"Managing" a photo shoot

[smileyguy]

Well, somebody else seems to like my photos and has asked me to do their family portraits in the new year. I posted here: (there was a url link here which no longer exists) about wanting to know how to manage a photo shoot better and the upcoming one is almost the same as the one I just did.

The one upcoming is my brother, his wife and three boys aged 9-15. They don't want "posed" studio portraits and would prefer to be outdoors. I'm not necessarily looking for posing ideas but ways to manage the flow of the shoot better so that people aren't wondering what to do and where to sit etc.

I don't do this type of thing professionally--and don't aspire to--but would like to know how to do it better. I'm working out of my "comfort zone" but that is a good thing! :confused:

Thanks for all your help.

 

[Cheryl Jacobs]

Smiley,

That's actually a really huge question. So much so that I spend a whole lot of time concentrating on it during my three-day workshops. LOL.

I'll give you a few helpful hints that I promise will go a long way toward getting what you're after.

After you've found the location and light you want to use, you've metered, and set your camera accordingly:

1) tell them all to get their faces as close together as possible. When they think they're close enough, make 'em get closer. REALLY close. This will accomplish a few things at once. It'll force better composition (eliminating straight-on shoulder and boring horizontals and verticals), it'll loosen them up (it just plain feels silly to squish that close, and somebody always ends up pinching or tickling somebody else) and it will set up a lot of interaction as the work to get closer to each other. It also helps to get them on the same plane, which is highly useful in terms of focus, particularly if you find yourself shooting wider aps than you might like.

2) tell everyone to hold on to somebody else. It also helps in a lot of diverse ways. It helps keep everyone where you want them, it creates a lot of diagonals for compositional interest, and it shows a much stronger familial bond.

Hope that helps. If you have more specific questions, I'm happy to field them.

- CJ

 

[AZLF]

Sounds like an interesting challenge ahead of you. Correct me if I am wrong but you are supposed to get a "family" portrait but they don't want it "posed"? I've shot a number of casual family portraits but there was at least a hint of posing to get them all in the shot. One possiblity is if the family has an activity they do together. If so you might find a good shot while they are involved in that activity. Outdoors is good but in my neck of the woods the best light is in the late afternoon when the light is a little softer and slightly warmer. Brush up on your fill strobe skills. If properly applied they can put some real pop into the shot without screaming "FLASH". Were I to take this on I would use at least a medium format camera if not a 4x5.

Good luck on your shoot and hopefully you can let us see the results.

 

[Cheryl Jacobs]

In my experience, not wanting "posed" almost always translates to not wanting "traditional studio." I can almost guarantee you that they still want to see everyone in one shot and visible. If you also do shots where they are goofing off and playing, etc, that is great, but they will be supplemental images, rather than "the" image.

FWIW I absolutely never use fill flash in my portraiture, outdoor or otherwise. It ruins the directionality of the light. Much depends on whether you plan to shoot B&W or color.

- CJ

 

[Gay Larson]

I love to shoot families outdoors because the natural light is wonderful. I never use fill flash either because what's the point if you want natural light. Just be careful of shadows on faces. I take my friends and family to a local park that has lots of interesting rock formations and benches and try different locatations. I agree that late afternoon light is best and I shoot with my MF but I usually shoot B&W unless they want color then I do both. It can be lots of fun and usually is less stressful which leads to more relaxed portraits. Good Luck.

 

[johnnywalker]

Gay and Cheryl, I imagine you have to be very careful as to the directionality of the natural light if you don't use fill flash? I don't use a lot of the pictures I take of my grandkids and animals because there's no "sparkle" in their eyes, so I've been toying with the idea of using fill flash. Mine aren't posed pictures, and the subjects don't take direction well - especially the grandkids.

 

[Jonathan Brewer]

Johnny Walker...................there certainly is no point in using a technique like fill flash if you don't perceive a benefit in using it, you use what you want to use.

Fill flash, used the right way isn't going to ruin the directionality of the key your using it with, and when I say the 'right way', I mean using fill flash that doesn't draw attention to itself. A 'key' and a 'fill' are two lights used together to give the 'illusion' that one light is illuminating a scene, and providing more detail in the shadow areas than you would see if you hadn't used the fill, simple as that. When you use fill flash and it telegraphs that you've used TWO lights instead of the illusion of using a 'key' and 'fill' that seems to be one light, then it didn't work.

You have a key that is directional(creates highlights and shadows), and traditionally(but not always), you can use a non-directional light source(a large white card, a large reflector, a wide softbox et al) as a 'fill' light to 'fill' in the shadow areas to provide more detail in those shadows, that's why the light's called a 'fill' light.

The 'key' to the illusion of using 2 light sources, where it looks as if you've used one, is using a fill that doesn't draw attention to itself, if the illumination being used as a 'fill' light has any directionality of its own(creates it's own set of shadows), then yes, the illusion is 'ruined'.

It's your call as to whether or not you incorporate a tool into your vision, but I would say Johnny Walker, that you've already started to wonder about this, and 'fill flash' is something you should investigate. It's something you have to learn how to do over time, like anything else, it involves taking risks, being a risk taker you will probably fall flat on your ass at first, over time, you will suceed, and then you'll have fun with it.

 

[Jonathan Brewer]

If you're using color film, and it's dusk, the light has a certain 'quality', sometimes a beautiful golden hue, if you're using 'fill flash', you'll need to match the quality of the keylight, which means considering filtration over the light source you're using as 'fill flash'.

If you're using a reflector to fill in the shadows as opposed to fill flash, you'd want to consider using the gold side of the reflector if it has one, to match the quality of your key. Using a harsh light source is a dead giveaway, leaving the sitter with two nose shadows. You can mess up by using too much, shooting outside using the sun as your key, it's in fact going to create shadows, pile too much illumination into the shadows areas created by sunlight, so that they no longer look like shadows, and it WILL look phony.

So you succeed in using 'fill flash' by being subtle, getting a 'feel' for it, good luck..............and of course, if you don't like it, don't use it.

 

[smileyguy]

I appreciate all the help up to this point, some very good advice. I would just like to reign in this thread a wee bit before we get too far off topic and on to lighting. I shoot with natural light, no flash--fill or otherwise--so lighting is not my concern in this particular instance.

Cheryl Jacobs, your advice is great and I appreciate you contribution. You're right, they don't want studio but they most certainly will want everybody in some of the shots. I have a suspicion they will want some with everybody, some with just mom and dad, some with three boys and some with individual boys. Pretty typical, me thinks!

I think my difficulty lies in wanting to catch candid moments or spontaneous images (which is what I generally do day to day with my own kids and dogs etc.) and having to use time wisely. This is not an instance where I can sit around and wait for something to happen in order to have a special shot. I really feel I have to go in with an idea of what I want to shoot and direct them in that way. Does this make sense?

AZLF, I like your idea of the family activity together. I think maybe the idea of them on a walk together, shots of them on the trail, bench, rock, riverside, etc. will work. It's just the directing that I find tricky I guess.

Your input/counselling is always helpful, keep it coming!

 

[Jonathan Brewer]

Smileyguy...........'I appreciate all the help up to this point, some very good advice. I would just like to reign in this thread a wee bit before we get too far off topic and on to lighting. I shoot with natural light, no flash--fill or otherwise--so lighting is not my concern in this particular instance.'......

..............How's it going?. Hopefully you'll take my comments as intended, which was to unload a few thoughts to Johnny Walker who as opposed to you is considering 'fill flash',..........I've certainly no wish to get off topic, but he's here, and expressed his considering going down a certain road, and I though it woundn't do any harm in giving him a few of my thoughts on the matter.

.....AND RETURNING to the initial topic , I started out my serious photography photographing in McArthur park in LA, that was with a Nikon FTN, with a Vivitar Ser.1 35mm-85mm varifocal lens, just me and the camera, no reflector, flash, no nothing.

Doing it this way for quite a long time, taught me something about biasing exposure one way or another to encompass a mood, or compromise between foreground/background/different parts of a scene/subject matter that's being hit by varying amounts of illumination.

If I can add to some of the suggestions you've already gotten, when I'm photographing a family for my portrait business, and they want the illusion of the spontaneous, I'll sometimes suggest going down to park to where the childrens playground is, and having the whole family go down the slides, or all together pushing a family member on a swing, or helping helping each other 'leap frog', or helping each other pull themselves by their arms along overhead bars.


You can come up with venues and events like these and get the family so wrapped up in having fun together, your biggest problem will not be getting them to have fun/smile/pose, but keeping up.

Lastly, with these kinds of shoots, it will be impossible to plan everything, nor should you want to, since you'll be coming up with ideas as you go along.

 

[smileyguy]

Thanks, Jonathan! I wasn't trying to slag anybody just practicing my "directing" on this thread.

Great suggestions BTW, I may use some of them but I suspect the boys may not be totally into it. They are 9-15 and perhaps too "cool" for that. They are swimmers and football players so I may do something with that or give them a chance to be "from the hood" as it were. Or bad boys, or show me some 'tude or something like that. Let them play in front of the camera for a bit.

Just some thoughts.

 

[Cheryl Jacobs]

Thought it might be helpful to post some examples.

The first shot came about as I explained above. "Everybody touch somebody" turned into "everyone tickle the baby" .... works for me. The second came about naturally after the first shot, and is more of an implied family portrait. I personally like to start with the semi-organized shots which allow the family the get comfortable with the process. It's hard to act natural on cue, so it generally works best for me to give some direction at first, and then let the family relationship take over when they're ready. These shots were taken while teaching a workshop, and I had no more than five minutes to make the family comfortable and natural-looking, with lots of onlookers.

- CJ