The demystification of dave hill! let's all help!

[mrbeagle]

Originally Posted by mrbeagle

my latest sad attempt

http://www.plushimages.net/pics/arr.jpg

should note no lucis was used.

[superkoax]

Originally Posted by 0lBaldy

Me thinks you have nailed it and just summed up six months of DH discussion with over 400 posts...
Just my thoughts after reading everything here and watching all the vids and seeing his set up on the DH site

It's the end result that counts really! I think the journey trough all the post have been a blast to read! Trying different tips and tricks people have shared! The lighting is crucial here, I would love to learn more on what f/shot shutter time the placement of lights and stuff! It's fun to see that this thread has come a loooooooong way since it's earlier posts! I've learn a lot! Thanks to all who contribute!

Let's talk lighting technique, people

[zogdart]

Her is a shot I did.

I think the lighting is pretty close. there is no retouch on it, exept a high pass filter set at overlay for a little sharpness.

I think he does a lot of photoshop to get his effect. it's not only the lighting.

I would have needed more props in between the background (my shower curtain) and me to get a better effect!

What do you guys think!

(i have aded the lighting set-up so you could have peak!)

[namphoto]

the easiest way to emulate hills lighting in my opinion would be to follow the standard greenberg set up. two left and right in the front softboxed, two left and right hair lighting gridded or softboxed, and a beauty dish fill. that pretty much gives you all the detail around the head.

also looking at hills post production, i think people try to hard to lighten and darken the areas they think look light or dark, but the basics come to this- you gotta really think about what would be light and dark in reality, the deepest areas would be shaded the darkest and the highest points would be the lightest.

i know i talk like i know what im doing, and i assure you i do. and i promise ill show some stuff ive done, just my cameras been down for a bit.

[superkoax]

Originally Posted by namphoto

the easiest way to emulate hills lighting in my opinion would be to follow the standard greenberg set up. two left and right in the front softboxed, two left and right hair lighting gridded or softboxed, and a beauty dish fill. that pretty much gives you all the detail around the head.

also looking at hills post production, i think people try to hard to lighten and darken the areas they think look light or dark, but the basics come to this- you gotta really think about what would be light and dark in reality, the deepest areas would be shaded the darkest and the highest points would be the lightest.

i know i talk like i know what im doing, and i assure you i do. and i promise ill show some stuff ive done, just my cameras been down for a bit.

can't wait! HURRY!

[George B]

Originally Posted by namphoto

the easiest way to emulate hills lighting in my opinion would be to follow the standard greenberg set up. two left and right in the front softboxed, two left and right hair lighting gridded or softboxed, and a beauty dish fill. that pretty much gives you all the detail around the head.

also looking at hills post production, i think people try to hard to lighten and darken the areas they think look light or dark, but the basics come to this- you gotta really think about what would be light and dark in reality, the deepest areas would be shaded the darkest and the highest points would be the lightest.

i know i talk like i know what im doing, and i assure you i do. and i promise ill show some stuff ive done, just my cameras been down for a bit.

Huh?.....why do you need a camera to show "stuff you've done"?

[namphoto]

Originally Posted by George B

Huh?.....why do you need a camera to show "stuff you've done"?

because we just talked about how lighting is crucial and i need a camera to show those lights?

[radutheodor]

Hey guys,

I really cannot believe that you don't realize that David Hill's pictures are HDR created with tools like Photomatix. And is not so difficult to ask your model to sit for ~3 seconds, how long will take the camera to shoot 3 different exposures ...

Let me give you some thousands of other examples:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/gsyrba/471380721/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/92832952@N00/163042946/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/stevenhorr/378774004/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/cecile-c/217688590/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/lightpainter/150410530/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/michele...chi/391928906/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/estradasbiz/327291047/

You got the idea, just go on FLICKR and search for HDR, Photomatix, Photomatix portraits ...

From my point of view, this kind of portraits doesn't have to much in common with Photography ... it's like you will have a laptop with you, but you will use the iPhone to connect to the internet ... this photography is like I will take some monsters from computer games and pretend their are portraits ... portrait is capturing a unique feeling, moment ...

Just take a look at below examples done by myself ... I screwed up some pictures on a bridge in my home town, just look at them how ugly they are by themselves ... then I load them in Photomatix, generate HDR picture and apply Tone Mapping effect and play with settings there ... this is not photography ...

You can visit this link http://www.radutheodor.com/?p=12 for some more examples of before and after ...

Good luck!

P.S.: By the way, do you see any moving object in his photos? Can you wonder why ... ;-) ?

[mrbeagle]

wow you solved it! whoo hooooooo!

on a serious note, those examples are FAAAAAR from dave hill's technique. I don't doubt there is some tone mapping going on but your examples aren't close.

[radutheodor]

@mrbeagle:

wooo hooo, the only way to find out what exactly David is doing to his pictures is to sit next to him while he's process them.

On a serious note, there is nothing special to those pictures from my point of view ... there is not to much to demystify ... it's about how much time you have to spend to tweak Tone Mapping and other similar stuff ... nobody can tell you what exact settings DH using in his photos ... each photo, depend on the subject, light, background, will need a different processing ...

Regarding examples which I gave, I took the idea, those were the first 5 photos found by doing the search, if go into detail ... the difference between DH HDR's and other's HDR's is the subject from the photography ... DH is preparing his scene, his going out there for professional models, his arranging the background, the foreground, he's trying to get an idea out of his photos ... it's obvious that if I will take 5 exposures of a picture with me standing like in a passport picture and apply Tone Mapping it will still be useless ...

I will show you some more examples from flickr, I really don't have time for this now ...

[enigmaphotos]

I have to agree with mrbeagle. Those examples aren't anything like Dave Hill. Just really bad HDR along with some really bad Lucis or other LCE. The halo'ing is terrible and the effect is completely OTT for Dave Hill.

zogdart and namphoto are much closer to the money for this look. Cheers for the lighting setup.

I'm not even close yet, but here is my example. Note no background as I'm waiting till Summer. I've gotten a whole load of Alien Bees lighting shipped to the UK to try it out.

Here

That is similar lighting to Greenberg, with some PWL and LCE.

Oh... and just to prove that Dave hill isn't a simple HDR portrait, these are HDR portraits. Completely different to DH.

Here...
...and here

Notice... no halo'ing. Halo'ing is bad in any HDR shot and not liked by many.

Edit: Oh... and you can do HDR with moving objects. Honest. And the newer HDR programs will take note of this and correct it.

[zogdart]

here's my second take on it.

Works a lot better when you are outside!

[Calvinhollywood]

Well done Zogdart
I lll guess the key was the lightning*g*

lg Calvin

[scottyb70]

What is PWL and LCE?

[CaptainHook]

Paint with light, Local contrast enhancement.

We need a glossary FAQ or something. Haha.

[George B]

Originally Posted by namphoto

because we just talked about how lighting is crucial and i need a camera to show those lights?

Ok one more time.......why do you need a camera to show "stuff you've done"? D-O-N-E, past tense.

Sheeez

[Calvinhollywood]

@George
Thats "off topic". Maybe he wants to shoot special for this kind of style.
And he dont like to work on old pictures.

lg Calvin

[George B]

Originally Posted by Calvinhollywood

@George
Thats "off topic". Maybe he wants to shoot special for this kind of style.
And he dont like to work on old pictures.

lg Calvin

Nothing like speculation.........

I simply asked him why he needed a camera to show stuff he has done in the past, why is that off topic? If he's done this kind of work in the past (which is on topic), then I ask again, why do you need a camera to show the work if it has already been done? If it's because examples are not available and need to be re-done then that is for him to explain, not you.

[zogdart]

@ Calvin.

I did put a little lucisart to it. Here is the comaparasion (no photoshop).

He might use it, but at small increments, but it's defenetly not only the lighting.

If you look at all the skin tone on his web site you will notice that they are off (more noticable with white people) but still nice. he doesn't seem to have the realistique skin tone or the bronze like jill greenberg.

[superkoax]

Originally Posted by George B

Nothing like speculation.........

I simply asked him why he needed a camera to show stuff he has done in the past, why is that off topic? If he's done this kind of work in the past (which is on topic), then I ask again, why do you need a camera to show the work if it has already been done? If it's because examples are not available and need to be re-done then that is for him to explain, not you.

We understood what he meant, you didn't...leave it alone!

[superkoax]

Originally Posted by radutheodor

@mrbeagle:

wooo hooo, the only way to find out what exactly David is doing to his pictures is to sit next to him while he's process them.

Why don't you just visit his site and watch his behind the scene links down on the right side of the site and look at the videos!

[enigmaphotos]

superkoax. I've looked at your post count and always thought... "this guy must be experienced", but I checked through a lot of your old posts.

I'll not post here anymore.

I really enjoyed this thread at one point but no more. I'm out.

People shouldn't be so nasty.... simple as... anyway, as mentioned before. I'm out of this thread.

[namphoto]

@george

alright alright dont fuss, i meant 'will do' future, come on be logical everyone else got it.

give me a week or so at the most you guys i promise.

[transoptic]

Originally Posted by superkoax

Why don't you just visit his site and watch his behind the scene links down on the right side of the site and look at the videos!

Yeah as enigma said you must have a lot of boring time on your hands. Anyway, we are all aware he has behind-the-scenes footage but if that showed how things were done this thread would be pointless.



Also, thanks enigma too for taking the time to post examples of HDR portraits and commenting on the possibility of moving subject HDR. I'm sure Mtmm is shrinking in his chair right about now.

[superkoax]

Originally Posted by enigmaphotos

superkoax. I've looked at your post count and always thought... "this guy must be experienced", but I checked through a lot of your old posts.

I'll not post here anymore.

I really enjoyed this thread at one point but no more. I'm out.

People shouldn't be so nasty.... simple as... anyway, as mentioned before. I'm out of this thread.

Hmmm...didn't quite understand what your were trying to say here!

Good luck to you, Enigma! Sorry to loose your experience!

[superkoax]

Originally Posted by transoptic

Yeah as enigma said you must have a lot of boring time on your hands. Anyway, we are all aware he has behind-the-scenes footage but if that showed how things were done this thread would be pointless.
[/url]

What? How can you sit there and judge me? Boring time? Just either be here or not!

Anyway not everyone is aware of the behind the scenes! And as to my reply on the last point on the lighting was to point out that he doesn't shoot hdr! He shoots, randomly! I have even written that before!

[superkoax]

Originally Posted by namphoto

@george

alright alright dont fuss, i meant 'will do' future, come on be logical everyone else got it.

give me a week or so at the most you guys i promise.

as I wrote eralier! can't wait!

BTW: what lighting equipment do you use?

[transoptic]

I dunno, dude. You seem to have a lot to say, without actually contributing anything worthwhile.
Kind of like someone who loves the sound of their own voice.


Case-in-point: Your last 3 posts.

Make that 3 hundred posts.

[superkoax]

Originally Posted by transoptic

I dunno, dude. You seem to have a lot to say, without actually contributing anything worthwhile.
Kind of like someone who loves the sound of their own voice.


Case-in-point: Your last 3 posts.

Make that 3 hundred posts.

I'm sorry that you feel that way! I'm curious to his style! Want to learn it. I started this thread to learn more really!

But if others feel the same way here...Please do reply! I don't want to be this member who write nonsense! I don't feel I'm just writing nonsense! I try to ask questions that everyone can take part in here...

[namphoto]

two alien bee 800s and sigma ef 500 external flash.