I like that a lot, Paul. That really says Rugged and Macho. The grain is okay there of course because it's "good grain". Film good; digital bad. :-) Funny how averse to it we've all become. A lot of shots now look _too_ clean and must have grain sprinkled back in to make them look good. This appears to be SOP with fashion layouts.
Great story too. I wonder if "branch dropper" looks good later on a resume? On Wed, Oct 3, 2012 at 4:01 PM, Paul Stenquist <pnstenqu...@comcast.net> wrote: > Doh. The URL… http://photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=16498665&size=lg > On Oct 3, 2012, at 4:01 PM, Paul Stenquist <pnstenqu...@comcast.net> wrote: > >> Interesting. Would love to be able to afford a few of those. They appear to >> be bulb soft boxes as well. >> >> Some dozen years ago I authored a commercial for Dodge Ram that had the >> truck climbing a mountain at night in a storm. Barking Weasel, the >> production company that shot it – on Mammoth Mountain in California – used >> one big soft box mounted on a crane to simulate moonlight and several huge >> strobes to simulate lightning flashes. And, of course, a Hollywood rain >> machine, which is basically a giant overhead sprinkler, and several smoke >> machines to make fog. Some PAs were assigned to climb trees, so they could >> drop branches down on the truck as it passed. We even had a wolf who >> appeared to come snarling out of the bushes, although he was actually shot >> in a studio and edited in later. The sound track was a woman singing >> Steppenwolf's "Born to be Wild." >> >> I don't' have the commercial on line, but I have a still I shot that I took >> with my LX. Don't remember what lens for sure, but it was probably the >> M200/4. I just opened the shutter in auto exposure mode and waited for a >> "lightning bolt" to provide enough illumination and close the shutter. Seen >> here before, but probably not in the last ten years. Note the heavy grain. >> Probably ISO 800 film. We used to think that was okay. I was kind of shocked >> to see the grain when I opened this file today. Hadn't looked at it in ten >> years or so. Perhaps the grain works here, although it generally seems more >> appropriate in BW photography. >> >> Paul >> On Oct 3, 2012, at 2:34 PM, Bruce Walker <bruce.wal...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> Nearly broke my Google-fu, but here's the vid ... >>> >>> http://www.petapixel.com/2012/08/05/shooting-a-mini-cooper-at-night-using-giant-bags-of-light >>> >>> The bag-o-light is by these guys ... >>> >>> http://www.licht-technik.com/eng/html/bol_turn.html >>> >>> This bunch were shooting outside so didn't have the superstructure and >>> needed floating light. >>> >>> >>> On Wed, Oct 3, 2012 at 2:06 PM, Paul Stenquist <pnstenqu...@comcast.net> >>> wrote: >>>> Those giant lighting soft boxes are usually called fisher boxes, after the >>>> company that makes them and rents them for shoots. You need a studio with >>>> a superstructure above to mount one, and a lot of equipment to control it. >>>> The idea is that you can tilt it in such a way that it both lights the car >>>> and creates an artificial horizon, reflected in the car. They're most >>>> often used with bulbs (sodium vapor lamps I believe), rather than strobes, >>>> since that makes it easier to set up the lighting. Plus, the same box can >>>> be used for television production as well as stills. They're usual >>>> augmented with a number of flags and flats to fine tune the lighting. >>>> >>>> >>>> On Oct 3, 2012, at 1:52 PM, Bruce Walker <bruce.wal...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>> There was that car advert BTS video someone posted here a few months >>>>> back (I think) where they showed a giant floating light source that >>>>> turned out to be an enormous softbox. A company specializes in >>>>> building and renting these things for shooting cars. >>>>> >>>>> Besides a large soft light source you'd need to flag a lot of glass, >>>>> chrome and polished areas to improve their contrast in the shot. >>>>> >>>>> When I did a table-top shoot of my light meter for a blog article, I >>>>> used my hand as a flag to block direct light from the 24" softbox onto >>>>> the LCD display. That made an enormous difference to the meter's final >>>>> appearance. All covered in the Light, Science & Magic book. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Wed, Oct 3, 2012 at 1:21 PM, J.C. O'Connell <hifis...@gate.net> wrote: >>>>>> Ive never shot cars with flash professionally but I have seen pro setups >>>>>> where the flash diffusers are larger than cars! (soft lighting across the >>>>>> whole vehicle). >>>>>> >>>>>> ----------------- >>>>>> J.C.O'Connell >>>>>> hifis...@gate.net >>>>>> ----------------- >>>>>> >>>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>>> From: PDML [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of Paul Stenquist >>>>>> Sent: Wednesday, October 03, 2012 11:26 AM >>>>>> To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List >>>>>> Subject: Re: Photographing cars with a strobe? >>>>>> >>>>>> I've been shooting cars with flash for more than thirty years, both night >>>>>> and day. It isn't a bad idea, but it can be tricky. I don't think it will >>>>>> help you achieve nice compositions in a crowded showroom, but it can work >>>>>> well as fill in daylight or as illumination at night. >>>>>> >>>>>> I used flash for fill on this dreary day shot. It ended up edge-to-edge >>>>>> on >>>>>> the front page of the Times auto section. I was low enough to avoid >>>>>> reflection problems, and I used a diffuser on the flash. It has been >>>>>> shown >>>>>> here before. >>>>>> >>>>>> http://photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=14450338&size=lg >>>>>> >>>>>> I've used flash on numerous occasions to achieve motion blur effects at >>>>>> night, with a frozen central image. These are usually shot at /.8th of a >>>>>> second while panning: >>>>>> >>>>>> http://photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=3708948&size=lg >>>>>> >>>>>> And I've used it to achieve sharp pics at night as well. I pick a shutter >>>>>> speed and stop that will give me some background illumination without >>>>>> turning it into day, and I tilt the head of the flash up to avoid burning >>>>>> out the foreground. I usually burn in the foreground a bit as well. Could >>>>>> have cloned out the hotspot here but didn't bother since it's not all >>>>>> that >>>>>> distracting. >>>>>> >>>>>> http://photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=11498399&size=lg >>>>>> >>>>>> Paul >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On Oct 3, 2012, at 8:45 AM, Larry Colen <l...@red4est.com> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> I have headed over to Canepa motors a few times to play with >>>>>>> photographing >>>>>> cars. There is a lot of pretty machinery there. Unfortunately, there >>>>>> isn't >>>>>> much room and it's pretty much impossible to get a picture of a single >>>>>> car >>>>>> isolated from the other cars on the floor. I had the thought that it >>>>>> might >>>>>> be possible to do something to isolate a car from the background by using >>>>>> strobes and taking advantage of the inverse square law, to light a car, >>>>>> and >>>>>> put a lot less light on any other distracting cars in the background. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I suspect that there are a lot of pitfalls to this technique, starting >>>>>> with all of the things on most cars that are shiny. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I've also considered using a strobe to shoot a car outside at night, for >>>>>> very similar reasons. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Does anyone have experience usign flashes to photograph cars? Can you >>>>>> give me some good simple reasons why this is, if not a bad idea, at >>>>>> least a >>>>>> lot more work than other possible techniques? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> LRC >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> Larry Colen l...@red4est.com sent from i4est >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >>>>>>> PDML@pdml.net >>>>>>> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net >>>>>>> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and >>>>>> follow the directions. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >>>>>> PDML@pdml.net >>>>>> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net >>>>>> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and >>>>>> follow the directions. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >>>>>> PDML@pdml.net >>>>>> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net >>>>>> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and >>>>>> follow the directions. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> -bmw >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >>>>> PDML@pdml.net >>>>> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net >>>>> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and >>>>> follow the directions. >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >>>> PDML@pdml.net >>>> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net >>>> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and >>>> follow the directions. >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> -bmw >>> >>> -- >>> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >>> PDML@pdml.net >>> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net >>> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and >>> follow the directions. >> > > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow > the directions. -- -bmw -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
