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

[tetragramaton]

One of my, small, project
http://www.flickr.com/photos/menanda...4696/lightbox/

[fxphoto]

Looks like www.davehillphoto.com is getting updated. There is a new music section.

[fxphoto]

@tetragramaton your pp is really cool. Would you like to share it.

[Fadewoodarts]

This thread will probably go on for eternity! I learn more and more every day about how to correctly work with composites and knowing your light setup. You have to spend time with your images. I have shoots that I did, put them away for a month, and shot others in the mean time.. came back to it, and that's when I had even more ideas on how to edit them. Even after that, I would spend a couple days or a week or even two weeks on one image, stopping, and going back to it to add something else. It's fun, and it keeps your imagination growing on how to properly use the amazing phenomena that is lighting with your camera and Photoshop.

http://www.fadewoodstudios.com

[egnoc]

@tetragramaton the image of the guy flying in the aircraft is something similar to what a friend of mine did a couple of years back - http://bit.ly/cndxHb

[strictlygunners]

I too would be very interested in the workflow behind the ace of spades photo.

[julianmarsalis]

http://www.rangefindermag.com/storag...l_Pangburn.pdf

[troco74]

hey guys, hello again!

im still finding the key of the look, when i find it, i will post it, but until then here i show three of my new pics

http://www.flickr.com/photos/brozpho...n/photostream/

http://www.flickr.com/photos/brozpho...n/photostream/

http://www.flickr.com/photos/brozpho...n/photostream/

keep posting! and sharing

[julianmarsalis]

http://vimeo.com/davehill

[gustofusion]

Hopping in a little late on this one but from my experience you can get this type of effect several ways, however its difficult to express any sort of drama from generic type shots. With minimal planning from a recent photo shoot we considered the final result in advance and shot several images with the idea that we would composite afterwards to get the type of shot that couldn't be captured on-site as one shot.

In the attached example we knew we wanted the group to appear in front of the backdrop that's used in the final composite but the shot wasn't possible so we shot both separate and composited them together.
With additions of shadows, haze and false lighting effects we were able to produce a shot that in many ways is believable but with just an element of not so believable. I think whats important is that there's a certain element of what one wishes to see but couldn't because it just doesn't exist that way in real life.

Shading in areas that are well lit goes opposite to whats real and tricks the mind, contrast in areas that normally are not contrasting adds to this effect.

During the edit there were several attempts to get it right as we wanted it, many were closed out without saving and we started over, don't think you have to continue with your editing process if its headed in the wrong direction.

All editing was accomplished in photoshop with various layers and blending modes, selectively erasing areas with soft brushes from various layers when they didn't add to the overall look.

http://65.40.25.142/storage/example.jpg

[tetragramaton]

Hi guys, in the case of the ace of spades shoot there was more composing involved than any other specific treatments for the model itself, and to the end of the day I end up with 38-39 layers. I done the whole think for one, sleepless, night. The other thing was that I couldn't work my lighting as wanted because I was using st-e2 and it was giving me so much troubles. Any way I'm posting few links were you can see before and in the post-production.

http://i27.photobucket.com/albums/c1...thilights1.jpg

http://i27.photobucket.com/albums/c1...aseofspade.jpg

http://i27.photobucket.com/albums/c1...ilightsweb.jpg

[Hyperviolet]

Originally Posted by troco74

hey guys, hello again!

im still finding the key of the look, when i find it, i will post it, but until then here i show three of my new pics

http://www.flickr.com/photos/brozpho...n/photostream/

http://www.flickr.com/photos/brozpho...n/photostream/

http://www.flickr.com/photos/brozpho...n/photostream/

keep posting! and sharing

what was your PSD workflow?
you are really close.
my problem is that i can't seem to figure out how to get the cartoon cinematic look.

[longside1]

Hi guys,

Just finished working on this shot if anyone is interested. I processed this with my own style in mind, but after finishing thought it looked similar to Dave Hill / Dragan.

Quite a simple lighting setup actually, one flash fired through a softbox high camera right and just a white reflector for fill on the models face.

Post processing was more complex with in excess of 70 layers. For that reason I'm not going into a massive explanation as I'll be here all day. In brief dodge and burn, selective contrast work and sharpening. No secrets but just built up gradually.

Lighting and patience is the key.

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5247/...d224a5dd_z.jpg

www.matthewhalstead.com

[Promotype]

Here's my try on some stock photo:

http://i56.tinypic.com/14vqmf7.jpg

[Calvinhollywood]

@Promotype
Have you ever saw a picture of Dave Hill in this style?

lg calvin

[longside1]

Originally Posted by Calvinhollywood

@Promotype
Have you ever saw a picture of Dave Hill in this style?

lg calvin

Hi Calvin, what did you think of my effort ( a couple of posts back), I would love to hear your thoughts.

Prehaps more Dragan!?

[Calvinhollywood]

Sorry but also no Dave Hill Style.
Where are the lights from each sinde?
Where is the detailled contrast etc. ?

lg Calvin

[longside1]

Originally Posted by Calvinhollywood

Sorry but also no Dave Hill Style.
Where are the lights from each sinde?
Where is the detailled contrast etc. ?

lg Calvin

Thanks Calvin, i always appreciate your feedback To be honest when I processed this shot I had more of a Dragan look in mind, but thought I would post here as it obviously has a 'stylised look'.

With respect to lighting, my image was lit with octabox camera right and minimal fill camera left.

I think DH's style has evolved considerably. He is not using as much flash, and in some of his images he has gone away from the hard side lights like others use e.g Joel Grimes Look.

Jenny M - softer light - no specular highlights
Adventure Girl (boat shot) - softer light - no specular highlights
Adventure girl (underwater) - softer light - no specular highlights
Adventure Girl (cliff Climb) - softer light - no specular highlights

The list goes on!

[Calvinhollywood]

Ok, but you cant compare a portrait like yours with a compositing of maybe 10 or 20 pictures. (adventuregirl)

If you create a compositing with so many pictures you will get this look without many lights.
Cause every pictures (of the compositing) have is own light. And at the end you have many many lights again in the picture.

lg Calvin

[longside1]

Originally Posted by Calvinhollywood

Ok, but you cant compare a portrait like yours with a compositing of maybe 10 or 20 pictures. (adventuregirl)

If you create a compositing with so many pictures you will get this look without many lights.
Cause every pictures (of the compositing) have is own light. And at the end you have many many lights again in the picture.

lg Calvin

Yes, you are quite correct. It does make this kind of work far more accesible to folks with serious lighting setups.

Nice chatting :-)

[pevanesce]

I'm not actually trying to replicate DH's look. I'm just trying new ways to apply high pass techniques for commercial applications. I did not shoot these images. They are low resolution jpegs that I downloaded from the Web and retouched, so the high pass sometimes causes artifacts. I do use these techniques in my commercial work, and they work well on high resolution files.

As some have said in here, there is no one filter that will achieve a polished look. Probably 75 to 80% of any of it comes from the lighting and retouching. I'm certain that it's no different for Dave Hill, Joey L, Joel Grimes, and others.

Before
http://i1133.photobucket.com/albums/...600x0wcrop.jpg

After
http://i1133.photobucket.com/albums/..._1600x0whp.jpg

Before
http://i1133.photobucket.com/albums/..._fb_before.jpg

After
http://i1133.photobucket.com/albums/..._after_sat.jpg

[longside1]

Originally Posted by pevanesce

I'm not actually trying to replicate DH's look. I'm just trying new ways to apply high pass techniques for commercial applications. I did not shoot these images. They are low resolution jpegs that I downloaded from the Web and retouched, so the high pass sometimes causes artifacts. I do use these techniques in my commercial work, and they work well on high resolution files.

As some have said in here, there is no one filter that will achieve a polished look. Probably 75 to 80% of any of it comes from the lighting and retouching. I'm certain that it's no different for Dave Hill, Joey L, Joel Grimes, and others.

Before
http://i1133.photobucket.com/albums/...600x0wcrop.jpg

After
http://i1133.photobucket.com/albums/..._1600x0whp.jpg

Before
http://i1133.photobucket.com/albums/..._fb_before.jpg

After
http://i1133.photobucket.com/albums/..._after_sat.jpg

Thanks for posting. Although I do have to ask, as your shots look nothing like Dave Hill, and you openly admit that you are not trying to replicate the Dave Hill look, wht post them at all in this thread.

How do these shot make any contribution to this thread?!

[tetragramaton]

Another one from me, not a Dave Hill but in similar fashion
http://www.flickr.com/photos/menanda...8548/lightbox/

[toolonglegs]

Not DH but still quite nice Tetra...and all with Canon flash guns!.
Any clues to how you got that look in post?.

[tetragramaton]

Mainly D&B and color corrections, skin cleaning ...all the standard stuff, but the important think is to have enough detailed photograph, well lit of course ... and the post processing took me around 3 hours.

[pevanesce]

Originally Posted by longside1

Thanks for posting. Although I do have to ask, as your shots look nothing like Dave Hill, and you openly admit that you are not trying to replicate the Dave Hill look, wht post them at all in this thread.

How do these shot make any contribution to this thread?!

Lonside1,

Thanks for the reply, and it's a fair question. I guess that I'm a little intrigued with the compulsion of so many people trying to replicate Dave Hill's look, particularly when some people, even in this thread, have achieved an almost identical look. If you placed some of Tetra's portfolio images alongside Hill's, I doubt that anyone would be able to distinguish them.

This thread is titled: “The Demystification of Dave Hill! Let's All He”

There is no question mark in the title, so I’ll go out on a limb in assuming that the poster is proposing that this thread will eventually reveal some sort of collective epiphany about Dave's technique. If I’m correct, then my response is that retouchers like Tetra, to a greater extent, already have. Even my quick retouch of the Audi demonstrates the animation resemblance associated with applying the combination of Shadow/Highlight and High Pass filtration. Beyond that, some of the other aspects of Hill’s look, and those of shooters like Joel Grimes, are pretty apparent. Lighting, dodging & burning, and compositing are three that stand out. In fact, you can see, in most lighting situations, whether the resulting image will accentuate the High Pass animation look.

The reality is that the only person who can truly demystify Dave Hill’s specific look is Dave Hill, and I doubt that you should expect that to happen until the look has become completely passé and Dave no longer depends on it to generate income. At that point, my guess is that he might sell a tutorial. In the meantime, learn what you can from people like Tetra, who seems willing to share his discoveries. And then go out and expand that skill into unique, new looks. The alternative is to fixate on replicating the Dave Hill look, and then what will you have gained – secondhand knowledge of a technique that has already saturated the market by high-profile shooters like Dave Hill, Dragan, and Joel Grimes? I guess I don’t see much of a future in it. On the other hand, think of the possibilities for recognition for those who expand upon the tools and then create new and equally interesting looks.

Best,

P

[longside1]

Originally Posted by pevanesce

Lonside1,

Thanks for the reply, and it's a fair question. I guess that I'm a little intrigued with the compulsion of so many people trying to replicate Dave Hill's look, particularly when some people, even in this thread, have achieved an almost identical look. If you placed some of Tetra's portfolio images alongside Hill's, I doubt that anyone would be able to distinguish them.

This thread is titled: “The Demystification of Dave Hill! Let's All He”

There is no question mark in the title, so I’ll go out on a limb in assuming that the poster is proposing that this thread will eventually reveal some sort of collective epiphany about Dave's technique. If I’m correct, then my response is that retouchers like Tetra, to a greater extent, already have. Even my quick retouch of the Audi demonstrates the animation resemblance associated with applying the combination of Shadow/Highlight and High Pass filtration. Beyond that, some of the other aspects of Hill’s look, and those of shooters like Joel Grimes, are pretty apparent. Lighting, dodging & burning, and compositing are three that stand out. In fact, you can see, in most lighting situations, whether the resulting image will accentuate the High Pass animation look.

The reality is that the only person who can truly demystify Dave Hill’s specific look is Dave Hill, and I doubt that you should expect that to happen until the look has become completely passé and Dave no longer depends on it to generate income. At that point, my guess is that he might sell a tutorial. In the meantime, learn what you can from people like Tetra, who seems willing to share his discoveries. And then go out and expand that skill into unique, new looks. The alternative is to fixate on replicating the Dave Hill look, and then what will you have gained – secondhand knowledge of a technique that has already saturated the market by high-profile shooters like Dave Hill, Dragan, and Joel Grimes? I guess I don’t see much of a future in it. On the other hand, think of the possibilities for recognition for those who expand upon the tools and then create new and equally interesting looks.

Best,

P

No offence but I still don't see how your images have contributed anyhing to the understanding of Dave Hill. As you say, he uses composites, flash and d n b yet your images appear to be lacking in these respects. There is lot more going on than just USM, to be honest is newer work appears more like matte painting, and I suspect there is a lot more software going on than just Photoshop, in all likelihood CGI etc.

Anyway, I'm undermining my own argument here by carrying on with this so I'm off to take some photos

[pevanesce]

Originally Posted by longside1

No offence but I still don't see how your images have contributed anyhing to the understanding of Dave Hill. As you say, he uses composites, flash and d n b yet your images appear to be lacking in these respects. There is lot more going on than just USM, to be honest is newer work appears more like matte painting, and I suspect there is a lot more software going on than just Photoshop, in all likelihood CGI etc.

Anyway, I'm undermining my own argument here by carrying on with this so I'm off to take some photos

I'm pretty sure that I answered your question.

Best,

P

[Boneappetit]

This is the closest I've been to it... (not there yet) I guess there are so many elements on the Dave Hill look, starting at the very base, and of course he must have his own chef secrets... Anyways here is my try... http://boneappetit.deviantart.com/#/d3bouih

[sam_bond]

I've said it before and I'll say it again... It's mostly all about the lighting!

I'm actually in the process of planning a test shoot to demonstrate this style! Hopefully I'll be shooting on Wednesday and I'll post my results here.

Here's a shot I did from last summer... It only uses 3 lights (1x Octa for key, 2x bare bulb 12" reflectors for rim/edge). The key light is a 750ws Bowens, and the rim/edge are 400ws Bowens. They do a good job keeping power with the sun!

I used lightroom to bring the colour out in the grass and sky (as you can see from the setup shot it was quite dull!) and there is very minimal dodge and burn. The background is as shot, and there is no compositing.

For the next test shoot, I plan on using 4 lights, much the same setup as with this shot, but changing the position of the key, and adding a fill. I also plan to use alot more photoshop (dodging/burning, High/Low frequency skin smoothing)

Any questions give me a shout!