Is It Gels or Photoshop?

[nataliaborecka]

Hello,

 

I've been studying an editorial shot by Javier Vallhonrat for Vogue UK, and the lighting is so beautiful. I'd love to try and

reproduce it. How do you think Javier achieved this amazing pastel effect? You can find the series here:

http://goo.gl/k6SI9 I strongly suspect the effect is all post, but I'd like to believe that it's possible to do in-camera with

some gels. What do you think?

 

Best,

 

N.<div></div>

[richardsnow]

<p>I suspect that it's both great light and a great photoshop artist.</p>

<p>RS</p>

[studio460]

<p>If it's an exterior, I would guess post-process. If it's a studio shot, it could easily have been gels (and perhaps enhanced, or tweaked in post).</p>

[studio460]

<p>Natalia said:</p>

<blockquote>

<p>. . . I'd like to believe that it's possible to do in-camera with some gels. What do you think?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Certainly, this would be do-able, in-camera. To accomplish a similar effect, you would light the set walls with a deep-colored gel. The white light directed toward the center reduces how well the gels read, and washes out their chroma. The fall-off of the white light creates a smooth gradient to the gel-colored wall. When a portion of the set wall is in complete shadow (the one created by the model), the gel reads very deeply. The ocean could be produced by either a Translight (back-lit, translucent photographic background), painted backdrop, or a keyed-in post composite.</p>

[mariosforsos]

<p>The near perfect sharpness of the shadow (especially at the distance seen here) makes me think "post processing" - in other words, PS. Also, I cannot see how you'd be able to colour the shadow so completely uniformly (i.e. without the centre going darker and the edges lighter) using gels or whatever else.</p>

<p>Personally I think it's a great image (in terms of the lighting on the model) but the rest is 90% PS.</p>

[studio460]

<p>Yes, it would be difficult to light the right set wall so deeply, so evenly, with so little space to hide the instruments, yet not hit the model with the colored lights. It is, most likely, Photoshop work (which would only require a simple selection). However, this would be possible (however, unlikely) if the set wall was actually a transucent panel, and was backlit with colored lights. Also, ColorBursts (DMX-able, RGB, continuous LEDs) may actually be able to achieve this effect, practically, with an opaque set wall. ColorBursts are capable of projecting extremely even beam patterns with very deep, saturated hues, and the units themselves have very slim form-factors.</p>

[studio460]

<p>Oh, duh. I just clicked the link! Apparently, that is a practical location. Now, looking at the other photos, it appears that those set walls are merely painted that color. The amount of "wash-out" is controlled by how much light they're adding, using high-Watt second studio strobes, some, possibly with Fresnel modifiers. Some panels appear painted evenly, some appear to have been painted with included gradients. Also, some unusual gobos may have been used in some of the shots to create those irregularly shaped shadows. It's a gorgeous series! Beautifully art-directed and styled!</p>

[studio460]

<p>On second thought, the panels were likely all evenly painted, and all gradients and shadows were completely created by the lighting (strobes), natural fall-off of ambient daylight, and reflectance of facing panels receiving direct sun. Also, painted surfaces can have varying reflectance values depending on the angle viewed. Gels or Photoshop? Neither! It was all done with white light and paint! Interesting technique!</p>