PDA

View Full Version : Shot deconstruction

genex
June 1st, 2006, 10:30 PM
Big D asked me about this shot:
http://static.flickr.com/55/157565848_68b926ae77.jpg

It was just shot straight up pretty much.

Hand held with a 24-70mm lens from about waist level (hers).

Nothing too fancy, just a straight up shot. In PS I just adjusted curves a bit and then output for web.

Here's the EXIF:
Image Serial Number: 000-9390
Camera Model: Canon EOS-1D
Firmware: Adobe Photoshop CS Windows
Date/Time: 2006:05:27 14:41:59
Shutter speed: 1/200 sec
Aperture: 3.5
Exposure mode: Manual
Flash: Off
Metering mode: Multi-segment
ISO: 250
Focal length: 60mm
Image size: 1648 x 2464
Rotation: none
jasons805
June 1st, 2006, 10:45 PM
How about more info on the location lighting so on. That can make a shot more so than the settings.
John Stutz
June 2nd, 2006, 01:08 AM
Hey Gene, I don't suppose you have a photoshop filter for removing uneven pro tan :-) I sure could use one too.
genex
June 2nd, 2006, 01:28 AM
Yeah someone needs to write that one for sure. I'm a bit lazy about touchups since I have a high volume of photos. If there are shots girls want prints from or for promotionals stuff, I'll clean stuff up. There were a couple shots where her bikini bite took off some skin so I did use the healing brush on those :)
genex
June 2nd, 2006, 01:29 AM
Oh Jason, that was back behind the building in the shade around 4pm or so I think so the sun wasn't in the middle of the sky.
BigD
June 2nd, 2006, 07:03 AM
Oh Jason, that was back behind the building in the shade around 4pm or so I think so the sun wasn't in the middle of the sky.


Do you normally use a higher ISO when in the shade? I was using a Gossen Luna-Pro meter yesterday and I think my shots look a little darker then I wanted, but I metered with ISO 100. I am thinking my camera may need to open up one stop to compensate.
genex
June 2nd, 2006, 10:04 AM
It depends on how dark the shade is - I'm usually shooting from 100-400 max outside.
femalemusclefan
June 2nd, 2006, 12:52 PM
I never knew taking pictures was so complicated!
I have so much respect for you guys.
Silly question, but are you all pro's?
John Stutz
June 2nd, 2006, 01:38 PM
No, not all of us are pros... myself included.

Oddly enough, I never knew taking pictures was so complicated either! There are only three settings on the camera, one of which is typically never changed, the second of which is usually obvious, and the third of which is generally irrelevant.
femalemusclefan
June 2nd, 2006, 01:49 PM
No, not all of us are pros... myself included.

Oddly enough, I never knew taking pictures was so complicated either! There are only three settings on the camera, one of which is typically never changed, the second of which is usually obvious, and the third of which is generally irrelevant.

That's very interesting John, because I definetly thought you are a pro!
Just looked at a few shots on your website. Many of the pictures, especially the gorgeous shots of Cheryl Mitchell are quite simply superb! You captured Cheryl's beauty and vascularity perfectly! :)
jasons805
June 2nd, 2006, 03:53 PM
I guess if you have been paided to take pics you can call yourself a pro. For me I have been doing it for along time(studied it in HS and College) a bit rusty now. As a kid I always wanted to take the picture whatever it was. As a got older wanted to do it for a job, but just never really pushed that hard after college. I kinda feel like it is passing me by a bit with all this digital stuff. I am good with Photoshop7 though.
John Stutz
June 2nd, 2006, 04:09 PM
Thanks femalemusclefan. The real story about my hobby can be found in my About Me (http://www.johnstutz.com/about_me.asp) page on my site. The short of it is, this is just a hobby for me -- and always will be.
TomNine
June 2nd, 2006, 04:18 PM
The secret to Gene's work has nothing to do with ISO or f-stops. The main thing is, what color were his toe nails for the shoot?

I don't care much about photography, as anyone will realize if they look at my pics. I just like to look at pretty girls flexing, and it turns out to be more socially acceptable if I have a camera in my hands while doing it.
genex
June 2nd, 2006, 04:19 PM
Tom speaks the truth! :)
George
June 5th, 2006, 09:26 AM
Yeah someone needs to write that one for sure. I'm a bit lazy about touchups since I have a high volume of photos. If there are shots girls want prints from or for promotionals stuff, I'll clean stuff up. There were a couple shots where her bikini bite took off some skin so I did use the healing brush on those :)
I actually have one....it's a kodak plugin for photoshop. I use it to get the "Vogue" magazine skin look. You'll need to tweak it a bit and experiment...otherwise you end up with perfect...no blemish...but also no "cuts" (no muscle) if you're not careful. I think the program is GEM Digital
Airbrush professional, ROC and Sho...there are 3 different programs...pretty pricey kodak plug ins...but they're killer apps...awww...hell....now I've given away my secrets....now how am I gonna compete with John S and Gene?....hehehe :help:
femalemusclefan
June 5th, 2006, 12:36 PM
The lady in your pictures has spectacular abs!
Who is she George?
Thanks! :)
George
June 5th, 2006, 12:41 PM
The lady in your pictures has spectacular abs!
Who is she George?
Thanks! :)
That's Mary Bell. She's a figure competitor in a few feds...and I believe she's still an OCB judge...Very nice lady....Also, look for more of my shots of Mary in an upcoming issue of Oxygen Magazine:}