Lighting Equipment & Techniques of George Hurrel

His light comes from a single direction,with a single set of

shadows.Also his shadow edges seem diffused.I know he shot 8x10, and

used fresnels.

Does anyone have specific information on creating this style today?

Could this be done with round reflectors and barndoors and snoots

with a modern light kit?

Here is a link that contains some of his work:

http://www.lafterhall.com/hurrell.html

Get Mark Mieira's book "Hurrell's Hollywood Portraits."

 

The sources tend to be small.

Also check out "Hollywood Portraits, classic shots and how to take them" by Roger Hicks and Christopher Nisperos. It has a section on Hurrel with several of his shots and detailed descriptions of the setup.

A while back a company I used to work for did some work for someone whose website said something along the lines of 'portraits taken by Hurrell's camera, in Hurrell's home ' or something like that. I can't remember who it was. Here's a photo I found on the first site in a Google search that looks like it shows some technique:

<br><p><center><img src="http://www.hurrellphotography.com/Hurrell/hurrell.GIF"></center></p><p>The site is http://www.hurrellphotography.com/</p>

I would use the pictures as a jumping off point rather than as a destination.

 

Some of them aren't that great or could be improved on with some thought.

I have a copy of Mark Viera's book. It gives little away in terms of Hurrel's technique but from some of the photographs of his studio you can deduce his arrangement and types of lights.

there was a great link in this forum last year on his set up. I wouldn't even begin to know where to look for it Steve. But he used all mole richardson tungsten and carbon arc lamps, up to ten or twelve of them. there was a wide shot of one set up and it looked like a nightmare with lamps and blacks flags. make up would melt off the subjects face it was so hot. and then under the enlarger it looked like a bit of diffusion printing.

Another very important point about his setup was that he hung his lights from booms- even had a special light made for him.

 

That gave him the freedom to put the lights anywhere he wanted, which you can see in the pictures.

 

I recently saw a demo by Monte Zucker where he used 16" mini-Apollo's on heads mounted on booms.

<i>"there was a great link in this forum last year on his set up. I wouldn't even begin to know where to look for it Steve. But he used all mole richardson tungsten and carbon arc lamps, up to ten or twelve of them. there was a wide shot of one set up and it looked like a nightmare with lamps and blacks flags. make up would melt off the subjects face it was so hot. and then under the enlarger it looked like a bit of diffusion printing."</i><p>Hurrel's negatives were <u>heavily</u> retouched - for a good example, look at the work he did with Joan Crawford, NOBODY has skin like that!<p>While you <u>can</u> reproduce his lighting style with studio strobes, you really need to do it with proper hot lights - i.e. spots and broads. A nice high ceiling in the studio would also be a big help...

The results of the 40's Hollywood photographers owed as much to retouching as they did to photography. They also used very large format cameras and powerful spotlights and the results are difficult to reproduce with modern equipment. And needless to say they had the most beautiful models imaginable .....

I found this in a bargain bin. Beautiful reproductions of Hurrell(n.b.) and others' work: Masters of Starlight, by Fahey and Rich, Ballantine Books, ISBN= 0-345-35509-1, 1987. Here is an excerpt: "Hurrell's inventive lighting style is immediately indentifiable: His dramatic use of light allows the shadow areas to play an important design element within the picture's frame. His use of Rembrandt and butterfly lighting ( the latter using a spotlight to produce a butterfly-shaped shadow under the subject's nose) in coordination with his own invention, the portable boom light, produced the Hurrell style." In short he loved black backgrounds and plenty of shadow. I suppose hard lighting,meticulously placed(vice contemporary boom- boom -thank- you ma'am/sir) would be George's approach.<p> He played jazz in the studio to get subjects in the right mood. And this book suggests his closest successor in style to be Edward Weston,though not necessarily in all aspects. His photo of Jean Harlow oozes sex appeal without a lot of nudity. Now that is photography. For a long time this type of work would be called "highly stylized" Hollywood crap. The circle has gone around.

Don't get all hung up on the exact type of lighting Hurrell used. Remember that great photographs are about art and style even more than technique. I worked with Monte Zucker in the past and have seen him do Hurrell type portraits using a Rangefinder magazine wrapped around his Photogenic flashtube. He just uses the same Rembrandt lighting as in his wedding portraits but creates a feathered spot with the rolled up magazine. Fresnel spots on your rear kicker lights at the same intensity as your main light work great at controlling the shadow regions...you can get a similar look at least lighting-wise with modern strobes without burning the model's face off by using hot lights...just think hard lighting and not the soft lighting to which we're all so accustomed.

 

The true magic of Hurrell (besides hours and hours of retouching his 8x10 negatives!!!) is the interplay of light and shadow. Hurrell started out as a painter before becoming a photographer and his compositional use of light and shadow is a key element of his style. Another key element is angular, often high overhead lighting placement with the use of boom stands and angular camera placement to create leading lines and S-curves from his female subjects' bodies. There is as much creative composition to Hurrell as there is lighting. Note the often disorienting angles in the extended hair shots...almost Hitchcock-like attempts at disorientation.

 

My point is that while the shadow detail and lighting are highly stylized by Hurrell, his compositional elements are every bit as important to the look...and having ridiculously beautiful models is almost a necessity. Remember that he had access to the most beautiful women of his day. You can also fake somewhat the hours of retouching by using some slight diffusion when shooting. I like the Sailwind #2 diffusion filter that's designed for hard lighting.

 

Create a vibe, place your subject at ease, and let the creative expression flow...that's more important than worrying about exact lighting placement. After all, some of Hurrell's shots aren't exactly the best lighting in the world (some rather flatly lit), but he always goes for stylistic composition and great expression...capturing something timeless from the individual under the lens. That is the magic of George Hurrell!

There is true magic in composing/lighting and shooting a portrait in 8x10. Walt Byrnes