Using pane of glass to create graphics

[ratface1]

Hi, I was wondering if anybody has seen a similar technique to this

before.

I'm photographing a vocalist (today actually) and was considering

using a pane of glass to sort of super impose musical notes around

her, as if she was singing or something like that...I don't want to do

this in photoshop, I'd rather it was taken all in camera as it's for

publication.

 

Anyone seen anything similar?

Anyone have tips or thoughts on how to make this work well?

 

Thanks!

[yance_marti]

The glass would have to be very large if you wanted the notes to appear in focus. If it was just a small piece of glass with notes painted on it, they would be very blurred maybe to the point of being unrecognizable unless you had a high depth of field. You might be better off making cardboard props and hanging them around her with fishing line or something.

[bill c.]

Tim-- I know what you mean about not wanting to do it in photoshop. I just LOOKS photoshop, and a lot of people don't like that. It looks cheap.

 

Back when things like this were being done on film, there was another way to do it, but it required a double-exposure, which can be extremely tricky. You take one shot on a black background with the (light-colored) notes hung in strategic positions, then shoot the main shot with the subject in a place where the notes aren't. Or if you want black notes you could sandwich the negs and scan them.

 

But today the best way is to do two exposures and then combine them with the layers tool in photoshop. Even though you're using PS, it doesn't look like it.

 

Best of luck. -BC-

[ratface1]

thanks for the advice. i ended up finding, painting and finishing the pane of glass after two hours work. then, on the drive to the assignment, broke the glass.

better luck next time...

[josphy]

Maybe project notes or whatever onto the background or even onto vocalist's face/body w/ a slide projector.

[redo]

BC wrote "Tim-- I know what you mean about not wanting to do it in photoshop. I just LOOKS photoshop, and a lot of people don't like that. It looks cheap."

 

I disagree with Bill about photoshop. An image poorly done does look photoshopped but when done with skill it is impossible tell. The same is true of of analog processing done with developer, fixer and airbrushes. When poorly burned or dodged it is very obvious that the image was changed but not when expertly done.

 

I'm writing this after your shoot with the vocalist to counteract the 'lie' that film and consequently prints are not manipulated. One is digital and one is analog...period. Photographers from the tintype days have been adjusting images to fit their vision.

 

A famous photo by Man Ray circa 1920 is a photo of a woman's back with drawn shapes resembling the cutouts on a cello. Manipulation is a given in photography. The print is only a representation of what is in front of the lens. That is why photographers choose scenes to fit the film or sensor's characteristics.

 

Bottomline, who cares if you spend time finding a piece of glass and hanging cardboard musical notes or if you spend time photoshopping musical notes. Potayto-Potatto

 

Red