How to shoot 350 people in the middle of the day?

The goal is to be able to produce a 4ft x 5ft color enlargement

where faces are recognizable. I have 4x5 & 8x10 format, 210 and

360mm lenses available. I can position the camera on a flat roof

approximately 40 feet above the group. How much area (ft2 or m2)

will 350 people occupy? What film and format would your recommend?

I'll have 5 people to help me position the crowd. Any other tips?

Would use Color negative film (ISO 100 or 400) in 4x5 get a

drum scan made and have the print made on a Durst Lamba

machine. I did this about two years ago with Provia 100F (RDPIII)

and the print was amazing: zero grain. I'm recommending color

negative because i doubt you'll be able to control your lighting if

you are outdoors. I was in a studio so that wasn't a problem.

Say a human head is 6x8 inches, and if you could show JUST the heads in a group of 17 down and 20 across, it would equal 340 heads. Now an 8x10 is 80 square inches, so each square inch would contain 4.25 heads on the neg, so each head would occupy about 1/4 square inch, and even a bit less with 350 heads. Now, each head would have to be check-by-jowl, and chin-by-forehead with the others, and I doubt you'll be able to accomplish this. If they all stood VERY close together, you might end up with half the face size. Do the math. A 4x5 is a 6x (6 times) blowup, so the heads would still be quite small, but surely recognizable if in critical focus. You might consider renting a panoramic camera.

I would hedge your bet by taking one (or two) shots of the whole group, then divide them up into 4 groups. That way they'll get something showing the full group, where they may be able to identify themselves, and another shot where there would be no problem.

 

You would need some kind of staging, unless you intend you shoot them all looking up at you on the flat roof - probably not a very flattering shot?

I just got thru scanning a 4x5 transparency with the Epson 2450 photo scanner....I did sample scans at 1200, 1800, 2400, 3200, 4800, and 6400 dpi....The above 2400 scans were worthless; as expected....The 2400 dpi scans looked the best; and were used for the final 330 Meg 2400 dpi scan... The 2400 dpi scan was not twice as sharp as the 1200 dpi scan; thus again I believe the actual resolution of this scanner is in the 1600 to 1800 dpi range.....The actual transparency of an old map is sharp; and was shot with a Apo Ronar on a process camera....The 4x5 transparency has detail visible on it with a microscope; that the epson 2450 didnt resolve.......<BR><BR>Thus use a drum scan; If one needs to pull out all of a 4x5 's detail..

How do you purpose to pose 350 people in a group to fit into a 4x5 or 8x10 rectangle? 18 deep by 19 wide, standing chest to back, and shoulder to shoulder would be 342 people, and would take up about 18 by 32 feet. So, you'd have to use a different grouping to completely fill the ratio of a 4x5 or 8x10, which are the same. If you used every scrap of neg area, you'd have 17.5 people in every square inch of a 4x5 neg, and 4.375 people in every square inch of an 8x10 neg. I think 8x10 is a must, and the 4x5 foot print should be an optical enlargement.

Kelly -

 

I just got a Microtek 2500f scanner, which claims to deliver 2500 dpi. I found that it most closely matches my Minolta Dimage Multi Pro at around 1600 dpi. For better or worse, this confirms my experience that flatbed scanners deliver around 60% of their claimed output - even when the scanner is rather pricey.

 

Of course, it's a welcome improvement over my Epson, which claims 1600 dpi, but delivers 800 dpi. It shoots below the glass, and has nice holders that keep the film flat...but I wonder whether it was worth all the money !

 

On a positive note, genuine 1600 dpi allows a 5x enlargement at very nice quality, and a 20x25 from a 4x5 is big enough for me.

I'd use the 210 on the 8x10. It should cover, considering the only move you will need is a rear tilt. This will enable you to get the group closer to the building, pack them closer together and avoid the problem of shorties behind biggies. With a bullhorn you can set it up on the fly. I've done similar shots without assistants. If the front row is a bit irregular, the distortion caused by the wide-angle view will be a bit more palatable, if you are unable to correct it in Photoshop. Use any long scale negative film....From there you can do anything you want.

Kelly & Ken,

 

Where in the original question does Chris inquire about scanners and resolution and all that other drivel that has nothing to do with setting up a shot of 350 people?

Jeffery: THANK YOU! I wondered when someone was going to jump in with that question, and I was just getting to it. Getting 350 faces on a 4x5 is ridiculous, and will be tough to resolve even with an 8x10. I'm DYING to hear the final outcome of that gig. He'd better get a early start!!!

Jeffery & Art; ....Ellis mentioned <i>"Would use Color negative film (ISO 100 or 400) in 4x5 get a drum scan made and have the print made on a Durst Lamba machine"</i><BR><BR>I should have added that with a 4x5; a <b>drum scan must be used; for the best image</b><BR><BR>I just spent a couple of weeks printing a 14 foot by 5 foot map on mylar for a model maker...The image on the negative was 3.3 inches long; on the 4x5 negative...The limit with this project in resolution was the scanner....A better scanner would deliver a better product............My results were alot better than he had planned!...The added cost of the 4x5 drum scan being farmed out would have <b>doubled </b> the total bill from me; that is with making nothing on the outsourced drum scan....<BR><BR>Since inkjet is now the norm with many large color "photos" here; one must also consider the quality of the scan..<BR><BR>To make a good looking 4x5 foot color poster; a drum scan would give a better poster from a 4x5 inch negative; than a Epson 2450 scanner...<BR><BR>As poster making goes this 12x enlargement is an easy job; since the enlargement is so mild by poster maker standards....This is like a 12x18 enlargement from a 35mm negative....

Dear Chris,<P> I hope your shoot goes well. obviously there is

no need to cram everyone shoulder to shoulder, and if you are

doing doing such an undertaking there clearly is the budgetto

get a decent scan made to have the print made. the last time I

had that big made -- about a year and a half ago-- the total cost

for the high res scan and the lambda print were less than $500 -

- maybe closer to $400.00 I used Houston Photo Imaging in

Houston, TX ask for Steve Hogan and tell him hello for me (713)

666-0282.<P> On another note: At what point did this thread

being meaningful to you?

Good and well, to be sure, but I STILL think his main problem will ge getting off a good shot in the required time.

Kelly,

 

I realize that Chris would probably need to get a scan in order to make a large print, I just do not think he was asking about # of pixels, etc. Whatever lab he goes to get the print done should know what to do as far as that goes, he just wants to know how to go about shooting the job in the first place.

 

Most likely an 8x10 neg would work best because it would have a longer tonal scale for an outdoor shot where Chris may not be able to light every person to his satisfaction. Seeing all the faces should not be a problem, my company photographed about 300 people with a Hasselblad from a balcony with the people looking up at us and it worked great for a 16x20 print; you could see the faces very well. What I think Chris may need however is a little wider lens than he has (the 360mm), perhaps a 240mm ( we used a 50mm on the Hassy with no distortion in the faces).

I'm going to take Ellis' advice regarding format and film choices. When the project is complete I'll post small sections of the digital file from the negative and from a scan of the print. Hopefully this will help others understand what is possible with normal LF equipment and only a modest amount of skill. The project should be a lot of fun.

 

Jeffery: In the initial post I listed 210mm & 360mm lens options.

<b>Chris; </b>what type of 4x5 foot color print are you trying to produce? a real photographic chemical color print; or inkjet/digital? <BR><BR><b>Ellis and the group;</b> If a 8x10" or 5x7" was used; what would the cost of a drum scan be?<BR><BR>The nearest lab here is 2 hours away; and they scan up to 4x5" @5700 dpi......Their cost is 25 bucks minimum; plus 1 dollar/megabyte above 25 megabytes file size scanned....Thus a 4x5" 2400dpi scan is 330 bucks....A 4x5 @3000 dpi is 515 Megs; 515 bucks

I weht to <A HREF = http://www.nancyscans.com/price.html>

http://www.nancyscans.com</A> for a price list.<P> A 200Mb

Tango drum scan from originals up to 4x5 costs $50.00. For

formats larger than 4x5 add $20.00.<P>Her cost for a 48" x 60"

KRIST'l print made with the Cymbolic Sciences LightJet 5900 is

$348.00 forthe first print & $179.00 forthe second.<P>While I

have never used Nancyscans I do know from others that they

have a great reputation for doing extremely high quality work

How are you lighting this group for shadows?

Ellis: At what resolution and bit depth would you have the 4x5 scanned?

 

Wayne: Regarding shadows, if it is sunny I'm going to fire a very large smoke bomb near the group from on top of a flagpole via radio transmitter. The resulting plume will act as a huge diffusion screen and soften the light from the sun. You have about 15 seconds in light breeze to make the exposure. The only tricky part is getting the metering correct. You must have an assistant meter the light impinging on the group and communicate the value to you. Hopefully, I will not have to do this because the smoke bomb is rather expensive. The most difficult part is getting the group to recover their composure after the smoke bomb goes off!

PS. I was kidding regarding the smoke bomb. What I'm really going to do is hope for an overcast day. I could fix a couple of shadows via photoshop, but no way will I do 350!

You should contact NancyScans there is a link above or whoever

is going to do the drum scanning for you and ask for their

guidance as to how large the scan should be,

Just finished a project with 150 people posed outside of buckingham fountain in Chicago. Used a 4x5 with NPS160. Did a drum scan and lightjet print thru Nancyscans. Made a nice profit on the final invoice. Important tip- use some fill lighting to get the shadows out. I used multiple quantum flash set ups with remotes. It really brings the color and pop we are looking for in this kind of shot. I love big group shots!

I have a picture on my wall of a past conference, with about 120 of us in it, shot using a 4x5 with halogen floods for fill light.. We occupy 1/3 of the picture. If he gets everyone to look slightly upward and arranges carefully (there are always small people to tuck into vacant spaces), this should be doable.

 

I would be tempted to use the 360 on 8x10, for evenness of illumination and final image size. On 4x5 it should still work, but I'd consider shooting it as 4 overlapping frames, and then piecing them together for the final mural. I'd also get a couple of banks of the type of halogens that road crews use at night to soften the shadows, though I don't know a specific filter pack for that.

 

If it weren't for the 4x5 final ratio, I'd really recommend a 4x15 panorama made up of 3 negs with about 120 people each.

Chris,

 

Will the 210mm lens you have cover 8x10 with room for some movements? You may need to do some tilting and perhaps some rise/fall in combination with the tilts to correct perspective, meaning trying to get the head sizes from front to back to be similar in size, unless that is not important. That is why I was suggesting a different lens if that were possible. Using a 360 may not be wide enough for such a large group without enough distance between you and the group.

 

If you were in Cleveland, I know someone with a Cirkut camera, then all you would need to do is make a circle around the camera with the group and you could do a "classic" group shot!

Jeffery: The 210 Super-Symmar HM 210/F5.6 I own has a very large image center that allows sigificant movement with a 8x10. Thanks for your input though.