Hollywood portrait lighting

[guy catelli]

update. i learned from ETC's website -- http://www.etcconnect.com/home.asp -- that there's a dealer of their equipment in my neighborhood: http://www.balny.com/

unlike, say, B&H or Adorama, the sales person at Big Apple, Eva, took plenty of time to answer all of my questions (it wasn't as if there were a line of other customers anxious for me to finish).

interestingly, she strongly recommended the Altman Fresnel's instead. she explained that that as the ETC Source 4 PARNels (couldn't they have thought of a more awkward name?) go to the widest angle, a dark area starts to form in the center of the beam.

she went so far as to have the in-house crew set up one of each so as to demonstrate (can you imagine this happening at Adorama or B&H? -- chuckling). the upshot is that i was totally impressed in favor of the ETC's instead of the Altman's.

i'm not sure i could even see what the heck she was talking about regarding the dark spot in the center of the ETC beam at full wide angle. but what was totally obvious was that the ETC's beam was way whiter than the Altaman's, as well as way more evenly distributed.

so, right now the tentative plan is to get 3 PARNels, and the LEKO -- the LEKO so i can finally cast a 'venetian' blind shadow on the model (woot!).

 

[Helen B]

Guy,

Slightly off topic, but another good place for continuous lighting in NYC is Dead Link Removed on W55th.

Best,
Helen

 

[guy catelli]

Guy,

Slightly off topic, but another good place for continuous lighting in NYC is Dead Link Removed on W55th.

Best,
Helen

Helen, this thread is already an excellent resource that many people are following -- i'm sure some will find the reference to Barbizon useful.

btw, my lights -- 3 ETC Source-4 PARNels and an ETC LEKO -- arrived late this afternoon (the owner of Big Apple Lighting dropped them off himself -- at no additional charge).

i'll be setting them up over the weekend.

 

[Christopher Nisperos]

Helen, this thread is already an excellent resource that many people are following -- i'm sure some will find the reference to Barbizon useful.

btw, my lights -- 3 ETC Source-4 PARNels and an ETC LEKO -- arrived late this afternoon (the owner of Big Apple Lighting dropped them off himself -- at no additional charge).

i'll be setting them up over the weekend.

Guy,

Glad you finally got your lights. It'd be great to see some of your results posted here, even if you're still in the testing phase. It would add to a thread that so far is pretty informative.

Good luck, be patient and have fun!

Best,

Christopher

.

 

[Christopher Nisperos]

Chris,
In your book, you mentioned about the offending cross shadows in some hollywood portraits. Well they may be considered as mistakes. Guess what Peter Lindbergh have done to actress Milla Jovoich in classic Hollywood style of mood in the currnet issue of Italian Vogue? He deliberately throws the rule out of the window and create five conflicting shadows on the background with fresnel spots as fill! I know it is HMI fresnel becuase he sometimes include the light in the photo.

Singlo,

Rules-schmules . . . when it comes to artistic expression, think like a Frenchman: the "rules" (and the law!*) are only suggestions!

Best,

Christopher

*Please.. no flames de mauvaise foi from les français(es) about this comment, given in a humorous spirit. You understand exactly what I mean. If you'd like to discuss it further, PM me for a rendez-vous. You name the meeting place in Paris, and you buy the wine! //cn

 

[singlo]

yeah the french has good taste in wine and so does in the use of shadows---see the works of Jeanoup Sieff.


Here is my latest photo with Hollywood style of lighting with a french actress; I have exceeded image quota. More photos at Modelmayhem:

Dead Link Removed

 

[singlo]

update. i learned from ETC's website -- http://www.etcconnect.com/home.asp --
interestingly, she strongly recommended the Altman Fresnel's instead. she explained that that as the ETC Source 4 PARNels (couldn't they have thought of a more awkward name?) go to the widest angle, a dark area starts to form in the center of the beam.

she went so far as to have the in-house crew set up one of each so as to demonstrate (can you imagine this happening at Adorama or B&H? -- chuckling). the upshot is that i was totally impressed in favor of the ETC's instead of the Altman's.

i'm not sure i could even see what the heck she was talking about regarding the dark spot in the center of the ETC beam at full wide angle. but what was totally obvious was that the ETC's beam was way whiter than the Altaman's, as well as way more evenly distributed.

so, right now the tentative plan is to get 3 PARNels, and the LEKO -- the LEKO so i can finally cast a 'venetian' blind shadow on the model (woot!).

ETC ellipsoidals are great stage lights..you will need pipe clamps to rig them or improvise with superclamps on stand mount position. They are hard light producing very sharp shadows. The framing shutters are super cool device. I have never heard of the central dark spot problem. It could happen to some open face fixtures though.

Altman fresnel is not as well built as Arri, Mole, Peppers..etc. I got a Mole Tweenie II 650W a while ago...it is very nice built but I hatre their old fashion barndoor design. It sucks when you try to insert wire scrim into the slot.

 

[Helen B]

ETC ellipsoidals are great stage lights..you will need pipe clamps to rig them or improvise with superclamps on stand mount position...

I don't have any ETCs, but I converted a stage ellipsoidal spot pipe mounting by simply bolting a 1-1/8" (baby) spigot through the hole in the yoke. For lighter lights that don't need the strength of a baby you can just put a 5/8" female whotsit (eg Manfrotto 014MS 5/8"-M10 'Rapidapter' - other thread sizes are available) through the hole in the yoke.

Best,
Helen

 

[Christopher Nisperos]

I have Roger's book and it is a great resource.Now, back to the OP's question about models squinting due to the flash/light . . .

-I don't use the Arri Fresnel equipment, so I am unfamiliar with the output...I have attempted the Hollywood Glamour Lighting and I don't recall my models having trouble with squinting.

-Now that I recall, many of my images have the model facing one way and the lighting, - she wasn't looking directly at the light. During those images where I needed the model to to look at the light, I used the model light [of a flash-unit]

-I also recall not having too much of an f-stop difference between the lighting of the room/studio and the model light.

-I used a very powerful ProPhoto strobe . . . with a spot attachment and a 10% grid . . . I would also use the black foil to further reduce/direct the spot
Fill was with a small softbox <--I know all wrong! I'll post some images whenever I get them scanned.



Rgards, Art. (Yes, basically I used my $5000 Nikon D2X digital SLR as a light meter)

Hi Art,

It's not surprising why your models don't squint! lol . . . Obviously there's a going to be a difference between a modeling lamp of, say, 250w (or more?*) —even when intensified by a spot and grid— and a focused fresnel spot of 1000w .. or more.

Looking forward to seeing some of your images!

Best regards,

Christopher Nisperos ... the other name on "Roger's book"

*(being as you're using all that fancy digital equipment, I wouldn't see a reason to need very powerful lights, in your situation ...)

.

 

[jackwass]

I want to thank all the people who have contributed to this thread (especially "the other name on Roger's book"), it's been really useful to read everyone's comments, and see (especially singlo's) examples.

I decided it wasn't worth attempting this style without two key (pardon the pun) pieces of equipment - a proper focusing Fresnel and Roger and Christopher's book. Now that I have both (and a few more books besides) I've starting experimenting. You wouldn't believe the cramped nature of my "studio" but needs must.

The first was originally a dud but we thought it worked as a more 20s style shot; the latter two were in imitation of a shot of Hedy Lamarr in Kobal's book of 40s portraits. Unfortunately the model's skin (and ancestry!) is more Rita than Hedy, but I hope it has still worked.

If anyone has any suggestions of the technical/composition/aesthetic/anything else variety I would be really grateful!

 

[Christopher Nisperos]

I want to thank all the people who have contributed to this thread (especially "the other name on Roger's book"), it's been really useful to read everyone's comments, and see (especially singlo's) examples . . . If anyone has any suggestions of the technical/composition/aesthetic/anything else variety I would be really grateful!

Jackwass, thanks for your kind comments --or, should I say you're welcome?
I like the third shot of Hedwig.. it's almost there as a base shot (from which you'd do your retouching, etc.) Quite obviously, it just needs a bit of fill. Keep going and --more importantly-- keep testing. There's your real "secret".

Best,

Christopher

.

 

[jackwass]

I think the problem was (as I hinted at) that the skin tones weren't right to create the image I was trying to imitate. In the original, Hedy(wig)'s skin was very white (through I guess a combination of natural tone, makeup and retouching) - to the extent that the image was almost black and white. There certainly wasn't any fill in the original.

The following attempts are of a more formulaic shot - and, I admit, definately does need some fill! I hope that they are getting closer though.

Testing I shall definately do...looks like tomorrow evening I'll try the same + fill + maybe hairlight. The reason I started with the shots above was because they only required a single light - I didn't want to get it too complicated first.

Jack

 

[guy catelli]

2nd shoot with ETC 'hot lights'

.... my lights -- 3 ETC Source-4 PARNels and an ETC LEKO -- arrived late this afternoon ....i'll be setting them up over the weekend.

Guy,

Glad you finally got your lights. It'd be great to see some of your results posted here, even if you're still in the testing phase. It would add to a thread that so far is pretty informative.

Good luck, be patient and have fun!

Best,

Christopher

.

my first shoot with the new lights is unshowable -- shadows look like anatomical amputations.

here're two from the second shoot. i call the first "Modern Marriage":

Dead Link Removed

and the second, "A Woman's Smile"

Dead Link Removed

 

[Christopher Nisperos]

my first shoot with the new lights is unshowable -- shadows look like anatomical amputations.

here're two from the second shoot. i call the first "Modern Marriage":

Dead Link Removed

and the second, "A Woman's Smile"

Dead Link Removed

Um . . . your model has a nice smile ... and a very cute little riding crop.

Your photos prove that with a busty model in a bra it isn't always easy to find the right pose. Your shots —as "bustys" often do— fall into the category of what we used to call, "cheesecake", rather than Hollywood glamour (not an insult! just a different category). Here's an example of a "busty" shot of Jayne Mansfield done in higher key commercial portrait lighting rather than so-called "Hollywood" glamor style, which is often in low key:

http://galleries.lycos.co.uk/d/13786-4/janemansfield.jpg

If you're going to shoot a busty model in Hollywood style, I'd even recommend a reclined pose. As well, try to find a way to tease the viewer and infer the bustiness rather than outright show it.... that's part of the "Hollywood look" just as much as the lighting, retouching, etc.

Another suggestion is to perhaps use a set rather than background paper. Yeah, I know.. you don't live in a Hollywood studio. But your model is in her underwear. Wouldn't it be less incongruous to actually have her in a bedroom lazing around in the bed? Or putting on makeup? Or what about brushing her hair? I dunno .. something other than getting ready to whip you!

Use more fill, too. Hopes this helps.

Best,

Christopher

. . . . .

 

[guy catelli]

this one has key lights on the model's extreme left and right. the fill is facing her. all three lights were diffused with circular white-cloth 'reflectors'.

Dead Link Removed

in the next shot, i was able to redden the model's hair (which she had requested), without reddening her skin tone as much as in the one above, by using Photoshop CS3 and setting Fill Light to 30, and Blacks to 15.

Dead Link Removed

 

[guy catelli]

above described photos with more permanent liks:

Dead Link Removed

Dead Link Removed

 

[Christopher Nisperos]

this one has key lights on the model's extreme left and right. the fill is facing her. all three lights were diffused with circular white-cloth 'reflectors'.

Guy —

Don't forget the basic rule that there should be one dominant light.
Therefore —at least in terminology— you shouldn't call your kickers key lights.
Just because they're stronger than the light on your models face, they are still "effect" lights. Which brings up a second point:

Your kickers are too strong and your fill —which functions as your key light, in this shot — is too weak. Your model has "hidden places" all over her face. Don't be afraid of flat lighting. Hollywood portraiture wasn't only hard spotlighting (especially fo women). Go back and look at Hurrell's work again.

Also —as long as you're messing around with Photoshop—, why not retouch skin, like a real Hollywood shot? Hard lighting brings out wrinkles and skin texture. IMHO, they are detracting from the quality of your work. In the absence of this retouching (and unless you're looking for a deliberate effect), you'd be better-off lighting your female models with a softer light source, such as floodlighting. (I'm not what you mean by white cloth reflectors ... are these covering your lights or are your lights being bounced off of them?)

By the way, I'd guess that the true APUGer way of retouching such a portrait would be by pencil or dye & brush on the negative itself (I've forgotten ... are you even using film?). Try it. It's fun and alot quicker than Photoshop anyway!

Best,

Christopher

. . . . . .

 

[guy catelli]

Dead Link Removed

 

[guy catelli]

i just tried a venetian-blind gobo insert in my ETC Leko. it started emitting smoke, and when i pulled it out, i could see that the "blinds" had begun to melt.

i'm using a 750W bulb, and the Leko has "750" stenciled on its side. can i use a bulb of lower wattage, and, if so, does anyone have a recommendation for what wattage i should use to keep from melting the gobo?

 

[guy catelli]

melting gobo pattern update

update: i spoke with Big Apple Lights, the vendor of the venetiian blind pattern. they said all "gobo" patterns eventually melt, especially the venetian blind patterns, because they block so much light that there's a big heat buildup.

i spoke with a sales rep at GAM, the manufacturer. he acted as if this was the first time in the history of the world that this had happened. he said that GAM uses thicker stainless steel than the competition and that their patterns can take 2000 deg F. but, he said if i mailed it back to them and they decided it was a manufacturing defect, they would send me a new one.

i wound up calling Rosco regarding their glass patterns, which can take higher temperatures than stainless steel ones (but they cost $85!).

a techie there told me that the stainless steel patterns emit some smoke the first time they're used because their enamel coating is burning off, they turn brown because of oxidation (a fancy word for burning), and that some stainless steel patterns last for many months with hours of daily usage, and some don't, depending upon a number of factors.

he also suggested that perhaps my Source Four Leko's light field wasn't flat, and that instead of focusing on the subject to be illuminated, it was focusing on the pattern, thus not only shortening the life of the pattern, but the life of the bulb as well.

i then called ETC to find out how to flatten the field of the Leko. i was directed to this page on their website:
http://www.etcconnect.com/docs/docs_downloads/miscdocs/S4 Focus & Tuning.pdf

the tuning of the light field was simple. i'm kind of annoyed that the "User Manual" that came with the Source Four didn't include this information, or at least a reference to the web page.

 

[singlo]

In your colored photo, the double kicker lights hit both sides of the nose which is unflattering to female in most cases. You should move the kickers at steeper angle from the back or use barndoors to avoid the light hitting the nose if your studio space is not deep enough.

Steel gobo shouldn't melt unless you use it not properly..maybe it is not inserted correctly causing ventilation problem. It also happened to me that lamp or barndoors emitted smoke when they were used in the first time becuase of vaporisation of the paint varnish.

BTW I am not a big fan of steel gobo and focusing spot to create patterns; I got Dedo gobo spot attachmnet and never use it to produce the pattern becuase the effect is too "articifial" for my taste; there are much better ways to create natural patterns.

Remmeber that Source four is a very hard light source...the size of the light source is the size of the projection lens which is quite small. If you use very hard light source as key, it is necessary to use soft and broad fill light to reduce the harshness. The function of the key is provide modeling of the facial structure and the fill light is to open up the shadows.

 

[Christopher Nisperos]

Get a copy of Roger Hicks's book on Hollywood Portraiture --
Sanders

Cold or dead thread, but... ahem .... Roger Hicks and Christopher Nisperos.

A major part of my "pay" in co-writing that book was the billing, so I'm not at all ashamed to remind people that I'm the co-author, having contributed a major part of the technical information that the book is, afterall, mostly known for.

 

[ghostcount]

"Hollywood Portraiture" by Roger and Chris is a fantastic book.

 

[semeuse]

I love the book by Hicks and Nisperos - an absolutely wonderful way to learn lighting.

and a note to Chris: in the book, you refer to Toby Wing (pages 64-5) "concerning whom our researches have proved lamentably deficient." I'm sure that by now you've heard more of her, but if not, here is a link to her bio. She was an interesting lady.

 

[Christopher Nisperos]

Toby Wing

I love the book by Hicks and Nisperos - an absolutely wonderful way to learn lighting.

and a note to Chris: in the book, you refer to Toby Wing (pages 64-5) "concerning whom our researches have proved lamentably deficient." I'm sure that by now you've heard more of her, but if not, here is a link to her bio. She was an interesting lady.

Wow, thanks. I gave the link a quick read ... seems that Toby Wing was alive at the moment our book was published. As a writing team, it was Roger who handled the biographical information about the stars and my job mainly dealt with the technical information, but nonetheless I would have loved to have spoken with her. Her life story seems like the grist for a pretty interesting film in itself! She really got around . . . Says, too, that her nephew teamed-up with Joan Rivers to do comedy.

Thanks again for the enlightment (no pun intended!),

Christopher