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

[Mtmm]

Originally Posted by crazyfly1

I stand by that until you or someone else comes up with a better explanation than "it's all done with lighting" which is the photographic explanation equivilant to the magicians "it's all done with mirrors". Which translates to "duh, I dunno either and I have nothing useful to contribute but I wanted to say sOmEtHiNg."

I´m not sure how much you do know about lighting, but do you actually believe that you can produce good enough highlites and shadows with no proper lighting to build a foundation for D/B retouching? Do you believe that Dave just sets up over 6 flashes just to show off? Or is it possible that with proper lighting you can generate a pure clean raw-file to work with? You can do magic with several flashes including ringflash. A raw file itself can already be really unreal and like rendered. After that nobody knows what kind of a technique Dave uses. What I think is that Dave does spend lots of time with Wacom drawing everything with d/b.

[crazyfly1]

Originally Posted by Mtmm

Do you believe that Dave just sets up over 6 flashes just to show off?

Why yes, yes I do. In fact let me quote Dave for you
"That big octobox is just for show."

So yes I think he does it sometimes (and he doesn't always) just to impress the noobs.
It's showing you a flower with one hand while he pulls a quarter from behind your ear with the other.
Don't get me wrong I have already clearly seen that some folks want this to be all mysterious and remain unanswered.

I don't know. It could be that I'm totally off base and all you need mtmm is to wacom your raw with ring flash and dodge and burn.

Or, it could be that as with so many things photoshop there are several ways to get almost identical effects.

[zogdart]

Mtmm is right, You need good lighting to get the good result.

No light...No image... you can wacom all you want! still no image.

If it would be as simple as shooting with a ring flash, and retouch with a wacom, a lot of people would achieve it.

You need a good understanding of light. the big octo is not just for show. I know lighting. I've been around...Did a lot of assisting with some of the big boys in London and N.Y.

Dave say's a lot of thing to trow us off...

[Mtmm]

Originally Posted by crazyfly1

Don't get me wrong I have already clearly seen that some folks want this to be all mysterious and remain unanswered.

And you have now discovered that mystery? Please, dont hold it down, shot us how to replicate Dave Hill´s style if it is so simple. There is hundres of users trying to replicate that style, nobody has done it. So please, enter the stage. You fail!

And for the record, I´m not trying to copy Dave, but I have learned a lot from his videos.

http://www.bodynet.fi/kuvat/danielhill.jpg

Guy in that photo is named Daniel Hill, just a coincidence.

[snook305]

Cannot believe the boneheads are still it is mainly lighting.. BS
His lighting is very basic lighting.. or at best average.
His "Look" is clearly achieved in POST! PERIOD!
Now get over it...:+}
Snook

[Mtmm]

Yes its done as I was saying before. First lights, then photoshop. But try to get this in to your head. You need a good lighting to start with. After that nobody knows what Dave does in photoshop/illustrator/after effects/3d max........

This is like explaining banana to monkey.

After all this some idiot is still saying, "you just need photoshop, blaa blaa...."

[zogdart]

Ditto!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[CaptainHook]

For anyone who thinks the way he lights is NOT integral to his look, watch his behind
the scenes vid with Chris Brown. He's tethered to the mac and the shots come up
as he takes them. The "look" is at least 80% there. No surprise that the raw files
look closer to his look than the many "post" attempts here.

[Mtmm]

This is a raw-file with 4 flashes, Elinchrom Rangers. 2 kickers, left and right. Key light softbox upper right, fill light ring flash front. Left kicker and ringflash at half power versus right side.

Post processing with d/b will produce more rendered like photo. After that I don´t have a glue what Dave uses. But I´m sure that d/b is done heavily in Dave´s photos for entire photo. When you go piece by piece the whole photo through with d/b you can generate more rendered look.

http://www.bodynet.fi/kuvat/raw.jpg

[crazyfly1]

Mtmm, you might consider posting that picture somewhere in a larger size and in raw tiff or psd.

This is my try at it, I know, I know, not even close. Maybe if I'd spent more than 3 minutes on it but I have to go to the store. Oh well, I tried.
Thanx for the image.

[Red Triangle]

That looks great!

Originally Posted by Mtmm

http://www.bodynet.fi/kuvat/danielhill.jpg

Guy in that photo is named Daniel Hill, just a coincidence.

[crazyfly1]

Another with more vignetting.
The more I do this the more I feel I am missing something that dave does when he adds the vignettes. Somehow he is getting rings of light intermixed with the rings of dark. Maybe a blend mode on the vignette layer?

[Mtmm]

Originally Posted by crazyfly1

Mtmm, you might consider posting that picture somewhere in a larger size and in raw tiff or psd.

This is my try at it, I know, I know, not even close. Maybe if I'd spent more than 3 minutes on it but I have to go to the store. Oh well, I tried.
Thanx for the image.

As you see, you are generating terrible halos, look at the shoulders.

Here is retouched with only d/b and some bleach bypass.

http://www.bodynet.fi/kuvat/raw2.jpg

[superkoax]

mtmm: youre on to something here in your last post! I would say skin texture??? maybe the picture is too small to have a good outcome for us poor dave hill fans Post bigger picture, pretty please????


Gerry

[crazyfly1]

Mtmm, two possible responses to that. One is "I don't have the luxury of working on an origional raw, post the larger image please."
The other is "look at this picture, halos? hmmmm.?