How do I get this effect?

[Jules]

I know there are a lot of talented + experienced photographers here so I wanted to ask if you guys like this look or is it something I wouldn't want to try and duplicate? Is this silvery, pearly look..

*am I allowed to post links to show what I'm talking about?*

http://viewmorepics.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=viewImage&friendID=554683&albumID=51818&imageID=41736963

http://viewmorepics.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=viewImage&friendID=554683&albumID=51818&imageID=43489951

[tirediron]

Like any other 'look' it's appropriate for some images, not for others. I think in this case, it was achieved with two lights; a main light(probably with a soft box) to illuminate the subject, and a second overhead light, providing the hair light and background illumination. The overall effect comes from under-exposing by 1, 1 1/2 stops.

[tegan]

I consider lack of detail to be a serious weakness, particularly when it is around the eyes. Poor work.

Tegan

[tirediron]

I consider lack of detail to be a serious weakness, particularly when it is around the eyes. Poor work.

Tegan

I consider SPAM nature's most perfect food, but that's not really relevant to the OP either! ;)

[PaulaLynn]

I consider SPAM nature's most perfect food, but that's not really relevant to the OP either! ;)

:D LOL @ SPAM as a food!

[tegan]

I consider SPAM nature's most perfect food, but that's not really relevant to the OP either! ;)

But my comment is. Why try to duplicate a technique that displays problems?

Tegan

[Marko]

Quote:
Originally Posted by tirediron http://www.photography.ca/Forums/images/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://www.photography.ca/Forums/showthread.php?p=6621#post6621)
I consider SPAM nature's most perfect food, but that's not really relevant to the OP either! ;)


Originally Posted by tegan http://www.photography.ca/Forums/images/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://www.photography.ca/Forums/showthread.php?p=6605#post6605)
I consider lack of detail to be a serious weakness, particularly when it is around the eyes. Poor work.

Tegan

I really appreciate your diplomacy with sense of humour T.I. :highfive:
Tegan - your comment was rude and off topic. You did not answer the question and you bashed another photographer who is not even here. This is not the critique forum. All the OP wanted to know was how to reproduce the lighting or effect.

[tomorrowstreasures]

Quote:
Originally Posted by tirediron http://www.photography.ca/Forums/images/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://www.photography.ca/Forums/showthread.php?p=6621#post6621)
I consider SPAM nature's most perfect food, but that's not really relevant to the OP either! ;)


Originally Posted by tegan http://www.photography.ca/Forums/images/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://www.photography.ca/Forums/showthread.php?p=6605#post6605)
I consider lack of detail to be a serious weakness, particularly when it is around the eyes. Poor work.

Tegan

I really appreciate your diplomacy with sense of humour T.I.
Tegan - your comment was rude and off topic. You did not answer the question and you bashed another photographer who is not even here. This is not the critique forum. All the OP wanted to know was how to reproduce the lighting or effect.

DUCK !!!!! run for cover!! :eek: Food fight!

[Mike Guilbault]

Actually.. depending on the purpose of the photograph (I can only access the second one for some reason - so don't know what the first one looks like), this could be the very effect the shooter was going for. It could be from the direction of an Art Director too. I think the photograph is very interesting and the lack of detail in the shadows is intentional.

The second image is dramatically lit and for the subject matter, and possibly the end purpose, well done. I believe however, that the original poster may be talking about the post-processing to achieve that hi-contrast, 'gritty' look. I've use this in various commercial jobs quite successfully. Even for some portraits.

In Lightroom, this effect is done by increasing the contrast, the recovery, vibrance, fill-light and a few other controls almost to the extreme. By varying these 'out-of-control' settings, you can achieve many different looks. The exact settings will vary from image to image depending on the inherent contrast and lighting of that image.

It is very image dependent however, and doesn't work on every image. I've seen this applied to many images that have failed miserably. It's one of those "just because you can, doesn't mean you should" scenarios.

Cheers,

[Ben H]

I like it. It's a nice effect to have in one's bag of tricks when you want something a little more processed looking.

Of course, like all more extreme processing, it's not applicable to everything. But I think it's a strong and interesting result...