Re: [Leica]Ted's Portrait Class Room

["Steve LeHuray" <icommag@toad.net>]

> Steve LeHuray wrote:
> 
>> Ted,
>>
>> Maybe we can get away for a minute from some of the daily let's beat up
>> Leica foo-fu-ra that is going on.
>>
>> I have never done much portraiture and recently took this portrait of
>> Stephanie Antosca, Producer for the NBC series 'West Wing.'
>>
>> I used the M2 with a Summilux 50/1.4 shot at 1.4 and I think 125. You can
>> see the shallow depth of field at 1.4. It is backlit from the window in
> her
>> office. The scan is from a 8x10 on a cheap scanner which does not do the
>> print justice.
>>
>> Any critique welcome. go to http://www.streetphoto.net/images/im3.jpg<<<<
>
> Hi Steve,
> OK old buddy hang onto your hat or seat! ;-)
>
> First of all it appears that the light is all coming from an overhead
> florescent lighting of some sort . The appearance of "back lighting?"  has
> hardly registered at all. And I'd say your mainlight scource is the overhead
> light of the office.
>
> Which leads me to believe your idea that the "back lighting was the main
> light" occurred due to your eyes while in the room and not that which
> obviously didn't register on the film.
>
> You may have seen the back lighting and thought it was registering on the
> film but obviously there is very little back light occurring in the frame
> you've sent. What's happened here is you saw the backlight but ended up
> using an exposure which basically eliminated the "back lit" effect.
>
> To improve this shot as it stands: I'd have had her turn in her chair to the
> left (her left) so that her body were about 45 degree angle to the camera
> and had her bring her head back around to you
>
> In this manner you "might have" caught a bit of a Rembrandt lighting effect,
> but with the light nearly all top heavy it might have been difficult for the
> full effect.
>
> And the heavy eye shadow sockets would need some fill, not much, but just
> enough to keep them open.  This could be done with a, heaven forbid I should
> admit this... a slight pop of flash!"  A miniscule amount to put a catch
> light in the eyes and soften the eye shadow caused by the over head
> lighting.
>
> Or you could use a white or light coloured card to throw whatever amount of
> light could be reflected forward to the subject from the overhead lighting.
>
> So there you are my friend, let's hear whatever happens.
> ted
>

Thanks Ted,

All you say above is true. I have to stop taking a 'slam-bang-thankya-mam'
approach to some of my photography. Also that shot was an after thought, I
only took 6 exposures with the M2 in B&W. Here is the real shot that
appeared in the magazine article about her.
http://www.streetphoto.net/images/im7.jpg This was with a Nikon F3 and
85/2.0, Supra 400 at f8.0 and 80th

As I am starting to like doing portraiture this shot taken with the M2 and
elmarrit M 90/2.8 was at 2.8 and 60th on Delta 400. This picture is also
this weeks PAW picture. http:www.streetphoto.net/images/im5.jpg

Thanks Ted for taking the time.

Steve
Annapolis