I am pretty new to shooting on film, and I love these portraits by photographer Cameron Hammond. I often shoot at the beach and I would like to attempt a similar lighting for an upcoming shoot. I am wondering if anyone has any advice on how to achieve a similar effect on film? What film would you recommend? Any advice on aperture, shutter speed, or anything else? When I shoot backlit, it tends to look very dark/muddy and not this clean look. Do you have any advice or specific films/camera settings that might achieve the look? Thank you!
-
1\$\begingroup\$ Hi Max. Can you edit your question to be more clear about what "this look" you're referring to, and also make the title more specific than "this look"? Please see the Photography Meta question, What's the best way to ask a "How do I achieve this effect" question?, for ideas about improving your question. Thanks! =) \$\endgroup\$– scottbb ♦Commented Oct 17 at 4:54
-
2\$\begingroup\$ Possibly a reflector to add some light on the shadow side. \$\endgroup\$– xenoidCommented Oct 17 at 10:53
-
\$\begingroup\$ The full set of photos is available here: https://cameronhammond.com/ribs-dust-x-luma. Note that these photos are NSFW. \$\endgroup\$– osullicCommented Oct 20 at 14:53
2 Answers
It's "clean" because it is properly lit. In addition to the obvious light source off camera behind the model (i.e. the Sun), there is a dimmer, relatively speaking when compared to the Sun, additional light source on the camera side of the model. It's either a large reflector bouncing light from the Sun onto the model, it's flash(es) gelled to match the ambient light, or it's a combination of both. Without this additional light you'd have little more than a silhouette. You can try to push the dark shadows in development/printing/digitization (scanning), but you'll never get more than a muddy mess, if even that.
What film you use, what settings you use, etc. are not nearly as important as what LIGHT you use to illuminate your subject.
-
1\$\begingroup\$ I don't think that there has to be a fill. I've gotten effects like this late in the day either exposing in between the sunlight and shadows, or just for the shadows, on Portra. On a beach, the sand can provide extraordinarily good fill, and I think that's what is going on here. \$\endgroup\$ Commented Oct 18 at 17:27
-
\$\begingroup\$ The model's hair is in fact not much more than 'a muddy mess'. That might have been done on purpose in post-processing to simulate 'film look' (which often means to replicate the technical deficiencies of film), but if the picture is indeed shot on film, it is not exposed with adequate fronal light to show any texture in the shadows. \$\endgroup\$– jarnbjoCommented Oct 18 at 17:38
-
\$\begingroup\$ @spunky_h0rn Any reflection, regardless of the source, is providing a fill. It seems to me to be more than what flat sand would provide. Perhaps there are dunes on this beach. Maybe it's the landscape. Maybe it's an artificial device supplied by the photographer or assistants. \$\endgroup\$ Commented Oct 20 at 8:22
-
\$\begingroup\$ @jarnbjo There's a lot more of the model than just her hair showing. \$\endgroup\$ Commented Oct 20 at 8:24
-
\$\begingroup\$ @spunky_h0rn The more I look at this, the more I think the source of the reflection was gold or bronze in color, such as a gold reflector. The water is not as warm as the model. \$\endgroup\$ Commented Oct 20 at 8:27
Just a few notes...
I think it's quite obvious from the golden aura to the photo that it was shot with the sun low in the sky – this makes the light less intense.
You need to meter accurately – I use a Gossen incident meter. Some info in this question with regard to where to position the meter.
In film photography, a "clean" image often comes from a bigger negative – I'm not familiar with the photographer, but if they're even shooting film (which I don't see as obvious), it could well be medium format.
As for film recommendations, the big two in colour film photography used to be Kodak and Fujifilm, but realistically nowadays, it's just Kodak. Personally I don't like Ektar for skintones – everything turns out too red – so I'd be shooting Portra in this case, and probably Portra 400 considering the light levels, though with a fast lens, 160 might work. Beware though that wide-open, lenses are not the sharpest, and it's also much harder to nail focus. Kodak Gold could work too.
If I were you, I wouldn't rely solely on a film camera. Shoot two cameras – film and digital – if you have both. Consider how you're going to carry the cameras, and don't put cameras down on the sand! Beware spray from waves too.
Don't be fixated on trying to emulate another photographer's work. What's much more important is working with your own model – getting them to feel comfortable, moving, posing, trying things (some will work, some won't). Just experiment and try to create something yourself.
Also, the reflector (as suggested in a comment) is a good idea – but for that, you really need an assistant. Don't shoot everything backlit – move around.
-
\$\begingroup\$ and maybe a filter is also needed to warm up everything a little bit \$\endgroup\$– FarOCommented Oct 18 at 7:33
-
\$\begingroup\$ @osillic Who's to say the photo did not involve an "assistant", either an official one or someone nearby who was called into service? \$\endgroup\$ Commented Oct 20 at 8:25
-
-
\$\begingroup\$ @MichaelC I'm not suggesting that no assistant was used for the sample photo - I'm not sure why you've taken that assumption from what I wrote. I'm just pointing out (to the OP, for their shoot) that if there's a desire to use a reflector, then it could be useful to have an assistant. \$\endgroup\$– osullicCommented Oct 20 at 14:46
-
\$\begingroup\$ @osullic Your answer seems to discount the suggestion of a reflector. "... but for that, you really need an assistant." As if the possibility of an assistant is an extremely remote one. I can tell you for sure, if I'm shooting a female model there's always at least one other person besides me and the model at the shoot, especially when what I would term "semi nudity" is involved. \$\endgroup\$ Commented Oct 24 at 19:50