nathansanborn

<p>John, you are absolutely correct that there are reasons to use different lenses, and many good reasons to invest in better glass, but unfortunately "getting better pictures" isn't one of them.</p>

<p>Test my theory, rent a 5D III, or a 1DX, and a 24-70 2.8, and use the heck out of it. In the end you may like that setup a lot better, and it may be capable of doing things your current kit isn't as good at... But you'll notice that all of the shots kinda just look like your pictures, the same way that the shots from your current kit look like your pictures.</p>

<p>Yes, many of the top pros use the top gear, then again, so do a lot of wealthy amateur photographers, and yet they achieve very different results. I have a really nice kit, and I've taken some really good shots with it, but I've taken more bad shots with my 2.8 glass than you have with your kit lens. It was never the lenses fault.</p>

<p>The best photo I took last year was shot with my iPhone, it had nothing to do with the device used to capture the photo, it was because it was the best lighting, composition, and subject matter. If you start to think about light, composition, and subject, then you can pick any lens and body and make great pictures.</p>

<p>Here's a great example

<p>Now, for pure lens advice, if you like the 50 1.8, but it's too long, consider a 35 1.8.</p><div></div>

<p>When I've done this in the past I've used an acrylic sheet to hold the negative, and shot my flash through an umbrella behind it. The double diffusion did a good job of evenly illuminating the negative. My challenge was keeping the negative and the camera parallel to avoid distortion.</p>

<p>The key to doing what you want is light fall off. Read about the "inverse square law". What this means simply is that the farther away from the light source you move the darker it gets. So to get something well lit while something else is dark, you need there to be a big difference between the distance of the light to the subject and the distance of the light to the background. This may be hard to do in a very small space, so the key is to move the light as close to the subject as possible.</p>

<p>You can send a DMCA takedown notice to the web host, in this case probably Facebook. I would google "DMCA" to get more information.</p>

<p>Switch to manual mode. If the picture is too dark (I assume you mean not enough ambient light making the background dark while the subject is brightly lit by the flash) then slow the shutter speed down to let more of the natural light onto the photo.</p>

<p>Also consider a model release app for your smartphone. I made my own model release, a very simplified one, but I always forget to get them signed! (stupid me). Unfortunately nobody has wanted to license one of my images for commercial use yet, so not having releases has not been a problem.</p>

<p>+1 on the book.</p>

<p>I switched to lightroom a few months ago and I love it! <br />There are some great videos on youtube on the B&H event space page, "getting started with lightroom" is worth the hour to watch before importing all of your pictures into lightroom to help with catalog organization.</p>

<p>Back in the film days I had a Gossen Luna Pro digital meter, it was very inexpensive and got lost. But it worked fine for me when I had it.</p>

<p>I replaced it with a used Minolta Flash Meter IV, I have had great success with battery life and accuracy. It is a great meter. My only complaint would be it's fairly large.</p>

<p>I use it often, but it is not exactly necessary with the ability to chimp and read the histogram. The nice thing is it allows you to have your lights set up and ready before the model arrives, and it is much faster than the chimp method in my opinion.</p>

<p>3rd</p><div></div>

<p>Another.</p><div></div>

<p>It's been a bit since I've posted. Lately I've been making some very sexy photos of some absolutely lovely models.</p><div></div>

<p>How do I get in touch with you? I was able to find your email on the prints page, but it should be more obvious. Make it easy for your customers to find you.</p>

<p>The night images on black made for a very dark page, and the borders of the images seem to get lost in the total darkness. Personally I would use a lighter background, but that may be a matter of taste</p>

<div></div>

<p>Maybe reduce the power of your flash?</p>

<p>I had a very capable very sturdy tripod... that I rarely used. Mainly it was a pain to lug around. There is no way I would travel with it. I just got it's partner last week.<br>

<a href="http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/687306-REG/Oben_AT_3400_BA_00T_AT_3400_Aluminum_Tripod_w.html">http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/687306-REG/Oben_AT_3400_BA_00T_AT_3400_Aluminum_Tripod_w.html</a><br>

This thing is super compact, super light, and I will be taking it with me nearly all the time now. It is not the most stable. With the legs fully extended it gets just tall enough, and barely stable enough.</p>

<p>But barely stable enough is so much more stable than not having a tripod. I would definately recommend this one. Or you could go a bit less compact and probably get some additional stability.</p>

<p>December 7, 1942, a day that will live in anonymity!</p>

<p>I would think that what looks as though it would change to cause this would be the models distance to the background. You say nothing changed in the set up, and I believe you. If the model were to take a step or two back, depending on how much space we're dealing with, it can have a huge effect. The main light would end up darker, and this would be very noticeable if the subject were close to the light to begin with. Also if the subject is not very far away from the background to begin with, moving closer to the background would cause the light to flare much more. Is it possible that the model moved on you?</p>

<p>To fix it, I wouldn't do too much to the camera yet, I would move the model farther away from the background to reduce flare. If this is not possible due to space restrictions, then I would change the lights.</p>

<p>Your first cause of action should always be to kindly and politely let the person know how they are causing you difficulty. Instead of a passive aggressive assistant body block or getting mad, try a simple "I'm sorry, it's a bit distracting to have you stand over my shoulder while I work, would you mind giving me just a bit of space please?" Use a pleasant tone, be sweet. They probably are unaware of the difficutly they are causing. If that doesn't work, get the people who hired you to step in.</p>

<p>In the words of Marine General "Mad Dog" Mattis “Be polite, be professional, but have a plan to kill everybody you meet.”</p>

<p>Enforcable or not, it probably isn't a good idea. Evidenced by the fact that the company doing it no longer has a Facebook page as a response to an avalance of negative coments.</p>

<p>It may be legal to be a jerk, but it is not advisable. I had never heard of the site before, and now the only knowlege I have is to avoid doing business with them, and it's not because of a bad review I read.</p>

<p>What color are the walls where the photo will be taken? If they are a neutral color I would try to bounce the light. The faucet will reflect the light source illuminating it, so a bounced light source should give you a very large less distracting highlight. Probably not the best solution, but it is what I would try first and it's simple.</p>

<p>My first thought was the Nikon 35mm f/1.8 af-s G DX as well. I have it and it is a great lens.</p>

<p>I would start at f5.6, 1/60 sec, and an ISO that puts you well exposed for the ambient light, then light your subject with your Speedlight. Here's why...</p>

<p>f/5.6 gives you enough depth of field to show you what the background elements look like, but they may still be rendered a bit softer than your subject, this aperture also is large enough that your Speedlight will be powerful enough to do the work it needs to. The shutter speed will give you the ability to hand hold your exposures with a fully exposed ambient scene, and still allow you the ability to darken the ambient by two full stops to make the shot much more dramatic if you want darker backgrounds. </p>

<p>I'm not saying this is the best way, but this is right where I'd start. I personally wouldn't want to use the AB1600 as it might be hard to get them dark enough to match the ambient without a very long exposure. I would also take shots both with and without gels on the flash (1/2 CTO or full CTO) so I have a few choices in the color temperature balance of tungsten ambient and daylight strobe.</p>

<p>The one picture will be hard to duplicate as it has a very interesting backlight through the wall behind the subject, but think about how the mood and feel of that shot speaks to you, and try to visualize what you would like your image to feel like, and what the light needs to say, and work from there.</p>

<p>By the way... that is a gorgeous location! </p>

<p>Depends on where you're at. You took the pictures, you own the copyright unless you transfer that right to another party. Without a release you can still sell the pictures, just not for commercial use (advertising).</p>

<p>If it were one of your wedding clients, and you didn't have a model release, and the brides grandmother wanted to buy a picture direct from you, could you sell it? Legally these scenarios are not really any different.</p>

<p>Happy Halloween! (and Nikon Wednesday...)</p><div></div>

<p>I've never tried it, but I've heard you can get great expression by bringing a trashy romance novel and have them read it to each other.</p>