Photographing Glass!

Similarly to flowers, glass has its own photography style. I found photographing glass almost as challenging as photographing jewellery. Again its all about making it look crisp and aesthetically pleasing. With jewellery you were trying to persuade the viewer to buy this product whereas with glass the aim is just to make it look as beautiful as possible. I found that the key is the reflectors.

Above are some photographs taken by one Simon Bruntnell, a  British photographer who photographs glass amound other things. He is just one of many photographers I looked at on the internet. I found that there weren't many photographers specialising in glass photography like Mr Bruntell here which might be attributed to the fact that it is a very difficult subject to photograph and isn't used very often...or at least not as much as some other specialties (e.g. commercial). What I really love about his work is the fact that most of it has a sinister feel to it. The background is often dark and he adds a lot of detail using reflectors which really makes the glass 'POP'. He also uses mirrors and reflections in a lot of his work which gives it a bit of an abstract edge.

After my research we set out to photograph glass which was at that point the hardest thing I had attempted at that point. We used wine glasses and beer bottles...they were of course already empty when we began :) However disaster struck a few weeks later where my memory card decided that it no longer like any of my photographs and destroyed them all! So I won't be able to show you the images however I do have the ones I did when I went back and did a few more on my own in the studio...here is the lighting plan I used...

After I had set up the lighting and adjusted the aperture for a correct exposure I had to choose a compostion for the subject I had chosen. At first I decided to work with this composition ...

 ...however I decided that it wasn't working because the shape of the glasses was too difficult to make out (due to the overlap).So then I went with this set up...

  

Once I had selected my compostion, I started to play around with reflectors to add detail. In the image above there is not much detail compared to the one directly below. However in this particular image I felt that there was too much detail (which is why I'm posting it!). In this particular instance less is more.

I continued to play with reflectors until I was satisfied with the level of detail. And here is the final piece....drum roll please...

I do quite like it however I was slightly limited for time when I took these so if I had more time I would have liked to experiment with some more compositions. I also would have liked a different background chair-looking thing (apparently it's called a 'small product table') because the one I used as a little scratched and I tried using my (very limited) photoshop skills to edit it however I wasn't really able to do much (again I refer you to my limited PS skills!).

Commercial Photography

Commercial photography is a very wide net to cast. However commercial photographer have one thing in common-they are being paid for taking that photograph. They are commissioned by someone to create a certain image, whether it's a company who want photographs for their ad campaign or an editor who hires a photographer for some photojournalism. Sometimes they're glamorous e.g. a fashion shoot, sometimes...not so much (photographers are paid to take pictures of  a crime scene for the police therefore it is considered commercial even though it doesn't fit in with the stereotype people often attach). It is named commercial photography because the photographer is paid not because it is a style used to SELL, SELL, SELL! 

What is thought to be typical 'commercial photography', often called commercial advertising photography, is a very popular style.There are many commercial photographers although some really made a name for themselves such James Nader, a London photographer who has been commissioned everywhere from Italy to New York. He mainly specialises in fashion, beauty and advertising. Here is a sample of his work...

Each of these photographs have a unique composition and even a unique style but all commercial advertising photographs have one purpose and one purpose only: to persuade the consumer to buy this product. So whether its jewellery, doughnuts or make up the same principles apply.

So after researching some commercial photographers for inspiration, I took the leap and started experimenting myself. My aim was to produce something dynamic, crisp and something that would look, by recognition of the style, to be commercial advertising photography. Obviously, I would never have the resources (or the patience) to create anything remotely close to Nader so I was prepared for it to be not as professional looking but I did want to see if I would be able to produce something with a similar style.

Started off with a white background for that slick and clean look! I experimented with many different subjects (all inanimate objects I'm afraid) but didn't quite find what I was looking for. They tended to look like ordinary still lifes instead of something for an ad so I carried on changing angles and changing lighting. Here are a couple from the glasseas campaign I as commissioned to do :) ...

I actually quite liked these photographs however what really bugged me was the hinge showing in the top left-hand corner of the left lens. Also when the shadows where cast they tended to be very distracting. I ended up giving up on finding an angle that works after I started tearing my hair out. As I was looking at the glasses frame in the images it occurred to me that to get the smooth and sleek look, you need to start off with a smooth and sleek subject...literally. I needed something smooth the light would just delicately bounce off. With the glasses frame in these photographs I felt the sleekness I was looking for so I set off to find a better subject.

That is when I came across the Olympia camera with the 50mm lens...love at first sight! Took it to the studio and started to get a feel for the texture and the way the light reflected when it hit the camera's surface. This is a diagram of the lighting I used. Note how the soft box in the top left-hand corner was considerably brighter in order to cast a shadow (See photographs below)

Once I had figured out how to light the camera I needed to figure out how to photograph it; I was happy with the composition it was merely a case of finding the correct viewpoint/angle. Here are some of the errors in the trial and error process...

I must admit this was one of my favourite images however I decided not to use it because I kept getting a reflection in the lens. I could have retouched it later however I wasn't sure if I would be able to make it look believable. Also the Olympia logo isn't showing well so it wouldn't work well as an ad.

I felt this angle led to the image being too confusing...I felt funny when I looked at it too long. That's the beauty of this angle I guess.....

With this photograph I felt that there was too much emphasis on the lens and not the whole camera so I felt it didn't work as well as some of the others.

Finally, I was able to capture the photograph I wanted and here it is...drum roll please...

I felt this one had just ticked all the boxes, including an obvious logo and the all-important sleek and smooth look. A criticism I had was the small black lump thing on the left had side of the camera (can't quite figure out what it is now...hm...). It's quite distracting and perhaps a slight change in angle would remove it! Also looking back now I wish I had taken the photograph from a slightly lower angle to show a little less of the lens. Other than that I'm quite happy really :)

Photographing Jewellery

I found this one of the hardest styles to do well and I still think there is much to be improved. I found it difficult to get the lighting right and flatter the jewellery at the same time. They just ended up looking quite clumsy because the composition was awkward and also the fact that it was zoomed in so far made it difficult for me to make the photograph interesting...hence the clumsiness. Also I think that because I was using a 14-42mm lens (which incidentally is the only one I  have that fits my camera) it messed with perspective and I couldn't get close enough so I had to use digital zoom (ech!) and the photographs came out funny...again hence the clumsiness. Unfortunately, I had clocked onto the lens problem much later on so I haven't had a chance to do another shoot although it is definitely something I want to try again...I guess its just a case of borrowing a camera and macro lens! 

In judging the photographs, my thought process was this...I would look at the photograph from two perspectives: the photographer and the consumer. 

First I would look at the technical aspects. Is the composition good? Is the exposure good? Is it in focus? Is the lighting correct? Is there glare? Does it need editing or cropping? blah blah blah!!! There always seemed to be something I could improve on. 

Then I would try and look at the photograph objectively and ask myself "If I saw this in, say, a magazine or on TV would it want me want to buy this product?" If the answer is no, I'd wrack my brains trying to figure out why and more often than not the answer was "I dunno know....I just doesn't seduce me like it should!". This ends with me trying many different combinations of compositions, lighting and angles. 

Anyway...here are some of the photographs I have been ranting about...

My problem with this photograph is that one earring has the correct exposure whereas the earring on the left is slightly overexposed. however when I angled it like the other, the composition just didn't work as well!

With this photograph, my issue was the reflection in the ring which is something I had a  problem with A LOT! Also a little bit of glare on the left :(

 I really enjoyed taking photographs of the watch however I wasn't able to do it in a way that includes all four numbers-it just looks strange when some of them are missing...or half missing!

My main problem with this photograph was glare-the light bounced off these bracelets like CRAZY  (note to self...do not photograph anything with glitter!).But I was able to solve the problem by reducing the light on the left and adding another light on the right just to ensure that the bracelets are well lit.

Technically speaking, I really liked the composition of this photograph-it took a while to find the right position for the bracelet and the lighting and exposure were great however my problem with it would be as a consumer in the sense that the bracelet itself wasn't very 'fabulous!' however it was a very interesting piece to try.

This photograph was not one of my favourites. Mainly I think because of the composition. It looked very awkward and I found this piece perhaps the hardest to photograph because of the shape of the stones. It was difficult to extenuate the shape whilst keeping the earrings well lit as well as avoiding glare! A way to light it properly would be to use a few more low intensity lights and decrease the one already being used to give a nice even lighting brightness whilst avoiding glare.

I then looked at some professional jewellery photographs for some inspiration at which point I came across a British commercial photographer called Tony May. I looked at some of his images and I noticed he tended to use a completely white background which made the jewellery stand out more (see right)

I then decided to try not placing the jewellery on top of something and decided to combine it with this technique we were taught using another light and a biconvex lens...

Using a biconvex lens in combination with the light source produced a colour spectrum which was projected onto the white table below the subject so the effect becomes the background. As the light passes through the lens the light is refracted an the colours separate producing this effect. Even thought is technique is still very different from the very crisp and clean cut style of jewellery photography Tony May has adopted I think that the use of the biconcave lens does add a certain something special so I think it works well. However if I were to improve the photograph I would ensure that when the spectrum is projected onto the white table, it is more straight because I think it would look better than the angle it is in now. Also I would perhaps exchange the transparent plastic because it has some scratches on it.

Photographing Flowers

There are specific ways you could photograph flowers to give a particular effect. To make them seem alive you can photograph them from behind. They are full of moisture and thus doesn't absorb the light (light transmits very easily). 

British Flower photographer Celia Henderson uses this technique frequently (alongside other set-ups , my favourite being in her from her Fuchsia set (left)...

I assume she used the white background to make sure the main focus was on the flower and also to make sure that the light reaches the entire flower, she would have used a reflector (silver paper) to reflect light to the front or place a soft light on a very low setting in front of the flower.

We also used gel sheets placed on top of the lighting to change the colour of the background and add some tone. It was really interesting to see how some colours and compositions worked better than others. Here are some of the results...

With these I think that the orange background itself works better because it helps the flower stand out more, at the same time the pink background helps the tones of the flower so the flower in the pink background image is better!

With these two I felt that different effects can be given with the same composition and same photograph (well almost the same!) taken by the camera. They are two very different photographs-the one on the left is quite sinister whereas the other radiates hope and optimism!!!

Similarly to the last set, these just go to show that with the exact same composition and by changing something as subtle as the gel sheet colour, it can give the effect of different times of day (left=early morning, middle=midday, right=night) and thus changes the entire atmosphere of the photograph. 

Another effect I experimented with was the complete opposite; placing a soft box in front of the subject to give the impression it's dead. Some almost have sombre and dark ambience, called 'obscuro' style. An example of this is another photograph by Henderson from her Magnolia set (right)...

Here is my result for my experimentation with the obscuro effect...

I then decided to challenge myself by meeting halfway-give the effect of being alive without placing a light behind. After many failed attempts (ended up being over exposed ☹) I was able to do satisfy this to a level I was happy with...Here is lighting diagram of the lighting set-up...

I tried using a reflector just to the right of the camera (between it and the soft box) however I felt that it took away some of the shadows nearer the middle of the flower and I liked the shadow because it gave the flower some tone. Et Voilà the result of my experimenting...

I chose this arrangement because I liked the contrast between the two plants-ones very large and colourful whereas the flowers on the other are slightly more dull but because there were more it was very interesting. I place the pink flower in front because at the end I wanted it to be the main subject. 

I decided the 'alive' technique might not have worked so well with this composition because the pink plants' colours are so bright and bold that I felt that the colour would be diluted if it were too bright and alive. I decided to place them on a wooden block because I felt it added a little texture and thus some character.

I found that lighting the subject from the side and placing the flowers at a slight angle I was able to aptly light the composition without compromising the challenge I set for myself. A criticism however is the background has then become too dull so perhaps this set-up would have been better to give a white background... 

Photographing Serrano Style

Andres Serrano is an american photographers who was very prominent in the late 1980's due to some of his controversial photographs however he also has a very unique style when it comes to portraitures. The background is very...erm...'flamboyant' and he generally includes only the subjects face, shoulders and chest in the frame; also they are usually sat at a slight angle and they can be looking into the distance or looking directly at the lens. He used this technique for many of his projects however my favourite is the series 'America' to demonstrate the diversity and the multiculturalism of America. Here are a couple from the series...

          

I then decided to try this technique with my very lovely model! The softbox was placed at a 45° angle to camera from the model and a Serrano-esque background with a snoot shining on the background (to mimic the glowing effect given in Serrano's photographs). A Mamiya RZ 67 was used (with a tripod). I made a lightling diagram to go with the set up...

The soft box provided a nice even low intensity light which is what I was after and as I mentioned earlier the snoot for the glow, the rest was simply a matter of capturing a good photograph. Also, I had a lovely assistant who held a reflector in place just below of the frame to ensure there were no unflattering shadows in the neck region.

It was quite difficult at first because I was not used to the inverted image! However after I got the hang of it I was able to produce some decent photographs, this one being my favourite...

All-in-all I think this is great photograph with fits in with the Serrano style however it is slightly underexposed whereas I noticed that Serrano's portraits then to have more highlights and shadows than mine which is something I would change if I were to do it again, perhaps by using a beauty dish. Also, I realised afterwards that the blow in the background isn't as prominent due to the snoot not being bright enough which is also something I would change.

Studio Photography

Studio photography can simply be defined as photography done in a setting where the lighting is artificial and controlled (i.e. the opposite of location photography!). We investigated different styles in which studio photography is used (high key/low key, commercial, flowers etc.) and also familiarised ourselves with the different equipment.

Types of Lighting...

SNOOT... 

 

        =

                             

Snoots help give small, very bright contrasting lights because the cone shape helps concentrate the light... à

This effect produces bright highlights and heavy shadows.





DEEP AND MID...




    =




This also produces a contrasting light however it is not as sharp as the snoot the light produced has a larger area.

 =      

A mid is very similar to a deep fitting except the deep fitting is silver on the inside whereas the mid is matt therefore the deep reflects more giving more light. The light that the mid produces is more 'blended' i.e. there is not as definite an area as the deep fitting (decrease in intensity as you get closer to the edges)

BEAUTY DISH/SOFT LIGHT... 

=

Beauty dishes (called a Soft Light in Britain) produce a large area of low intensity light. Similarly to the mid light the light blends around the edges. This very diffused light is a result of the smaller dish in the middle; the light hits it, is reflected onto the larger dish behind and again is reflected onto the subject, which is why the area is large but low in intensity.  

SOFT BOX... 

 =

Soft boxes produce a very large area of very low intensity light (the larger the soft box the larger the area of light...). Shadows are very week as are the highlights. They are perfect for lighting up larger subjects and give the opposite effect to the snoot (snoot=small, bright, concentrated and softbox=large, quite dull, diffused). You have to choose the pertinent size depending on your subject e.g. if you are doing a portrait of a persons face a small soft box will suffice however if you are doing a full body portrait a bigger soft box might be needed!!!