For my latest image, I got to try out some of my new Christmas presents. The first being, the Camera Axe System, an interesting product that allows photographers to devices cameras such as hot shoe flashes, studio flashes, etc based on a wide variety of inputs from sensors (Microphone sensors, light sensors, photogate sensors, valve sensors). The software on the Camera Axe is open source as well, which means if you have the mind of an engineer or computer programmer, you can even modify the code to suit your needs.

If you don’t have a degree in computer sciences, than the base software is more than enough. It allows you to set thresholds for the various sensors (meaning for instance, you can specify the value that triggers your device to go off) as well as setting delays (the difference in time from when the sensor is alerted to when the device is actually triggered.)

This criteria is very useful when doing high-speed photography, where a few milliseconds can greatly change the result of the photo. You can see here from one of my early test shoots, how just a few milliseconds changes the entire effect of a popping balloon.

The other Xmas presents I utilized in this shoot were Paul C. Buff’s new Einsteins. Einsteins have a distinct advantage over any other Alienbee AB light because of its faster flash duration. It is absolutely impossible using the AB800′s that I have to capture water that is frozen. Although it seems like a brief instant, the duration of the flash (even at its lowest setting) it too long to freeze the motion of fast falling water. Having both of these tools at my disposal now, i wanted to create an image that would put them to the test.

I began by going out and buying the coolest looking bottle of clear liquor I could find, which just happened to be a Limited Edition of Absolut Vodka. The bottle’s silhouette was very similar to the iconic Absolut Vodka shape, but the texture was completely unique due to diamond-shaped bevels all over the bottle. I knew with so many facets that it was going to make it extremely difficult to shoot. When I first got it into my studio, I set up my lights and saw that my suspicions were correct. The facets of the diamonds refracted the light in strange ways making it difficult to actually see the texture.

In the past, I’ve used Krylon Matte Spray Paint to minimize the refracting effect of glass. You can see it in action in this photo I used for my Miller Lite photo found in my portfolio. 

I was unsure, however, if the matte spray would have any effect on something so crazy looking. To my surprise, it surpassed all my expectations. If you are a product photographer, and don’t have any of this stuff, go and get it.

Lighting Setup

From there on, it was just experimenting with the lighting setup to make the bottle look the best it possibly could. After I was confident the bottle looked good, it was time to utilize my new toys. I tried to keep the lighting setup very similar, but I reduced the power on all my flashes to shorten the flash duration. With the room blacked out and the lights turned off, I triggered my camera with a Infrared remote. The shutter speed was several seconds, which allowed me to navigate through the darkness, scoop water out of a bucket, and then throw the water onto the product. The sound of the water hitting the table triggered a microphone sensor that I had below the product, which in turn fired off my flashes. Because the room was completely black, the only thing exposing the picture was my flashes meaning that I would have no motion blur. You can see a photo of the setup which I took during daylight of how everything was positioned.

Image Build Up

I experimented all weekend with the best ways to light and throw the water, taking several hundred photos. There wasn’t one that really screamed to me, which is partially my mistake for not concepting what I wanted the photo to look like before hand, and so I decided I was going to have to composite several together. You can see my entire editing process below in the animated .GIF.

I’m pretty excited about how these new tools will elevate my photography game and am excited to see where this high-speed stuff goes. If you have any questions, feel free to reach out and contact me. I’d be happy to help. Big shout out to those at Camera Axe and Paul C. Buff for making sweet products.

I used a basic 4 light setup made up of 4 AB800′s. In truth, I actually needed 5 lights to do this shot in one take, which wasn’t an option, and I so I was forced to merge multiple exposures. The overwhelming majority of the final image was made from this light setup. As you can see, I have two edge/rimlights that are being shot through transluscent diffusion panels. Softboxes would have also worked for the edgelights. I then had another AB-400 that was shot through a medium-sized softbox that was meant to expose the top of the watch and the face of the watch. Lastly, I had a AB800 on the ground that was snooted and aimed toward my 50% gray seamless paper. You can see my light setup and the results of this setup in the pic below.

Looking at the results, there are several things I don’t like. The bottom of the strap and the face seem too dark. To brighten up the lower strap, I needed to place a light shooting up.  I removed both of the edge lights from the image, and placed one of the AB800′s on the ground, pointed up. Because the camera, camera tripod, and lightstand the product was attached too were so close together, I didn’t have room to put a softbox on the light. Instead, I decided to simply hold one of the diffusion panels, and force it in between the light and the product. You can see this light setup and the results in the pic below.

These too lighting setups (w/ slight variations) were really all that was needed to expose the watch.

Once the idea of lightning came to me, I realized I needed a background with a little more color. I turned off all my lights and busted out some blacklight tubes that I bought at home depot. I wanted a background that looked abstract, but had hints of a subtle glow. To do this, I took a long exposure and waved the blacklights around in a random fashion. Here is that result.

So with all the basics covered, it was now time to combine everything in post. This animation covers the entire process from beginning to end.

And now the final image. I basically just transformed the background to make it a landscape orientation and composited a bunch of lightning. I’ve received a lot of mixed reviews on the final image, but even if you don’t like it, I hope the behind the scenes stuff helps.

]]> http://jeffcreech.com/blog/?feed=rss2&p=423 2 http://jeffcreech.com/blog/?p=409 http://jeffcreech.com/blog/?p=409#comments Sun, 13 Nov 2011 02:01:10 +0000 Jeff http://jeffcreech.com/blog/?p=409

Watches are a very difficult subject to photograph. The small size and reflective surfaces that jewelry and watches often have will challenge even the best of photographers. Add into the mix, a mixture of textures and materials such as polished and brushed, and a difficult shot becomes infinitely more challenging.

That was my main objective of my latest Omega image. It’s a fairly simple looking watch, but the subtle differences in polished and brushed steel gives it a refined look. To achieve the final image, I combined over 10 exposures. I generally shoot a base image, which I feel is an all-around decent image in terms of overall lighting. From there, I will go through all of my images and focus on just one aspect of the watch (crown, dial, bracelet, etc) and choose an exposure that shows off that aspect the best. Here are the majority of the shots I used to make the final image.

You can see how they were combined in this image build up animation.

And lastly, here is my setup. The lights that you can see in the background were simply christmas lights that I hung in the back and then desaturated in post. I seem to have forgotten to get a behind the scenes photo of my setting them up.

So there ya go. Hope this was helpful. If you have any ideas of stuff for me to shoot, send me an email and I’ll do my best to make it happen.

And here is the Image buildup…

The image below is made up of probably 6-10 images. Most of the frames you see in the animation below will be merging images or parts of images together. Other frames will be layer adjustment maps, and some (like the shadows and the purple glint of the sapphire) are just made from scratch in Photoshop.

Got any ideas of Images you would like to see build-ups of? Drop a comment and let me know.

I recently came across a job posting on one of the many forums I frequent that caused me to raise one of my eyebrows. The listing asked for someone who was available the week of March 13, could photograph in at least 7mp, was experienced in model photography, and could handle being around beautiful, naked women. Sounds like a dream job, right??

Here’s the kicker, the last criteria for the job was this, “…would be willing to work for FREE.” This was not your run of the mill, no budget, local business gig. The client for this job was Playboy. There were not that many details being offered up, but there was a supposed opportunity of future work if the photographer nailed it. I realized that this was an amazing opportunity for someone, but I couldn’t get over the fact that a successful organization as large as Playboy was unwilling to pay for photography. Below is my reply to that job posting:

I’ve found myself looking back at the past few years recently, wondering where photography went wrong. At what point did it become acceptable to work for free? At what point did creativity become a cheap commodity? I honestly don’t understand how it is deemed kosher for individuals to not reimburse others for the services that they perfomed.

I can’t say that I don’t have anything to do with the shift in value. I on several occasions have been lured into working for free. Seduced by the allure of increased exposure, “future” gigs, and rare perks of the job (naked chicks and fast cars), I lost my values and prostituted my services. But every time I finish one of these jobs, I am always left feeling violated. Disappointed and let down, I wonder why I let myself fall for it again. Why is it, that when a job is deemed “fun,” that the gig is in of itself payment? Isn’t the whole purpose of pursuing a passion, so that you can get paid for doing what doesn’t feel like work. I don’t mean for this post to come across as if I am seeking pity, for myself or any other photographer, but it is strange how common free work has become. I understand that the economy is hurting right now and many businesses are suffering, but I don’t see that as an acceptable excuse.

I consider photography a trade, similar to an electrician, plumber, or mechanic. It takes several years of rigorous study and countless hours of practice to really excel at your job. Would anyone ever ask their mechanic, “I have a car that needs some engine work, how about you repair it for free this time, and the next time the engine blows up, I’ll pay you for it.” Why is this not acceptable, but it is deemed perfectly reasonable when that mechanic is substituted with a photographer? It actually makes less sense to me. In this case of Playboy, the photography is absolutely vital to the success of Playboy’s business. What is Playboy without the photography? The photographer who worked for scratch is directly responsible for lining Playboy’s pocket with green. In the case of product photography, the photographer is the one who communicates the benefits of said products to the customer. How successful would Absolut Vodka be without their award winning photography and ads? What if their ads were nothing but heavy copy?

Or how about this situation, “You fix my leaky pipes, and I’ll give you a little byline on a sign in my front yard.” Let me call my utility company and see if they’ll accept bi-lines as payment. Last time I checked bi-lines and “future” gigs don’t pay the bills. Luckily, I’m still young and don’t have responsibilities like a family or a mortgage, but I feel sorry for those who have chosen photography as a career, and now can’t compete. I would lovvvveee to pursue photography as a career, but I realize now that it’s not a viable source of income.

As I said, my rant is not directed toward [name omitted]. I have no reason to doubt [name omitted] here. He probably has more credibility than me and if he says, “there is a possibility for future work,” than there probably is, pending one’s performance. This sounds like an amazing opportunity and it is not my goal to discourage others from taking advantage of the awesome situation. This is more or less, nostalgic rhetoric on how things once were and how I wish things could still be. Further dialogue would be great, but I don’t expect any of my questions to be answered. Ugh, /rant.

What are your alls thoughts on this? I’m not local enough to apply for the gig, but even if I were, I probably wouldn’t have. Am I crazy? I like to think I’m just tired of my trade being devalued to the point of nothingness.

To help with this endeavor, I’ve assemebled a list of tips and tricks that I use to remove rigs from my images.

#1 Use the pen tool initially and often. — The first thing I do when I open an image is outline the boundaries of significant areas as new paths. It may seem rudimentary, but it will most definitely speed up your workflow later in the process. Take notice of changes in color and gradation and use the natural boundaries of the car’s lines and reflections as your path’s boundaries. When needed, utilize shift+clicks and alt+clicks to add/subtract selections from each other.

There really is no such thing as overkill when it comes to paths. The more, the merrier.

#2 Make quick work of backgrounds with the clone tool. — Let’s face it; without the clone tool, many of us would be helpless to remove even the smallest of discrepancies in our images. It is by far the most powerful tool for removing rigs, but to utilize it to its full potential, one must regularly alter brush size, brush hardness, and opacity. Various textures and elements in backgrounds of rig shots blur and merge into strange shapes and gradients. Rig shots have that certain “Wow! factor,” because of this illusion of motion represented through the converging lines. Converging lines are very difficult to replicate when cloning because there is no correct source to clone from. On one side of the rig, the line may be too thick and on the other, too thin. To solve this, use a smaller brush with a medium opacity, and over several strokes blend the two sides together. It will take a little patience, but it is well worth the effort.

#3 Eliminate repetition of pattern with the healing brush. — There are some instances where the clone tool just won’t cut it. Often, the source area (the area you are cloning from) may be smaller than the area you are cloning to. In this case, the clone tool may cause a repetition of pattern that may be visible to viewers. I always find it funny when I look at an image and see the same tree branch 5 times in the background. The healing brush can be used to disrupt any accidental patterns caused by cloning. Use it just as you would the clone tool.

#4 The paint brush is the Ace in the “Hole.” — You may come across certain situations in which the clone tool and the healing brush are both insufficient. The paint brush, with a little practice, can be the most effective tool in removing rigs from images. The key is to vary brush size, brush hardness, and opacity and to use other parts of the image as reference to what you are painting. I’ve touched on this briefly in the past. Refer to Removing Reflections in Post for more detailed instruction.

Believe it or not, this whole hood was recreated with the paint brush. There wasn’t enough source area to clone from, so I was forced to create from scratch the various elements of the hood.

#5 Reduce harsh edges with the blur tool. — Paths, in combination with any of the above tools, have the tendency to create very hard edges. These edges may stick out like a sore thumb as rig shots typically have some camera shake. In many instances, the blur may increase as the relative distance of the object to the lens increases (ex. the rear wheel being more blurry than the front wheel on a front 3/4 rig shot). It is important to take this effect into consideration and use the blur tool accordingly.

Using these 5 tips (and a few more :p) I was able to successfully remove the rig from this SRT-4 image. Check out the animation below to see the whole process.

As you can see, this pictures lacks a lot of pop and could definitely benefit from some added contrast. As it is now, the image looks rather flat, although it clearly has the potential to be something more. Open the image in Photoshop and navigate to the adjustment map menu located at the bottom of the layer window. Select Curves, which I conveniently highlighted with a red box.

Once you select Curves, a window should pop up, showing the graphical display that I explained in my last blog post. We know from my last tutorial, that we are going to want to create a S-curve. A S-curve produced additional contrast by darkening the shadows and lightening the highlights. One approach to creating this S-curve is to simply select two random points on the line and manipulate the curve until the image looks appropriate. A more refined approach involves selecting two points on the line by using the actual image values as reference points. To help you understand, take a look at the image below. By command + left clicking (cntrl + left click on PC) a point on the image, we conveniently identify that pixel’s location on the line. I start by locating an area of the image that I would like to be brighter, and cmd+left clicking in that area (denoted by a red circle). I then locate an area that I would like to be darker and opt+left click within that area (denoted by the other red circle).

Once the points are identified on the line, I use them to make my adjustments. In this image, you can see where I have drug the most-right point up, effectively brightening the highlights of the image.

Next, I darken the shadows by dragging the left point downwards.

We are now left with an image that has significantly more contrast than the original.

While the main purpose of curves is to adjust contrast, it also has the ability to correct white balance. Luckily, I shot the above image in RAW and was able to make some slight tweaks in the color balance. As you can see, this image is now much too warm. Let’s use curves and another simple tool, threshold, to correct the white balance. Start, by navigating to the layer adjustment map and selecting Threshold. The Threshold command converts grayscale or color images to high-contrast, black-and-white images. You can specify a certain level as a threshold. All pixels lighter than the threshold are converted to white; all pixels darker are converted to black. This becomes important to know because the next step after the threshold command is to select a pixel in the image that we would like Photoshop to represent as a pure white pixel.

Drag the white arrow, all the way to the right side of the histogram. Now slowly drag the arrow to the left, until we start to see white pixels. I like to go a little bit further after seeing the initial white pixels, so that the change is more drastic. We will want to mark these pixels, so that we can easily select them in the later steps.

To do this, turn Caps-Lock on, and you should see that your eye dropper has turned into a crosshair. Navigate toward the white pixels and shift+click to leave a crosshair marker. We are going to use this point later in the process as a reference point. Exit out of the threshold window after leaving the marker, and create a Curves adjustment map. Click on the eyedropper tool that I have highlighted in red to select the white eyedropper tool. Make sure caps-lock is still on and match your mouse pointer (which should still be a cross hair) with the marker. Once you are directly matched up with the marker, you should see that it disappears. Click the left click to set this point as the new white point.

Here is the image with both techniques in this tutorial performed on it.

While this technique does fairly well at correcting minor inaccuracies in white balance, it struggles with images that are badly affected my improper white balance. In those instances, it is best to use the Color balance tool. Or if you are smart, you shoot in RAW and can do it in your RAW editing software.

Check back next week, for my explanation of Levels and its uses in altering contrast.

To locate curves, one must navigate towards Image>adjustments>curves or use the curves selection from the layer adjustment map list. After selecting curves you should see a menu that looks like this:

At a quick glance, it looks harmless enough, but let it be known that curves is a very powerful tool in adjusting the brightness and contrast of an image. Focus your attention on the graph and its respective axes. I find it easiest to speak of the graph in terms of a coordinate plot made up of an x and y axis. Think of the horizontal axis (or x-axis) as all those values in the image ranging from black to white. Values are of course, colors devoid of any saturation. Think of the vertical axis (or y axis) as all those values in the image, ranging from black to white, AFTER adjustments to the brightness and contrast have been made to the image. By default, the graph contains a diagonal line that bisects the graph in two. Imagine a point in the middle of that line. That point corresponds to a value that is a 50% gray. To verify that this is true, draw a vertical line down to the x axis from that point and you should see that it is the midpoint between pure black and pure white. Now, draw a horizontal line to the y axis from that same point. Again, the line should intersect the y axis at the midpoint between pure black and pure white. This make sense because we have yet to make any changes to the image. In other words, any point on that line should have an x and y value that is identical because we haven’t actually adjusted anything yet.

There are three basic shapes that one should utilize when making adjustments with curves. Refer to the image below. The first I will teach is the lighten curve. Click the midpoint of the line and drag up. To understand what we have just done, imagine the coordinates of the new point. The x axis which represents the values in the image BEFORE any changes is still at a 50% gray, but the y axis, which represents the values in the image AFTER we have altered the curve is closer to white. One can see with the coordinates that I have added below the lighten curve, that the y value is lighter than the x value. Take note though, that it is not just one x value in isolation that was affected by the change. In fact, every point on that line is now different, with those values closest to the 50% gray point having the largest incremental change. The important thing is that ALL values of the image are now lighter.

The second curve is a darken curve. It is the exact opposite of the curve explained above and is created by dragging the line downward. Again, it is important to see that every point on the new line is darker, with those values closest to our point, being most affected.

The third curve is a contrast curve. The definition of contrast is “The difference in brightness between the light and dark areas of a picture, such as a photograph or video image.” In other words, to increase contrast, one must increase the difference between the light values and the dark values. We accomplish this by making an S curve. Drag the right portion of the graph up, thereby making the light values lighter and then drag the left portion of the graph down, thereby darkening the dark values. The midpoint, 50% gray, remains unaffected. Using the two points on my curve, one can see that the y value of point 1 is darker than the x value and the y value of point 2 is lighter than the x value.

Next week, I am going to tackle correcting color balance with curves. Hope you check back.

The issue is on newstands now, so be sure to pick one up!