Weshoot.com

The Official We Shoot Blog

  • Home
  • About
  • To Comment

Archive for the ‘Learning’ Category

Putting Lipstick on a Pig . . .

Thursday, February 16th, 2012

Some years ago, I was emailed by a man who wanted me to photograph a business property. He was a commercial real estate broker with a property to sell. He sent an image he had taken of a rundown business property in our area and wanted to know if we could photograph it. I called him, and we exchanged information.  I said I had viewed the image he sent and was curious why he would spend money on getting an image of such a property, to which he replied, “I need a pro to take the image, and then put some lipstick on this pig.” I asked him what he meant. He said he wanted the property to look great and that our photographic ability plus considerable Photoshop editing skills could make winning images. He would be showing the images to a buyer out of state, and he might be able to make a sale on the strength of my images. He wanted me to be complicit in fraud! Once I heard this, there was no way I was having anything to do with such activities, but out of curiosity, I asked him what his budget was for this, and he said he had very limited funds and could only pay about one-fourth of my then day rate. Not only did he have the chutzpa to ask me to commit fraud, even though I wouldn’t have shot and altered the image for profit, he still had the gall to think I would be thrilled to do it at no profit! I hope everyone he called was willing to say no.

Now, I have been asked to enhance properties before, like the time the water truck broke down that was used to wet down a parking lot and I had to make a parking lot look wet for an image. I was also asked before to put two adjacent aerial images together of an airport my partner had taken, and make one photo out of them, and then extend the airport background to look like the drop-off behind the airport had been filled in, and a retaining wall added. This was sort of a photographer’s rendering of what the airport could look like if the airport hired my client to remodel the airport. Another time, a company hired me to take an older aerial image of a building they had built and update it to close to what the building looked like now with landscaping as they couldn’t get another aerial shot. I, of course, went to the building and did extensive work to make a realistic image of the building that I imagined from the air. This image was made into a large print, framed, and hung in the boardroom of the construction company.

In these images in the above paragraph, there was no attempt to defraud anyone. If anyone asks you to do something like this, make sure of what their intentions are. Ask questions. And if someone asks you to “Put lipstick on this pig,” run the other way as fast as you can.

– Gary Silverstein
We Shoot

Tags: architectural, architecture, Seattle commercial and advertising photography, weshoot.com
Posted in Learning, Tips | Comments Off on Putting Lipstick on a Pig . . .

Expanding your capabilities . . .

Saturday, September 17th, 2011

Here’s one of our promo videos!

 

All professional photographers should strive to increase their capabilities.  One of the ways is to embrace video.  A lot of wedding photographers have done this as this gives them more ways of generating capital.  Being versatile is very important.  But there are costs for doing this.  Let’s talk about video and where it figures in. 

In the film days, a professional photographer could buy 2¼” medium-format cameras to do weddings and portraits, or a 4″X5″ (or bigger) large format camera to photograph architecture and products.  This was a huge barrier to entry to amateurs, with the huge cost and learning how to work with what were mostly manual systems.  Unless an amateur or student was particularly well-heeled, he couldn’t purchase this equipment.  He would have to work with the less expensive smaller format 35mm cameras, that were also more expensive when moving up to the high end.  A budding pro would have to work his way up, sometimes working as an assistant for an established pro.

In the past, architectural clients wouldn’t hire someone who couldn’t give them large-format transparencies or negatives.  It shut out a good many photographers.  It was a barrier to entry.

Then digital still photography became the norm and the cameras evolved into something very capable of producing a very large and sharp print.  And the price started dropping.  The barrier to entry was being lowered.  And digital had another perk.  Editing software came into its own.  The one with the highest regard is Adobe Photoshop.  It is not cheap for the current version.  But there are some lower-cost alternatives that don’t do as much.  A barrier just fell again.  More amateurs call themselves pros.  Now, the competition is very heavy.  It is hard for the clients to tell who can do the work or not.  The Internet is awash with images.  Some may steal an image and say it is theirs.  Others shoot all the standard stuff photographers take as a hobby.  Flowers, landscapes, people, boats, cars, etc.

A commercial photographer does more with the images he creates.  You wouldn’t hire someone to shoot your company’s expensive product to show it in its best light, if the photographer only showed you a portfolio of beautiful sunsets, would you?

You would want to know that the photographer could get great detail and sharp, clear, well-lit images of products as seen in his/her portfolio.

Since we already have extensive experience at commercial photography, we add video to the mix to increase our versatility and do more for our clients.

Video is a whole different animal than still photography.  You have all the things that a still photographer has to think about, plus movement and sound to deal with.  And editing videos is more complicated than it has ever been as there are more tools to work with. While a lot of video cameras will do a great job of recording what is in front of them with just the press of a button, editing them is way more than trimming a clip and placing it on the end of another clip.  And, everyone watches TV.  If you want to see what is possible, look at the intro to CSI Miami.  It is a mixture of stills, video clips, and moving graphics. It probably took months to put together and it is over in less than a minute.  HD video files are huge.  A one-minute HD video in QuickTime format is around a gigabyte in size.  You need a computer with some real horsepower to harness the expensive software that it takes to get something really professional.  Rendering time can run many hours.  Adobe Premiere Pro, After Effects, Photoshop Extended, and a legion of other programs come into play.  And the learning curve is steep.  High costs, a lot to learn . . .  Now, there is a barrier to entry. 

If you haven’t already, take a look at our video at the top of this post.  As you can see, it adds a dynamic dimension to our professional commercial portfolio. It is a great way to show off our portfolio and for a client company  to promote itself, as well.

– Gary Silverstein

Tags: barrier to entry, commercial, http://weshoot.com, photograph, photographer, professional, promo, promotional, still photography, value added, versatile, versatility, video, video editing, videographer
Posted in Learning, Marketing, Tips | Comments Off on Expanding your capabilities . . .

Food Photographers and Food Photography . . . Are you hungry?

Friday, August 19th, 2011

Food photography has been with us . . . well, since there was photography.  But then, there is FOOD PHOTOGRAPHY.  That “It looks so good, I can taste it!” photography.  That “It’s making me hungry photography!”  You know what I am talking about.  Prime examples are the Red Lobster video ads with butter dripping off seafood.  Don’t they make you hungry, even after you just ate?  Now, look at your food images.  Are they the victim of flat lighting  Do they lack color?  Do they make anyone hungry?

Almost everyone has a digital camera.  Some have better digital cameras than others.  Many have a small strobe built into the camera, while others may use a flash unit that fits in a shoe on the camera.  For a commercial pro, that would be the lighting of last resort just to document something.  This is the worst lighting one could use, especially for food.  Any small thing or element that is white or very light gets blown out and loses detail, like sour cream or whipped cream.  If the food image is mostly white or light colored, like vanilla ice cream, the strobe and camera may automatically adjust to make it gray, or a darker color, instead.  Did you ever wonder why the image you tried to take that reflected the flash back displayed as dark or a sickly shade of brown?  That is because the auto-exposure feature of the flash read only the brightest spot in the frame and shut down the strobe before it was able to light the darker areas.  Silverware, other bright metal, and glass have a habit of reflecting very bright hot spots with flat lighting.

Great food photography all has one thing in common: great lighting, which includes positioning the lighting to better enhance the food.  It is critical.  It all starts there.  See Example 1.

stir-fry

Example 1 - Click on image to enlarge.

See how the glistening highlights make this look juicy and delicious?  To make better-looking food images, the main lighting comes from the back, sides, or above to reflect on the food (in this case with a soft box).  Overall ceiling room lights don’t serve this purpose, nor does a flash mounted directly on a camera.  To see examples of what I see as overall room lighting or direct flash lighting for a similar food dish as Example 1, click here .  Of course, the services of a great food styl ist and a lot of post-production work is done in Photoshop to get the color and look found in Example 1.

It is said that a picture is worth a whole lot of words (1000, 10000, or the amount to be determined by the viewer) .  I say that a great food image is worth that many more sales.  If you are selling food, it pays to do a lot more work creating your food images, or you could hire We Shoot.  You can find us at weshoot.com.

– Gary Silverstein

Tags: food, food photographer, food photography, food stylist, http://weshoot.com, photographer, photography, we shoot
Posted in Learning, Tips | Comments Off on Food Photographers and Food Photography . . . Are you hungry?

How to take more professional images . . .

Tuesday, August 9th, 2011

We just finished a product shoot where the client first tried to take the pictures himself.  That did not give him the results he wanted for his business promotion.   He called a friend with “A really good camera,” and the results were, shall we say, less than stellar.   He called us and showed us the images his friend had taken.   While he indeed may have had a really good camera, his friend lacked the skills and equipment necessary to show the products in the absolute best light (pun intended).   For most product photography, it is all about the lighting and knowing how to use it.   It is not about the camera, lens, or resolution (sufficiency in each is all that is needed).   Quality of lighting – diffused or harsh, color of lighting, and its relationship to white balance are all factors.   Lighting shape is a factor – square, round, or some other shape.   How will the light reflect off the subject?    Using an umbrella to spread out the light when shooting a mirrored surface will show the ribbing in the umbrella in reflection.   Is a spotlight required?   How is that accomplished?   When should one use continuous lighting (such as hot lights), or should one use strobes?   What are the advantages of each?

When we were done and presented the final images to our client, he said that he felt bad that he wasn’t using his friend’s images.   But then he said this was about making money from his business and increasing same, and although he didn’t want to make his friend unhappy, he wanted to use these images to make money.   And that is the bottom line.   I am including some images as samples.   They have nothing to do with the above-mentioned product shoot, but are being used for illustrative purposes only.

Sample 1 is an image I took to illustrate really poor photography.   I used the flash built into a pro-sumer DSLR and the image is badly out of focus (on purpose).   It is underexposed.   It is taken against a dark busy background, and there is no editing whatsoever of the image.   I have seen shots like this on eBay, and even company websites when someone is trying to promote their products – anything from a widget to a building.   Except for the fact that the image cost nothing to create (once the camera has been purchased), there is nothing good to say about it.   In fact, bad photography could be hiding flaws in the product, as far as the viewer knows.   If the photography is bad, whatever the company is selling is suspect – if corners are cut with the photos, what corners were cut with the product?   For a better chance at selling an item with a photograph, a bit of work will be involved.

poor amateur product image

Sample 1 - Click to Enlarge

Sample 2 is against a white fomecore background and had two AC-powered studio strobes with soft boxes opposite each other at each end of the shaver to show texture in the shaver, and to highlight  stainless steel cutting heads.   The soft boxes spread light out with very diffused lighting and bring out a lot of detail with no harsh shadows.   There is some minor enhancement with Photoshop in this sample.

Basic well-lighted product image

Sample 2 - Click to Enlarge

 

In sample 3, I have made a “clipping path” to trace out the shaver from the original background, rotated the image vertically, and made a background layer with Photoshop in which I made a gradient of black and red.   Some more enhancement was done with Photoshop, including making the glowing yellow-green lights on either side of the on-off switch to simulate the look when the shaver is switched on.   Now you may ask why I didn’t take it with the shaver “on,” instead of simulating the look.   First, the shaver probably wouldn’t stay in position with the vibration of the shaver running, and also because I had more control of how it looks in the output this way.

weshoot.com product image

Sample 3 - Click to Enlarge

Now, which sample image would you choose to promote your product?

I will help you get close to sample 2 results, but you have to have some other props and accessories and do extra work to get there.  First get something white (for a dark subject) as a background , like a piece of fomecore.   It also helps reflect white light onto a dark object.   If shooting a light-colored or white object, you might want to go with gray or black as a background to contrast.   Next, go to a store like Lowe’s or Home Depot and buy several clamp light housings (see http://bit.ly/o3p5cP ) and a commensurate number of daylight compact fluorescent bulbs.   This won’t work as well as strobes with soft-boxes, but it will beat using a camera-mounted strobe.   Try different lighting positions until you get the lighting, shadows, and highlights you desire.   You will also need a tripod and a camera capable of taking a time exposure and allowing the flash to be deactivated.   You may also need to set the white balance (check your camera or editing program documentation to see how to do that ).   Make sure to get sharp focus.   Getting too close to the subject reduces depth-of-field, and some part of the subject will go out of focus.   Take several shots at different exposures to get the best one.   It may take more tries to get exactly what you want.

To get to sample 3 results, you will need a photo-editing program, and know enough on how to work with images for given results.   That is not within the scope of this article.  Really good product image editing takes knowledge, experience, and patience.   It can be time consuming and a lot of hard work.   It also helps to know a few enhancement secrets and have a lot of Photoshop experience.  That’s why I still get work, even if my client has a “really good camera.”

– Gary Silverstein

Tags: commercial product photography, product photographer, We Shoot Photography, weshoot.com
Posted in How To, Learning, Tips | Comments Off on How to take more professional images . . .

Take much better pictures with your camera: Move and soften that flash!

Thursday, July 28th, 2011

For a doctor, the first rule is, “Do No Harm.”  The first rule for better photography should be, “Take the flash unit off your camera (if possible)!” Why? Well, it is an unflattering lighting source, for one.  It is a bright direct light source like the sun.  It produces harsh shadows and high-contrast conditions for your subject.  You won’t see any of that in well-done professional commercial images, unless that is the specific intent .  Just look at beautiful models on magazine covers, or products in a name brand ad.  Remember when someone was telling ghost stories and held a flashlight under their face?  It threw the harsh shadows upward and gave the story-teller a scary look.  Normally, on-camera flashes throw harsh shadows downward on a horizontal image, and to the left or right on a vertical image. A lot of good wedding and portrait photographers use accessory flash units very similar to the one you might use on your camera, but they mount them off the camera.  A lot of these photographers are able to hand-hold their units by mounting the flash to a bracket which moves the flash way above and centered over the lens axis to allow the shadows to drop down behind the subject so they are not noticeable in the images.  When they want to take a vertical shot, the bracket allows the strobe to still stay positioned at center and over the lens axis so the shadows drop down behind the subject. This approach also reduces the chance for “red-eye,” (the glowing red marbles) as well. Another trick is bouncing the light off a diffuser card (attached to a number of modern flash units), or through specific attachments, or putting tissue paper or some other white translucent material over the strobe to mitigate the harsh shadows.

If you don’t want or can’t afford a flash bracket, some DSLR cameras allow wifi remote control of a dedicated flash so you can hold the flash above the camera, or most of these cameras have accessory wires available so you can hold the flash sufficiently above the lens to get the same effect.

A lot of people use point and shoot cameras.  They can’t remove the flash unit, but they can usually turn it off.  It will require the photographer to utilize a tripod or other support for the camera and shoot with available light.  Many of these cameras have different modes or manual controls to allow slower shutter speeds so ambient light can be used instead of that bright, unflattering strobe light.

Try these things, and your images will definitely start to look better.

-Gary Silverstein

Tags: flash photography, getting better pictures with flash, more professional look to my pictures, shooting with flash, weshoot.com
Posted in How To, Learning, Tips | Comments Off on Take much better pictures with your camera: Move and soften that flash!

“Photography is so easy . . . Why does a pro charge so much?”

Tuesday, December 14th, 2010

Note:  This article explains why pros like us charge what we charge and why we get it.

 

First, the long answer.

Photographers in the “ business” of photography don’t view their business as a hobby. The motivating factor is income. The average hobbyist – a nonprofessional – sees photography as an enjoyable pastime, and receiving money for their photography, although a nice addendum, is not the reason they engage in the activity. A hobbyist can be at several levels, from a novice to an accomplished photographer, but a pro has to always be at the top of his or her game to compete. After all, no professional photographer’s client wants to pay for sub-par images.

An amateur may show his shadow or reflection in the final picture, while a pro would never think of submitting such an image to the client. A nonprofessional photographer – an amateur – takes snapshots. “Click!” A pro may take a quick shot, but he or she quickly calculates variables to get the best possible shot, from the sun’s angle, to shadows, to exposure. To avoiding including as little as possible of his or her shadow so as to be less difficult to remove post-shoot. Getting closer to the ground or framing the subject through another object may not only get a more enticing image, it may as well eliminate the photographer’s shadow. Every little detail of an image is considered while shooting. Visualizing the image as a finished product, in two dimensions on a computer screen or in a print, is an essential part of the professional’s job.

Let me provide you with an example of work we do for a particular client to help illustrate the mark of – and the necessity for – a pro. This client, an out-of-state advertising agency, commissions our work for their client (a bank), sending us to many locations a year to shoot specific subjects (and other subjects we deem suitable) in the community around their branches. From our submission, our client chooses a number of images to be displayed in each branch for which we shoot. Requirements for these shoots include high-resolution images in a vertical, black and white, gray-scale format. If our images are submitted by FTP, they can be high-res jpegs; if delivered on DVD, they will be tiffs. No horizontal or color images (not even as sample images) will be accepted, so every sample image we send has been first converted to black and white. We have done a large number of jobs for this client because we deliver what they want, what they need. They expect artistry in taking the images and artistry in executing the post-shoot processing of each of our images.

Let me lead you through the workflow on the assignments we do for this agency. With the assignment comes a list of specific things in the community to shoot. We travel to the community, some as near to our studio as one hour, some as far as a day’s drive. We arrive in the community with maps we have printed up from our research of subject matter our client has shown primary interest in, and then we drive around to locate other targets we see as appropriate for this client. Leaving before sun break may be necessary for some objects of interest, knowing that a low-sun angle may cause our shadow to appear in the image, and conversely, if we are facing the sun, flares may occur (especially with a wide-angle lens), resulting in noisy silhouettes or blown-out skies. We are sometimes asked to shoot on a deadline in the rainy season, meaning diminished shooting days and hours. While shooting in the rain with its accompanied white or gray sky (cutting contrast, for just one example) can be dealt with, mist on the lens will ruin an image and must be carefully monitored. We also don’t typically shoot higher than 400 ISO, as this usually introduces an unacceptable amount of video noise to the discerning professional eye, especially in the shadow areas, but sometimes it must be done.

A discerning professional eye also abhors low-light conditions, so a portable flash mounted on a flash bracket is a necessary part of the equipment bag. One never knows when having a little more light could come in real handy.

You may ask what’s the big deal about shooting black and white. Simply set your camera to black and white, right? Well, after some experimentation, I found that our Nikon cameras’ black and white mode still shoots the raw images in color, and the camera is merely adding a black and white filter to the image. If I take the image in b&w mode, I can remove the b&w filter in Nikon’s raw editor, Capture NX2, or if I run it through Camera Raw in Photoshop CS5, it doesn’t see the filter that was put in by my camera, at all. So, I don’t even bother shooting it in b&w in the camera. I add it later as a layer in Photoshop CS5, which gives me more options in the look of the image.

So, let’s say that I take a close-to-perfect image. What happens then? The amateur can take the memory card to a camera-store kiosk to output to disk or print – enhanced to the kiosk program’s ability. Or, the amateur can elect to work on it himself, let’s say with Photoshop Elements, a relatively inexpensive program that produces good results. Great for the amateur photographer but a program which pales in comparison to the immeasurably more professional Photoshop CS5 and the raw editing of the aforementioned Nikon Capture NX2 – both incredible programs costing – and worth – much more.

Using the raw editor, I weed out the images that are not up to the caliber I wish to present to my client. Yes, even pros have camera movement, out-of-focus and under- or overexposed images. These are discarded. During the shoot, we take several images of the same thing, one of many differences between a pro and an amateur. This backup is further enhanced by using two different cameras and, when possible, two different shooters. One camera has the long zoom (18-200mm), and the other has an ultra-wide angle zoom (10-20mm) lens. If for some reason the subject isn’t captured successfully by one photographer, it is captured by the other. Consequently, we have several versions of the same subject from which to choose the very best for the client to select from.

All images that pass muster are then further evaluated with the raw editing program. Adjustment of density (lightness and darkness). Selection of the most accurate and impressive color. Saturation. And mild sharpening. The images are then converted to tif images, labeled with our copyright and other information from the image metadata.

Another place a professional such as myself is different than an amateur is hard-drive space. Hard-drive space is a commodity to me. I buy new one-terabyte drives to replace those that fill up. None of our professional images are erased to make room for new images. All work is stored on multiple drives. There’s never enough backup. Images are lost by the client – disks are misplaced – more times than I wish to count. It’d be death for my business if all I saved an image to was one drive and I got that fateful call from a client, and had a drive failure. In the long run in terms of both time and money, it is cheaper to save an image to the hard drive in perpetuity than it is to burn it to removable media (CDs and DVDs). This, of course, adds expense to the business. But it makes me more efficient. And takes up less room in my studio.

I now take the color tif images I made in Capture NX2 and bring them up in Bridge, the sorting program that comes with Photoshop CS5. Next, I open a number of them in Photoshop, magnifying each image to 100%. Having a powerful computer system with lots of processor horsepower and ram to run these programs is of immeasurable value, increasingly necessary to the professional with a large workload. I am currently running an i7-950 processor, and 12-gigs of ram with eSata internal drives and USB 3.0 external drives, a time saver for the loading and processing of the high-res images delivered by my cameras. Again, a necessary business expense. When efficiency and high quality are needed, sparing no expense is first on a professional’s business agenda.

At 100% magnification, I scrutinize each image for imperfections. A dust mote on the sensor can have the appearance of a fuzzy “ball” in the sky, and it needs to be touched out. If a distracting shadow or reflection was also captured in an image, that will need retouching work, as well. If a building’s sides aren’t straight (a distortion caused by the lenses and the angle taken), I will bend the image to make them so, if it enhances the look. Even if our client doesn’t demand it, cigarette butts and other things that distract from a good-looking image are removed to make it a better image. Providing a client with the best – from the image samples to the finished product – is a mark of a professional.

At this point, it is time to turn the image into a psd, or Photoshop, file. I then use a “black and white adjustment layer” in Photoshop to take away the color. Oftentimes, the b&w image will look “flat,” lacking contrast. There are several software filters available in Photoshop. Years ago, when using b&w film, a photographer might use a colored filter to enhance an image. A red filter, for example, will produce a dark or black sky with white clouds. Infrared film will produce white foliage. Photoshop has filters that mimic these traits in a b&w digital image, and can be modified as well. Or I may choose to add contrast or a light or dark sky, or make a “soft-light” layer and darken or lighten some section of the image only. The image is then saved as the layered psd file in case additional changes have to be made. At this point the image is still in color with adjustment layers. Once I am happy with the image, I “flatten” all the layers to one and save it as a gray-scale tif in another folder. When all of this is accomplished (my last job with this client totaled 107 and took several days), I prepare the images for my client. I use an “action” in Photoshop to automatically save a reduced-size version of each image in another folder as a low-resolution jpeg, and then I prepare another folder for additional backup. I then bring up every image in that folder in Photoshop, and use a brush “stamp” to put our “We Shoot” watermark on every one. But I am still not done. I then make a single “zip file” of all of these images to transfer to the client by FTP or into their drop box. I advise them, usually by email, that they’re ready to see, and they unzip the file with their unzip program to see all the images. I then await their notification of the image numbers they want in final high-resolution, sending them the images on disk, via FTP, or to their drop-box.

Why does a pro charge so much? When photography is so easy? Besides the photographic and post-production time and expense involved in making a successful image, it’s more than just love of the art. It’s knowing our work will make our client successful, increase their return-on-investment, and keep them coming back for more.

And the short answer is, being a professional – being able to provide high-quality photography to a client – costs money. We fulfill a need for a client who needs high-quality images, and we need to make enough to continue to provide high-quality business to our client. It makes our client money, and it makes us money. A successful image goes a long way in helping to sustain a successful business – a professional business – for our client and this pro. A win-win for all concerned.

-Gary Silverstein

raw image representation

Jpeg made from unedited raw image

color after editing

Jpeg of raw image after editing

black and white final image

Jpeg of final black and white image

 

Tags: black and white, color, commercial photographer, photographer, photography, professional, professional photographer
Posted in Learning | Comments Off on “Photography is so easy . . . Why does a pro charge so much?”

Shooting a new product . . .

Thursday, July 8th, 2010

Shooting a new product is something commercial product photographers face all the time.  Sometimes the client has ideas about how it’s supposed to look, sometimes not.  At times, it is easier to give the client the look he or she wants, if they spell it out, as opposed to “You’re the photographer.  You come up with a great image.  You’re the pro.  That’s what you’re being paid for.”  Or something to that effect.

The following product shoot fits the latter scenario more than the first:

I had three bottles of an inexpensive nail polish to shoot.  The bottles contained glitter.  I wanted to show the bottles to be more powerful than they are.  After all, from my perspective, if one is seeing the nail polish in an ad, it should appear to be, well, more than nail polish.  The bottles themselves were less than perfect.  In a big money promo shoot, a photo stylist will sift through many bottles to find the perfect ones.  Sometimes the manufacturer supplies the products, and sometimes the stylist has to go to several retail outlets to get the most perfect props for the image.  In the case of the nail polish, it was three colors of glitter nail polish – a red, an orange, and a green.  In this case, it was a low-budget shoot, meaning no stylist.  Also, I found only one local outlet for the product, and they had a limited supply.  So, I picked out the “best” bottles.

Next, I had to prepare them for the shoot.  Cleaning dust and fingerprints off needs to be done.  It is harder to remove these blemishes with editing software than cleaning the bottles physically.  I used an anti-static cloth, and a can of Blow-Off to remove the aforesaid marks and dust.

I placed them on a translucent white square mounted over a studio strobe.  This lights them from underneath and eliminates shadows.  It also provides white light behind the clear parts of the glass.  See setup image below, example 1.

After adjusting three studio strobes and the camera for the exposures I wanted, I then captured the image you see in example 2. As you can see, the color is way off due to the lighting changes, so color correction was in order.

With numerous changes made in Photoshop, including adding more glitter than I could get from lighting alone, I created the image in example 3.  Glitter comes from adding a small light source to shine on the glitter.  I used a bare bulb on one strobe and shut off the strobe part so the modeling light would act as a small light source (hence the yellowness in example 2).  I increased the time exposure to allow that bulb to put enough light on the subject to appear bright against the instantaneous strobe light.  I also used a “mine flashlight” (the green object to the left front of the nail polish bottles in example 1) to shine on the bottles.  I additionally added small specs of glitter to the bottles with a “bling brush” in Photoshop in several colors.  I had to add the colors and rectangles and shadowing to the background.

What if I told you that given the “You’re the photographer . . .” speech above that once the image was shot, there were several tries with internet communication about colors and backgrounds before the client was happy.  Like I said, it is sometimes easier to make the client happy when they have a clear image of what they want, and they convey that idea to the photographer.  Otherwise, it is a real challenge to guess what the client will like, and it may take several tries.

In the end, it is nice to see the finished product.  But very few know how much work and dedication go into that finished product.  Now you have an idea.

-Gary Silverstein

Example 1 - Click on image to enlarge.

Example 2 - Click on image to enlarge.

Example 3 - Click on image to enlarge.

Tags: advertising, glitter, Marketing, nail polish, photograph, photographer, photography, promo, promotional
Posted in Learning | Comments Off on Shooting a new product . . .

Reflecting on Reflections, Part 3

Monday, June 28th, 2010

“The Shoot From Hell,” said one of my assistants, in reference to shooting the electronic control panel housed in brushed stainless steel.  Brushed stainless is no shiny brass doorknob to shoot, see previous blog post “Reflecting on Reflections, Part 2,” but it is definitely something difficult.  The unit (see images below) is a rather large, oblong-shaped, heavy electronic control panel with three red LED read-out screens which were as reflective as a mirror, housed inside of a brushed stainless steel shell, which was also quite reflective.

The brushed stainless, unlike the doorknob, won’t show my countenance, but will show all lights, colors, and dark areas surrounding it.  Any light that is not broad, whether a room light, a window, or the reflected light off our clothing, shows up as a blurry, colored reflection blob.  The size of the unit makes it difficult to isolate easily.  Many different exposures were made to control where lights sat, where reflectors were aimed, and where the assistants and I were situated.

Each setup or position of the unit was accompanied by moving lights and camera and adjusting everything many times.  My assistant who muttered the “From Hell” phrase, is himself a good photographer who eschews lighting and strobes to create images.  He mostly likes to shoot with available light.  He said it would drive him crazy trying to photograph things like this for a living.  I, on the other hand, view it as a challenge.

Finally, when I finished shooting the product, many hours were spent retouching and enhancing the images.  I then submitted the images to my client as low-res jpegs over the ‘net, and we worked together choosing the background for the images he liked.  See the images below.

While reflective objects present a challenge, make sure your attitude toward them is not defeatist.  This is difficult shooting to say the least.  Hard work and determination is the hallmark of anyone trying to get this done.

One last word on this kind of shoot.  It does not lend itself to using a point-and-shoot camera with the flash on the camera.  For the most part, it has certain minimum requirements of a good DSLR camera, and sufficient off-camera lighting and lighting equipment.  Otherwise, the results will be unsatisfactory and amateurish.

– Gary Silverstein

click on image to enlarge

click on image to enlarge

click on image to enlarge

Tags: enhance, Photoshop, reflecting, reflections, retouch, shoot, shooting
Posted in Learning | Comments Off on Reflecting on Reflections, Part 3

Reflecting on Reflections, Part 2

Thursday, June 24th, 2010

Without a doubt, the hardest single thing I ever photographed was, of all things, something so ubiquitous that we handle them every day.  I am talking about door knobs.  Plain, highly reflective, brass doorknobs.  Now, why is it so hard to photograph a doorknob?  Well, it becomes a lot more difficult when there are some rules.  Rules like one would run into with a doorknob manufacturer looking for someone to shoot images of their products for promotions.  Do you think they want a reflected image of a happy, smiling distorted photographer looking out from their new brochure at the viewer?  How about seeing that photographer’s camera and tripod, or the space the doorknob happens to be in?  Simple, inexpensive, plain, highly polished brass doorknobs become painful to contemplate as a product photographer.  They not only are spherical and reflect the entire world around them, they have a backing plate made of the same stuff, that will reflect things that exist behind the knob, from the reflection on the back of the knob.  

Several years ago, we had spoken with a potential client, the marketing department head at a large manufacturer of doorknobs, hardware, and faucets about working for her company.  She said she had several photographers she used for shooting these products, but she said she would send us a sample of their products so that we could submit a test photograph to show that we could handle this type of photography, in case she needed our services.  Parameters for shooting this product were clear.  Shoot it on a 4″X 5″ transparency, and no retouching of any kind was permitted.  She said they did any retouching needed at the graphics department at the manufacturer.  

About 5 days later, the product arrived by UPS.  There was a plain brown cardboard box inside the outer package.  I opened it up and beheld a photographic nightmare.  It was an inexpensive, highly-polished brass doorknob set, complete with keys.  

It reflected everything!  It saw me, the room, everything in the room, and to my horror, the backing plate re-reflected everything the back of the knob “saw.”  I knew this was to be a fight.  I looked at images of doorknobs in advertising.  They looked perfect.  Some were “brushed” metal – not polished, but still shiny.  Some were dull finished, and just reflected highlights.  The polished ones stood out.  No reflections of photographers, cameras, tripods, rooms, etc.  I assumed that there was some reflection of a camera lens somewhere during the taking of the image, as there was no way to avoid the reflection from the angle presented.  A different angle may have allowed one to position the lens where the reflection would be positioned over the keyhole, but you can’t shoot there for different angles.  The first problem includes camera, tripod and photographer reflections.  One way to avoid this taking up a lot of room on the doorknob is to make a blind out of white material, like foam core, and cut a hole through which the camera lens “sees” the doorknob.  

Although this cuts down on untoward reflections, it still reflects the lens and the hole, unless the hole is dark and tight around the lens.  I figured this made for a minimum of retouching at the graphics department, and would be acceptable.  A second consideration was the lighting.  Lights or hot spots show up on the product itself and a smooth highlight with no hot spots would be a better solution.  Everything I tried did not work!  As said before, putting a piece of foam core in front of the doorknob cut down reflections, but I thought that aiming lights from behind the doorknob and bouncing the light toward the white foam core blind would produce the effect without bad reflections.  I was wrong.  The strobe “soft boxes” reflected into the back side of the door knob and re-reflected off the backing plate.  I had distorted oblong light reflections staring at me from the backing plate.  

It became evident there must be a way to do this.  I tried white sheets, but the lights created hot spots, and it reflected any corners and folds.  I had seen a shooting tent at my local pro camera store, and headed down there next.  A tent like this was used to evenly light small products and I thought this was the ticket.  It cost $250.00 plus tax.  I got the tent home, and assembled it.  It was made of a translucent white fabric, meant to diffuse the light inside.  It also was rigid and had seams and a rigid frame inside the fabric which showed up in the reflections.  It had several holes for camera placement, and try as I might with stuff to cover them, they showed up, too.  Fortunately, I was able to return the tent for a refund as it really didn’t do the job.  

I even talked to man who owned a company that made plastic blister packs in Santa Barbara.  I drove out to Santa Barbara to get a prototype dome of a transparent, but clouded plastic that he was thinking of producing.  It took out most of the distracting reflections, but reflected the cloudy nature of the dome and made the doorknob appear dull and not highly reflective.  I sent it back to Santa Barbara with a thank you note and a description of the effect.  

I finally built a box enclosure of translucent white plastic, got what I thought was a good image and sent that to the marketing manager.  She said to keep the doorknob, and she would call us if she needed us.  Last I heard, she was working for another company doing something completely different.  She never called!   

Below is the image I created, after scanning it and retouching it for our portfolio.  Shiny, reflective doorknobs are tough.  Try it if you doubt me.  

– Gary Silverstein      

Doorknob with minimal reflections - click on image to enlarge

Tags: 4x5, camera, photography, Photoshop, reflecting, reflections, retouch, shoot, shooting, view, view camera
Posted in Learning | 10 Comments »

Reflecting on Reflections, Part 1

Saturday, June 19th, 2010

I was once asked about the hardest thing I ever photographed.  Of course there have been several difficult things to shoot, but as a commercial photographer, some product and catalog shoots and reflective objects just jump out.  Reflecting on a number I have done, I think they have gotten a bit easier for me with time, either because of experience, or the ability to use digital retouching and enhancement techniques, or both.  To say that there are no more challenges would be a misstatement, however.

My first bout with reflective product shots came during the era of film, long before digital capture or scanning was even possible.  Digital retouching was a pipe dream for the future.  I was asked to photograph jewelry with a large-format view camera (a 4X5) on transparencies.  We opted to use our then-considered-powerful 1200 watt-second Balcar studio strobe set for lighting.

The jewelry pieces were white metal (silver, I think) and included rings, earrings, and a necklace.  All pieces were to be shot in one image, laid out on a blue fabric.  I was to capture highlights from the reflecting white umbrellas mounted on the strobes in each piece of jewelry in the layout.

In those days, we were located just south of Hollywood, California, and there were many film labs nearby, so film processing turnover was fairly fast – three hours on a non-rush basis.  We had 4X5 Polaroid self- processing black and white positives that could be shot with the 4X5 camera that we could see as proofs prior to shooting the transparencies which needed processing at a lab.

The Polaroids were over a dollar each, in those days – a big, but necessary expense.  For this shoot, we went through something like ten of them, just trying to position the irregularly-shaped jewelry, so it would show certain highlights.  Each time we shot one, we would find one piece that would go dark, with no highlight.  It would have no sparkle, it would look, well . . .  black!  We finally got what looked like a good Polaroid, put in the transparency film holders and shot four transparencies of the same shot (one for us, one for the client, and two for insurance in case we needed to lighten or darken the exposure by chemical process).  We ran it to the lab up the road, and three hours later went over there to see our new transparencies.  One of the pieces of jewelry had moved slightly and it went dark.  There went a bunch of money, and a lot of time.  It took until the next day before we got it right.  It was a good experience, and I learned a lot.  I managed to find the image in our archives.  See it below.

– Gary Silverstein

Tags: 4x5, camera, film, jewelry, large format, layout, reflect, reflecting, reflections, shoot, shooting, view camera
Posted in Learning | Comments Off on Reflecting on Reflections, Part 1

Next >>

  • Categories

    • How To (21)
    • Information (548)
    • Learning (30)
    • Lighting (179)
    • Marketing (291)
    • Photographs, Images (545)
    • Tips (38)
    • Uncategorized (2)
    • video (13)
  • Archives

    • September 2025
    • June 2025
    • May 2025
    • April 2025
    • January 2025
    • December 2024
    • November 2024
    • September 2024
    • August 2024
    • July 2024
    • June 2024
    • May 2024
    • April 2024
    • March 2024
    • February 2024
    • December 2023
    • November 2023
    • October 2023
    • September 2023
    • August 2023
    • July 2023
    • May 2023
    • February 2023
    • January 2023
    • October 2022
    • September 2022
    • August 2022
    • July 2022
    • March 2022
    • February 2022
    • January 2022
    • December 2021
    • July 2021
    • June 2021
    • May 2021
    • April 2021
    • March 2021
    • February 2021
    • January 2021
    • December 2020
    • November 2020
    • October 2020
    • September 2020
    • August 2020
    • July 2020
    • June 2020
    • May 2020
    • April 2020
    • March 2020
    • February 2020
    • January 2020
    • December 2019
    • November 2019
    • October 2019
    • September 2019
    • August 2019
    • July 2019
    • June 2019
    • May 2019
    • April 2019
    • March 2019
    • February 2019
    • January 2019
    • December 2018
    • November 2018
    • October 2018
    • September 2018
    • August 2018
    • July 2018
    • June 2018
    • May 2018
    • April 2018
    • March 2018
    • February 2018
    • January 2018
    • December 2017
    • November 2017
    • October 2017
    • September 2017
    • August 2017
    • July 2017
    • June 2017
    • May 2017
    • April 2017
    • March 2017
    • February 2017
    • January 2017
    • December 2016
    • November 2016
    • October 2016
    • September 2016
    • August 2016
    • July 2016
    • June 2016
    • May 2016
    • April 2016
    • March 2016
    • February 2016
    • January 2016
    • December 2015
    • November 2015
    • October 2015
    • September 2015
    • August 2015
    • July 2015
    • June 2015
    • May 2015
    • July 2014
    • June 2014
    • May 2014
    • September 2013
    • June 2013
    • March 2013
    • February 2013
    • January 2013
    • December 2012
    • October 2012
    • July 2012
    • June 2012
    • May 2012
    • March 2012
    • February 2012
    • December 2011
    • September 2011
    • August 2011
    • July 2011
    • March 2011
    • December 2010
    • October 2010
    • September 2010
    • July 2010
    • June 2010
  • Meta

    • Log in
    • Entries RSS
    • Comments RSS
    • WordPress.org

Copyright © 2025 - weshoot.com | Entries (RSS) | Comments (RSS)

WordPress theme designed by web design