Not Your Everyday Banana

by Bart Arondson

submit your photo


Hall of Fame
View past winners from this year

Please participate in Meta
and help us grow.

Tag Info

New answers tagged

1

Putting the lightmeter under the chin makes sense to me because: a) It is incident light what's being measured, and the little sphere is to be located as close as posible to the surface being iluminated (i.e. the face's skin). Putting the lightmeter at the same distance from the light source is crucial as light intensity varies with distance to the source. ...


4

Lightmeters are superior to in camera metering because they are able to measure the incident light, not just the light reflected off the subject. Reflected light metering is less accurate as the camera/meter has no way of telling the difference between a white cat that is massively underexposed and a black cat that is correctly exposed. With incident ...


3

You're mixing up some terminology here, so starting with vocabulary, a "wide angle lens" is one that can go wide and give a you a very large field of view--a lens that takes in the scene. What "25mm wide angle" means is that when you're zoomed all the way out, the field of view you have is equivalent to what a 25mm lens would see on a 35mm film camera. ...


0

A cheap solution is to use a legacy wide aperture lens with its X-mount adapter. You loose Autofocus but you keep manual focusing helpers : focus peaking etc. See here for an example Minolta Rokkor MD 50mm f/1.2 review


3

In digital photography, the most issues come from the dark portions of the image where sensor noise has the most impact on the quality of the result. Electronic sensors accumulate light, but while they are collecting light, they also collect random noise. To avoid this noise being an issue, a technique known as ETTR or exposure to the right is even used ...


2

As in many cases the key to reverse engineering the light lies in the catchlights (reflections of the original lighting in the subject's eyes): Here we can see that a single hard (no diffuser) lightsource was placed above and to the right of the subject (as the camera sees it). There were no other lightsources on the subject, but in many of the images a ...


2

My understanding of subtractive lighting is such that you take control of natural ambient lighting by reducing or reflecting it. This work looks more like it was taken indoors, and more in line with low-key photography, essentially photography in which shadows are the predominant part of the photo. The basic setup is a very dark room, one strong light, ...


1

Hard to see what you're asking. A given focal length and composition will always have the same character due to laws of optics. You're always going to see that effect, it has nothing to do with the subject. If you're asking whether some people look good that way, then yes of course they do — but that's your responsibility as the artist to make that happen. ...


2

There's a bit of post production going on in that image that is probably clouding things somewhat. If you look at the area at the top of the image it's clearly been blown out (overexposed) and then brought back from pure white to a dirty grey pink colour. This says to me two things - the contrast of the image has been lowered so that the blacks and whites ...


5

You need to shoot at either sunrise or set (sunset is generally warmer in tone), when the sun is very low in the sky. Shoot with the sun behind the model (taking care not to look directly at it if possible). As you are shooting into the sun, you need some light source to light the front of your model: this could either be a diffused flash or a reflector. As ...


10

Editing out the eyes removes a metric tonne of information that might have been helpful in answering your question — please don't do that if you're asking about studio lighting problems — but there is still something to be seen in the photos you have posted. Apart from the makeup and post-processing that have already been mentioned in the comments, it's ...


4

No, there are no Fuji X native prime lenses, AFAIK, under $500, other than the 27/2.8. Zeiss Touits aren't exactly cheap, and the Samyang/Rokinon X lenses aren't exactly small and compact, as they're mostly dSLR lens designs with an X mount. And the one that isn't is a fisheye. Adapting is also probably not a good idea. The four-thirds format is smaller ...



Top 50 recent answers are included