Tuesday, February 20, 2007

Dear Jimmy

At the risk of turning this into a pretty girl shooting, Dear Abby column, I thought I'd use a recent email as a source for today's update.

PGS reader, Thomas, writes:

"Jimmy: As always, I enjoy reading the column. It's a blast.

I have, however, a request. Is it at all possible that you could do an entry about what the output of those images is? I have a buddy who usually shoots film with a Hasselblad and he really knows his way around it, but when it comes to digital, he's a dunce. He's thinking about getting a Nikon D80 but isn't sure of anything beyond it. He just kinda knows it'd be nice to shoot digital stuff now and again. Anyway, he always asks me stuff and since I work in a traditional processes darkroom, I have no idea.

What'd be nice to understand (from the perspective of the photographer) is how the image is processed in-camera, how it's given to the client, and what - if anything - you do to it between those points. How much Photoshop is he gonna have to learn?

Thanks, man. You're the best."

Thanks, Thomas. Being a Canon guy, it took me a moment to figure out you weren't calling your buddy a dunce because he's considering buying Nikon as his entry into the world of digital photography. That aside, I'll take a stab at answering your questions.

In terms of in-camera processing, I don't do much. For instance, I don't often manipulate color temperature with the camera. I'm not saying it's inherently wrong to do so, I simply, as a rule, prefer not to. If I want to warm the model, I'd rather do so with gels on my lights or, ocassionally, with a warming reflector while shooting in daylight. When I'm shooting with strobes, I use my camera's default WB setting for strobes. I go with the daylight setting for daylight and tungsten for tungsten as they apply to the light sources falling on the subject. If I'm concerned about mixed light sources, I might do a custom white balance for that set. While it doesn't qualify as in-camera processing, I have turned down the LCD brightness on my cameras as, in my opinion, the factory setting provides a misleading image on the camera's LCD screen in terms of exposure. (Note: Learn how to use the histogram!) I've found, when it comes to chimping, using the factory settings can mess you up. WYS is not WYSIWYG, i.e., What You See is not What You See Is What You Get.


A lot of the stuff I shoot will be processed by a graphic designer/Photoshop artist. Often, the model is going to be cut-out and used in artwork with a background other than the BG in the frame I've captured. That's why I shoot a lot on seamless or, when I'm on location, I'll look for a neutral BG if there's one available to shoot against. When I'm shooting for a magazine layout, of course, it's a different matter.

As a rule, I don't do any processing of the images I've captured and will deliver to the client. I quickly go through them, delete strobe misfires, out-of-focus shots, and a few others, and burn everything to CDs. (My Flintstonian laptop doesn't have a DVD burner, though I'm planning on buying one that does in the not-too-distant future.) I should add that I don't often shoot RAW. Mostly, I capture large, fine, JPGs as that's what most of my clients' graphic designers request.

I keep backups of the images on one of a number of portable hard drives I possess. I usually keep the backups for a few months then, eventually, burn them to CDs and archive them.

After the shoot, I'll go through my backed-up images and pick a few to process myself. (Assuming doing so is okay with my client.) I do this for personal use, e.g., my port, this blog, etc. I don't, as a rule, do too much processing on these personal images. From the perspective of personal use of the images captured, I would recommend your friend learn Photoshop. Even if he does not intend to do anything personally with the images, it's still a good idea for him to learn about Photoshop. Knowing what the post-processing person will be doing with the images will effect some decisions he makes as the shooter, at least in terms of making that other person's job easier and more effective.

I hope some of this helps anyone about to make the transition from film to digital.

The pretty girl at the top is Francesca. I shot this a few months back. As usual, Canon 5D w/85mm prime, ISO 100, f/5.6 @ 125. I used a 5' Photoflex Octodome for the main and medium Chimera strip behind her, camera-left. There was probably a piece of white foamcore providing a bit of fill, camera-right.

2 comments:

Anonymous said...

Well, well, well, my buddy dimed me out. How nice of (Thomas) Scott. I've told him as much. Thanks for the post, and I'll just ignore the Nikon/dunce comment.

I do plan on acquiring photoshop, but for a film shooter it seems a bit intimidating. But I have another question.

If I'd like to buy a 5' octadome, which battery pack would you recommend? I have zero knowledge about all that stuff. And while I may look like a hack, I think I take some damn fine stuff, albeit in natural light (that's the sound of me tooting my own horn!). See, I'm trying to go simple. One light, a reflector and a pack. Nothing fancy. I just want to be able to shoot full length (or less) shots of people.

Again, this is probably WAY basic for you, but the info will really help. I read the blog daily and really enjoy the insight and asides (and the ladies of course).

Thanks for the help.

Jim

P.S. No need to put this on the site

jimmyd said...

hey jim!

sorry about the nikon remark. couldnt' resist. :-)

I'm quite happy with photoflex's octodome. it's quality-made and costs less than many of its competitors. it has removable silver and gold interiors linings... or you can leave the inside of it white.

for a monolight, i don't think it matters much as long as it's fairly well made and recycles quickly. i use novatrons which are medium priced. generally , i have an M300 novie in the octodome. 300ws is plenty of power for me as i keep the dome in close to the model.

here's advice i give people: start with one light and one modifier and something to bounce light, e.g., foamcore, a reflector, etc. also, get some cinefoil (black foil) so you can shape the light when you want to get extra creative. it's amazing what you can do with one light. once you've got 1-light shooting down pat, go for a second light and so on.

photoshop IS intimidating, especially when you're first working with it. fortunately, there's plenty of tutorials and lessons--for free--available on the internet. take advantage of them. i did and still do! i'm not sure it's possible for anyone to learn EVERYTHING there is to know about photoshop.. and just when you think you do, they come out with a new version or update.

good luck as you venture into digital!

jd