Environmental portraits for business web site

[marklcooper]

<p>I'm throwing this out for discussion. I will test my various pieces of equipment to see what produces the best results for me. I realize this is not the portrait forum, but the portrait forum seems kind of light in traffic. I trust you guys/gals from my many years on this forum. Matt - do you hear me calling<g>?</p>

<p>One of my computer clients has approved me taking portraits for the company web site. She wants environmental shots of staff working in their office and at their non-office jobs. The current pics were taken by an ex-staffer with a point and shoot, with a lot of bravado, and little photographic skills. (www.allenrefractories.com) Each office has fluorescent lighting and a window with adjustable shades. I have total access to these folks so we can do this correctly.</p>

<p>Here's a shot I did with another client: <a href="http://auntellensfarm.com/marks-stuff/candids/DSC-2885-063.JPG/view">http://auntellensfarm.com/marks-stuff/candids/DSC-2885-063.JPG/view</a> This was just a fun shot. Handheld with my 17-55 with no flash.</p>

<p>Another fun shot with the 17 - 55: <a href="http://auntellensfarm.com/marks-stuff/candids/DSC-1302-130.JPG/view">http://auntellensfarm.com/marks-stuff/candids/DSC-1302-130.JPG/view</a> This pic was taken at Allen Refractories. Handheld with my 17-55 with no flash.</p>

<p>My kit is now pretty much as complete as I want it. D300. Tokina 11-16 f/2.8. Nikon 17-55 f/2.8. Nikon 70-200 f/2.8 VR I. Sigma 30 f/1.4. SB-900. My tripod is a very old aluminum-legged unit that does need upgraded.</p>

<p>I guess what I'm asking is what is the best way to get web-site quality portraits? Lights off and flash only? Available light only? Tightly framed vs loosely framed? How much of the shot should be in focus? What are your preferences? What works best for you? Again, I have some experience with this and will be doing my own testing so I can provide the boss lady with some proofs so that she can choose.</p>

<p>Thanks in advance,<br>

Mark</p>

<p>The attached photo is the boss lady (Ellen) working in her old office on St Patrick's day 2010. No cleaning up of her office just for the photo. D300 with 17-55 f/2.8G at 45mm ISO 200 1/13s f/3.5 SB 900 on hot shoe rear curtain slow AA 0EV Auto WB. Window shades probably closed. Hand held.</p><div></div>

[blake_schwalbe]

<p>Mark, one approach could be to use a large aperture so the background is out of focus, to achieve good separation. The lighting in your samples is very clean and bright, but also perhaps somewhat stark and flat. Have you tried synching your flash to lower ambient (background) light, so your subjects stand out more (use a faster synch speed).</p>

[alex_zepeda]

<p>Take a look at the Strobist website. Lots of good tips there in general. His "On Assignment" section has some interesting "environmental portraits", and a lot of detail on how he's achieved the look. For example:</p>

<p>http://strobist.blogspot.com/2006/03/on-assignment-real-estate-developer.html<br /> http://strobist.blogspot.com/2006/04/on-assignment-blind-snoot-portrait.html<br /> http://strobist.blogspot.com/2006/04/on-assignment-simple-wallsnoot.html<br /> http://strobist.blogspot.com/2010/01/on-assignment-john-e-mcintyre.html<br /> http://strobist.blogspot.com/2011/10/on-assignment-theresa-daytner-pt-1.html<br /> http://strobist.blogspot.com/2011/10/on-assignment-theresa-daytner-pt-2.html</p>

<p>And I agree with Mark. Don't just use depth of field to separate your subject from the background, use the light too.</p>

[devon_mccarroll]

<p>If you want environmental portraits, then you do need to show some of their environment around them in focus (i.e. anything that relates to the job they're doing), rather than tight framing. Also, if you have a light stand and umbrella, I would position your light off camera and have someone available to hold a reflector for fill if you need it. That will "model" the light a bit, make it less flat, and you can also arrange it so that you're not casting shadows like the one from her hat on the wall in the photo above. Also, be sure to focus clearly on the eyes, so that they come out nice and sharp.<br>

I would also talk to everyone in advance to make sure that they avoid wearing distracting clothing, like t-shirts with logos and that sort of thing.</p>

[marklcooper]

<p>I appreciate the suggestions. We have a lot of material that can be used to direct light to eliminate shadows.</p>

<p>Do you recommend using the normal office environment, or perhaps cleaning/organizing where required?</p>

<p>I know my office can be a total disaster area at times. Hard hat and steel-toed shoes required<g>.</p>

<p>Thanks - Mark<br>

Fortunately, the IT department is not represented on the company web site<g>.</p><div></div>

[Spearhead]

<blockquote>

<p> one approach could be to use a large aperture so the background is out of focus</p>

</blockquote>

<p>That's the exact opposite of what to do with environmental portraits.</p>

<p>The combination of "web site quality" and "environmental portrait" places little demand on equipment. As long as the lens captures everything in the room, you should be able to shoot at f8 - f11 with desired results, even with an older camera.<br>

<br />Regarding the lighting question, there's no way to answer that in general. If the location has good light, you can use that. If not, use your flash, bounce is probably best in most situations. There's no reason to slow your shutter down unless the space is bigger and there is substantial separation between the subject and the "environment."</p>

[blake_schwalbe]

<p>Sorry, I always try to flatter my subjects. Hard habit to break from doing head shot photography for too long. Yes, f8 - f11 is better, that way you'll get everything in focus. But Ellen there has a wood molding going through her cheek and out the back of her head. And the McDonalds paper cup is given the same visual importance as her eyes. What if, maybe, you would have positioned her a little farther from all of that clutter, maybe by the front of the desk, and with a longer focal length and larger aperture have given her prominence, with the defocused background hinting at the environment, the monitor and clippings, without actually being able to read them?<br /><br /> Arnold Newman did environmental photography where everything was in focus though. </p>

[alex_zepeda]

<p>Those racks are pretty well organized, also my favorite shot of the set IMO. I just don't like that freaking pipe in the background. Maybe move him around so that it's him and the racks that dominate the frame. Not him, the racks, the clock, etc. Maybe.</p>

<p>And, yeah, I'd axe the McDonald's cup and the tin of nuts if only to avoid having other brands in the shot. Check out the Strobist shoot of Theresa Daytner, clutter can definitely work. But having unrelated objects in there is distracting (and the wood through her cheeks...).</p>

[kohanmike]

<p>I'll make suggestions not so much for technical information, but rather aesthetics; use odd angles, get down low and shoot up, cut across a piece of equipment, be as far away as you can and zoom in, longer focal length is more flattering, be very aware of the 3rds rule where the frame is is separated into a grid of nine boxes, three across the top, three across the middle, three across the bottom, important elements align with the intersecting points.</p>

[kohanmike]

<p>Image rule of thirds.</p><div></div>

[marklcooper]

<p>Alex - him is me. The pipe you have issues with is the discharge from the room air conditioning unit. The IT pic is just a fun shot with me as the subject. It will probably not make it to the final web site.</p><div></div>

[marklcooper]

<p>Man - That can't be me! I'm not really that old looking. Granted, it's getting late on a Saturday night. I should be home on the farm (<a href="http://auntellensfarm.com/marks-stuff/critter-portraits/DSC-9512-113.JPG/view">http://auntellensfarm.com/marks-stuff/critter-portraits/DSC-9512-113.JPG/view</a> )</p>

<p>Thanks for the feedback<br>

Mark</p>

[johne37179]

<p>Whether or not the work environment is in crisp focus or soft, but recognizable is a matter of personal taste. I would shoot both and let the customer choose. One of the reasons for hiring a professional is not just to get the "one" shot, but to have a number of really good shots to choose from. My biggest concern in the setting you've described would be the mixed light sources. florescent lighting is all over the map in terms of temperature and it seems no two bulbs the same. Mix in natural wind light, light from computer screens and your own light source on the camera or with portable lights and you have a recipe for a nightmare. <br>

My guess is that you will have to plan on doing a lot of custom white-balancing and post process color temp work. I would shoot a test shot at each location under each set of lights that includes a gray card that you can calibrate to so your shots are consistent throughout. Just my 2¢.</p>

 

[kurt_holter]

<p>I shoot tons of these. Here are a couple of considerations:</p>

<p>When a client asks for environmental portraits, that frequently means simply that they're not looking for "shot on a backdrop with studio lighting". Find out whether or not your client wants portraits which convey the "flavor" of the subjects environment, or very the literal "here's Joe working at his disk with all the stuff he has on the walls rendered sharply, piles of TPF reports here and there, two minute hit and run for each subject pictures". If you're looking for "flavor", see if there are other areas in the building which are more interesting, less busy, etc. which will still convey this but do so more effectively than a cramped office or work area.</p>

<p>I hate clutter. By that, I mean that people understand that many folks have, by the nature of their jobs, offices and work areas filled stuff. However, the things that drive me the craziest are water bottle and coffee cups, sticky notes on anything (especially computer monitors and file cabinets, stuff on the wall that isn't straight, knick-knacks, and other things not directly related to the work the individual does. No matter how rushed my assignments are, I always get rid of this kind of thing, whether by moving it or moving my subject.</p>

<p>Everybody love to harp on the "shoot fairly wide open and blow out the background" bandwagon, but in many cases the environment is simply too small or crowded to do this. Others insist that everything ought to be sharp. There is simply no universal rule when it comes to this.</p>

<p>Find out if the pages are already laid out, and therefore whether the images will be used vertically, horizontally, of square. Shoot accordingly. There's no point in the client and subject loving, say, a vertical you've shot if it can't be used in the layout.</p>

<p>If these are going online, in the vast majority of cases, they'll be used fairly small. When it comes to images reproduced small, simple compositions are frequently the best.</p>

<p>I've shot these with everything from multiple studio strobes to available light. Most of what I'm doing these days is either going with on on-camera flash with a fill flap or card bounced off of a wall or ceiling, of that same thing supplemented by an additional small strobe firing into an umbrella. Sometimes I shoot them with the available light, but...</p>

<p>If you shoot available light you need to be very aware of the quality of the light. Obviously you want to be sure in most cases to get some light into the subjects eyes; whether reflected there from white papers on the desk in front of them or adjusting their position to take advantage of window light or another source. Shoot raw and optimize the color in post.</p>

<p>I hate most environmental portraits where the subjects are looking down at paperwork, or a monitor, etc.. If I need to shoot someone "not looking at the camera", I'll usually have them chat with my contact or art director, who is out of the frame. that way, through the subject's gestures, etc. there is some implied action in the image. Otherwise, engage them in conversation yourself.</p>

<p>I'm a big advocate of shooting these off a tripod, even when you don't need the stability. This will help you be more deliberate in your composition. Sometimes I'll start with a tripod and then move around a little bit more once I'm shooting.</p>

<p>In your photo of the boss, she has a great expression that looks genuine. The crop is a lot more loose than I'd have wanted. Thirty seconds of de-cluttering in advance would have improved it considerably. Additionally, if you'd bounced your flash into the wall to your right, you could have killed the nasty shadow behind her. I've never been a fan of saying what I would have done after the fact, but in this case I'm doing so just to point out some things for you to think about.</p>

<p>Good luck!</p>

[marklcooper]

<p>Thanks for all the pointers. We're going to be bringing the web site in house and will probably do a major face lift. I'll do some sample pics in various offices to play with background focus, lighting, neat office vs messy office vs staged office. This project will be conducted along with my various computer/network duties so it will not be a go in and get done quickly kind of thing.</p>

<p>Thanks again - Mark</p>