Aug 18, 2011 | Aviation, B&W Photography
“When do you shoot B&W?” It’s a continual question I receive most often after I blog a B&W image. I truly wish there was a little recipe I could post that one could follow and it would create success for photographers. But I’ve not run into such which is why I keep posting B&W images with the hope that if I babble on about how I shot it, something might click for you to help you with this incredibly dramatic medium. It also has me looking at those photographs of mine that are B&W asking myself, “What did I see that told me to go B&W?” And in this case, a resounding answer doesn’t come flying back. There is something about the light, but what exactly it is I can’t put my finger on. This photo is a good example of what I’m referring to.
At Oshkosh in the Warbird Theater are featured aircraft each day. They aren’t exactly simple clean shots, there is all sorts of “stuff” around making getting a clean background a challenge. Now I’m fascinated by the Focke-Wulf 190 because it’s very simplistic looks are misleading to its lethal reputation. So when I saw this parked in the circle I walked around and around and around it just staring at it. Of course I had my camera in my hand but making clicks was a bit of a challenge. When I was at this angle you see here, I liked the drama of the angle and was happy to see a clean background, but the clouds weren’t enough. The biggest obstacle though for me was the backlit fuselage. The paint pattern is lost in the backlit, that is until you go B&W. I would love to tell you that this thought process went streaming through my consciousness but that’s not the case. Looking at the elements I placed in the viewfinder, I think that’s what came together when I went click. All I know is that when I made this capture, I knew it was a B&W photo.
The finishing is for the most part pretty straight forward. The first thing I did was finish my normal way in ACR. Then in Photoshop, the first thing I did was to remove some “stuff” over the left wing. Then I used my favorite B&W tool, Silver Efex Pro (did you know you can get a discount buying it clicking on the button at the bottom of the page?). I did my usual move with Structure and then used 5 control points in the sky to darken it. Then in Photoshop I darkened the tarmac on the right. Lastly, I using Stamp Tool > Luminosity to remove some halo around the tip of the prop. And all of that took less then two minutes to do. And I think that is kinda the key to knowing if the image you thought would make a good B&W is really a good B&W. Of course you need a clean black and white in a B&W image, but if you have to spend a lot of time getting there, then perhaps the image doesn’t make a great B&W image. These are just some random thoughts that I hope click with some helping them getting involved in this very romantic pursuit.
Photo captured by D3x, 14-24AFS on Lexar UDMA digital film
Aug 15, 2011 | Aviation
I am torn but that question a lot. Clicking for the sake of clicking just doesn’t make sense (practice not included) when I head out with a camera. I love telling stories with my favorite being with photography. But you could say it’s like writers block, staring at a white piece of paper with no words coming to fill them. I gotta click though. So there are times I click for the sake of clicking just to start putting those words on the blank piece of paper knowing they will be erased later. I just wanna get the juices flowing, the mind thinking and the heart connecting.
So after photographing the C-41 I saw this Cessna T-50 “Bambo Bomber” lookin really nice in the light. So I made the first click and while OK, the background is killing me. How to clean it up? Moving closer and going lower are my only options, much like that on the C-41. But even moving in a few steps, zooming with my feet, I made the next click but it still doesn’t really work. I wasn’t satisfied. By getting closer I had to go wider and in doing so, the tail becomes too large in the foreground giving it too much weight. To deal with that, gotta move back and go with a longer focal length.
Once I moved back, I did the “dance,” including those elements I want while excluding those I don’t. At the same time I worked the angle to get the glow in the window. Even after all of this, while I like the photograph it doesn’t rock my world. The light is gorgeous but there is still no story. Yeah, light can be a story but pushing one’s craft means not being satisfied with just great light all the time.
The photography side to me is real simple. The C-41 and T-50 are all 5 image, hand held HDR. Photomatix Pro is used with it’s defaults (excpet Black slider set to 1) to combine the five images. Then I do into PS and add a little Nik, OnOne and finish them with using a Saturation Curve to remove the “blue” HDR tint from elements on the aircraft. I have no clue if these rambles help you at all, but these were the thoughts and challenges I worked through one evening trying to tell stories.
Photos captured by D3x, 14-24AFS on Lexar UDMA digital film
Aug 15, 2011 | Aviation
What can I say, I like those asses! That sounds bad, let me rephrase that. One angle I like with aircraft is from the tail looking to the nose. When I first started to work this angle I had a heck of a time getting an image I like. Then I realized my issue with success from this angle was always the background. I needs to finish not only the image but the story. Now of course, what’s the story?
That is always the challenge in every click I think, the story. What story can I tell about a parked plane? This is a C-47 that saw service in WWII. It dropped paratroopers in Europe and here it is parked. It’s just surviving all this time is a story in itself but without these words, you wouldn’t know that. It has its D-Day strips but without knowledge of WWII and aircraft, you wouldn’t know that without words either. Telling the story in a single click is a bloody challenge!
My fall back in these situations when the story just doesn’t leap out is sky and light. When there is an interesting sky and some great light, I can still create the clicks with the only possible message of a craft made to be in the air. Now sexy light is sexy light and it will make anything look good. But completing the click with a story makes the photograph so much more powerful.
Photos captured by D3x, 14-24AFS on Lexar UDMA digital film
Aug 8, 2011 | Aviation
While photography is all about light, story telling with light in most cases is all about direction. The direction the light hits the subject determines what will and won’t be featured in your story. Featured is not the same thing as lime light nor is the opposite, shadows, mean it is hidden. It’s such an amazing fine line between it all, it is no surprise so many photographers are challenged by making the most of this essential ingredient to our photography. It doesn’t matter the subject, mineral, vegetable, human, animal, how the light plays off it and how you record it is how we as visual communicators, tell our story about the subject. I was wondering around the static aircraft at Oshkosh and found an opportunity to visually show what I’m talking about.
Front lighting is probably our most common and popular lighting source. Front light source often creates an even lighting pattern on our subject. In this case, the top image, the light on both sides of the fuselage is the same. Because the curve of the fuselage is pointing up, the top edge of the fuselage is not seeing the light giving it that dark stripe. That darkness giving way to lightness going down the fuselage is what tells the eye the fuselage has a shape to it. With front lighting, it is very easy to evenly light the entire surface and when we do that, we eliminate shadow and therefore any suggestion of shape.
Now when it comes to exposure, front lighting is the simplest but for most is the most complicated. Why is this? It’s the shadow. I think it’s simple because the matter of shadow is easy to handle. Be it harsh or soft, in my mind, putting it in its place with exposure is a simple matter. For many though this is not the case. Most worry about that shadow, normally it’s too hard and must be dealt with. I would encourage you to embrace shadow rather then fear it. Make the shadows work for you rather then against you. How do you do that? Think of it as visual element, think of it as an asset, think of it as a mystery to the viewer, think of it as anything other then a problem.
Next is side lighting and it’s the light pattern of definition and mystery. How can one lighting pattern do both? Look at this photo of a T-28, what does the side lighting tell you about the fuselage? One thing you can see are the ripples of time, age and to many, experience. Side lighting is a great light for talking about texture. Why is this? It’s shadows again, the play of shadow and highlight is what tells the eye there is a texture. That’s the definition. At the same time the shadow hides certain details like the engine. There is a slight hint to the massive power that pulls this great classic through the air. Other details are hidden as well by shadows, they are hinted to and our imagination fills it in but we don’t directly say what’s there. That’s how side lighting works its magic for us.
Side lighting is great when it comes to exposure because it is so forgivable. Why is that? You can get the exposure “wrong” and to most, it still looks right. But when it comes to telling the story, the right exposure is like adding the right punctuation to a sentence. The more underexposure you add, the deeper the mystery and when played correctly, the greater amount to tap the imagination. In the photo at top, there is my customary -.07 but in this middle photograph, I’ve dialed in -1.7, a full extra stop. Why? Look at the photo, I think that answers the question.
Back lighting, where the light source is streaming right down the lens barrel. I think of this as the sunset light pattern because that’s when most folks use it. At sunset and then the meter naturally underexposes pumping up the colors. Ooooooh! If there is one type of photograph most photographers fall short on are sunrises and sunsets. They get sucked into the color from the process and then forget to tell the story. This is partly because the subject being backlit is all black so it gets ignored and that’s where the story telling ends. Most don’t use shape effectively because no one talks about it, but is that silhouetted subject has a recognizable shape then you start to tell a story. If we go beyond that and give the subject some light value other then black, we increase the story telling as well as exposure complications.
If you just shooting the back lighting then exposure is a no-brainer! The meter will underexpose and you’re good to go. But what if you wanna tell a story, spin a tale and add some intrigue? This is when many throw up their hands and give up but don’t! You have two very simple options, flash fill or HDR. If you think through the problem you will come up with the answer and execute it. If you have a smallish subject you wanna provide more information about, flash fill is a natural. But don’t be satisfied with throwing a flash in the hot shoe and going click. Get the camera out of the hot shoe and off in a direction that emphasizes the back lighting, not just fill in shadow! What does that mean? Lighting the entire subject is not the goal, just giving enough information to tell the story is. Let the imagination to its job, just feed it enough to do it. And think about not only the quantity of light, but quality. If you’re shooting at sunrise/sunset, what’s the quality of that light? It’s warm so using straight flash might not be the answer, you might wanna gel it.
And then there is HDR. The backlit shot of the P-51 is a HDR. You should know that when you look and see the sunset and information in the fuselage. The key here is doing what is called Realistic HDR and knowing light. Look at the fuselage, is it all lit evenly or is there still shadow, mystery? I’m not talking colors here, I’m talking the basics of photography and that is light. If you know the direction of light, know your subject and how to combine those two to tell you story, your photography will explode! If you know this then your exposure problems will disappear. If you know this then your finishing is post will be a snap. Look at that magical ingredient light and passionately grab it and your photography will grow in the direction of light!
Aug 3, 2011 | Aviation
One of the challenges of B&W is having faith that your original gut feeling that the photo would makes a good B&W once you’re back in the digital darkroom. The process for me starts at the camera. This is a 5 image HDR, using it to grab all the nuances of the shading needed to make the B&W work. Once I compiled the HDR, I take that Tif into ACR to do some more subtle finishing. That includes using the Split Grad in ACR. What seems heavy heavy handed in ACR, the split grad once taken into Silver Efex Pro works perfectly with the shade of gray of the foreground and the side of the FJ-4. Now how did I know all of that when I made the click. I knew that because I failed many times before and learned from those failures to find success. The one problem with me and failure is that I do it so much, I have to remember the success so I can repeat it again. To me, this is another simple click since the total time invested in the image from click of the camera to click to save was just three minutes.
Photo captured by D3x, 24-120VR on Lexar UDMA digital film
Aug 3, 2011 | Aviation
A T-28 at sunrise. I liked the drama of the moment, not sure on finishing but its a start.
