Monday 5x Exec portrait shoots: taking votes on how. Advice welcome.

[mvw photo]

<p>Hi gang,</p>

<p>I shall be shooting some execs on Monday. Headshots. I am dithering as to how to shoot, between one of these three alternatives:</p>

 

<ol>

<li>Three strobes (monolights), two into umbrellas, fired by Pocketwizards. Standard key/fill/background, maybe reflector for one and use one as hairlight. Backdrop, grey. (Maybe a gel on the background light for e.g. slight blue tint). </li>

<li>Three speedlites (580ex/430ex), two into umbrellas, fired by pocketwizards (manual). Standard key/fill/background, maybe reflector for one and use one as hairlight. Backdrop, grey. (Maybe a gel on the background light for e.g. slight blue tint). </li>

<li>Three speedlites (580ex/430ex), two into umbrellas, fired using E-TTL (by light). Standard key/fill/background, maybe reflector for one and use one as hairlight. Backdrop, grey. (Maybe a gel on the background light for e.g. slight blue tint). </li>

</ol>

<p>For 2 and 3, I have grids and gels etc.</p>

<p>So I would normally do speedlites and TTL for one shoot. However, with five execs rather than one, I am tempted to bring proper lights and set them up properly for consistent exposure etc.</p>

<p>Thoughts?</p>

<p>Michael</p>

<p> </p>

[mvw photo]

<p>Oh gosh, I should add, this is on location so I have to carry what I bring :-)</p>

 

[dave_wilson1]

<p>Michael, I have done a lot of this, and I have used various degrees of equipment. I suggest matching the equipment and style to the client. Short example, one shoot I needed headshots of mechanics for an Oldsmobile brochure. One portable umbrella with on camera fill and simple backround was more than enough. Another shoot was for about 8 top execs at a pharmaceutical firm. I went the whole route and set up studio lights and background in a conference room and made a big deal out of it and charged accordingly. If you're shooting women, I highly suggest you take a few with a very mild diffuser like a Tiffen Diffuser #1 or FX, the weakest one. Don't use a bubble pattern diffuser like a softar or Hoya Softner A-B, or anything too dramatic or obvious. Photoshop and all the other programs are great, but getting a few softer on the shoot is sometimes a better option. In your case I might set up the better equipment if you think it's beneficial and the $$$ is there. Edit- Another thought is equipment is sometimes the least problem, it's the horrible hair, make-up, jewelry, teeth etc.</p>

[Spearhead]

<p>On your website, you advertise both portraits and corporate shoots. Why are you asking about this, shouldn't you know if you're pitching yourself for this kind of work? Given how google indexes all this highly, do you really want your clients to know that you have to ask for help for fairly basic corporate portraits?</p>

[mvw photo]

<p>Jeff, why do you ask that?<br>

Yes, I know the options. Yes, I am sure I am going to produce good shots. But the moment I think I know it all, and my methods never need change, I'll start moving backward. If my clients google me, then good for them. They'll know I take their jobs seriously.<br>

And you can do this shoot using any of the three methods I outline above. Which would you use?<br>

Yes, Dave, that makes sense... indeed I find that for execs often appearance matters! And I briefed them in advance, of course, w.r.t. appearance, clothing, etc.</p>

 

[barry_kenstler1]

<p>Michael,<br /> I agree, there is nothing wrong with asking peoples' opinions, no matter how basic the subject or how experienced the photographer. Sometimes there's a little gem in a response that can change how you think or work.</p>

<p>All three of your options have merit, though I'd be inclined to suggest the studio flashes simply because that's what I'm most comfortable with. A hybrid solution with some speedlights in manual mode is another possibility and one I've used. Studio lights might project a more "professional" appearance, but that is debatable considering how many pros are now using speedlights for such assignments. If you'd like to use one of the studio flashes as a hair light, and another to light the background, I'd suggest you forgo the fill light and substitute a reflector. I've found that I get perfectly good results by substituting a large white fill reflector opposite the main light for the separate fill light. In fact, it's hard for me to tell the difference between the shots I've done in my studio using a fill light and those shot on location with a large piece of white Foamcore in its place. The difference shows up primarily in the background, as it will be slightly darker. I just drag along a shade lighter gray seamless paper roll when using the reflector. Of course, I'm comfortable with this setup and know approximately how to place my reflector to get the equivalent ratio. With the strobe modeling lights you have the visual confirmation too, so you can usually see how that reflector fill is working on the face.</p>

<p>For what it's worth, for corporate-style headshots I usually bring along a three light setup: main light (umbrella/softbox), hair light w/barn doors, background light w/barn doors. The ladies often appreciate the hair lighting; the bald guys generally don't. I close the barn doors on the hair light for the folks with thinning hair. I may use diffusers or colored gels on the hair and background lights depending on the desired look.</p>

<p>Oh, yes, I think using a light diffuser, as suggested, is worth considering. I used to use the Tiffen Soft FX and black mesh diffusion filters when I shot film, but stopped when I switched to digital. That's something I should reconsider. I've been spending a little too much time retouching my female clients. <br /> Good luck on that shoot.</p>

[mvw photo]

<p>Barry - great response. Hang on while I respond to it in detail.</p>

 

[mvw photo]

<p>So Barry:</p>

<p>First, thanks for the support. However well I know something, I will never cease asking what my colleagues do.I get good at things by kicking around ideas - around the photo water cooler, I spend the day talking with my colleagues about how to do the next shoot. This is that water cooler.</p>

<p>Hearing all this, I think I may do the follwoing tomorrow: a hybrid blend. Like this:</p>

<ul>

<li>Backdrop: grey, 5' of more away from subject</li>

<li>Subject on stool</li>

<li>Key light: 400 Ws monolight into softbox</li>

<li>Fill light: ditto monolight into umbrella</li>

<li>Hair light: Canon speedlight with Honl snoot (feathered) </li>

<li>Background light: Canon speedlight with Honl 1/4" grid and light blue gel.</li>

<li>I carry reflectors etc as a just-in-case.</li>

</ul>

<p>All lights fired by Pocketwizards (I have enough).<br>

That way my main lights are continuously variable; the less important lights are speedlites, but for these I can use the convenient Honl barn doors, snoots, grids and gels.<br>

Looking forward to this.<br>

Jeff may not agree, but for me, changing the way I light for every shoot, or rather: changing the way and the equipment I achieve the lighting I want, keeps me interested and fresh. Thanks for your input - as always, photo.net does a great job sharing.</p>

<p> </p>

[mvw photo]

<p>Oh and fwiw, I generally use a slight (very light) gel on the background light, but not generally on the hair light, except a slight warming sometimes.</p>

 

[barry_kenstler1]

<p>Michael,<br>

Sounds like a very workable plan to me. I admire your enthusiasm. I'd be happy to have half of it. I agree, learning to get similar looks from different sources, and different looks from the same source, can charge you up, not to mention make you a better photographer. In my experience, shortly after you've concluded you're an expert with nothing more to learn, life is likely to present evidence to the contrary. </p>

<p>Happy Lighting,<br>

Barry</p>

[bobcossar]

<p>Hmmmmm.....Jeff has a very valid point I think......I certainly would never need to come to a forum to ask a thing like that.....If you have obtained the assignment then you must have represented yourself as knowing what you are doing.</p>

<p>But, that question strongly suggests otherwise.</p>

<p>Imagine if tomorrow you are going for a root canal....and tonight you see a post in a medical forum....Hey guys, can you give me some suggestions on doing a ........You get the idea no doubt. With carefully measured respect...Robert</p>

[mvw photo]

<p>"Very valid" as opposed to just "valid"? :-)</p>

<p>Robert, yes, I know what I am doing. I shoot portraits like this for companies, newspapers, individuals and magaines. I also teach both a course in portrait lighting and several courses (the more advanced one I wrote) in Mastering Flash.</p>

<p>But has your technique never changed? I presume you are a photographer? A few years ago, doing this with speedlites would have been unimaginable. Now you can use them, and with E-TL II and CLS/iTTL you can do it. A year ago, TTL through radio slaves was impossible. Now, you can do it.</p>

<p>I know dentists, and yes, they do talk to one another about how they tackle certain jobs. In fact I would be delighted to know that my dentist is talking to other dentists about what technique to use. I also know some dentists who do not do that, and they do things the way they did them in 1975 - not the dentists I want to use.</p>

<p>I find it hard to believe that pros here are being told not to ask questions about technique. That is what photo.net is great at!</p>

<p>With equally carefully measured respect,<br /> Michael</p>

[bobcossar]

<p>My point, Michael is that qualified pros in any profession do not generally ask for details as to how to do something related to an already booked assignment, <em>on an on-line forum, </em> such as this one.</p>

<p>You, as the pro., are <em>expected </em> to know what you are doing to an expert degree. Had your question been of a more general nature, the adverse comments may not have arisen. But you are asking basic advice about a specific, booked, commercial shoot.</p>

<p>Most pros wouldn't do that......just sayin' Robert</p>

[mvw photo]

<p>So I am not "most pros", I suppose.</p>

<p>You describe your comments as adverse. I am trying to understand why it is necessary to be adverse. If you do not agree with someone, or you think they are not behaving in a professional enough manner, why point that out? "If you can't say anything nice, say nothing", is good advice.</p>

<p>Again, Robert, I think anyone should feel free to ask anything anywhere. Why not? Our profession is a secret, now? Not for me: I do not keep secrets from my customers. While I am sure I can produce a perfectly good shoot tomorrow using <em>any</em> of my suggested methods, or even some not suggested (like available light, if there is any), I think it is exciting to talk to other pros about how today they would tackle my shoot.</p>

<p>Further, if I end up learning something new, I do not think learning is bad, or a sign of weakness. Among other things, I teach pros (mainly wedding pros) from Ontario to Arizona the use of flash, and they also have questions about already-booked shoots: in person and online. Wouldn't <em>dream</em> of making adverse comments: on the contrary, I love it when people ask and learn.</p>

<p>And how do I learn what I teach? Again, by asking as many people as I can what they do in given situations. You would be surprised how often, as Barry suggests above, I learn a new gem of wisdom.</p>

<p>If I had been a pro for 40 years (it's not quite been that many!) then the last thing I would do is sit back saying that it is bad to ask. This applies to the most basic questions, too. A very well-known wedding pro said recently, in a workshop a fellow photog attended, that he shoots weddings in Program mode. Amazing - that never would have occurred to me, to shoot anything important like that in anything other than M or A modes.</p>

<p>Another thing: when things shift (e.g. now from strobes to speedlites, as in the last 5 years) it is interesting to see how and when the pros shift. I'd love to know how many of us now use small speedlites a la strobist for formal location shoots.</p>

<p>Personally, I usually set up TTL speedlites in a few umbrellas for a simple shoot, but for 5-6 execs in a row, I'll bring the strobes and use the setup as per above.</p>

<p>Anyway, your comments noted, thanks. But my questions stand and any discussion is very useful.</p>

 

[barry_kenstler1]

<p>I agree that Jeff and Robert have a point about managing public image, particularly Jeff's point concerning search rank. It's true, a stupid post on Photo.net is stupid indeed. Where I differ with Jeff and Robert is on the interpretation of Michael's questions. I don't see his questions as a sure sign of a foundering newbie, but as someone who'd like to hear other photographers' pros and cons on each of three setups. Each of the proposed setups could produce perfectly acceptable headshots. I was expecting comments on the virtues of monolights and their modeling lights, or detractors of the same complaining about bulk and weight, for example. How about controlling the speedlights via E-TTL vs. manual? What works best for you and why? I think these are perfectly reasonable questions that deserve perfectly reasonable responses.</p>

[mvw photo]

<p>Thank you Barry. I was indeed hoping for that kind of discussion, and appreciated your suggestions.</p>

<p>One thing in particular is the merits of small, light, convenient speedlites vs their lower power, lack or modeling light, and tendency to run out of battery. Also the merits of TTL (convenient and fast) vs manual (reliable and predictable). How do you all weigh those?</p>

<p>I have shot many sessions with off-camera TTL speedlites, and as many with strobes. What I have not done very much is speedlites on manual (controlled by Pocketwizards, using Flashzebra cables) combined with monolights. That's what I shall use tomorrow. I find the small Honl flash modifiers very convenient.</p>

<p>Anyway, all other ideas, suggestions, tips, new insights also welcome. Again, that is what photo.net is so good at!</p>

<p> </p>

[mvw photo]

<p>Another not unimportant "con" of monolights is the power leads needed. One reason I use speedlites so often is that I grab them out the bag, unfold the stands, turn the flashes on, and I'm done. Strobes, I'm always hunting for power outlets.</p>

<p>And there's the "line of sight" thing. I recently did an exec headshot with TTL for West of the City magazine in a giant hall (ex warehouse, to be an exhibition hall). Had to use TTL speedlites (the nearest power was far away) - but the shoot was very tough because in a large hall, there is no reflecting at all so you need line of sight, which is tough when using multiple umbrellas: which one to point at?.</p>

<p>On the other hand, this year I shot Miss Halton on Toronto Island beach, and TTL was easy in spite of the umbrella: only one light to aim at so it was easy. I actually use this shot as a teaching example, see here: http://blog.michaelwillems.ca/2009/09/23/let-there-be-light</p>

<p> </p>

[markonestudios]

Check out the Strobist for some pretty good ideas on just such. Ooops! I may be too late, seeing as your shoot is today :)

[mvw photo]

<p>Not too late, and I love strobist.</p>

[mvw photo]

<p>OK, here's how I set up: standard four lightsm but the hair- and background-light are speedlites.<br>

Pics later: although I have copyright, it would be bad form to share pics before client sees them!</p>

 

[mvw photo]

<p>Oops, upload gives me a server error.</p>

 

[mvw photo]

<p>One more try.</p>

[mvw photo]

<p>Nope. "The requested URL cannot be accessed due to a system error on this server. "</p>

[steve_10170]

<p>Michael - silent observer interested in seeing your results. I have had limited experience using strobes only, and will be interested in seeing the outcome with your mixed equipment. Also, would like to see what you learned/experienced about manual modes/TTL in such environment. I think your inquiry discussing detailed options was appropriate; not a desperate call for 'help'. Cheers!</p>

[mvw photo]

<p>Hi Steve,</p>

<p>Thanks. And indeed no call for help and certainly not desperate.. the issue for me is not the technology - hey, as said above (and thanks for your confidence) - I know how to light. What I am interested in is in doing it without carrying 300 lb of gear every time, while still getting the predictability I need. And in what other photogs are doing now. :-)</p>

<p>Do please send me an email (michael@michaelwilllems.ca) and I'll send you some of the pics. I'm very happy with the results, but more- with the logistics.</p>

<p>Michael</p>

<p>PS I used the monolights as well as the speedlights all on manual. Fired by PocketWizards.</p>

<p> </p>