Meetup Assignment: Group Shot
For those of you attending meetups, here's a thought: Why not take the opportunity to try a cool group shot?That's what the folks at the South Bay (SF / Silicon Valley area) did.
You have a roomful of lighting gear, subjects and (presumably) thinking photographers. What more do you need?
As line-em-ups go, the above example is pretty cool. But you can also get a little more conceptual with it: Make a quick, well-lit shot of everyone there as an exercise. Then maybe grab four or five people and try your hand at an album cover concept, or an ESPN Magazine cover of an offensive line. Play with it a little.
I can tell you that I am working on a group shot using a coupla dozen readers that will raise the bar a little bit. (I'd tell you more, but I'd have to kill you.)
And if you want to keep tabs on local meetups, you can easily do so by searching in the drop-down menu on the sidebar.
-30-
__________
New to Strobist, or lighting? Start here.
Now shipping, in DVD box set or download: Lighting in Layers
Connect: Discussion Threads | Reader Photos | Twitter
Posted at 12:01 AM.
21 Comments:
David, thanks for the feature! We all had a lot of fun with that setup, but the hairs on the back of my neck are still singed a bit...
Cycle 61 Photography
That's what the folks at the South Bay (SF / Silicon Valley area) did.
ahem.....
s.f. is not part of the south bay, thank you very much (it's like saying washington d.c. is part of the baltimore metro area). we city folk like to think we're a bit more refined than the surbanites to our south, despite the south bay having better vietnamese food. and yes, san jose is basically nothing more than a suburb, with a lot of techie brain power driving the sprawling wasteland.
Here's what I'd like to see: Frame after frame after frame to see how the recycle went down with an approximate recycle time. Next I'd like to see the image at least 6 inches wide, 1200 pixels maybe, so I could see how this could be used by someone for a printed piece, you know resolution , apparent depth of field, for that degree of enlargement. Also I'd like to see the camera raw file next to the finished file. Finally I'd like to see it it large enough to tell exactly just what that is in the guy's, with the green shirt, front row, far camera left, hand. Here is my point :awesome job on the firing of the strobes and I'm assuming you didn't pop any heads for the final image from others, but beyond the web how usable is a dinky picture? Maybe if you have time could you share some more info? thanks.
Well...this was a group shot, so it wasn't done with burst mode or anything. So...why would we do frame after frame such that we'd have any recycle times? Is that how you do portraits? In burst mode?
When we were doing jumping shots (I was the jumper), the one with the PW did have it on burst. We had a lag between the optical slaves and the PW units, of course, but at 1/16 we were recycling pretty fast. Most people were getting 2-3 ghosts of me in a single shot.
this shot shows off the setup while firing, and you can see some haven't fired. That's partially because it's optical, and partially because some haven't cycled yet. But we were getting quite a few firing in the 1/15-1" shutter speeds we were using (we shut all the lights off in the gym for it).
Now...did you consider looking at the file at original uploaded size? You ask for 1200 pixels, you already got 1000 available. Or are you really that concerned with that last 200? We were all holding cameras (well, not me), so the guy in the lower left is holding his.
Here's my point - David is pointing out something that we tried, for the heck of it, because we could and it would be fun. We weren't trying to do something for use beyond the web. David sees that...
Allen, thanks for responding. Here is my point and it relates to your last comment. We weren't trying to do something beyond the web. David mixes in photo shoots from uber shooters and I think my greatest fear is that people will read what they want about how simple it is to knock out a great website images and then promote themselves as working photographers in some sort of editorial or corporate manner and fail miserably when it comes to the non web world of off set printing. I don't shoot in burst but when I have attorneys or high paid people in front of me, especially groups of them it's just not kosher to hope that I get one frame where everything fired on schedule after waiting for ever for the recycle on my miniature strobes. As far as 1200 pixels wide I meant at a higher ppi, and btw when I pulled off the file from the group shot it came up to 500 wide at 72ppi. I'm not arguing that one can't have fun enjoying any hobby, but that hobby has turned into pseudo professional careers for lots of folks and I'm trying to clarify that when David mixes Annie and Platon with you guys some folks may not really know the difference other than opportunity. And as far as what mr green shirt was holding , it was in jest, it looks like he's holding something other than a camera. Have fun but don't quit your day job. Also thanks for buying gear it helps solve lots of issues that would previously taken for ever to resolve in the past world of pros testing gear.
Mr. Anonymous sounds like a professional photographer who's nervous about all these amateurs taking away his livelihood.
Stop trying to scare folks. If you have talent, you have nothing to fear from us nobodies.
I'm not sure this comment will make it through, but I promise I won't post again regardless of any followup. This is not meant as a mean-spirited response.
First, it sounds a lot like you're saying David is doing harm by mixing in shots from uber shooters and stuff like what we did. For instance, while I don't shoot a single frame, either, my "miniatur strobes" certainly let me fire 5 or 10 shots with perfectly acceptable (and often negligible) recycle times. Probably 2 frames per second if I needed to, though I'd want to give it a bit of time to cool after 10 straight shots at 1/16 or 1/32.
But your suggestion is that David...and perhaps this entire website, is doing harm to your business.
Also, as far as ppi and 1200 and whatnot - I'm sure you are a highly competent photographer, but you should actually learn about ppi and pixels and etc. It is an obvious fact that you do not understand the terminology. The largest size off of flickr is 1000 pixels wide. That is 1000ppi.
And yes, it's a camera. Try the 1000 pixel version on flickr. You can see the lens. Oh, and I was there.
I'll try not to quit my day job. Or my other day job. The one where I take photos professionally.
sigh. (seriously, no problem if this doesn't make it through to the blog, I just wasn't comfortable being insulted).
Allan,you all are so right. I had no idea who I was talking to, or what I was talking about. Enjoy your day jobs.My sincere apologies.
I was at this meetup as well and this picture was purely fun and experimental. We had no notions of getting it on the Strobist site so I don't really understand all the fuss about the picture. Either way I appreciate all the people that came out to help each other with ideas and setups. I think the best thing about these meetups is that a local community of photographers can form together and create fun and creative pictures. And maybe one day those fun and silly pictures can get on a website like Strobist. I'm just honored that people take the time to comment on the picture good or bad.
Okay, folks. That's enough of the anonymous sniping. If you are going to continue to taunt each other, please include your addresses, SS# and home phone numbers along with the comments...
Banter is good. It gets us engaged. I'm engaged just reading and now am moved to post.
Here is what I'm further moved to ... setting up a meet up in the Nashville area. I've talked with the head of our "creative arts" at our church and he's offered space for us.
See, nothing but good comes out of all of this, in my opinion.
Thanks Strobist!
Onward!
Kyle Dreier
Franklin, TN
SS#: 454-09-3223 ;)
Could it be that this shot was the inspiration for the USA Today photo of the Daytona 500 winner? That was what popped into my mind when I saw them both and then it dawned on me which one came first (hint: it wasn't in Florida)
Ok, I AM the guy in the GREEN shirt. In the pic I am holding my beloved Olympus C-8080 WideZoom. It has one lens that won't come off, so I don't have dust problems, by the end of the day weighs about 25 pounds less than prooofeeessional gear, and was made with glass shards from a dropped Hubble telescope lens - one that focused well. Well, I am telling the truth about holding it!
Strobist is Great Motivation.
And only weenies use anonymous.
Dan, aka RingyDingyDo
Inspiring photogs at daytona. Now _that's_ what I'm talking about :-)
As David stated in the post, you put some creative minds together, let them loose, try to have some fun...well, that's what the meetups are all about.
Here is London's Storbist Meetup shot!
We were going for the sitcom/television show look.
That shot gives me one hell of an idear for the next meet!
This is a great group shot David, thanks for posting it! I love the idea of all the strobists with their strobes... :D
I really enjoyed looking through the rest of the stuff you guys did, thank you Allan for posting those, and the explanation.
*ahem*
Dear anonymous:
I would have put this response into a private email so as not to embarrass you too much in a public forum, but in your cowardice (or perhaps laziness) you neglected to leave us a way to contact you, so here goes:
First, I have to correct your usage of PPI, which you and allan both used wrong. I will quote from wikipedia, but I believe it is correct nonetheless:
"Pixels per inch (PPI) or pixel density is a measurement of the resolution of a computer display, related to the size of the display in inches and the total number of pixels in the horizontal and vertical directions. This measurement is often referred to as dots per inch, though that measurement more accurately refers to the resolution of a computer printer."
The ppi of your monitor and the dpi of your printer do not affect in any way the pixel size of your image, they instead affect the size in inches at which the total of those pixels are displayed. You could have said "it only came up 3 inches wide at 72ppi" and that would've made sense, but the way you used it made you sound like a newbie.
Second, Allan uploaded that shot at 1000 pixels wide. If you were familiar with our "dinky" little intorweb, you would know that there is a "view all sizes" button above the picture when you view it on flickr. There is a chance that you are not logged into flickr and that allan has it set so that only flickr users can see the "all sizes" button on his picture. There is also a chance that you didn't even look.
Third, just because you work doing something doesn't mean you are automatically good at it, nor does the reverse apply. It often does, but this isn't set in stone. I work as a photographer, but I do not consider myself a professional or promote myself as such.
Finally, why does your greatest fear have to do with other peoples' failure? I don't think it does. I think you just wanted to sound knowledgeable and be anonymously critical of something.
Didn't you have a day job to quit when you decided to become a professional photographer? You weren't born with high-priced strobes in your hand. If a pro photographer's all you've ever been straight out of college, then congratulations, you're lucky and probably had rich parents. Most of us have to live in the real world though.
And what the heck would we fail so miserably at anyway? Resolution is a function of the camera, and depth of field is a function of the aperture. So you buy a good camera and a decent lens before you bill yourself as a pro (duh) and make sure to use an appropriate aperture (a high-school student could tell you that.)
But what does either one have to do with taking a well-lit picture? I think you know the answer. What is strobist about? Lighting. Thanks!
PPS. You have my email address now, but just in case you're too lazy to click a link or two to find it, feel free to respond to me at fervus@gmail.com.
I wish there were strobists meetups closer to me... :)
http://www.flickr.com/photos/cooganphoto/sets/72157600110462037/
Here are a few (6 actually) of my group shots from 2007
The Vancouver Strobist Group got kind of "hung-up" on the group shot concept this weekend:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/suchy/2289844833/
DH
what tags should we throw on the group shots? if this is a real assignment anyways...
it would be interesting to compare.
Post a Comment
<< Home