|
Forums >
General Industry >
Digital crotch shots...
I've been having a problem in the studio recently. A number of models have expressed dissatisfaction with the results from my digital cameras. Specifically they say the hair in the images seems fuzzy, as if I wasn't able to stop motion well enough. The problem seems to be limited to the close up crotch shots I've been working on for a book project I'm involved with. I'm using an H1 with the 120 macro lens and a 13mm extension tube, so I'm in a bit tight on the subject. I've tried turning down the air conditioner to eliminate breezes but after a while everyone is yapping about stale or dank air so I have to turn the units back on. I'm using Speedotron at less than half power so flash duration isn't an issue and I also wear an OSHA certified face mask to eliminate my breath as a source of turbulence. The camera is on a big mono pod, so I know that isn't an issue. I would like to produce a coffee table book of about 150 of these images, but I'm loathe to put out a product that isn't 100% perfect. While I'm told by other photographers that the images are compelling or they create a sense of tension in an ambiguous way, I think they look like garbage cans stuffed with steel wool that are being taken by vagabonds to the recycling plant down the street from my studio (the taken part helps explain the motion problem and I felt was a good visual metaphor). Any ideas? Sep 27 06 06:38 pm Link wax Sep 27 06 06:39 pm Link I would have to see them to tell you how to fix it. Sep 27 06 06:41 pm Link YEAH, SURE. Sep 27 06 06:41 pm Link Mike Carroll wrote: Can't do it, it's not natural and is almost reminiscent of fake boobs if you ask me. The thrust of the book is in the hair so to speak. Sep 27 06 06:42 pm Link Bob Randall Photography wrote: You're a great story teller!! Sep 27 06 06:43 pm Link Bahahahahahaha! Yer killin' me! Sep 27 06 06:44 pm Link Bob Randall Photography wrote: What's wrong with fake boobs? They seem to get a lot of attention here. Even put a couple in my port. Sep 27 06 06:47 pm Link Jerry Nemeth wrote: Jerry I'm dying here. I need help with this problem or the publisher is going to walk on me. Can you imagine a 20X24 coffee table book of out of focus curly hair. Yipes! Sep 27 06 06:49 pm Link Have you thought of eschewing models in favor of garbage cans stuffed with steel wool, possibly in hermetically sealed vacuum chambers..? Sep 27 06 06:50 pm Link I doubt that your problem is really motion. With studio strobes, inless you are purposely dragging the shutter, you should be fine. In the digital world though, the problem may be in sharpening. Try this. After editing your image and making it the way you like... flatten everything, then duplicate the background layer to make a second background layer called "background copy". On that copy layer, go to the "filter" dropdown menu and choose "Unsharp mask" and make the following settings: Amount 250%, radius 0.4 pixels, threshold 4 levels. It may now be overly sharpened...which is fine...just drop the opacity of that copy layer and you'll get the right amount of sharpening. Another thing...when re-sizing an image...going from a large sized image to a smaller one...don't reduce any more than 20% in one step. Such reductions toss out pixels and PS has to determine which go and which stay. When a ton of 'em are getting tossed at once, it makes improper decisions. I believe the reason you are seeing this in the hair only, is that it it the thinnest line of pixels. I believe your real problem is a pixel sharpness issue. If this helps, can I get a copy of the book at a discount? I love everything about a woman's pubic area. :-)~ Sep 27 06 06:51 pm Link Bob Randall Photography wrote: I feel your pain!! Sep 27 06 06:52 pm Link W.G. Rowland wrote: Come on WG, I'm serious here and you're just trying to threadjack or something similar to it like you always do. I need help with this. Although a companion book something like steelwool and different pants or coming out of the side of different pants or in front of pants on the grass or ... God there's so much you can do with it maybe you have a point. Point, thats it. Steel wool and points sorta like a sexual metaphor (boy I love that word) you could have different shapes and sizes and color of points all stuck in garbage cans filled with steel wool hair. Brilliant. Sep 27 06 06:55 pm Link Mikes Images wrote: I am so So sorry. Sep 27 06 06:57 pm Link Bob Randall Photography wrote: lmao Sep 27 06 06:57 pm Link you say the models mentioned it, you don't say what you think....shouldn't that be criteria? Sep 27 06 06:58 pm Link hmmmmm. nothing else to say at this moment. except for my desire to post some crotch shots. Sep 27 06 06:58 pm Link I'm guessing you may be having a similiar issue to the one I had. Some images have seemed soft.... I recently learned that RAW files just come out a little soft, and a few tweaks with the UNSHARP MASK filter in photoshop cs2 and viola! crisp clean crothch shots.... ok maybe not clean, but the image will be.... You may view more info on sharpening RAW images from the Canon Digital Learning Center http://www.photoworkshop.com/canon/index.html Hope this helps -daniel Sep 27 06 06:58 pm Link Use a merkin. Sep 27 06 06:59 pm Link Stephen Melvin wrote: You are not going to get me to ask "Whatsw a Merkin". Sep 27 06 07:00 pm Link Bob Randall Photography wrote: I would never threadjack.. As always, I'm quite serious.. Sep 27 06 07:02 pm Link daniel jenkins wrote: You may be onto something here in the Raw arena. I've dipped into the Raw myself on this project and I'm not quite sure how to handle it. With film you just dig in and see what developes, but this digital Raw has a whole new feel. I tried it, I have to be honest, but I may go back to JPG because it's so much sharper and better to work with. Sep 27 06 07:04 pm Link Two words: hair spray Sep 27 06 07:04 pm Link Try applying a half a can or so of super hold hair spray or spray lacquer. Allow at least 20 minutes for drying before firing strobes or lighting a match. No candles!!! If that doesn't work, put the crotches in a freezer (the supermarket has walk-in's that should suffice. Mist the pubic hair lightly before entering.....then shoot quickly before defrosting occurs.....you might try wrapping the crotch in fiberglass insulation before leaving the freezer area. HTH D Sep 27 06 07:06 pm Link From ancient times, man has always been limited in his exploration of the world. He has been limited to that which he could plainly see. If something was too small, too far, too fast or too slow, it remained unknown, uninvestigated or unexplored. Even motion in plain view was lost to the human eye if it moved too fast. With the invention of the camera in the 1800s, man was suddenly able to see bits and pieces of the world stopped in time, ready for investigation. One man in particular, Bob Randall, was fascinated at the possibility. Look at his story here. Light, film speed and focus all play a part... Sep 27 06 07:06 pm Link jayedwards wrote: How many cans would you use per subject and how long does it take to scrub it off and what kind of cleaner do you use. Is it safe to smoke near it? Sep 27 06 07:07 pm Link How do I always get sucked into wasting my time reading these crazy threads? My moma told me I was mentally defective, and here I am, proving it. Maybe if you flash-froze the hair somehow - don't they use that technique on food shoots sometimes? I know, every time I start shooting close in for shots like what is being discussed here, it gets really chilly around the model. (Real cold, yah know?) So it seems like it would just be a continuation of that process. EDIT: Ah, I see Kelly has it worked out much better than I did. I was just thinking of liquid nitrogen tanks in the studio. Sep 27 06 07:08 pm Link Bob Randall Photography wrote: Scrub hard and don't smoke!! Sep 27 06 07:09 pm Link Shoreline Studio wrote: Jesus Christ you guys, these are people we're talking about here. You all make it seem like we're discussing those frozen taco (or perhaps the dumplings) appetizers you can get at Friday's. Sep 27 06 07:16 pm Link Seriously - with that lens/tube combo your DOF is about 2mm - most of the image isn't blurred, it's out of focus - get rid of the extension tube and shoot closed down all the way - Sep 27 06 07:17 pm Link I think I just fell in love with you all over again... just to stay on topic.... More light and a faster shutter speed should do the trick. *grins* Sep 27 06 07:18 pm Link You need two things to get good digital crotch shot photos: some basic action-shooting skills, and some intimate knowledge of the crotch you're photographing. The skills include panning, peak action, follow-focusing, prefocusing and developing a sense of timing. The knowledge helps you anticipate those perfect still hair moments that make for great snatch photos. It does take some practice to perfect the crotch techniques, so now that you've read about how to do it, go out and practice, and practice some more! Soon you'll become proficient, and you'll have some awesome crotch shot photos to show for it! Sep 27 06 07:18 pm Link that lens is know to be not so sharp, especially with a tube. try a longer lens or go 35mm digi with a good lens. are you using strobes? Jim Sep 27 06 07:19 pm Link Æ69 Sep 27 06 07:19 pm Link Glenn Worton wrote: Again, the thrust of the book is to be in close and tight. I don't know how you use your camera, but I need the extension tube for that extra depth and dimension. I do stop down until the very last possible second, I don't know what happens after that. Sep 27 06 07:20 pm Link Iona Lynn wrote: I need more help than that with this project. Shhhhhhhh. Sep 27 06 07:21 pm Link shoot wider and crop if you can;t do 35mm digi with a 1dsmkII or 5d Sep 27 06 07:22 pm Link Substitute stock photos of Willie Nelson? Just a thought.  Sep 27 06 07:22 pm Link I can't decide whether or not you're serious here, but if you are you might try high pass sharpening if you're not happy with the unsharp mask approach. I prefer high pass myself as unsharp mask can cause noise problems And I find that almost all digital files, even those perfectly focused in-camera tend to be slightly soft without some sharpening in the computer. I doubt it's motion blur from the setup you describe. High pass sharpening: -Duplicate the background layer in Photoshop -Run the high pass filter on the new layer (Filters -> Other -> High Pass) with a radius of 4-6 -Set layer blending mode to Soft Light -Vary the layer opacity to strengthen or weaken the effect. For an image that was focused properly I usually use a setting of between 45% and 75%. -If it's not enough sharpening, duplicate the layer. Sep 27 06 07:23 pm Link Use a tripod instead of a monopod!! Sep 27 06 07:24 pm Link |
