terry thomas photos

May 31, 2012

One correction to Gary Stevens: the camera was a modified Mitchell BNC, not BCN.

July 18, 2010

I work on movie sets shooting stills. The way the story is told the Hollywood studios had forms for expenses and Sheet "C" Line 47 is where Spring Loaded Wooden Clips were listed. BTW, do not buy cheap-o Chinese made wooden clothespins. The wood will split or break. Try to find ones actually made on the USA. Or do what I do, go to Grandma's basement and swap some new ones for ones she has been using since 1950! LOL!! Terry Thomas... the photographer Atlanta, Georgia USA

July 18, 2010

The lighting here may be more complex than you think. It is not at all what you expect.

Actually, there are two different lighting setups at work here at the same time.

Setup #1: the girl is lit but none of her lighting hits the background. All her lights have gobos to keep the lights from hitting the background. (I buy $7USD black foamboard from office supply stores or craft/hobby stores.)

As a matter of fact if Setup #2 did not exist the background would photograph medium to dark grey!

Setup #2: the white background is actually 20 to 30 feet behind the girl. 4 matching lights evenly illuminate the background (2 on each side, one above the other). Large panels are set up out of camera view to block these 4 lights from hitting the girl or lens. Some people purchase bi-fold doors at Home Depot / Lowes and paint them white. Because the doors are sturdy and hinged they are self-supporting. I like to go to these same stores and buy 4x8 foot sheets of foam insulation (one side silver / one side paintable paper). These foam panels are fairly light weight and cost only about $8USD each. If needed I can quickly chop them to any size I want. The four lights are not aimed at the background as there would be areas that are lighter or darker than others. Instead, the lights are aimed at the panels then the light bounces off and hits the backdrop for a smoother result.

By setting up the lighting this way a photographer has full control of the amount and style of light for each of the two subjects: the girl and the background. Also this eliminates a lot of post-production time because the subject is already knocked out of the background.

See? Not at all what you expected, was it?

BTW, I really don't like umbrellas of any size too much because they throw light everywhere and it's hard to control. I much prefer soft boxes, standard reflectors or reflectors with grids inserted. I tell novices it's like comparing a hand grenade to a rifle - one gives you far more control on what's hit.

Terry Thomas... the photographer Atlanta, Georgia USA <a href="http://www.TerryThomasPhotos.com">www.TerryThomasPhotos.com</a>

July 18, 2010

Be sure to not make the rookie mistake of buying a less powerful light because, "Oh, it's just the hair light so I can save some money getting a lower power unit." Big mistake. Why?

I'm glad you asked. If you are going to judge your lighting setup by eye all your strobes need to have the same power output and same wattage of modeling light. If they are not you won't be able to see the lighting rations, contrasts, shadows, etc. accurately.

Let's set up an example: you get two 800WS Alien Bees (key and fill lights) plus one 400WS Alien Bee for a hair light. You screw in 150 watt Halogena bulbs for modeling lights into all the units. At full power the modeling lights will look OK but the hair light will be under exposed by a full f-stop because the strobe is 1/2 the power of the other two.

Another reason you want all your lights to be the same power (Watt Seconds) is when setting up your lighting on location or in a hurry any light can go in any position. You won't have to be sure the lesser unit goes to the hair light position.

Another reason: what if you want three lights to illuminate a subject but don't want a hair light in your setup. Then you have to worry about the lesser unit's location.

Finally (and I have had this happen) let's say you are on location and one of the two more 800WS units dies or for some reason does not want to work that day. Then you are down to one 800WS and one 400WS unit. Kinda restrictive.

So please take the advice of someone who has been a photographer since 1955 and be sure all your lights are the same.

Note: many of the eBay kits offer just what I'm saying to NOT purchase. They have two powerful lights and one less powerful. Yes, it saves a little money up front but in the long run it is a big mistake.

History: I started with three 800WS Alien Bees. They are so powerful I could have purchased three 400WS units and spent the saved money on barn doors or grids.

Oh yeah! Buy a set of grids. They come in real handy for portrait work. I use mine a lot for my kicker lights.

Best, Terry Thomas... the photographer Atlanta, Georgia USA

July 18, 2010

I had a Stroboframe and it took almost no time for it to become wobbly and sloppy.

Then I got a Custom Bracket. What a difference. Yes, it weighs a bit more but the movements are quick and sure and I'm sure I will pass it on to future generations, it's that well made.

Hey, 40 years ago I was shooting high school sports with a 4x5 and 30 years ago I was shooting weddings with an RB67. So a Custom Bracket with camera and flash are feathers in comparison!

Terry Thomas... the photographer Atlanta, Georgia USA

July 18, 2010

If I were going to create a similar image I certainly would photograph each person individually. Then I would assign each image to a layer in Photoshop. If the client wanted it in one shot I would use one of my large format cameras so I could swing the lens to get more depth of field.

Back to how I would photograph each person: I would put a mark on the floor, turn the camera on it's side for a vertical composition and have the same basic lighting for each person. Then I would modify the shadows or reflections as needed with reflectors or gobos. In this manner the lighting would be exactly the same for each person, only the highlights or shadows would be modified.

By photographing one person at a time all the people will be in focus and I would avoid issues like the second Marine with very dark skin having almost no detail. For him I could bring in a gold-toned reflector right next to his right shoulder (masking the reflector's light from his uniform).

Note: gold reflectors work wonders with dark skin like his, experiment. White or silver reflectors make dark skin look cold, IMHO.

Terry Thomas... the photographer Atlanta, Georgia USA

July 18, 2010

Could it be that your backlight is almost a point light source and therefore quite contrasty?

Have you tried a wider light source but limited what hits the gem (from the camera's viewpoint) with a black piece of paper? Cut a small hole in the black paper for the light to come thru but not so wide that the camera will see it. This way the angles of the light rays hitting the stone will be from a wider field, as seen by the stone itself.

To paraphrase, "Luke, become one with the stone!"

Terry Thomas... the photographer Atlanta, Georgia USA

July 18, 2010

Francesco,

I think you are making a big mistake. You do not want to measure the EXTERNAL size of the retaining ring but the INTERNAL size.

Think about it: if you drill a hole the size of the outside of the retaining ring what is going to hold the lens in place? Nothing. It will fall out.

Measure the hole in the center of the ring. What you cut out of the lens board should be about that size and the retaining ring will hold the lens in place.

Experiment with a piece of stiff paper or cardboard. If you make a mistake it will cost you almost nothing.

Best of luck.

Terry Thomas Atlanta, Georgia USA

December 3, 2009

Go back to school and learn the rules of English grammer, spelling and punctuation.

No client is going to want to hire someone who did not pay attention in school.

September 5, 2009

During the filming of the movie "Jaws" one of the zillion-dollar Panavision cameras fell into the ocean.

Here is part of the story as told by Mik Cribben from: <a href="http://www.cameraguild.com/interviews/chat_butler/butler_location_jaws.htm">http://www.cameraguild.com/interviews/chat_butler/butler_location_jaws.htm</a>

I had gone out to Martha’s Vineyard for a short vacation but when I heard that a feature film called Jaws was being shot I ended up spending most of my time watching the filming.

The timing of my visit to the set of Jaws was quite fortunate. My first trip out to the many boats and barges that made up the set was on the day when they were shooting the most important scene in the picture, the one in which the shark leaps out of the water and crashes down on the back of the boat. The whole afternoon was spent preparing the shot and as it approached 5:30, the end of the day, it looked like they were never going to get the shot off, but just before 5:30 everything came together and Steve Spielberg decided to go for the shot. He called, “Action” and he got a lot more than he called for. Steve, Roy Scheider, Dick Butler (Robert Shaw’s stuntman and no relation to Bill), Bill Butler, three camera crews and three cameras were all aboard the “Orcha II”. When the shark came down on the boat it looked like an explosion and for thirty seconds all hell broke loose. The weight of the shark caused the boat to fill up with too much water and it started to go down like a stone. I saw Roy Scheider dive into a mass of nail-filled pieces of wood splintered from the transom by the shark and did not see him come up for a long time. Other people were jumping clear of the boat and people on other boats were rushing to help them. There was much confusion and people were shouting, “Save the camera!” and “Save the lights!”.

As the boat started to sink it also started to tip over. Some crew members on the work boat, “The Ruddy Duck”, also dove clear of their boat when they saw the 30-foot mast of the “Orcha II” coming down on them like a tall timber. Fortunately the “Orcha II” was attached to a crane on one of the boats, “The Whitefoot”, and this kept the “Orcha II” from sinking or tilting too much. To top it off, a sudden squall came up and it started to storm. After it was all over no one was seriously hurt but the number one camera had been submerged and the magazine with the hard-earned footage was filled with water. Everyone thought the footage was lost and the whole thing would have to be done again, but Bill Butler had the magazine immediately taken to shore and fresh water was exchanged for the brine. The magazine was carried in someone’s lap on the next plane to New York and was processed by Technicolor in New York under the supervision of Otto Paoloni that night. They got the results the next morning. The footage was fine. No second take was made, and that is the footage that the public will see in the film.

Terry Thomas Film Unit Stills Photographer Atlanta, Georgia USA

July 24, 2009

Darius Jedburg:

When I lived in Tokyo in 1966 to 1968 I had better luck with Nikon service at the factory, not the service center across from the central Tokyo Train Station.

I'm sorry but I don't remember the Tokyo district where the Nikon factory was located. My memory cells from 40 years ago say it was on a train line that ran south of the Tokyo Central Station.

I hope this helps.

Terry Thomas... the photographer Atlanta, Georgia USA <a href="http://www.TerryThomasPhotos.com">www.TerryThomasPhotos.com</a>

February 17, 2009

I've been a photographer since 1955 and let me tell you Photoshop does one thing and REAL filters in front of the lens does something else. Both have their place. Test & learn. Here is one way: get a Series 8 or Series 9 filter adapter that fits the threads of your portrait lens. Then go to an Ace Hardware or similar store and buy round pieces of glass. They stock them as replacement lenses for flashlights. Get some that fit in your Series adapter. Wash the glass rounds. Then when dry put tiny dots of clear fingernail polish all over one side of the glass. When dry you have your own Softar for under $5. The nice thing is you can vary the size and number of dots. Don't worry about the quality of the pieces of round glass since you are reducing the quality of the image anyhow! Some glass shops will cut thin glass to fit a Cokin filter adapter. And as before, make your own filters. Another trick: get black mesh from a fabric store or panty hose. Stretch it. Shoot thru it. Many aging Hollywood actress had her career extended with this trick. Babara Wawa and Oprah still use it. Terry Thomas... the photographer Atlanta, Georgia USA <a href="http://www.TerryThomasPhotos.com">www.TerryThomasPhotos.com</a>

February 17, 2009

David,

That link to Zack Phillips website is now the Phillips light bulb folks. Please update or delete as all this text without a photo makes no sense.

Terry

February 17, 2009

I often use that old Hollywood look when creating headshots for actors today. Grids over my Alien Bee strobes do the trick.

click: <a href="http://terrythomasphotos.googlepages.com/headshots">http://terrythomasphotos.googlepages.com/headshots</a>

Signature URL deleted, not allowed on photo.net per the Terms of Use.

February 17, 2009

Craigslist

February 17, 2009

Why don't you ask the questions here? I'll bet that Gucci used several photographers and if you can find out who they were they might not have time to answer you.

As the saying goes, It couldn't hurt!"

Ask.

Terry Thomas... Signature URL deleted, not allowed on photo.net per the Terms of Use.

February 17, 2009

First of all, DON'T have your White Balance on "Auto", use "Daylight" or "Flash". Next, I have a D70 and ONLY shoot RAW with it. Nikon calls the file NEF. Both Irfan View and Photoshop read the files. I've never had speckles like that. I suspect it's not the flash or the camera but your camera settings. Set everything to the normal defaults and Raw and Daylight and ISO 200 then you should be good to go. There is no reason to shoot JPGs instead of Raw files. Why would you take the time and effort to create the photographs then throw a large portion of the information away? That's nuts and it's what you are doing when you shoot JPG. Fast CF memory cards are so cheap today that cost of CF cards can not be a reason. PLEASE don't tell me you have a mismatched set of strobes! (That's where not all are the same power rating.) If so you have made a big mistake. You will not be able to see with your eyes what the camera sees. It's an often-made mistake so don't feel too bad. The other problem with an unbalanced set of lights is if you are out in the field and one light gets broken/stolen/lost then any other light can not take it's place. (It's happened to me.) So often students ask me, "Oh it's only a hair light. Can't I buy a lower power unit?" NO! For the reasons I've listed here. Signature URL deleted, not allowed on photo.net per the Terms of Use.

February 17, 2009

DON'T use umbrellas, use softboxes. With umbrellas half the light goes thru and half is reflected away. You are wasting your light energy. In an analogy it's like comparing shotguns to rifles. With a shotgun the energy spreads out everywhere. But with a rifle the energy goes to the target. A softbox will allow you to direct the light where you want it.

Ever see the set of a movie or TV news program? You will NEVER see an umbrella in use - only softboxes and "can" lights. The only time umbrellas are used is on a show when an actor is portraying a photographer. Then the props guy will use umbrellas because the great unwashed public *believes* that's what "real" photographers use. Lastly, don't buy a set of strobes that are mismatched in their power rating. For example "Oh it's just a hair light so I will buy a lower power unit." Wrong!!!! If you do you will not be able to see with your eyes what the camera will see. Also if you are out on location and one of your lights dies or gets broken or stolen then any of the remaining units can take it's place. (It's happened to me.) Signature URL deleted, not allowed on photo.net per the Terms of Use.

February 17, 2009

I'm curious why you think a book on portraits needs to be "new for the digital era". Posing and lighting techniques that are hundreds of years old are just as valid as something thought up yesterday. Go to your local library. I'll bet they have at least one book of the Hollywood master photographers from the 1920s and 1930s. You will learn a lot from that book. A book I like is "Skin" by Lee Varis. $50 or so. <a href="http://www.photoshopsupport.com/photoshop-blog/07/04/skin-photoshop-photo-retouching-book.html">http://www.photoshopsupport.com/photoshop-blog/07/04/skin-photoshop-photo-retouching-book.html</a>

Signature URL deleted, not allowed on photo.net per the Terms of Use.

February 17, 2009

First of all, just because you give someone an image on a CD does not mean you are giving them any rights. You really need to learn more about your legal rights. There are other forums for that subject. Since I use a PC I use a free software program called Irfan View for many steps of my digital workflow. First of all after I get rid of "blinks & blurs" I renumber all the images the way I want. The camera's filename or number is meaningless.

Next I convert the images from digital Raw to either TIF or JPG, depending on my needs. When I do the conversion I set the DPI to 1. Since DPI doesn't matter for viewing an image they can look at it all day but if they try to print it the result will be a disaster.

Then I use Irfan View to put "© 2009 Terry Thomas Photos" in small type right in the middle of the image. It's barely enough to see but also means a person can't use the image for anything. Sadly I've been forced to do this because a few people have tried to use my images without paying for them.

Then I use Irfan View to add three lines of text in larger yellow type at the bottom of the image

This way it's clear that the image rights are retained by me and limits what they can do with the files. After I edit the images and am paid I supply the customer with files or prints that only have a very faint "© 2009 Terry Thomas" in one corner. Signature URL deleted, not allowed on photo.net per the Terms of Use.

February 17, 2009

1. why does it matter to you if she used strobes or HMI lights?

2. why do you call this "cinematographic"? (BTW, I work on movie sets shooting production stills.)

All she is doing is using gels over WHATEVER lights she is using. No diffusion with umbrellas or soft boxes. Very hard lighting. AND beautiful models. Plus her vision.

Here is a suggestion: take whatever lighting you have, stick on some gels and shoot. Soon you will develop your own techniques and style. Emulate but don't slavishly copy. Be your own person. Signature URL deleted, not allowed on photo.net per the Terms of Use.

February 17, 2009

I have a Nikkor 85mm f1.8 and love it for headshots. It's SO MUCH easier for my 63 year old eyes to focus in the studio than any of my zoom lenses. Here is a suggestion: get an 85mm f1.8 and a 50mm f2 instead of the 50mm f1.4 lens. You will save some money. Then in the future when you can afford a 50mm f1.4 sell the f2 lens. I also shoot a lot of portraits with a 55mm Micro Nikkor. With my D70 crop factor it's quite nice and when needed I can get very close. Parents love it when I do that with their baby's eyes. Signature URL deleted, not allowed on photo.net per the Terms of Use.

February 17, 2009

I must be getting old, what is "color blocking"? Most people with little experience tend to be too far away from the subject. So don't be afraid to get in close for some of your shots. If they aren't good don't use them but at least give yourself the option.

Yes being at the mercy of the weather can be a problem. But it can also save you. For instance a moist street will reflect colors from signs, etc in the background. Shooting in the evening with a tripod and the colors reflected might be good for your project. Use wide angle lenses and telephoto lenses - almost never use a "normal" lens as it gives you a "normal" angle of view.

So add all my hints up into one suggestion: shoot with a telephoto lens, wide open (like f2.8 or f4), on a tripod, on a wet street, in the evening. Have a friend stand to the side and manually pop a flash, if needed for fill. DON"T use on-camera flash. Ick!

Get signed Photo Releases and Property Releases. Signature URL deleted, not allowed on photo.net per the Terms of Use.

February 17, 2009

She is a lovely lady but most likely just lacks confidence or had a bad experience with a photographer. I agree with other folks here: a higher angle is more flattering plus a reflector to brighten the shadows. A touch of white makeup under the eyes might help too.

Shoot tighter. No one is going to be dating her for her coat buttons.

I've experimented on and off over the years with soft focus photography. Here are a couple tips.

Go to a hardware store and get some pieces of round glass. These are used as replacements for flashlight lenses. Be sure to get ones that will fit into a Series filter adapter (older camera stores have these on a drawer somewhere). I find Series 8 works well for me.

Then take clear fingernail polish and put random small dots of the fluid on about 1/2 of the round glass. These will act as lenses and break up the image. The effect will be like a very expensive soft focus lens or filter.

Experiement with other patterns and sizes of dots. Then test.

Oh, by the way. Out of focus highlights can take up the appearance of the dried fingernail fluid. This effect can be quite creative. Shoot wide open with small light sources far away such as candles or street lights. Use a tripod of course for long exposures.

I had a glass shop cut some rectangles of thin glass that would fit into my Cokin "P" filter holder. Then I made my own soft focus filters in the same manner.

Another trick: black mesh fabric or hose makes a terrific diffuser. As a matter of fact many Hollywood stars had their careers extended when this stuff was stretched over a frame and held in front of movie cameras. I've used this trick under an enlarger, too. Signature URL deleted, not allowed on photo.net per the Terms of Use.

February 17, 2009

If the dog is lying on the floor, you can too. And without a tripod your shots should be OK.

Don't use an on-camera flash. The dog's eyes will not look good.

An inexpensive source of reflectors is a Dollar Tree store. They have 30"x40" white Foamcore boards for $1. Buy several. Then take one, smear Elmer's White Glue all over it then over that put a layer of aluminum foil from your kitchen. On one side of the board put the dull side of the foil as a relector. Take a second board, do the same but put the shiny side of the foil up. For less than $5 you have a bunch of very useful reflectors. I had one like that for over 20 years until I lost it somewhere. Oh well...

Signature URL deleted, not allowed on photo.net per the Terms of Use.

Sign In

Profiles

Forums

Blogs

Events

Downloads

Gallery

Store

Posts posted by terry thomas photos