I was told today that we're expecting more snow over the next couple days - as if we need any more - so to try and cheer myself up, I was cruising through some photos when the weather was little warmer. I came across a bunch of shots that I had done for James Madison University as part of a stock-project during the fall semester, then I realized that they were run on the homepage - so there's one of the screenshots of the page from that time.

See, what's interesting about this is that these folks really do work with all of the equipment - from the test-tubes, to the super-refrigerator, even to the wanna-be-welding-mask - but not that day. They were really just humoring me for the sake of the photos. That seems to be a trend that will never go out of style.

So I decided to go post something 'people-less' this week.

I was photographing the university's symphony orchestra rehearsal earlier this week - got some good stuff involving people - but I also got some good stuff without people. I don't think there's a great deal of interest in 'people-less' shots for a school, unless they are working on ads of some sort (and even then, they try and throw photos of students), and I didn't want these to go to waste.

Wooden instruments can be incredibly difficult to get in color due to fact that the white balance plays such a key role. Sure, the camera makes an attempt, as does Lightroom, but the hue of the wood is very difficult get 'just right'. If this were a canned shoot, I would calibrate a custom white balance setting in-camera before the shoot really began to make sure the hue of the instrument was recorded correctly.

These have been converted to black and white (obviously) - but not just any black and white: high contrast. There are a number of different ways to pump up the contrast to increase the drama. I did it by using a levels adjustment. You can get even more specific by raising and lowering the luminance of the individual colors. All in all, I like it the way it is.

OK - so our rotating portrait session is scheduled for 3 PM in a nice location. I picked the location because it had a nice ambient feel to it, it was rarely crowded, and I could move around without interrupting the flow of traffic. Well, lots of traffic and no parking spots got me on-location at exactly 3 PM. Doh! I had about 6 minutes to set up my lighting from gear-bag to light stands, test my lighting, oh, and pick my location because the one I originally picked (you know, the nice one) was filled with tables and chairs. Doh! On the fly, I picked a spot in the corner, as if I had been told to do so by the teacher, and set up shop. As you can see, it turned out fine.

There are a million tricks in the book to get your subjects to smile naturally. I like to try and make them laugh - half of the time, admitting you can't make them laugh makes them laugh. The laugh isn't actually what you want to capture, it's the lead-up to the laugh. The smile a laugh creates is incredibly natural and flowing. The last thing you want is a smile that says, 'I'm smiling, see, see, look here, I'm smiling.'

I guess what I'm trying to say is that natural-looking smiles are good, canned smiles are bad. Duh. The underlying message is that your subject reflects your energy and attitude. If you are having a good time, they're having a good time. If you aren't saying anything, they have no idea how the shoot is going, and they are more likely to think it's not going well. Share your results as things move along, talk about what you like in the photos, ask them what they like or don't like, make adjustments - have fun. The more your laugh, the more they laugh.

Oh, and I know the composition of 2 out of 3 photos isn't 'correct.' That's because the ultimate use of these things is for a website placeholder - a placeholder that's super-wide and super-short. The photos will eventually be cropped and moved around - hence the extra room on the right.

I'm posting this shot for no other reason than they fact that it was fun to shoot. Quick setup, quick shoot, quick teardown. In fact, driving to and from the location took longer than shooting.

Two lights were used for this - one stuck in the left corner, the other off to the right side (not quite the corner). Both were snooted to project the light on the subject and nothing else, as well as to make the light a little harder. Now, shooting in a glass room has it's challenges, some of which can only be overcome by using a little photoshop. Yes, I said it. The positioning of my light to the right was key in lighting the back left side of my subject, which means that I can see the reflection of the light source in the glass on the left - that was until I 'shopped it out. I normally don't do that, but it was really bugging me so I went ahead and did the deed.

No lecture on CLS, nor histograms, not this time at least. I really don't have much of a reason to post this other than the fact that it's a fun photo from a fun shoot. Isn't that enough?

So here's a shot that goes against the post I wrote just before this. I confess, I used more than one light for this photo. But hear me out...

One light is 45º to the left of her, the other is 45º to the right - the shadows give it away. Both flashes are gelled to CTO (Color Temperature Orange). Camera is in Manual, 1/80 or 1/100 sec (I don't remember), f/5.6, 20mm - I think that's the recipe. It's the recipe for a single lit subject against a controllable background. By that I mean that I could easily dial down to 1/250 sec to make it darker, or dial up to around 1/40 sec to make it lighter - either one wouldn't impact my subject.

So does it really go against my last post - not really. You could have done something similar with one light, but because I couldn't diffuse the light (this was a public event, not a private shoot), I would have been casting very harsh shadows on the opposite side of the face.

Lastly - this stuff isn't complicated. Setting the lights up is simple, and fiddling with your settings isn't either - as long as you know what you're changing and how it impacts the image.

Update: A friend just asked me if I did anything to this photo in post. Yes - a small levels adjustment to increase contrast - but besides that - no. I didn't change the exposure of the foreground or the background, I didn't change the saturation or the color of the clouds in the sky or the turf, I didn't add any fill light, I didn't add brightness on the subject with the adjustment brush, I didn't crop or straighten it, heck, I didn't even add sharpening (which I should have, since it was shot in RAW). It's not that I'm gung-ho about being loyal to the almighty original image, it's just that I liked what I shot and went with it. OK, I'll say it - I'm lazy.

I've posted images in the past where I've mentioned use of a single-light setup. Well, I'm going doing it again and saying in plain english: one light is enough! For many cases, at least. Folks think that they need to lug studio lights around with them, giant reflectors, backdrops, large softboxes, etc. when the truth is, a light with a diffusion source, a nice environment, and a great subject go a long way. 

So here's the setup for both of these shots:
-SB-800 on a light stand
-Shoot-through umbrella

The end. 

Don't forget the camera.

Do a test shot of just your background to see where and how it exposes. If it's nice at 1/250 sec, go with that. You may even want to increase that to 1/500 sec, depending on how much drama you're looking for. So the shutter speed determines your background, not your foreground - that's your light's job. I advise playing around with your flash's power level on manual settings. With either Nikon or Canon's TTL adjustment levels, you don't really know what you're doing and you have far less control.

Oh, the whole point of my post in the first place was to point out that multiple lights aren't necessary to get great shots. Sure, multiple lights are necessary to do certain styles of lighting, or to illuminate your background while shooting your subject - but don't try and convince your significant other that you need another flash to get better shots.