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

[HelloPiccadilly]

some of them are really nice....
But, I'm going to be tired of such kind of picture ))

[Pinto]

Originally Posted by Tareq

Check this website, to me he is doing better than Dave Hill, so why didn't call this technique his name?

http://www.jangonzales.com/

I would disagree. DH's images are much more consistent, and his overall quality is a step up from Gonzales.

[igot2pman]

HelloPiccadilly, just wanted to give a better critique of why I say not.

I say not for 3 reasons:

The picture has a dark mood and title for that matter.
---DH I don’t think has ever done a dark theme (maybe the 50 cent series but still not dark), there always happy or doing something that they do.

The complexity of the image is just not there.
---DH backgrounds are very complex; I count at least 5 steps from foreground to background. Some even have more, many more.

Not much color.
---all his pictures have lots of complimenting colors and he evens them out.


Now don’t get me wrong, you did a lot of good things here: Good sharpness over all, had a theme (although I wouldn’t have gotten it without the title), good sharpen, good leading line, and good D&B. I like the overall picture and in all reality, you could possibly make a series out of it. Same girls different houses...just an idea. Thanks for describing how you did this.

If you want to take DH to the next level, maybe Dave Hill Dark is the next step. But you still have to keep in mind the complexity of the images.

Keep it up,
-Keven

[Gee]

No seriously Gonzales got some cool pics, but theres is a lot that i can't even look at... On some of them there is some reaaally bad d/b etc etc and the whole thing just doesnt fit :|

[HelloPiccadilly]

igot2pman
okey, really thx for your comment!
I continue my trying and learning

p.s. this was previous shot of this theme ) http://img58.imageshack.us/img58/817...ena1024vi0.jpg

[igot2pman]

Originally Posted by Gee

No seriously Gonzales got some cool pics, but theres is a lot that i can't even look at... On some of them there is some reaaally bad d/b etc etc and the whole thing just doesnt fit :|

I agree, Gonzales pictures have been taken too far, to the point of looking fake. DH rides the line between fake and real, and knows when to quit. Not to mention the background complexity. Gonzales sometimes only has foreground and background seeming that little thought went into the picture.

I think DH is doing everything right, and in all honestly I don’t think that the "look" can be pushed much further. He has progressed; in earlier pictures, he had simple overall concepts for groups of images. With the newer 50 cent series, there is almost a story. The only real thing that DH can do in my view is change genre and start doing other themes. Gonzales is good at what he does, but has a lot to work on...

My thoughts,
-Keven

[Gee]

yes. exactly my though about the 50 cent series. its soooo much better than the rest. seriously

[Biwa]

Originally Posted by Tareq

Check this website, to me he is doing better than Dave Hill, so why didn't call this technique his name?

http://www.jangonzales.com/

Not even the same as DH to me much too illustrative and the skin is funky.
Looks like hes someone that has tried to compensate for what the process does to skin . That is where DH still has the edge, his skin holds its own.

[Tareq]

OK OK, i wish to do or have same effect of Jan and not Dave Hill, so if you all like DH then me and some of my friend prefer the other one, it is personal choice

[Gee]

yo
does anyone got the dave hill interview from the brittish magazine DSLR magazine ?

[longside1]

I've got a copy at home, it's really good, he explains his workflow, in particular with regards to the application of photoshop which I found really helpful...

[mort3]

can you please scan it a post here? or some link? in my country it is not possible to buy this magazine and I would like to read it. thank you

[longside1]

I must come clean, whilst I have the magaine it does not reveal anything at all about Dave's workflow, just a very cruel joke on my behalf!! Apologies!

[mort3]

ok no problem. still if you think that interview is interesting, can you please upload it? i would like to read it
thank you

[longside1]

No probs, I'll see what I can do...

[obosila]

Another try.

[dennisonb]

You know guys (as a small side note from a conversation with a photographer friend) as cool as all this looks, its probably not the future of photography. There will definitely be clients that like stuff like this- but I am willing to bet it will never be the real big clients or the real big magazines. While the style looks cool, the photos don't actually *look good* and it's a style that art directors and advertising agencies don't generally like. Just take a look at the compilation books of the worlds best advertising photographers or best fashion photographers- you don't see stuff like this *anywhere*.

Of course, this style does work for specific kinds of jobs, and of course there is a time and place for everything. But for young photographers out there looking for role models and dreaming of really making it *big* I would personally recommend trying to "demystify" the great photographers like Steven Meisel, Annie Leibowitz, Mario Testino, Dianne Arbus, Irving Penn, among many others. Let the retouching perfect the image you already captured with the camera. Retouching is a tool, but you shouldn't let it become your photography.

The magic and power of photography is not in the retouching and that's not something that is going to change.

For everyone else who's in love with this style- rock out. But if there are young photographers out there really trying to work their own style/feeling/purpose/image out, leave this one alone. There is no mystery in hours of photoshop, trust me the mystery is elsewhere.

-dennison
www.dennisonbertram.com

[HelloPiccadilly]

i've checked your site...
superb))

[gun4hire!]

Tnx HP,
Glad you liked it. Thanks for letting me know. We all work in a vacuum of sorts, and criticism is always nice to hear from the outside world.

[longside1]

Hi obosila, great shot. Can you please elaborate upon the post processing work?

Many thanks,

[gun4hire!]

hey longside1
i think you posted in the wrong spot... try again.

[longside1]

Originally Posted by gun4hire!

hey longside1
i think you posted in the wrong spot... try again.

My last post concerned the shot by Obosila further up the page?!

[gun4hire!]

sorry longside1, my bad.

for everyone else...
dh is o.k. his style is tooooooo overdone by everyone copying though. it's starting to look dated already to me.
i like these guys better
timtadder.com
damicostudios.com

been around longer too. their techniques are a bit more nondestructive as well.
love them both.

[gun4hire!]

Originally Posted by Tareq

Check this website, to me he is doing better than Dave Hill, so why didn't call this technique his name?

http://www.jangonzales.com/

We could call them both jan hill or david gonzales. or JANID, a bit like beniffer. lol

These guys are getting to be a dime a dozen.
everyone is bitting everyone.

[Gee]

couldnt agree more with dennisonb.

but tbh its with photog like DH that i wanted to learn how to light.
now i do it most of the time. but not in a illustrative look or something.
i'm looking for cool/bleach/clean look like in ads.

and gosh, it's hard ;D

[Tareq]

Originally Posted by gun4hire!

We could call them both jan hill or david gonzales. or JANID, a bit like beniffer. lol

These guys are getting to be a dime a dozen.
everyone is bitting everyone.

To be honest, i saw many of that look on another websites even on some magazines, could be better than Dave or Jan or less, even some of those photos are old like about 4 or 5 years ago, so i don't know why that only Dave Hill became famous all over the world like he is the only or the first one did that style, and if that is true he is the only or the first then i think sooner or later someone else in the future will discover a new style as well and call it his name.

[Soul_of_Kilik]

YIKES!!

Would you look at the size of this discussion!! Jeez! Has this guy got the world boggled or what!

Here's my opinion (and I apologize if I might be repeating whats already said, but there is no way I'm reading all 10billion threads!)

I've been checking ol' Dave's stuff out for like a year or so. I found his work when I was trying to discover my own 'movie-poster' look. This look and feel is not unique to DH, but it seems he's certainly become the trademark of it.

The different forums and blogs all seem to have variants of how to achieve this, and I'm sure DH does not follow his own exact formula. Different lighting scenarios would bring different challenges. Scott Kelby has written a few ways to achieve this look with different applications (mostly through RAW processing software, and not PS) - though you can shoot me for that link - I seem to have lost it somewhere in my email database.

I think it's not so much the exact steps and process, but more the 'know-excactly-what-you-want' from the shadows, highlights, textures, etc. I would kill to get my hands on a high res version of his work, and really analize it at 100% - 200% magnification - coz if you don't, it's all just speculation.

I thihnk DH treats every project uniquely, and does not just drop it into the "Dave Hill Effect-o-rizer".

[HelloPiccadilly]

for me, the main problem is background...i'm confused with it..
how to make it with one shot...(no hdr, no collage)

To play with skin is much easier..)

[Soul_of_Kilik]

Originally Posted by HelloPiccadilly

for me, the main problem is background...i'm confused with it..
how to make it with one shot...(no hdr, no collage)

To play with skin is much easier..)

From what i see, it comes down to a good shot to start off with. Sometimes with lighting, and often with long exposures.

[HelloPiccadilly]

what do u mean by long exposures?)

for example, i have 3 source of flash-light...600 joile each..

I'm always trying to photograph with about 1/160 and f/20, so what the point to make 1/50? it's going to be less clearly..