Photoshoot info and discussions...

[genex]

James and I were discussing things about shoots and such and thought a thread here might help out.

Lots of time girls ask about shoots and new folks to the industry also often ask how to know who to shoot with etc.

So I figured I'd let you all start things and feel free to ask questions too. I'm going to ask a few other photogs to participate as well as industry folks.

[genex]

Oh yeah, Kenny Kassel has an article on our site about getting into the industry that might be relevant:

Part 1: http://www.ftvideo.com/genex/articles03/modeling/modeling_1.htm

Part 2: http://www.ftvideo.com/genex/articles03/modeling/modeling_2.htm

[Loriann]

Great thread:):)

Here's a couple questions..

When you are photographing the models, what skills do (or would you like) the models have to have to make the shoot unique?

What usually catches your attention when scouting for potential models?

LA:)

[genex]

The second one is hard to answer as I like something that appeals to my aesthetic which isn't necessarily static. I like well-conditioned athletes though - the rest of the look is something more intangible.

For the first, I almost don't tell people what I'm looking for, but what I do look for is what that person's personality is like, and I try to capture that. So I like them to be themselves and my job is to pull the essence of that out. Not sure if that makes total sense or not. :)

[Loriann]

Makes total sense, thank you for sharing your thoughts:)

Which competitions will you be covering over the next few months? I notice a lot of photographers shoot outside, is it because of the lighting and/or background...then next.... how do you get the lighting perfect when you are in sooo many different locations?

LA:)

[genex]

I'll be at everything National level in the states and both nationals in Canada as far as shows. For lighting, I like the challenge of natural light and also am too lazy to bring my lights. We have two kits at the studio, but they are often being used for other shoots the same weekend's I'm gone for BB shows.

[John Stutz]

Gene... mind if I chime in on this thread?

[genex]

we'd welcome that!

[James]

Gene... mind if I chime in on this thread?

hey john,

Yes, please do. We would like more photographers to contribute to this type of discussion. This thread is kind of a small 'test' to see if it warrants it's own forum catagory as I would like to create a resource and exchange of info between photographers, models and webmasters.

[BigD]

This thread will be very helpful. I am constantly fighting flash and fill flash. Natural light, as Gene said, is what I like. But those damn shadows on the face because of sun. What do the rest of you do? Gene, do you use an on camera flash inside most of the time?

[John Stutz]

No doubt James, as soon as you start to get critical mass here, you'll need a dedicated section! One thing us fitness photographers like to do is talk about the shoot. In fact, given the opportunity, some of us tend to overcontribute. And considering that the core of this site is about photography, it's a natural topic that will certainly have its fair share of participation.

As for the current questions...


When you are photographing the models, what skills do (or would you like) the models have to have to make the shoot unique?
That's about the best question anyone could ask (imho)!! I constantly tell people I work with that all of my bestest shots are born out of something the model brought to the shoot, and not something I directed her to do. The model ultimately makes the difference between an average and an extrordinary shoot, not the photographer, who remains relatively constant from one shoot to the next. Every so often I work with someone who simply blows me away with the poses or ideas she comes up with.

Many times, this comes with experience. Or perhaps it's just a natural way of being for some people to stretch beyond the usual reportoire of poses. Be willing to have fun and try all sorts of whacky things. Use the landscape around you as props and try something unconventional. Ordinary poses create ordinary shots. Conversely, extrordinary poses create extrordinary shots. Look at the images that make you gasp, and then see what poses the model struck in each. You'll see that it's way out there in nearly all cases.

Is this something one can practice? Perhaps. Or perhaps just practice being less inhibited. But without a shadow of doubt, the model makes the shoot, so do something unconvnetional and you'll surely see results.


I notice a lot of photographers shoot outside, is it because of the lighting and/or background
For me, it's because of lighting and background. Fun has a lot to do with it too. I'm an outdoorsy type of guy, so climbing, hiking, getting dirty, or wet and working up a sweat adds to the experience. The props supplied by nature also add a large dimension to the shoot that's nearly impossible to replicate indoors.

Oh, and I suck as an indoor photographer.


how do you get the lighting perfect when you are in sooo many different locations?
Funny thing about the sun, it has produced fairly consistent lighting conditions over the past several million years. Provided there are no pesky clouds in the way, lighting conditions are highly predictable wherever you go. One need only point the camera in the proper direction (which appears to be easier said than done).

The simple rule of Sunny 16 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sunny_16) is all you need to get perfectly exposed pictures outside every time!!

[genex]

Doug for outdoor shoots I do use fill flash if it's in the sun, but usually I am shooting in shaded or partially shaded areas. I have concerns with squinting when it's too bright out and avoid that. John shoots a lot in the daytime from what I've seen and one way to get around it is to have the model looking directly at you so there's no visible squinting.

[John Stutz]

It's hard to get around squinting in direct sunlight. Even with eyes closed, I constantly have to remind the model to relax her face. And I mean constanly.. like every other shutter click. The two facts I live with are 1) It's not possible to open eyes in direct sunlight except for in the first or last few minutes of the day. Simply facing the sun is terribly hard. 2) deep shadows on the face (and body for that matter) are not possible to avoid unless you use fill flash or a reflector.

Because of these issues when shooting outdoors, I embrace the shadows and make them an integral part of my imagery. When you try to brighten the face, you'll inevitably brighten the rest of the body too, losing some of those deep shadows on the body that are often very desirable.

What the "pros" use is a scrim (http://www.amvona.com/v7/shop/?page=shop/flypage&product_id=2314). And by that I mean, those people who make a living off of shooting high fashion and glamour for the top magazines and catalogs. That's the industry standard and all but required for conventional outdoor photography. Btw, I briefly mentioned this in the latest issue of my newsletter (http://www.johnstutz.com/issue.asp?2006,april). You'll get nice even lighting without any squinting, and your face and eye lighting will be perfect if you position your model to catch a nice bounce of light off the ground. The backgrounds will be warm and pastel, not nearly as deep as you would get with direct light. Go pick up an Abercrombie & Fitch or J-Crew catalog, or check out the awesome work of Steven Bigler (http://sbigler.tripod.com/) and you'll see what I mean. It's "perfect" lighting... exactly what you probably don't want for physique photography though!!! (imho)

[BigD]

This is GREAT stuff! Thanks John, and I do enjoy your newsletters!



No doubt James, as soon as you start to get critical mass here, you'll need a dedicated section! One thing us fitness photographers like to do is talk about the shoot. In fact, given the opportunity, some of us tend to overcontribute. And considering that the core of this site is about photography, it's a natural topic that will certainly have its fair share of participation.

As for the current questions...

That's about the best question anyone could ask (imho)!! I constantly tell people I work with that all of my bestest shots are born out of something the model brought to the shoot, and not something I directed her to do. The model ultimately makes the difference between an average and an extrordinary shoot, not the photographer, who remains relatively constant from one shoot to the next. Every so often I work with someone who simply blows me away with the poses or ideas she comes up with.

Many times, this comes with experience. Or perhaps it's just a natural way of being for some people to stretch beyond the usual reportoire of poses. Be willing to have fun and try all sorts of whacky things. Use the landscape around you as props and try something unconventional. Ordinary poses create ordinary shots. Conversely, extrordinary poses create extrordinary shots. Look at the images that make you gasp, and then see what poses the model struck in each. You'll see that it's way out there in nearly all cases.

Is this something one can practice? Perhaps. Or perhaps just practice being less inhibited. But without a shadow of doubt, the model makes the shoot, so do something unconvnetional and you'll surely see results.

For me, it's because of lighting and background. Fun has a lot to do with it too. I'm an outdoorsy type of guy, so climbing, hiking, getting dirty, or wet and working up a sweat adds to the experience. The props supplied by nature also add a large dimension to the shoot that's nearly impossible to replicate indoors.

Oh, and I suck as an indoor photographer.

Funny thing about the sun, it has produced fairly consistent lighting conditions over the past several million years. Provided there are no pesky clouds in the way, lighting conditions are highly predictable wherever you go. One need only point the camera in the proper direction (which appears to be easier said than done).

The simple rule of Sunny 16 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sunny_16) is all you need to get perfectly exposed pictures outside every time!!

[BigD]

Doug for outdoor shoots I do use fill flash if it's in the sun, but usually I am shooting in shaded or partially shaded areas. I have concerns with squinting when it's too bright out and avoid that. John shoots a lot in the daytime from what I've seen and one way to get around it is to have the model looking directly at you so there's no visible squinting.



So you shoot mainly with no flash whatsoever?

[Scott]

Here are a couple of outside shots i got recently, This is a great thread BTW!

[LarryN]

Great thread:):)

Here's a couple questions..

When you are photographing the models, what skills do (or would you like) the models have to have to make the shoot unique?

What usually catches your attention when scouting for potential models?

LA:)

I look for models that show alot of expression. That is one thing that magazine publishers want more than anything else. For most models it takes lots of practise infront of a mirror to develope their facial expressions.

Larry

[genex]

Yeah that porn star open mouth look is quite popular with Robert Kennedy. Ladies, if you open your mouth a little and not smile but just look suggestively, that works quite well for Kennedy - particularly for American Curves type work (not so much Oxygen!)
:)

And Doug, yes outdoors I primarily shoot with no flash.

[BigD]

Yeah that porn star open mouth look is quite popular with Robert Kennedy. Ladies, if you open your mouth a little and not smile but just look suggestively, that works quite well for Kennedy - particularly for American Curves type work (not so much Oxygen!)
:)

And Doug, yes outdoors I primarily shoot with no flash.


Thanks, Gene. I am going to work more on that with the Sunny 16 rules and see what I can produce.

[John Stutz]

Sunny 16 assumes your camera is set on manual of course, and you're shooting with the sun, not into it.

For anyone shooting in any mode other than manual... best of luck to you!!

[Scott]

Hey John, Do you still use a SLR film camera or do you go straight dig with all your work now? My photog class instructor says you cant capture a true B&W with Dig do you agree with that?

[BigD]

Hey John, Do you still use a SLR film camera or do you go straight dig with all your work now? My photog class instructor says you cant capture a true B&W with Dig do you agree with that?

I disagree with that, they have gotten MUCH better and I love how mine look.

[LarryN]

Hey John, Do you still use a SLR film camera or do you go straight dig with all your work now? My photog class instructor says you cant capture a true B&W with Dig do you agree with that?

What your instructor is saying is that a digital sensor can not record monochrome black and white colours (which is true). However, the sensors these days come awfully close to recording these colours. It is hard to tell the difference.

Larry

[jasons805]

I'll be at everything National level in the states and both nationals in Canada as far as shows. For lighting, I like the challenge of natural light and also am too lazy to bring my lights. We have two kits at the studio, but they are often being used for other shoots the same weekend's I'm gone for BB shows.
Ya I hate lights too and I don't really think they help much. Big shadows behind someone not so cool. For me I like to shoot the moment let people do what they do very little direction. My best stuff seems to come by luck in a way. I like to let the person I am shooting have as much imput as they want. I think ittends to bring out some good ideas I didn't think of or it lets me know how far they want to go with everything. It's been a while since I have done professional work fulltime or even regular part time work, but I still really enjoy it.

[jasons805]

I disagree with that, they have gotten MUCH better and I love how mine look.
All and all I think it is hard to tell a good dig PIC from a real negative. I think dig is getting better everyday, but I hate the delay time that some cameras have from when you take a PIC and it actually takes a PIC. If you move to fast you might get some blur too. The time factor for real b/w is just not feasible for the net now, in this I want it now attitude. I think most old school photogs that teach so on love the old ways of doing things and will not change much. I am in the school where I love developing film printing so on. I just don't like the fact that you can mess up and with dig you don't have that worry. I even liked not knowing what I had till I finished developing the film.

[jasons805]

Maybe people could post pics that they have takin that they really like. Of anything. I will see if I can find anything I like. I lost so many photos over the years.

[BigD]

Here is one from a shoot I did recently.

http://i46.photobucket.com/albums/f148/dwjantz/Mandysmall.jpg

[BigD]

From this last Sunday

http://i46.photobucket.com/albums/f148/dwjantz/PICT3281.jpg

[jasons805]

hard to find stuff but here are 2
http://img206.imageshack.us/img206/3356/pic14nd.jpg (http://imageshack.us)
http://img63.imageshack.us/img63/7981/pic28vg.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

[John Stutz]

Hey John, Do you still use a SLR film camera or do you go straight dig with all your work now? My photog class instructor says you cant capture a true B&W with Dig do you agree with that?I use a digital camera. I always say, I'm not good enough to shoot film!! Really, I'm not.

There are several debates about which is better, digital or film. Some camps would say that digital cannot replicate the quality of analog film. I've also read highly technical articles about the mathematics of light and the ability of the eye to perceive, which state that digital has already surpassed film. All I know is that regardless of the quality of the media, I am entirely incapable of creating images with film that can even come close to the quality of images I can create with digital. Let's assume for the sake of argument that film is 10 times better than digital. Even so, I still believe I can create a final digital image that is 10 times better than anything I could capture on film. On the flip side, I actually know good photographers who can create superb images on film. More power to them.

In the end, most everything these days is converted to digital before it goes to print. So you'll need to scan film to digital if you plan to display it on the web or take it to press. And if you like color, you're going to have to trust a lab to make your prints -- as if!! For the cost of processing film, I could buy a half dozen Nikon D2x bodies and a few lenses to go with them. I also don't have the patience or the time to drop off and pick up film.

True, folks like jasons805 may enjoy printing. And I can respect that. It's an art, and it takes talent. Hey, I enjoy writing software, whereas most people would rather blow their brains out. To each their own. I personally do not miss my darkroom days for one second. Workflow for digital is so much more convenient by multiple orders of magnitude for me. But then that's no fun for those who love red lights and chemical highs.

In 2001, I shot with a one of the first digital SLRs, a Fuji that was perfectly awful. I mean the quality was beyond horrible. Despite that fact, I still created the best images of my life. It's as if I instantly jumped 10 years forward in experience. At that moment, I swore I would never shoot another frame of film ever again. I still haven't.

Oh, your teacher is dead wrong. Ok, technically, digital cameras only have RGB sensors. That's irrelevant. When converted to B/W and printed on a good printer with good paper, I can produce a stunning B/W image that will surpass anything I've ever shot with B/W film by leaps and bounds. It's not even close. Note, I have a really expensive printer, and I print on really expensive paper. Admittingly, my printer may fall a teensy bit short when compared with the most exceptional B/W film prints. But then, I'm no print expert, and mine is not the most exceptional B/W printer. I believe there are 1 or 2 better which can meet or beat any B/W neg image. Oh, and if it matters, my images are typically 4-5 Megapixels, and will print at 20"x30" flawlessly!!

...but I hate the delay time that some cameras have from when you take a PIC and it actually takes a PIC. If you move to fast you might get some blur too. ... I am in the school where I love developing film printing so on. I just don't like the fact that you can mess up and with dig you don't have that worry. I even liked not knowing what I had till I finished developing the film.I give you lots of credit for sticking with your darkroom. If you love it, keep it up. I also like the fact that you liked not knowing what you had till you finished developing the film. No doubt, taking a photo is only half of the art. Some of us have switched from darkroom to Photoshop to complete the process, but if you're good in the darkroom and if you enjoy it, then definitely keep it up.

Also, all the med-to-high end Nikon or Canon (and other) digital SLR cameras won't have that pesky delay. Cameras like the D2h are touted for their phenominal responsiveness. I have a great "delay" story about my first film camera, which was the first fully automatic and electronically controlled camera. But I'll save that for another day.

[jasons805]

I love photoshop. I mean when you scan it is it not dig now? Cropping color correction whatever photoshop is so great. I have spent so much on the film stuff it is hard to switch over. I would love to though.
PS I have a cheap nikon cool pics and was trying to take pics of my new dog chasing a tennis ball so on and man was that a pain. If I can find one of them I will post it lol

[John Stutz]

The lag on the lower end cams (film or digital) can be a drag. If you think your coolpics is bad, try the Olympus 7000i (if you can find one).

The blurriness comes from your shutter speed of course. You probably know, but for others.. use at least 1/250s for anything moving. 1/500s or faster if it's moving fast (like sports action). 1/500s will only slightly blur a spiked volleyball. Even the cheapest cams can handle that, but you'll likely need to take if off Program mode.

[BigD]

Today I am going to be shooting the new Beatles show in Branson, Missouri during a dress rehearsal. They are needing promo pics and the 8x10 photos the entertainers use to autograph for show goers. They are also having a new Sinatra show in this theater. It has been so long since I shot anything like this I will have to figure out my settings! On a side note, George Harrison's sister, Louise, is the one who brought this show to Branson.

[BigD]

Yeah that porn star open mouth look is quite popular with Robert Kennedy. Ladies, if you open your mouth a little and not smile but just look suggestively, that works quite well for Kennedy - particularly for American Curves type work (not so much Oxygen!)
:)

And Doug, yes outdoors I primarily shoot with no flash.


Hey, Gene. You mean like this one I shot of Natalie in Tulsa? :)

http://i46.photobucket.com/albums/f148/dwjantz/PICT0385.jpg

[genex]

yeah she's got a bit of that mouth open style. :)

[hommes]

Gee. It must be nice to have such a compliant test model...

[TomNine]

I see my recent attempt at humor was deleted. I apologize, it was inappropriate. And possibly not very funny.

I might as well post a recent picture I think turned out okay. Don't ask me how I did it, I just push the button thing.

http://i12.photobucket.com/albums/a215/TomNine/DSC02576.jpg

[Scott]

Now i know compared to some of the others that have posted pics here these 2 look very novice like but anyhow its a little shoot i did with a girl a few months ago!

[Scott]

Here are 2 i took today ok so they arent of hot fitness women so sue me :p

[LarryN]

From this last Sunday

http://i46.photobucket.com/albums/f148/dwjantz/PICT3281.jpg

BigD,

The contrast in your images is excellent. You are well on your way to becoming a successful photographer. Another good way for photographers to develope their skips and make some cash at the same time is to shoot head shots for talent agences.

Larry

[femalemusclefan]

Now i know compared to some of the others that have posted pics here these 2 look very novice like but anyhow its a little shoot i did with a girl a few months ago!

Good pictures Scott.
She has great biceps, thanks! :)

[BigD]

BigD,

The contrast in your images is excellent. You are well on your way to becoming a successful photographer. Another good way for photographers to develope their skips and make some cash at the same tme s to shoot head shots for talent agences.

Larry

Thanks Larry. And I have a new camera coming Wednesday, can't wait!

[BigD]

How many of you use PhotoShop on all your work? Or do you try to get your image correct when you shoot it??? Are we photographers or graphic artists? Here is an excerpt of part of my little debate on this on another forum:

as you are just entering into the photog world...trust me...EVERYONE edits...and if they say they don't. They are lying. ****, 80% of the models these days wont sign releases until after they see their pics retouched.

Unless you know photoshop or plan to sell your stuff to art house mags, you better learn photoshop inside and out.

Our camera club does not allow photoshopped images into our contests and I have been told by a few they they do not use it except for things like cropping, or a little fix here and there. But to always be sitting in front of a computer for hours changing it all to make it look really good seems a waste of time except under certain circumstances. I want to take GOOD photos with my camera!

[John Stutz]

I'd love to respond to the prior post by BigD. However, I'm in a hotel lobby right now and I need to skedaddle soon.

In the meantime, I'll ask Gene or James if it's possible to split this question off into it's own thread. It's a great discussion, but this forum section will end up as one single 400 page thread if we don't get it going properly. How 'bout it?

Another idea would be for various photogs wishing to upload their pics (presumably fitness related) in order to receive [honest] feedback from other photogs AND competitors.

I'd also like to ask what else anyone thinks would be beneficial for the fitness community to share in this forum section?

Ok, I'm off to the CO Pro to win the Hummer...

[LarryN]

Hey, Gene. You mean like this one I shot of Natalie in Tulsa? :)

http://i46.photobucket.com/albums/f148/dwjantz/PICT0385.jpg




That is the look. You may want to re shoot her doing the same pose while wearing a bronzer and a bikini from Colleen Kelly at http://www.sexyswimwear.com

Larry

PS Photographers can write off the cost of bikinis on their income tax!

[BigD]

I will be in Tulsa next weekend to shoot with Natalie again and another girl, lingerie and bikini with my new Nikon! I will upload a couple of them after that.

[Scott]

This is probably a very elementary question but how do you detemine the distance to stand when shooting models like should you get up real close or stand back and zoom in? Or does it just depend like if your just doing a headshot, or individual body part versus a full body shot?

[genex]

Scott that depends on what lenses you are using and what kind of effect you are trying to get. A lot of us shoot with longer lenses and stand further back. That's when you'll often see the backgrounds more out of focus if the model is also far from the background.

Some people like to exaggerate things and may use a wide angle up close to make bodyparts look larger, etc.

[BigD]

Scott that depends on what lenses you are using and what kind of effect you are trying to get. A lot of us shoot with longer lenses and stand further back. That's when you'll often see the backgrounds more out of focus if the model is also far from the background.

Some people like to exaggerate things and may use a wide angle up close to make bodyparts look larger, etc.


I second this. It sometimes can make the girl feel as if you are getting in her space if you get real close.

[BigD]

Here are a couple I shot in Branson, Missouri last week of the new Beatles tribute show. I just signed a contract as Regional Manager of Advertising Sales and Chief Photographer for Branson Live magazine for Ozarks Entertainment Group. :) GREAT contacts and opportunities there!!

http://i46.photobucket.com/albums/f148/dwjantz/PICT3805.jpg
http://i46.photobucket.com/albums/f148/dwjantz/PICT3633.jpg
http://i46.photobucket.com/albums/f148/dwjantz/PICT3629.jpg

[BigD]

One more


http://i46.photobucket.com/albums/f148/dwjantz/PICT3617.jpg

[BigD]

Hey, John. Looking forward to your response when you can get around to it.


I'd love to respond to the prior post by BigD. However, I'm in a hotel lobby right now and I need to skedaddle soon.

In the meantime, I'll ask Gene or James if it's possible to split this question off into it's own thread. It's a great discussion, but this forum section will end up as one single 400 page thread if we don't get it going properly. How 'bout it?

Another idea would be for various photogs wishing to upload their pics (presumably fitness related) in order to receive [honest] feedback from other photogs AND competitors.

I'd also like to ask what else anyone thinks would be beneficial for the fitness community to share in this forum section?

Ok, I'm off to the CO Pro to win the Hummer...

[John Stutz]

BigD, See the new thread started by Gene.

[John Stutz]

This is probably a very elementary question but how do you detemine the distance to stand when shooting models like should you get up real close or stand back and zoom in? Or does it just depend like if your just doing a headshot, or individual body part versus a full body shot?One doesn't "determine" a proper distance to stand. It's more a function of the size of your lens, its field of view, and the way in which you want to portray your model in the image.

As an example, I was standing approximately 50-75 feet away from the model in this shot (http://www.johnstutz.com/image.asp?fit_girls,natalie_barnett,1,high).

Here's a shot of me and Mari (http://www.johnstutz.com/web/mari.jpg) (I'm on the left) during the shooting this photo (http://www.johnstutz.com/image.asp?fit_girls,mari_kudla,8,high). As you can see, when I shoot with the big lens, I stand way back!! And as you can also see, Mari's sister was way way way back!! Though she used a smaller lens, she was still about 500 feet away from us.

Whereas this shot (http://www.johnstutz.com/image.asp?fit_girls,maggie_diubaldo,11,high) was taken from a distance of 5-10 feet.

So there you have it... it varies from photo to photo and from lens to lens.

A better question to ask might be, "how does one detemine when to start a new thread?"

[BigD]

BigD, See the new thread started by Gene.


Thanks, didn't see it

[BigD]

Hey, Gene and James. Curious as to the model releases you use, if any. What does it entail and what is compensation for the models?

[Eddie]

Hey I was wondering if any experienced photographer believes that setting up private shoots
in a gym is one of the toughest deals to negociate? I know timing plays in big role in it.

[genex]

Actually Eddie, I've found that its pretty easy usually to do that. It's a common thing so most gyms have policies around it that you just have to adhere to.

[Lift Studios]

Hey I was wondering if any experienced photographer believes that setting up private shoots
in a gym is one of the toughest deals to negociate? I know timing plays in big role in it.It comes down to knowing the general manager or gym owner usually. It's a challenge to shoot in a gym that isn't your local gym or one where you don't know people running it. 24hr fitness and Ballys are the worst.

I've shot Heather Policky and Phil Heath in local Colorado gyms and the gyms are stoked to get the added exposure.

[Tre]

Forget the big corporate fitness centers like Bally's, 24-hour fitness, Planet Fitness, LA Fitness, etc. - they don't want you in there, and it's a waste of time to even pursue it.

The local gyms are best and many will be happy to get you in. There's often no charge, and I've never been asked to pay more than $75 for the day. That was for the former World Gym in Columbus, which I believe is now a Gold's(?) - does that sound right? They started charging in 2006, but for years, had let us shoot there for free during the Arnold weekend.

It just takes a few phone calls to set up in advance.

[HDPhysiques]

Tre' is correct. Most of the big gyms are a pain in the ass, but if you know somebody, you can usually get stuff done in those gyms under the radar.

The small ones are great, they love the exposure, and the "buzz" it generates among members..... especially when you bring in a ton of lighting equipment. lol

Columbus Worlds Gym was reasonable with rates until this year. They gouged everybody this year (which is odd, I think they'd love to have their gym filled with top level IFBB pros....), so next Arnold, I'll find someplace else.

HDP

[Eddie]

So the smaller local gyms are the best way to go huh.

Hmm, yeah that doesn't surprise me.

The big name national facilities are so conscience of their image and all.
And probably feel they give enough credit and exposure anyway with all commercials they do.

Thanks for the input fellas . . I definately appreciate it!:D

[claus]

Hello -
I am photographing FBB and Fitness, but also male BB, musicians, theater, dance, circus, different sports, action, people at studio and on the street.
Most of all I like available light situations, for available light shootings I use sometimes reflectors and / or flash. Sometimes I do studio photography too, using my studio flashes (up to six lights). I work for some athletes, press, Internet press, for athletes, sponsors (supplement companies) and for some promotors of bodybuilding events.

Its interesting when you see the pictures of certain photographers and their styles - some you recognize always - such as John Stutz (by his dramatic light and perfect picture composition - he likes the diagonals and the golden cut), Steve Wennerstrom (by his poses and sometimes to hard camera flash), Mike Neveux (by the style and elegance), Bill Dobbins (by his studio lightning, some accesories he uses a lot, and some poses), some of Genex (diagonal cuts, shots from above, almost looking very light and cool) - not to forget Robby and his passion for biceps and biceps poses mostly photographed from a little deeper point of view as usual (he is not as tall as most of the other photographers).

I am trying to develop my own styles - and I am lucky I have some fantastic models - thanks to all - and I am always looking to improve the quality of my work.
I do not have a website for BB - when you are a model, ask me for some samples.

Sincerely, Claus

[genex]

Hey Claus thanks for your input. For those of you who haven't met Claus, he's all over the European circuit and I'd say is one of the top photographers over there.

[claus]

Hey Claus thanks for your input. For those of you who haven't met Claus, he's all over the European circuit and I'd say is one of the top photographers over there.

Thanks for the flowers - GeneX - I am speachless by such a compliment from you ...



when will you be back to "old Europe"? Will you be at the worlds again?

Regards, Claus

[genex]

Hi Claus, Hopefully I will be back for that!

[Eddie]

I must say you do indeed do some awesome work there Claus!

At least when it comes to the shots of the ladies. Keep up it man!

I don't care much for seeing those male pics though.