lighting exercise-wine

Working on my lighting. Please give me real world feedback on it's quality level for commercial work.

Hallo Jeff, I am getting thursty. Lightning is ok.

Perhaps a bit more contrast. Nice picture.

 

Regards,

Your composition is good. I would like to have seen greater depth of field - enough to bring the grapes in the foreground into sharp focus. (the ones that are closest to the camera don't appear to be.) The square reflection from the softbox is distracting. If you could achieve a hightlight that runs the entire length of the glass and bottle it would help to further define the shape and elegent curves of both the glass and the bottle. (you can achieve this by either putting your existing softbox closer to the set (I'm not sure how large your softbox is) or using a larger softbox with a thinner profile (striplight). I like what you did with the back ground and back-light.

From a professional point of view. Excuse me for being critical, but you asked. My compaints are, in no particular order: The lighting is bad, it does nothing for the subject, no shape, no emphasisis. The background is more dramatic than the subject, it detracts from the subject bad. The light you used, has some kind of modulation in it, and the long white sheet(?) you have next to it is wrinkled, and all this reflects in the glass. The square light does not sit well on the glass. What is the patterning on the bottle, and why does it end at the neck? The grapes aren't sitting well, we see too many stems. The grapes aren't juicy or inviting. The background is really overdone. The drape adds nothing to the shot. I would also like to see a better scan or display, it really needs more whiter whites. Wine and liquor 'set' shots are rarely done in B&W. This is not a good attempt at pro work because it would never go in a portfolio. It doesn's show creativity, innovation, or even technical ability. It would have no appeal to those either inside or outside the beverage industry.

All that said, and I hope you forgive my bluntness, and take it in the manner it is being given, let me suggest a couple of alternatives. If you think about them you might see that instead of a great wine image, you could have produced a great photograph, this is ultimately much more important than attempting a high quality wine set. I propose that a better shot would have given outline and shape to the glass, I'd rather see it clearly on an all black background. I propose a shot that emphasises the name of the wine, everything else secondary. I propose a shot with a minimum of background, filling the frame with grapes, wine, and lable. I propose purple light from the glass, falling on the lable. I propose the bottle be at a different angle than straight up standing. I propose moisture, I propose color, I propose selective focus. It can be a million things really, and instead of trying to copy what you might think is sellable, you might want to concentrate on the bigger picture of what makes a great photo and photographer. It is the only way to win in the long run! Good luck!

Thought I'd fill in some technical details.

I appreciate the commentary, all excellent suggestions. I realize that this photo isn't about creativity or originality, I was just trying my hand at some product lighting. I didn't give tons of thought to the layout of the things, although I suppose I should since it affects the whole picture. I was pretty limited for equipment on this one. I shot in B&W because I didn't have color balanced lighting. I used two construction lights (cheap reflector lights), with one of them placed in a softbox. The softbox was pretty small, thus the square highlight on the bottle. There is a large sheet draped in front of a sliding glass door to kill the ripples in the curtain. The patterning on the bottle was powder dropped onto it mainly to kill reflections from the room and to give it a dusty quality. The background was a bounce reflector 2 feet behind the product table aiming down at a 40 degree angle with one of the construction lights bouncing light up into it.

 

Not trying to give 'excuses' just informing the technical details. I'm working on getting some strobes and decent sized softbox.

 

OK, but my point is, that construction lights are fine. A good, (or great) photographer can come up with great images from anything.

 

I'll give you a few examples. My professional resume is filled with images that are "well done". This buys me little. The only thing that I can really sell, are the images that are very creative and eye catching. It took me years to learn this, unfortunately. Sometimes a prospective client will ask me if I have any shots of glass or reflective objects, and yes, I pull out the "well done" stuff. But if I really want to make an impression, I need to show him how I've shown a subject in a totally new way. Otherwise, the only difference between me and another studio is price.

 

When I was serving my apprenticeship for photography, (not) so many years ago, I remember a shoe catalog we did. The photog said that he could light these with pan lights, and he did. Very nice shots, different.

 

My wife shoots very good (excellent) B&W portraits. She knows nothing about processing film or even making her own B&W prints. She married me, and hung out with photographers, and viewed photography for years before she picked up a camera. When she did, she said she "knew exactly what she wanted to do". And she does it. She has an auto focus camera, which she keeps on automatic, and an on camera flash. Mostly she works on location, and she uses a regular routine. She puts the camera through all it's possible paces on automatic, and shoots through all the possible backgrounds and poses she can think of. Mostly she works very hard to interact with the subjects. The great rapport shows in the prints, and only occassionally is there a tree coming out of someone's head.

 

I haven't gotten a feel for the stock photography market, but I am compiling a portfolio for the purpose of selling them stock. I am using the products and people that regularly come into my studio, taking what should be a straight forward image, and turning it around to something that has universal appeal. By the way, stock might be a place you might look to improve and move towards a professional level.

 

Anyway, I'm glad that you didn't take any offense to my post, I was trying to be positive, and also I was thinking to myself. Right after I posted, I thought of a great wine shot I want to do, watch for it on the photo critique!