Theatre Photography

I have been asked to take some b&w film shots of an amateur stage production, the producer wants a retro 1970s b&w feel. I’m going to use TMax 3200 as the light levels will be low. I have a relatively fast f/2.8 zoom to use. Regarding exposure, would I better off spot metering each shot or just take an overall reading of the stage with my Weston Master V and leave it at that? Because of time constraints I will not be able to get in early and take incident readings on stage. It’s been 30–40 years since I photographed any kind of stage production, and because of health concerns can no longer do my own d&p, I’m at the mercy of a commercial lab. I will shoot digital as a back up, just in case. Thanks in advance.

Regarding exposure, would I better off spot metering each shot or just take an overall reading of the stage with my Weston Master V and leave it at that?

Theatre lighting tends to be very contrasty, so IMO neither spot nor averaging will give bulletproof readings. But I'd lean toward an average reading as being the best bet, especially if taken close to the actors.

 

If you're carrying a digital camera as well; why not use a reading or picture from that to guide the film exposure?

Excellent suggestion. I’ll set my DSLR to 3200 and take a reading. Decades ago I took a bunch of stage photos, but I had the opportunity to take incident readings when the actors were doing their blocking. Can’t do that now.

Excellent suggestion. I’ll set my DSLR to 3200 and take a reading.

 

I agree, but rather than a meter reading I would be inclined to snap a digital shot and view it with the "blinkies" turned on. Then use the exposure where a slight amount of blinking are occurring in the skin highlights or white clothing. I'd personally verify that this is good enough in a dry run, of sorts, ahead of time.

Honestly I would think twice about 3200. If you have a 2.8 lens you should be fine at 400 unless the stage is just DARK. 3200 will give a lot of contrast and grain and the lighting might make it worse. Expose for highlights and the medium tones and let the shadows go where they will. Since you won’t be doing the darkroom work you will have less control of the smaller details.

 

Rick H.

Expose for highlights and the medium tones and let the shadows go where they will.

Hmmm. Works for digital, but that's the opposite of the old film adage to "Expose for the shadows and let the highlights take care of themselves".

However, Delta 3200 (not really; its true ISO is only about 1000) does tend to block up in the highlights pretty easily, especially if push processed. Then again most 'push' processed B&W film will have blocked highlights. So best to stick to the true ISO speed - got from the maker's H&D chart - and develop normally.

 

Unfortunately Harman, AKA Ilford, only give a useless chart marked in 'Relative Log Exposure'. About as helpful as a chocolate teapot!

I was sent a video of a dress rehearsal and the stage is much brighter than I anticipated, the sets are pastels and bright. I think I’ll be OK with ordinary Tri-X at 400 or maybe pushed one stop. I decided to take the digital backups in monochrome. Thanks to everyone for their comments.

The old saying is not "expose for the shadows and let the highlights take care of themselves". That is the modern, digido version.

The old adage told us to take control over the highlights too, by a considered choice of development: "... and develop for the highlights".

Decided to make a change in my equipment. Going with my trusty M3 and Summicrons, 50/2 and 90/2. Will be easier to focus with these old eyes and wide enough to be safe shooting at 400 or 800. Plus if my Tri-X are disappointing I have the digital monochrome as a back up. Don’t like that I don’t have control in the darkroom.

I suspect that will give good results. Rodeo Joe, back in my newspaper film days we often pushed Tri X to 1600 with Acufine, usually for indoor and night time sports events. That’s when I realized the highlights were more important than shadows for my purposes. The theatre work I’ve done usually had much better lighting and I could go with slower shutter speeds. It might be a good idea to shoot a quick test roll early and process it first to see if you need to make any changes in developers or time.

 

Rick H.

Most exposures I made at f/4 with shutter speeds varying from 1/30 to 1/125. Didn’t want to sacrifice DOF so set hyperfocal distance, 25 feet from front of stage to first row of seats. Tonight will bring my M5 and rely on its TTL meter, which is usually spot on. (Sherry Kräuter did a CLE years ago and it works with clock-like precision.) Unfortunately ran out of Tri-X, so using some BW400CN instead.

The old adage told us to take control over the highlights too, by a considered choice of development: "... and develop for the highlights".

That was OK for St. Ansel and his individual sheet-film exposures. Not so easily implemented with roll film or 35mm, and absolute anathema to the 'push process' brigade; who still firmly believe that extending development really does increase film speed. Instead of just increasing contrast and making the highlights unprintable.

The old saying is not "expose for the shadows and let the highlights take care of themselves".

And, yes it is. I can show you that exact quote in a 1935 photography manual. It was only later adopted and adapted by Mr. Adams.

Shot the third and final matinee performance with my M7 and BW400CN (1 stop to ISO 800/30°) as I ran out of Tri-X. Used 50 and 90 ‘crons at f/4. Got shutter speeds of 1/30–1/125. If anything comes out decent, I’ll post a few examples once I get the uploads from The Darkroom later in the week. Thank you for the advice above. I think Uncle Karl did a good job.

FYI.—Excellent book on doing stage photography is Creative Techniques in Stage and Theatrical Photography, by Paddy Cutts and Rosemary Curr (London: B.T. Batsford, 1983).

Hi,

I'm sure it's a great book, especially for your 'brief' (retro look). I tried to look up some references and reviews. The book is still for sale (2nd hand) but I could only find 1 review by a Zach Cleland on Goodreads.com:

 

"It was a gift from one of my theatre professors when I graduated and went into theatre photography. It’s mostly outdated info because of how photography has advanced, but as a look into the history and context of the field it was delightful."

 

I shoot exclusively digital and for stage/theatre/sport usually in 'burst mode' to precisely capture movement and expressions. But I often borrow 'film photography' library books and I also buy them 2nd hand. Though the film/digital capture and development technologies are different, the same 'general photography principles' apply. I've learned a lot from good photography books written in the pre-digital era!

 

I've been tempted to buy a film camera for years but I've never gotten around to it. I'm sure I will in the coming months/years!

 

Great to read that your stage 'photoshoot' was a success! I'm looking forward to seeing a few of your pics.

 

Best wishes,

 

Mike

 

FYI.—Excellent book on doing stage photography is Creative Techniques in Stage and Theatrical Photography, by Paddy Cutts and Rosemary Curr (London: B.T. Batsford, 1983).

Mike,

I’m an old timer who can’t give up film even though I have loads of digital equipment. I have a huge stable of Leica M and reflex gear—cameras, lenses and tons of all sorts of accessories. I have a library of hundreds of books, all pre-digital. Used to do all my own darkroom work but because of health issues I had to give that up. I did my share of rock concert photography in the 1960s–70s, when it was fun—i.e. lax security, easy access back stage, performers approachable. People I talk to now say it’s not fun anymore, tight security; they herd you into a pen, first three sets, then get the hell out. A different world today.

A different world today.

About which there is much good, in photography and other things, if we don’t get stuck in nostalgia for our past and youth. An evolving present and a different future can be really exhilarating, perhaps less via comparison and more via embrace.

 

Glad your shoot went well. I’ve shot several student plays for a theater teacher friend of mine and the enthusiasm of the kids is infectious.

Yes, I read the same kind of things about photographing modern-day concerts: in the pen for the first couple of numbers and then herded out. Even at my local (free) multiple-stage 'concert in the park' events, D)SLRs have become prohibited in recent years unless you have an accredited 'press pass'. So mobile phone photos are fine but ones taken with a 'real' camera/lens aren't. Bags are checked for 'camera's'.

 

I don't know for sure but I suspect that there were fewer 'good' concert photographers in the 1960's-70's and it was perhaps easier to earn a reputation.

As you say, people were probably more approachable and relaxed about having photos taken. These days, hordes of (digital) photographers turn up in the hope of getting a 'selling shot'. Bands are also much more protective of their 'brand'.

 

Good to reflect back on 'easier' times!

 

Mike,

I’m an old timer who can’t give up film even though I have loads of digital equipment. I have a huge stable of Leica M and reflex gear—cameras, lenses and tons of all sorts of accessories. I have a library of hundreds of books, all pre-digital. Used to do all my own darkroom work but because of health issues I had to give that up. I did my share of rock concert photography in the 1960s–70s, when it was fun—i.e. lax security, easy access back stage, performers approachable. People I talk to now say it’s not fun anymore, tight security; they herd you into a pen, first three sets, then get the hell out. A different world today.

I’ve had encounters where a DSLR with interchangeable lenses is a no-no, but if you have a mirror-less digital camera with a fixed lens, it doesn’t count as a so-called “professional” camera. Also, an M3 in a beat-up brown eveready case is hardly ever questioned. Heck, security can’t figure out how to turn it on!

 

Yes, I read the same kind of things about photographing modern-day concerts: in the pen for the first couple of numbers and then herded out. Even at my local (free) multiple-stage 'concert in the park' events, D)SLRs have become prohibited in recent years unless you have an accredited 'press pass'. So mobile phone photos are fine but ones taken with a 'real' camera/lens aren't. Bags are checked for 'camera's'.

 

I don't know for sure but I suspect that there were fewer 'good' concert photographers in the 1960's-70's and it was perhaps easier to earn a reputation.

As you say, people were probably more approachable and relaxed about having photos taken. These days, hordes of (digital) photographers turn up in the hope of getting a 'selling shot'. Bands are also much more protective of their 'brand'.

 

Good to reflect back on 'easier' times!

About which there is much good, in photography and other things, if we don’t get stuck in nostalgia for our past and youth. An evolving present and a different future can be really exhilarating, perhaps less via comparison and more via embrace.

 

Glad your shoot went well. I’ve shot several student plays for a theater teacher friend of mine and the enthusiasm of the kids is infectious.

 

Sam,

My great niece is in the production and you’re 100% right, the enthusiasm of the students is infectious. They pour their heart and soul into it, constant practice sessions, rehearsals. I was really blown away at how good these kids were.

Great to hear!

 

FWIW, my 2 daughters were both enthusiastic 'dance and drama' students/participants in their teens, They both had a wonderful experience through their rehearsals and performances. One of my daughters has since become a professional dancer/actress.

 

QUOTE="dr._karl_hoppe, post: 5953796, member: 1469423"]Sam,

My great niece is in the production and you’re 100% right, the enthusiasm of the students is infectious. They pour their heart and soul into it, constant practice sessions, rehearsals. I was really blown away at how good these kids were.

Great to hear!

 

FWIW, my 2 daughters were both enthusiastic 'dance and drama' students/participants in their teens, They both had a wonderful experience through their rehearsals and performances. One of my daughters has since become a professional dancer/actress.

 

QUOTE="dr._karl_hoppe, post: 5953796, member: 1469423"]Sam,

My great niece is in the production and you’re 100% right, the enthusiasm of the students is infectious. They pour their heart and soul into it, constant practice sessions, rehearsals. I was really blown away at how good these kids were.

 

My great niece loves theatre. She has been approached over the years to do modelling and acting in commercials. Her parents decided against it because they saw how others her age were robbed of a normal childhood. People we know told the parents to be prepared that her modelling and acting will totally take over the family’s life to the exclusion of just about everything else. I think my nephew and his wife made the right decision. She’s now at an age where she can explore her creative talents with a solid childhood behind her.

 

I’m training her as a budding photographer, first with all the basics of film, then onto digital. I’m a retired astronomer so I have all the time in the world to mentor her along before I croak. I have no children so she will inherit tens of thousands of dollars worth of incredible Leica gear. She has done some back-up tracks for a couple of local recording artists, just fun stuff. She understands theatre, music, photography, etc. is a tough gig to crack into, so she wisely has decided to pursue a legal education as an “insurance policy” if the creative thing doesn’t pan out. I have a law degree in both civil and canon law from Heidelberg but unexpectedly veered from my hobby of astronomy into a professional career. You never know what path life will take you.

Wonderful to hear! We have a lot in common and should perhaps move to PM's :).

 

I think your nephew and his wife made the right choice too! My youngest daughter was just 10 when she was offered a place at the prestigious 'Dutch National Ballet Academy' in Amsterdam - 100 km away from where we lived as the crow flies. At the time, my initial reaction was 'over my dead body!' because I could predict how this would affect her childhood. But she really had her heart set on it and we eventually decided to try it out. We made arrangements beforehand with her local school that she could always re-join if things in Amsterdam didn't work out. My ex-wife or I woke her every day at 06.15 and between us drove her to the nearest 'main' train station (30 mins). It then took her an hour to get to school. Then either my ex-wife or I would pick her up again in the evening. So basically, she was traveling 3 hours a day to get to the school she wanted to be at. And our family life was pretty much regimented around the 'travel times'. And of course, things occasionally went wrong (cancellations, snow/ice on the rails, etc.). For her dance/drama/vocals degree, she moved to Amsterdam and has stayed there since. She was around 20 when she first acted in a regional film production and she only began modeling/acting/dancing/presenting professionally after she graduated aged 21.

 

She by no means had a 'normal' childhood because dance & travel took up all her time and energy. But it was something that she - of her own free will - wanted to keep doing. Her only performances were arranged by her ballet school. Two conflicting thoughts regularly went through my mind at the time. One was "How differently might have you become if you hadn't dedicated yourself so completely to dance?" and "Who am I to stand in the way of the natural talent that my daughter has and passionately wants to develop?". She's turned out fine, btw!

 

As you say, dance/drama is a difficult business to get into and a 'backup plan' is indeed advisable! Although my daughter was well-qualified, she decided that she preferred not (immediately) to become a dance/drama teacher. She's pretty smart and - during the Covid period - she worked 2-3 days a week as an administrative assistant for arts subsidies. In the past, she happily smiled and handed out badges at conferences to get some income. I'm pretty sure that should her 'artistic career' begin to fade, she'll find something else.

 

I love the fact that your niece is a budding photographer and that you're mentoring her (another possible fall-back occupation :) )

 

Mike

 

PS on 'life paths', I decided 45 years ago to live and work in Norway for a year. I loved the country and I wanted to get some 'international experience'. Norway - despite a couple of interviews - didn't pan out and I was offered a job with a great small company in NL. At the time, I thought: well NL's OK too, it's just for a year. 45 years later I'm still here!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

My great niece loves theatre. She has been approached over the years to do modelling and acting in commercials. Her parents decided against it because they saw how others her age were robbed of a normal childhood. People we know told the parents to be prepared that her modelling and acting will totally take over the family’s life to the exclusion of just about everything else. I think my nephew and his wife made the right decision. She’s now at an age where she can explore her creative talents with a solid childhood behind her.

 

I’m training her as a budding photographer, first with all the basics of film, then onto digital. I’m a retired astronomer so I have all the time in the world to mentor her along before I croak. I have no children so she will inherit tens of thousands of dollars worth of incredible Leica gear. She has done some back-up tracks for a couple of local recording artists, just fun stuff. She understands theatre, music, photography, etc. is a tough gig to crack into, so she wisely has decided to pursue a legal education as an “insurance policy” if the creative thing doesn’t pan out. I have a law degree in both civil and canon law from Heidelberg but unexpectedly veered from my hobby of astronomy into a professional career. You never know what path life will take you.

Wonderful to hear! We have a lot in common and should perhaps move to PM's :).

 

I think your nephew and his wife made the right choice too! My youngest daughter was just 10 when she was offered a place at the prestigious 'Dutch National Ballet Academy' in Amsterdam - 100 km away from where we lived as the crow flies. At the time, my initial reaction was 'over my dead body!' because I could predict how this would affect her childhood. But she really had her heart set on it and we eventually decided to try it out. We made arrangements beforehand with her local school that she could always re-join if things in Amsterdam didn't work out. My ex-wife or I woke her every day at 06.15 and between us drove her to the nearest 'main' train station (30 mins). It then took her an hour to get to school. Then either my ex-wife or I would pick her up again in the evening. So basically, she was traveling 3 hours a day to get to the school she wanted to be at. And our family life was pretty much regimented around the 'travel times'. And of course, things occasionally went wrong (cancellations, snow/ice on the rails, etc.). For her dance/drama/vocals degree, she moved to Amsterdam and has stayed there since. She was around 20 when she first acted in a regional film production and she only began modeling/acting/dancing/presenting professionally after she graduated aged 21.

 

She by no means had a 'normal' childhood because dance & travel took up all her time and energy. But it was something that she - of her own free will - wanted to keep doing. Her only performances were arranged by her ballet school. Two conflicting thoughts regularly went through my mind at the time. One was "How differently might have you become if you hadn't dedicated yourself so completely to dance?" and "Who am I to stand in the way of the natural talent that my daughter has and passionately wants to develop?". She's turned out fine, btw!

 

As you say, dance/drama is a difficult business to get into and a 'backup plan' is indeed advisable! Although my daughter was well-qualified, she decided that she preferred not (immediately) to become a dance/drama teacher. She's pretty smart and - during the Covid period - she worked 2-3 days a week as an administrative assistant for arts subsidies. In the past, she happily smiled and handed out badges at conferences to get some income. I'm pretty sure that should her 'artistic career' begin to fade, she'll find something else.

 

I love the fact that your niece is a budding photographer and that you're mentoring her (another possible fall-back occupation :) )

 

Mike

 

PS on 'life paths', I decided 45 years ago to live and work in Norway for a year. I loved the country and I wanted to get some 'international experience'. Norway - despite a couple of interviews - didn't pan out and I was offered a job with a great small company in NL. At the time, I thought: well NL's OK too, it's just for a year. 45 years later I'm still here!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

My great niece loves theatre. She has been approached over the years to do modelling and acting in commercials. Her parents decided against it because they saw how others her age were robbed of a normal childhood. People we know told the parents to be prepared that her modelling and acting will totally take over the family’s life to the exclusion of just about everything else. I think my nephew and his wife made the right decision. She’s now at an age where she can explore her creative talents with a solid childhood behind her.

 

I’m training her as a budding photographer, first with all the basics of film, then onto digital. I’m a retired astronomer so I have all the time in the world to mentor her along before I croak. I have no children so she will inherit tens of thousands of dollars worth of incredible Leica gear. She has done some back-up tracks for a couple of local recording artists, just fun stuff. She understands theatre, music, photography, etc. is a tough gig to crack into, so she wisely has decided to pursue a legal education as an “insurance policy” if the creative thing doesn’t pan out. I have a law degree in both civil and canon law from Heidelberg but unexpectedly veered from my hobby of astronomy into a professional career. You never know what path life will take you.

 

 

That’s amazing, Amsterdam. We’re Dutch. I was born in NYC when my father worked at UNHQ in NYC. Shortly after I was born, he was sent to The Hague on the Permanent Court of International Justice. When I was 11 we moved back to NYC and I graduated from high school. I decided to pursue a legal degree at Heidelberg rather than stateside, and while there attended the Max Planck Institute of Astronomy. I came back to the States and my career veered into astronomy. I never practised law but I did pass the NY bar exam.

 

Sounds like your daughter made the right choice. It’s always good to have a back-up plan. I never thought my hobby would morph into a career but it did by some totally unexpected turn of events. Photography was my first love since I was 6 or 7 years old, but it never was a viable source of income, just a lot of fun.

I'm mostly satisfied with the shots I took. Here are a few,