Picture: Better Products through Constant Research

[Sean Setters]

As I walk through my workplace, I often see shot in my head that marketing might be able to use to benefit the company. I'm on a mission to capture at least a few of these so that I may give them to our marketing department to use in whichever way they feel is most beneficial. I was finally able to check-off one of those shots off the list in my head.


The subject is a person I've come to know from working at IDG, LLC. With a background in chemistry, she is very intelligent, personable, friendly, and one of the most amazing cooks I've ever known.


I'm not going to post this to flickr, as I'm not sure I want too many people seeing it before it's my final set of images. I wanted to give you guys a first-look, though. ;-)


I'll be headed to Chicago tomorrow (Fri) and won't be back to my home desk until Monday. Posts will be sporadic at best after this evening until I return.


[img]/cfs-file.ashx/__key/CommunityServer.Components.UserFiles/00.00.00.21.08/_5F00_MG_5F00_7465_5F00_8x10-copy-small.jpg[/img]


strobist: 1 Vivitar 285, camera right (high, basically beside subject pointed downward), 1/4 power, with 2 full CTO gels, shot through a 15" Alzo Mini Softbox, triggered via Cybersync. 1 Canon 580EX, below subject pointed upwards, 1/32 power, with 1 full CTO + 1/2 CTO gel, shot through a DIY snoot directed at the flask the subject's left hand, flash triggered optically. 1 Vivitar 285HV, camera right (behind subject), 1/4 power, with full CTB (blue) gel, bare, perched on top of my MaxSaver flexible tripod which was placed a tabe, shot to rake across the background, triggered optically. White balance set to tungsten.

[Oren]

Sean to be honest, this is not one of your best shots. I think the DOF is too shallow and therefore some of the subject is not in focus. I also think that the light is too harsh.

[Sean Setters]

Sean to be honest, this is not one of your best shots. I think the DOF is too shallow and therefore some of the subject is not in focus. I also think that the light is too harsh.
<div style="clear: both;"]</div>

Fair enough. I purposely used a depth of field because I wanted to limit how much detail there was in the background. The lab is quite cluttered. Also, they do alot with various inks in there, so there are spots of various colors adorning the walls and tables. This is much more apparent in the other shots where I'm shooting at a wider angle. I think I took one shot at f4.5 and then quickly turned the dial back to f/2.8. I didn't realize I wasn't getting the whole subject in focus until I got back home to post-process. In the end, I decided that the parts of the subject that were out-of-focus simply weren't where my eyes were drawn to (my eyes primarily go to the subjects eyes and her left hand holding the beaker--and those areas are in focus).


If I thought I could have taken more of the subject's time, I might have set things up a little differently or played around with the shot a bit more. But as it was, she was being very gracious to stay after work to allow me to shoot her.


I do appreciate the comments. I'm glad to hear what other people think of the image especially as I'm hoping to see it used as an advertising piece. Even if the company did use it, I don't think it would be a very large image--maybe just a small shot in a brochure.

[Oren]

Well fair enough too lol. I don't know, this picture is actually confusing me... sometimes it looks very good and sometimes not that good (I explained why).


Anyway, I wish my bad shots looked like this []

[Sean Setters]

Well, I'm off to Chicago. Not taking a single piece of camera equipment (as an added birthday present to my girlfriend). I haven't even left yet but the thought of it is killing me! ;-)

[Chuck Lee]

Save travels!!


When you arrive in Chicago and read this I see a couple of things in your shot that also confuse me. I love the fact that the warming gels create a blue background. That's kick'n. especially the reflected side lighting on her face. But she, at least on my monitor, is very red instead of warm. I was not there, but I suspect that the patch on her jacket is white, in which case the white balance is shiftedto the red. Secondly, the light on her is very hot. She looks like she's baking under a sun lamp. This looks like the work of DPP or ACR. I'd try a second development with lower exposure to kill some of the really strong highlights in her hands and face and try a few different white balance settings. Mainly, balance for the label on her jacket. Personally, I like the short dof and the subject isolation it provides. The composition IMO is excellent!


Remember Sean, all the worlds a stage but you are absolutely your best critic!!............[]

[Daniel Browning]

Chuck took the exact words right out of my mouth. Fix the skin tones and this is a winner.

[hotsecretary]

Agreed, you can fix this up nicely in post-processing and fixing up the exp/temp/saturation on some parts easily in LR or Photochop.

[Sean Setters]

Currently making the rounds in Chicago and having a blast. As far as the skin tones go, I'm completely ignorant of the issue. Is it simply too warmv (or else the areas not predominately illuminated by the mainlight too cool?). Keep in mind I'm color-blind, so fine tuning is rather difficult for me. Does the picture need a cooling filter in photoshop? Or rather a selective warming filter on the extremities that didn't get hit with the mainlight? I've had a few beers in the last few hours (great Irish pub and another great sports bar), so I'm hoping this post makes sense.

[Keith B]

I'm just glad to see Rachel Dracht is working again.