i am not a technical photographer.

that is mac's strength.

i will try to share mine, which is discussing where my head is at as i try to get a shot.

later.

rob

Some Cheese With That Glamour? (Mac)

Ok, so after reading Jenn's recent post I realized I am probably a little snobbish in attitude towards glamour photography and I shouldn't be - necessarily. Being an art nude photographer is no better than a glamour photographer - just different. There are some glamour photographers out there that like to think they are artists, but I am going to have to disagree with that notion. A disagreement that is utterly pointless. Why? Because art is in the eye of the beholder. While I view glamour's primary purpose to be for the titillation of the viewer and art's purpose to stimulate many senses including titillation in some cases, there are those that would claim that the glamour genre is indeed art.

Arguably the best glamour in the world is or at least was, Playboy. Top notch photography, beautiful women, elaborate sets and locations all conspire to produce some beautiful and technically amazing photographs. I admire those that shoot glamour with the skill and proficiency of the Playboy photographers. I guess I turn my nose at glamour photography in general because there is so much of it and most of it is junk made by perverts who have no interest whatsoever in the fine craft of good glamour photography and the models that think they are all that and a bag of chips and have no business being in front of a camera - they are made for each other.

As I have often said, I am a fan of all photography as long as it is good and of course good is in the eye of the beholder - it is a no win situation. What is good photography to one person is junk to another and so on. I know what good photography is to me as soon as I see it. Being slanted heavily towards the technical more often than not the first thing that catches my eye are the technical aspects of the image such as the focus, the light, the tones, the colors, the exposure, etc. with composition and subject matter usually rounding up whether I think the image is a success or not. I am not really anti-glamour as much as I am anti-perverts making horrible photographs for their own personal jollies which constitutes the majority of glamour that is out there on the Net today. That being said, we live in a free society and these twits can do what they want and I can continue to have my opinion of it - pointless though it may be.

Yes, I will shoot Jenn with a "sled" (snow mobile or "Skidoo" for those of you not familiar with the jargon) and a fuzzy bikini simply for the challenge of it and to produce some photos that make Jenn happy or not in the case that I fall flat :-) We won't get to those photos before the end of September when our time with Jenn is up, but I will post the work here when it is done and Jenn can certainly add her thoughts on the shoot at that time. Rob and I have always encouraged our past models to continue to follow the blog and post comments as the project goes forward.

It looks as though Jess is done with the project and Jenn is trying to get a shoot in with Rob before the end of September when the model portion wraps up. Rob is on his way back from Burning Man so I am sure he will have boat loads to share whence he regains a sense of normalcy and his butt heals from a very public spanking he received LOL. I think I have my model chosen for the next session which begins in April 2010 - I just have to ask her :-)

Oh Yes (Jenn)

Yet again, I'm sucking hind tit (pardon the expression) with this whole blogging thing. Sigh. Our last shoot was over 3 weeks ago now I think......dang it!Anyhoo, Mac blogged on the last shoot first.....and as "cheesy" and cliche as it was....was my fav! Not even sure why...its not like i can even "act" yet for those kind of shoots. I actually still feel a bit ridiculous putting on "those" faces...ie) "OK, now make your sexy pouty face" ...are you effing kidding me. Guess WE should do MORE cheesy shoots so I can make all those faces and expressions with out feeling like a complete Jack-Ass.

Kinda funny..one of these images ended up in my boss' hands (he let me borrow the GSXR from our show-room floor) and he forwarded it to a neighbour who sent it to his boss, who sent it to his boss who has indirectly approached us to do a promo/ad shoot for Nortrux Volvo! HA! As well as numerous others who have approached me for garage posters.

My last post with the photos from the dirt bike "shoot" (if you can even call it that), for that magazine, I THOUGHT (hoped I guess) would've looked something like these ones. This is what I wanted, this is what I would be proud to distribute in a magazine or as a poster.

I think that this shoot shows Mac's versatility as a photographer and his talent as well. Not only do these pics look calendar quality (positioning of myself, the lighting, the background), but he was able to make ME (little ol' never modeled before, never done glamour sexy pouty face before) actually look like maybe I'm a seasoned professional.

So, Mac, as much as you don't love the cliche-glamour-sexy-pouty-face shoots, I think you're too talented to not do them! and I CANNOT wait to do another...... hummm, I think snow, with my sled, maybe a fur lined hoody, white bikini....whaddya think? Cliche enough yet!?

~J

Dirty!! (Mac)

I bet my sensor is filthier than yours! I think that is a twig in the upper part of the frame. Time for a cleaning I am guessing :-) Click on it to see the debris in all its glory.

Motorcycle Glamour (Mac)

Alright...nobody laugh at me or I am taking my ball home. A little while ago Jenn posted some photos here taken for a bike magazine. I was a little surprised by the snapshot quality of the images and Jenn was none to impressed with them either. So being the experimental dood I am I said we'd attempt re-make them and re-make them we did.

I was going to use my studio lights but I lent one of my batteries to Mr. Rob so I was forced (in a good way!) to use my speedlights. Here is the only photo showing most of the setup - I forgot yet again to snap the whole scene. I cranked up the shadow recovery so the softbox would be more visible in the upper left of the frame. You can also see the gelled SB-600 off to the right and there is a silver reflector just out of the right frame.

Pretty simple set up. I had the camera in manual mode like always, set my shutter speed to 1/250th since I wanted to kill the ambient light and darken the sunset and it is the max sync speed with which I can do this (come on Nikon...give us 1/500th you did it with the D70!). I then noodled the aperture to f5.6 and took a shoot of just the ambient. A little too dark so I bumped the shutter speed up to 1/125th and we were ready to add the flash.

The softbox had an SB-900 with an external battery pack for faster recycling and set to TTL and the gelled SB-600 was also set to TTL and triggered with an on-camera SB-800. Once I got the little buggers talking to eachother away we went. The only thing I did to the lights was put in -0.7EV on the SB-900 from the SB-800 because it was a little hot which I am presuming was because of all the black in the scene.

There ya go...quick-no light meter-Nikon CLS-motorcycle glamour photography by an art nude photographer. I said don't laugh.

The Hot Shoe Diaries - A Sort of Review (Mac)

Since I am on this speedlight kick I have been scouring the internet for tips and tricks and generally searching images made with the system. One of the reigning gurus of the Nikon CLS is without a doubt Joe Mcnally. Joe produces top notch, studio quality images with these little packages of light. He is so involved with these things he will, on occasion, put three or more (seven in one photo!) speedlights on a subject to get the necessary power when a monolight would be the much simpler choice in terms of setup.

Anyway, I purchased his book The Hot Shoe Diaries to gain some insight on how these little flashes are used to create some of the amazing images Joe manages to manufacture. This book reads very casually - almost too casually sometimes and is rife with colorful metaphors that eventually get a little too much. I suppose if you read a chapter, put the book down for a few days and read the next it isn't so bad, but the metaphors get a little nauseating if reading the book in one or two sittings.

Cheesy metaphors and the talking-to-your-buddy-in-a-pub style of writing aside, I thought the book was a decent insight into the thought process of a guy that is a master with the Nikon CLS. Joe goes through various images that depict a good variety of settings (some seemingly impossible to light with shoe mounted flashes) and explains his setup, why he did what he did, and often includes little sketches of the lighting sets. He covers the use of modifiers, gels, grip gear, how to set the flashes up in their commander or remote modes, the use of the SU-800 controller and many other useful bits of info pertaining to using speedlights.

Joe prefers to use the Nikon CLS system in TTL mode allowing the gear to do the lion's share of the work while he oversees the whole 'picture' making sure the system is ultimately doing his bidding which was what attracted me to his book. I am not really interested in using the Nikon CLS in manual mode since my monolights are infinitely better if that is what I am looking for. I am looking to use the power of the TTL capabilities and I'll use manual when the situation calls for it which, according to what Joe does, seems very rare :-)

A guy like Joe makes this all seem so simple - this getting of great images with minimal gear. Indeed, it does seem simple until one goes out and attempts to makes similar images. As Joe eludes to several times, speedlights spray light everywhere and they need to be controlled and well. I am very curious to see Joe's work straight out of the camera to see exactly what the light was doing and what was modified in post. I am a big believer that of some one is going to talk and teach about light that they show the images before any post production dogging, burning, and other manipulations to what the light gave. Good light is an essential starting point, but it is rarely perfect. A book about lighting techniques is all fine and dandy, but alongside the final images should be an uncooked version to show the raw light and what it contributed to the scene before it was enhanced in post. And, yes, most of the great images you see have some level of post production work - don't be fooled that it is all light.

Post production often makes the images punchier, increasing contrast, dodging and burning, adjusting colors, etc. I think it is disservice to show someone who is interested in making those very same punchy images a lighting setup, they go out and do the exact same thing and the resulting images don't look like what said guru is producing. Why can that be? They used the very same gear, the exact setup, the exact exposure settings, and they fell flat. It is because these authors neglect to tell/show that what they got out of the camera is remarkably similar to what the rest of us get and the difference is largely what they or their retoucher did after the fact and that is a whole new set of skills and several books. I am talking about image quality here not composition, story telling, or other artistic elements that make or break a photograph. I am almost always on about image quality that being the technical aspects of tonality, contrast, sharpness, color, light, shadow, transitions, etc that are all partly responsible for the 'look' of these great photographs.

I think the great many of us who buy these lighting books are looking how to create those very same images full of pop and punch and these books give us the framework to make better images, but without informing and showing us that the lighting is only partly responsible for achieving the final image we are still left struggling. How do I know this? I know this because there are a handful of great photographers out there that do show their work straight out of the camera it it looks a hell of a lot like what comes out of mine and yours. The magic is what these guys do in the post production side of things. If you are armed with that comforting knowledge you won't feel so bad when you attempt some of these lighting techniques and don't end up with the same results. Subject matter, composition, a crew, good light, and post production are all responsible for creating many of the amazing photos you see out there. When will we see one of these uber photographers show us the whole kit and kaboodle? I'd buy that book.

In summary, Joe does a decent job of explaining Nikon's CLS and how he uses it to light and create some incredible photographs - photographs that look like they were made with expensive studio gear. Some people may not appreciate his very casual writing style, but putting that aside there is some great information on how to use speedlights to tackle just about any photograph you want to make. Joe also opens your eyes to thinking outside the box and thinking creatively. I would recommend this book to anyone looking to get more out of Nikon's CLS, but some decent knowledge of exposure and lighting is necessary to really appreciate what Joe is putting down - this isn't a book for someone who just got back from the Best Buy with their D90 kit.

Jenn at Night (Mac)

Jenn posted all the keepers from our shoot the other night so I will show some behind the scenes stuff and talk about my first time using Nikon's CLS for my nude work. As Jenn mentioned the original plan was to shoot at a playground but it was a little too light out still - wouldn't want to offend any passersby. We jumped into the bushes behind the playground to kill some time. Here is a shot of the setup as Jenn was gracefully disrobing. There is an SB-800 to the left and an SB-600 on the right in the background. The idea with this shoot was to simply drop the lights, set them in TTL and see how they perform. I didn't give much thought to placement or any fine tuning as I was more interested in the rough and dirty abilities of the system. It wasn't too dark at this time - it just looks that way because of the 1/250th shutter speed.

We then moved down to the river and my this time it was pretty dark and as a result most of these photos were out of focus - I could barely see Jenn. In this shot there is an SB-600 on the other side of the river - man, these little speedlights can pump out some light especially when it is dark :-)

We then packed up which is super easy with speedlights as opposed to my usual White Lightning strobes and Vagabond battery packs. As Rob is discovering, I have used studio lights outdoors almost since I picked up a camera. I generally do not like the sun as a light source because you can't move it, vary its power or modify it easily. If a photographer can't control his light then what is he doing? By dragging studio lights out with me I am in full control of my light instead of being at the mercy of the sun and compromising my work due to less than ideal light. The vast majority of my outdoor work is shot with studio strobes, but let me tell you, hiking that gear 3 hours up to a mountain waterfall is NOT an easy task hence my desire to see if speedlights may be the answer here.

Here is a shot of Jenn showing the placement of the lights. There is one more speedlight just out of the frame on the left. I added the one underneath her to light the underside of her and I had that one set to manual which is why the over exposure. I changed the master setting to TTL and away we went. Jenn posted the finished shot in her post below...a little different than the original, eh? New photographers can get very frustrated trying to figure out how another photographer made a particular image - I still do. You would never have guessed the final image was actually shot at night, in a colorful playground with speedlights.

Another photo here showing the speedlights directly off to the sides of Jenn set to TTL. While I didn't do a lot of "thinking" on this shoot or attempt to modify the lights, I was pretty happy with how well the system performed in TTL mode. It sure made my life simpler by not having to use a light meter or the LCD and going back and forth to each light a few times to dial in the exposure like I would do with manual lights.

I shot a wedding yesterday and brought along the speedlights to see what I could do with them in the cloudless, 28 degree day we had. I will post about that experience and review the softbox setup I used for some of the shots down the road here.

alien bees (rob)

I've been abducted!

Thanks to the conversations I have been having with Mac about creative portable lighting outdoors, and my upcoming journey to the desert in Nevada next week,

I went out and bought myself a set of portable Alien Bees.

Mac has been lugging studio equipment around outdoors for some time now, however, it never appealed to me due to the size of my studio lights, and the expense of elinchrome batteries (about $1500 I think for the battery).

Mac decided to use his growing speedlight collection to try to battle the dominance of the sun, and has been doing some really nice stuff with it,

however, I did not want to spend the money on more speedlights, when for a similar price tag, I could get a really nice, highly recommended portable studio.

I can't wait to get it out to the desert, but in the meantime, I decided to test it in a wedding.

I am super-D-duper pleased with the results.

Here is my one quick sample I wanted to fire off, before I am away from my computer for 3 days.

This is taken with two Alein B800's to either side of the couple, slightly facing the back wall to create the spotlight effect. I shot it with my 17-35mm lens. I cannot remember the settings I used, and unfortunately am running out the door.

That's it for now...

looking forward to creating more images like this!

Rob

So Pleased (Jenn)

OMG.... after much ado, we were finally able to get together for some camera action!!!

Was a fun shoot and I'm very happy with what came out of it...(hope Mac's as stoked as I am).

Met Mac at his place, hopped in the Ford and headed for our destination. All I knew was we were going to shoot in a "park" after dark. (ha that rhymes)......well it was still VERY light at 8:30, so I was a little nervous about it. Apparently "park" to Mac is a "playground;" so immediately what I though the shoot was going to be - it wasn't.

Being that is was still incredibly day-light out, we headed through the PLAYGROUND (its not a park!) down to the river.

The river session was great, a little cold mind you, but good. The first picture, the darkest of the 3, I am goning to have blown up and framed for my new house. Love the femininity of the shilouette - can't believe its mine. The colours of the last two absolutely blow my mind. So vivid!! The pink and purple of the sky in the 2nd one ...I don't even know what to say, it almost looks false it's so perfect - let me asure you - it was not, neither was the water temperature! Oh, and I'm sure the 2 people that watched the entire river portion of this shoot have given that little town something to talk about! ;-P

Totally kicked myself in the ass with the playground ...."oh yay! Monkey bars, can we please do something with them!? I love the monkey bars....." idiot. Well, I'm apparently not 10 anymore and I never remember the damn monkey bars being so much work!!!

Yes. The answer is yes, I had my naked ass all over a little kid's slide! Haha. It was pretty funny trying to get these shots, as it was so dark, Mac was literally shooting into the dark. The lights he/we brought work off the main flash on his camera. So we took a few shots to see where we were and the rest were a surprise.

Had a great shoot and a fun evening, hope it's now easier for us to get together, as summer is nearly over :-( I guess we all just got too busy for our own damn good.

We have another shoot scheduled for Sunday evening, a different kind of shoot and I really hope we can come away from that one as successful as we were here!

Until Sunday!

~J

Playing Around (Mac)

I think Jenn and I are shooting tomorrow night! Yay. So my last post had me show a few photographs shot with Nikon's CLS, set up and shot in minutes. No real time to play with things because of the slight rain and crabby kids. When given a little more time to be creative I think these little speedlights are going to be a hoot.

Here is a photo taken the other day with two speedlights in TTL mode one off to camera right providing the rim light and one in a tiny softbox beside me camera right as the main and the sun high and behind them. A little tweaking in lightroom and voila - snazzy shot of the kids at a local park. The beauty of this set up is that like shooting grandma it was quick and automatic. I simply dropped the lights where I thought they needed to be, making sure they were in sightlines of my on-camera master, set my camera on manual f14, 1/250 @ ISO 200 to get the background the way I wanted it and the camera took care of the rest.

I would never venture to take my studio lights out when doing shots of the kids simply because they move around way too much and have very little patience for dad to muck with lights. Nikon's CLS allows me to work quickly in situations like these to get much more interesting light than I would normally do which would simply be an on-camera flash acting as fill.

Here is a photo with the sun behind and camera left, an SB-600 camera right and behind Marek and an SB-800 in a small softbox at my position. Again this was all handled automatically by TTL - I simply placed the lights and started shooting as my wife spun the tire around.

I plan on using speedlights with Jenn tomorrow for the first time shooting nudes and I will remember to take some shots of the setups. I will also do a review in the next little bit of a great portable softbox/speedlight setup involving a Photoflex softbox and a contraption called the Magic Slipper. Very cool.

Visit to Grandma's House (Mac)

Took the family up to see grandma in Red Deer this afternoon and I thought I'd pack my little Nikon CLS package with me for some photos of grandma and her great grandkids.. We we found a little park where we let the kids run around for a bit while I quickly set up an SB-800 in a 60" reflective umbrella just out of frame to camera left and an SB-600 in a Photoflex small Q39 softbox right beside the camera for a fill (you can see the catchlights in the eyes). I set the camera in manual mode with a setting of f10 @ 1/250 to drop the background down and I had the SB-800 set to TTL and the SB-600 to TTL with -1EV compensation and fired a test shot - bang on. Could not be simpler for a three minute set up - the TTL system handled the exposure on us automatically. Here is a photo of the ambient with no flash.

We had some wind and it was raining a bit (you can the see drops on grandma's clothes) so I didn't want to play around too much with anything - no time. I had the lights set up and ready to shoot in a matter of minutes with the TTL it was a piece of cake. The only thing that bummed me a bit was having to position both flashes to be able to "see" the signals from my on camera SB-900. Not a big deal but I am sure I am going to run into situations where this isn't possible and radio is the way to go. I think I might try this super quick set up again but the the on-camera flash providing the fill and see how that works. Here is the only shot of both kids and grandma. I so love photographing with kids - not!

Nikon CLS (Mac)

I am trying hard to set up something with Jenn. The idea is there. The location is there. We just need to get together. We still have 'till the end of September for the "model portion" of the blog, but as Rob mentioned below we are now going to open the blog up to post about all of our photography related things even during the 6 months were are working with a specific model. We are still going to have the model portion because it is cool to get their perspective on things, but with everyone being so busy all the time it is sometimes difficult to get together and then the blog sits here with nothing going on kinda like June.

I am beginning to explore Nikon's CLS flash idea. I am searching for a faster way to work at weddings with light other than lugging a White Lightning X1600 around. I don't mind that for family formals where the situation is static and I have to light large groups and compete with the sun - a powerful strobe is the trick. However, trying to lug that gear around to shoot the bridal party and the bride and groom sucks. Big time.

Enter Nikon CLS. I have had several SB-600/800's but I have never really used them off camera simply because they lack the power, recycle time, and wind resistance that a large studio strobe has. I have done a lot of reading lately about speedlights and how I may use them to work quickly and more creatively and I have found a few ways to put my fears to rest whilst using speedlights. External battery packs recycle the flashes quickly and doubling up the lights will add more power should it be necessary.

The one thing that I am really intrigued by, however, is the TTL capabilities. The ability for the camera and flashes to communicate exposure information is what is getting me excited. No more manual farting around with lights. I can set lights up, pop a few test shots, adjust the remote flashes from where I am standing, and start firing away. I only ever use one light when I am out and about because I don't have the time or patience to adjust two or three lights so having them remotely controlled automatically and the ability to adjust them from my current location is very cool.

So far I am pretty happy with how the system works and my only gripe is that the system works via infra red which means the remote flashes must be in line of sight of my camera. I am a big fan of versatility in my gear and this sucks. The system works in a lot of situations and for weddings I think it will be great, but for my personal work I have already run into limitations. I was trying a super wide shot of my kids and I got in close to them to exaggerate the effect which put me in front of my main remote flash...it couldn't fire because it couldn't receive the info from my commander. I couldn't turn my commander flash to face it because then the remote flash I was using as a kicker would then be out of the line of sight and it wouldn't fire. Bummer. Why doesn't Nikon make a radio system? Pocket Wizard and Radiopoppers are struggling along with radio TTL systems so I am sure Nikon could do it and do it well.


Anyhoo. I am eager to explore Nikon's CLS as it relates to my nude work. To be able to carry three or four small flashes out on location in the mountains is going to be so nice. Let me tell you that hauling studio lights, stands, modifiers, and a big ol' battery 10K up a mountain is not an easy nor a fun task. I am sure there will be limitations especially when competing with the sun, but I am sure the system is going to be good for a great many situations. If I can ever get together with Jenn we will do my first CLS shoot with the nude. I am looking forward to it.