Friday, June 06, 2014

Packing for two, sequential, inter-related shoots. One still photography and the other video. Double the pain?


I had the highest hopes for what some on the web are calling hybrid imaging. The idea is that we'd find one camera that would do really great photos and really great video (done!) and then we'd find one type of lighting that would work for both types of imaging. We would happily switch between stills and video without ever having to change our lighting and everything would be quick, convenient and merry. I bought into it. But it's total bullshit----at least for now.

Let me backtrack... I bought into the concept because, for many of the jobs I do the new way can really work. If I go out to shoot an executive portrait and the marketing department also needs an interview I can set up LED or fluorescent lights, grab a Panasonic GH4 (or even a Sony RX 10) and get good stills and video content at the switch of the mode dial and with the attachment of a good microphone. Where things start to break down is when we move beyond the easy stuff and introduce subject motion and the need to freeze action in still images. All of a sudden we're back into the realm of flash.

I'm doing a job today that would be perfect for continuous lighting if it weren't for the fact that we'll need to create a feel of rock concert kinetics with our actor. We're doing marketing images for Zach Theatre's rendition of Tommy and we're going to try and get wild stage movements and swinging, Roger Daltry-esque microphone moves frozen on a white background and then we need to get the same kind of moves again for video, on a green screen background. Ouch.

The fast movements of the actor require the action stopping short exposure times of flash. He'll also be wearing a jacket with fringe all along the sleeves and the fringe will create even more movement as the actor rocks across the white background. I'm taking four Elinchrom flashes to deal with this part of the shoot. We'll set up two units to light the background, one unit for a main light and the fourth for fill or accent. We've done this a thousand times before and I have no fears that we'll be able to get exactly what we want for the stills. With flash.

But flash is, of course, useless for video. We're shooting the actor against a green background so the editor can composite some really cool animation into the background. And that means that the screen has to be evenly lit and as far from the talent as focal length and studio configurations will allow. We don't want the green from the background to wrap around onto our actor's gold,  highly REFLECTIVE, jacket.

I'd like to through a lot of light onto this shot so we can use 60 fps to make the video look sharper. And we need to be careful to match front and background exposures so we don't have issues in post production. I'll be using six, big fluorescent fixtures with modifiers, where necessary. Two directly on the background, two on the talent and one as a backlight. The backlight fixture will have a layer of magenta gel on it to combat any incursion of the dreaded green wrap. (The Mag. filtered light will serve to cancel out the green).

To do these shoots, one after the other, requires: A set of background stands. A white background. A green background. Clamps to tighten up the backgrounds and kill wrinkles. Eight or nine light stands (the continuous lights require more stands for the modifiers we put in front of them). Diffusion frames for modifiers. Four Elinchrom strobes with umbrellas and a soft box. Six (heavy) fluorescent lights. Filter gels. Four 25 foot extension cords. One still photo tripod with ball head. One video tripod with fluid head. One monster Gitzo tripod as a solid base for our video slider. One heavy duty cart to transport everything with.

Did I forget anything? How about cameras? I'm taking the GH3's and GH4 and  small sample of lenses. And, with green screen, always a light meter. Oh heck, always a light meter anyway.

The schedule is tense. We leave the studio at 12:30 and start unloading and setting up at the theatre at 1 pm. The still shoot is first. We fine-tune and get our still shots from 2 until three. At three on the dot we pull down the white background and exchange it for the green one. We pull all the flash units and replace them in new configurations with the fluorescent lights. The actor's make-up and costume gets refreshed while the director and I fine tune the video imaging and go over settings.

We're using the clean HDMI out of the camera into a digital recorder that writes 10 bit Pro-Res 4:2:2 because the editor is old school and got burned on much older video cameras many years ago. He wants to start with the cleanest, sharpest green screen files he possible can. I am more optimistic and I'm dying to try shooting in 4K and then importing in FCPX as 1080p (in Pro Res 4:2:2) but we're working as a team and the editing is his area of expertise so I bow to his experience.

We need to be lit, metered, color correct and ready to go by 3:30 pm. That's a really tight turn around. But I think we'll manage. We have both Ben (super assistant) and my new intern in tow. Ben will take charge in wrapping up the gear we used for the stills. We start shooting the video in earnest at 3:30 because we have a hard stop at 5 pm when we have to start packing and hauling stuff out. The theater needs the space back by 5:30 pm.

If we shoot to the digital recorder in the video sequence then my part of the video production ends them. My job is to get the director and editor the best technical content I can so they can concentrate on directing and editing.

Ben and I should be back at the studio by 6 pm and we'll unload before we head to the house. Saturday I'll come back to the studio after swim practice and unpack every thing and put each tool in its place. Trying to stay organized so we don't waste time getting ready for next week's projects.

It would be a lot easier to do this all with one set of lights but sometimes you just have to bite down and do things in the optimum method. For this shoot it's all about lights and making stuff sharp. For the video it's all about nailing the green screen. And as far as I can tell there's no way to hybridize the lighting tools. Sorry Hybrid Imaging. 


Wednesday, June 04, 2014

Is a lens alone enough reason to get into a system? Maybe.

The Samsung 85mm 1.4 lens.
©2014 Kirk Tuck
www.visual sciencelab.blogspot.com

Downtown communications...
©2014 Kirk Tuck
www.visual sciencelab.blogspot.com

I recently discovered that the lens I've had in my equipment drawer for a couple months now may be the most fun 85mm 1.4 lens I've had the pleasure to own. It's solid and externally boring but it makes images that I find exactly in line with what I want. Longer than normal (120+ equiv.) Incredibly detailed and sharp in the middle, wide open. But is that enough to buy into a system?

When I was growing up in photography there were tons of photographers whose daily bread was made shooting Nikons and Canons. But a large number of them also had an additional camera around their necks. It was a Leica M3 or M2 or maybe an M4 and they generally had one lens for it. The guys who liked portraits had a 50mm Summicron and the people who were more inclined to shoot traditional photojournalism generally opted for a 35mm Summicron. No big system investment. A lot of the cameras were bought used. But the little outlier camera and lens was generally thought to be the shooter's "personal camera" or "art camera." The mechanism that aligned with his core vision. 

Now I am certainly not comparing the consumer-aimed Samsung NX30 camera to a Leica M3 but I must admit that even in my fervor to make the Panasonic GH4 and its family my primary shooting system I am happy to have the option of sticking a very well made 85mm 1.4 on the front of a camera with a slightly larger (and very detailed) sensor for shooting portraits. The combo of the NX30 and the 85mm has yielded some nice portraits for me and as soon as one of my clients makes their selections and launches some of the new people images on their websites I'll share them with you. 

While it is mentally convenient to "lock into" a system it's also nice to have options. The Samsung 85mm 1.4 is an option I like. Now I am waiting to see if the rumors are true. Will they introduce a professional caliber NX-1 at Photokina? Will it feature 4K video? Will it be affordable? 

In the meantime I'm heading back into the giant time vacuum that is known as Final Cut Pro to finish up a long and hesitant edit on a project. Hesitant because when given a huge range of choices it's alway harder to start.....

Camera Raw has come to the Panasonic GH4. In the form of a "Release Candidate." Whatever the hell that means.

Lauren Lane in "Vanya" at Zach Theatre. 
©2014 Kirk Tuck
www.visual sciencelab.blogspot.com
Shot in Jpeg with the GH4

No one has ever explained the term, "Release Candidate" to me but I'm guessing it means, 'we tried a bunch of different stuff and this is the one we think we're going to finally release but we are looking for adventurous stiffs to break it for us, just in case we screwed up mightily...'  Okay, I'm game. I'll download the "release candidate" of the new Adobe Raw 8.5 so I can use the Panasonic GH4 in raw file mode. I am a little nervous about the whole thing because Adobe put a little asterisk by the GH4 name on the list and noted that it was "preliminary" support. Again, as this was unexplained I'll guess that they are still trying to improve whatever it is they do to make the conversions pretty. 

Since all raw files seem to be modified Tiff files I'm a bit perplexed by the need for most camera makers to customize their raw code to the point that it becomes somewhat proprietary and requires the seasonal re-writing of the very software we want to use most in our jobs. If I remember correctly both Leica and Pentax give shooters the option of saving files in the ".dng" format which makes the files quite a bit more "universal" and pretty much ensures that even if the camera maker succumbs to the vagaries of the current market and goes away entirely there will always be a way to utilize raw files already shot. 

I guess every maker is looking for the tweak. According to Thom Hogan, Sony tweaks their raw files in the A7 series by making them lossy and encoding them as 11 bit files instead of 12 or 14 bit files like Canon and Nikon. Could be that Sony knows something the other two don't but it could also be that they are looking for some fast compression and more images on a card to serve to photographers who don't look under the hood much. Other makers seem to bake in some noise reduction that can't be turned off while some (medium format) even offer 16 bit files. 

At any rate I am happy to finally have a convenient way to work with the GH4 raw files. I'm heading out today to shoot some test shots so I can load a few and see if I can do a better job with sharpening and noise reduction than the camera does, on the fly with Jpegs. The update corrects a glitch for older Nikon compressed raw files and it provides support and lens profiles as detailed below. So....if you've got a GH4, an Oly M10 or one of the other beauties on the list you might consider heading over to Adobe:  http://labs.adobe.com/downloads/cameraraw8-5-cc.html

New Camera Support
  • Canon PowerShot G1 X Mark II
  • Fuji FinePix S1
  • Nikon 1 J4
  • Nikon 1 V3
  • Olympus OM-D E-M10
  • Panasonic LUMIX DMC-GH4 (*)
(*) denotes preliminary support
New Lens Profile Support
Lens Name
Lens Mount
Sigma 50mm F1.4 DG HSM A014
Canon
Sigma 18-200mm F3.5-6.3 DC MACRO OS HSM C014
Canon
Tamron 16-300mm F3.5-6.3 DiII VC PZD MACRO B016E
Canon
Fujifilm Tele Conversion Lens TCL-X100
Fuji
Nikon 1 NIKKOR VR 10-30mm f3.5-5.6 PD-ZOOM
Nikon
Nikon AF-S DX NIKKOR 18-300mm f/3.5-6.3G ED VR
Nikon
Sigma 50mm F1.4 DG HSM A014
Nikon
Sigma 18-200mm F3.5-6.3 DC MACRO OS HSM C014
Nikon
Tamron 16-300mm F3.5-6.3 DiII VC PZD MACRO B016N
Nikon
Tamron SP 150-600mm F5-6.3 Di VC USD A011N
Nikon
Sigma 30mm F1.4 DC HSM A013
Pentax
Sigma 50mm F1.4 DG HSM A014
Sigma
Sigma 18-200mm F3.5-6.3 DC MACRO OS HSM C014
Sigma
Sigma 30mm F1.4 DC HSM A013
Sony Alpha

Three cameras. Three photographs of medical practices. Three different looks.

Nurse with child in Premature Infant Unit.
©2014 Kirk Tuck
www.visual sciencelab.blogspot.com

I actually love making photographs of healthcare subjects. There's drama, compassion and it's all about the human condition. When I was younger I would faint at the sight of blood. As I've gotten older and had one health scare I've become less sensitive to things like injections and blood tests and more in tune with the idea of how vulnerable we all are when we present ourselves to our health care providers. I like that my images can help to demystify or humanize the experiences. That we can tell somewhat universal stories so that people can understand what they are getting into. 

These three images are some of my favorites from various shoots I've done in hospitals in Austin and San Antonio, Texas. I love looking at work that spans time and these span a decade. They were also done with three different cameras and three different lenses. It's interesting to see how the vision changes along with the equipment. 

The top image of the nurse and child was done most recently. We did it in 2012. I was using the Sony a99 at that point along with the 85mm 1.4.  With the progress in sensors I was able to shoot without having to supplement the lighting in the space. That made my job a bit easier and it was required on the preemie ward. Getting the right image required me to position the people in the right light since just about every place is top lit. It also required finding a background that wouldn't fight tooth and nail with my main subjects. The image was shot at f4 since that's both a sweet spot, performance wise, for the lens and also provided enough depth of field to cover what I wanted. With the good high ISO performance of the camera I was able to shoot at a high enough shutter speed to hand hold the camera. It's pretty straightforward documentation. 

Medical Technician. Austin Heart Hosptial
©2014 Kirk Tuck
www.visual sciencelab.blogspot.com

The image just above was done back in 2003 on a long, two day shoot for the Austin Heart Hospital. Our job was to fill a bucket list worth of images for an ad agency out of new Mexico. Back then we used two cameras primarily; the Kodak DCS 760 (larger APS-H sensor, 6 megapixels) and the Nikon D2H. I loved the low ISO image quality of the DCS 760 (think ISO 80...) and I used it wherever possible with flash or in daylight. But my "low light" camera was the D2H which allowed me to shoot images all the way up to a stunning ISO 800 with "containable" noise. This image was shoot quickly and hand held. The lens, if memory serves, was the really good, Nikon 28-70mm f2.8 (which I like much better than the 24-70mm that followed it). 

This woman was working with blood samples and needles and I was careful not to look down at her gloved hands...  I shot quickly. Probably no more than five frames. I chimped and then moved on. 
When I came across the image in post I realized that I had underexposed by at least a stop and back then cameras were much less forgiving about that. But the client liked the image and wanted to use it so I correctly the exposure and sent it along. While it has some pattern noise that show up on the solid areas the client didn't care. He said, "This looks like journalism. It looks real and not set up." Okay. I can go with that. I just love the raw feel of the image. 

Austin Radiology Associates Doctor in reading room.
©2014 Kirk Tuck
www.visual sciencelab.blogspot.com

The final shot is one I've always liked. I used it in one of my books and I've written about it before. It's lit almost entirely by flat screens in the small reading room. There is one flash directly behind the panels you can see in the background. There is a second light from the far corner of the room to provide some hair light and separation but all the light on the doctor's face is from the screen in front of her and a small reflector just to the right of the camera. 

The camera was one of my quirky favorites, the Fujifilm S5. I loved the way that camera handled flesh tones! It was magnificent. And I looked the tongue in cheek interpolation to 12 megapixels. It even said "12 megapixels" on the body so clients at the time were quite happy. But the real eccentric part of the image was the lens. I'd picked up a very old copy of the Sigma 24-70mm f2.8 for a couple hundred dollars. The focusing was sloppy and sometimes the zoom ring became withdrawn and recalcitrant but just look at the out of focus effect in the background and the sharp-but-not-too-sharp imaging of the main subject. 

The image was shot in 2007 just as I started writing my first book. The one about using battery powered flashes. The marketing director for this client had a lot of respect for the doctor's time. We usually needed to get in, set up a shot, light it, and shoot it in about 30 minutes. Less time wasted was better. The time constraints worked well with our "new" lighting techniques. Back then we called the little flashes on the nano stands "light on a stick." Now it's pretty much ubiquitous. Not so back in the days of 80 ISO.....

As I said, I love shooting medical marketing images. It's all about the people and their interactions with each other and with ever changing technology. And that makes everything more fun.

Three different cameras. Three different lenses. Two approaches to lighting. 

Tuesday, June 03, 2014

Food shooting at Asti with an exhilarating lens. Yummy sharp.

Ravioli. Asti. ©2014 Kirk Tuck

First of all I'd like to thank everyone for the comments and e-mails congratulating my family on Ben's graduation. It was heartwarming to read all the good wishes for us. He's looking forward to one last, action packed Summer in Austin and then off for new adventures. 

And speaking of new adventures I wanted to give you a quick look at some food images that we did on the fly, during our video shoot, at Asti Trattoria here in Austin, Texas. Chef and owner, Emmett Fox does a fabulous job turning out wonderful food and we've got a handful of SD cards with many beautiful, moving shots of the beautifully plated food. Close up motion pictures of food is one area where I don't believe a slider can be over used....

But what I really wanted to show off was the 35-100mm f2.8 X lens for the Panasonic G cameras. When I made my switch over from the full frame Sony cameras I had a few concerns that I might not be able to get the same, luscious, shallow depth of field and biting sharpness that I used to take for granted with the 70-200mm 2.8 lens. I was wrong. If anything I think the lens for the Panasonic cameras is a much better optic, overall, than the aging Sony lens. It is discernibly sharper, wide open and the colors are wonderful. Especially welcome when you consider the differences in camera sensors. 

These images were all shot at either f2.8 or at f3.5. They started life as large Jpeg files and I've done very little post processing to them. If I were highly proficient at PhotoShop I'm sure I could do lots of little magic steps to make every image look just a little better but I am happy with the almost untouched files. What did I add? A little contrast and a tiny bit of shadow lifting. That's it.

I feel like I hit the jackpot with the 12-35mm and the 35-100mm lenses. They cover a great range, have the same look and feel, operate in the same way and even offer good, solid image stabilization. 
With the recent addition of the 7-14mm I am a bit disappointed because there are so few new toys to lust after. I guess when people bitch about a camera system having a limited range of lenses they aren't complaining because there is some sort of image they are unable to shoot, rather they are making a statement about how disappointing it is not to have more things to buy. 

While the GH4 is not a perfect camera (a bit too much noise as we move up the ISO ladder) and I'm sure I'll be first in line for the GH5, I am delighted with everything that's come out of the lenses. 

Finally, there is an old myth that says all food that gets photographed is doused with motor oil, burned with torches and covered with glycerin and food coloring. Happily that is never the case in my work on in casa de Asti. When Chris and I finished photographing this food we munched on it with happy abandon before moving on to our next shots. It was delicious. But we could see that through the lens.....

I should call images like this: Stuff we shoot between sliding the cameras.

Seafood and Risotto. Asti. ©Kirk Tuck

Ravioli, v2. Asti. ©Kirk Tuck

Seafood and Risotto v2. Asti. ©Kirk Tuck

Carpaccio Salad. Asti. ©Kirk Tuck



Sunday, June 01, 2014

Ben Graduates from High School. Headed east for college.


Over the years I used Ben as a model, an assistant, a sound engineer, a second camera operator in video, and so much more. He's a wonderful kid and he just graduated from one of the top three high schools in Texas. One of the top 50 high schools in the country. He was in the National Honor Society, a varsity cross country runner, awarded as a distinguished athlete scholar and so much more. He graduated with a grade point average over 100. Seven of his eight classes last semester were Advanced Placement classes.  He'll be attending a private college in upstate New York in the Fall. He earned a merit scholarship to the school that he chose. Suffice it to say I will miss the best assistant and most patient model I ever had. Without a doubt the smartest kid I ever met.  But I think he'll have a blast for the next four years. 

Makes every karate practice, soccer practice, swim practice, tutoring session, boy scout meeting,homework helping session and Pokemon card tournament I ever went to with him seem like it was all worth it. 

What does he shoot with? Still using a Sony a57 and a couple of inexpensive lenses. But he's mostly a video guy. Will be follow in my footsteps and pursue a career in the visual arts? Naw, I hope we've done a better job raising him than that...... :-)


It's a VSL tradition: The Sunday afternoon walk. Today it's all about Samsung's 85mm 1.4

©2014 Kirk Tuck
www.visualsciencelab.blogspot.com 

Early on I downgraded the Samsung NX30 for several reasons. The main reason was that the EVF is not spectacular and doesn't match the rear screen. The secondary issue was the silliness of dedicating so many resources to NFC and Wi-fi. Which I still consider a supreme waste of resources. So I was lukewarm about the camera and hell bent on making the m4:3 cameras work for everything. 

Then I shot a job for the people at the Appleseed Foundation and I realized that the combination of the really good 20 megapixel sensor and the insanely good 85mm 1.4 lens made the NX30 a very powerful tool for a portrait photographer. I grabbed that camera as I headed out the door today and walked around downtown just looking for stuff to shoot. 

The image on top is my favorite. Not because of the content but because of the wonderful way the building is rendered out of focus in the background, along with the almost impressionistic drawing of the clouds. Have a super fast lens combined with a detailed sensor is a nice thing. 

While I love the performance of the GH4 there's space in my photographic tool kit for a worthwhile combination like the NX30 + 85mm 1.4.  I've also discovered something uniquely interesting about this camera. The EVF is actually showing me the real parameters of the raw file. It's always a little lighter and less saturated than the jpeg file. I never realized this until I switched the camera to shoot raw+jpeg today. I'd look at the image in the finder, like it and shoot. When I chomped it on the rear screen it was darker and more saturated. I had chalked this up to a mismatch between screens but when I opened both files in PhotoShop I found that the Raw files matched the look I got on the internal, EVf screen while the jpeg versions matched (perfectly) what I saw on the external screen. Weird, right?

But knowing this I know have more leeway in deciding how to use and interpret the information. I'll be testing the EVF more and depending on it from now on. Not a fault but a feature not listed in the (damn) owner's manual. Now I have more respect for the camera. In addition the detail I'm getting in the raw files is astoundingly good. As good as what I used to get with the Sony a99 at 24 megapixels. I'll chalk it up the the 85mm maximizing the interplay between lens and sensor. I am smitten with the 85mm lens. I almost did the unthinkable and picked up the phone to call my contact at Samsung to see how cheaply I could get another NX30 body. I was mentally juggling the idea of making it into a full professional system for some of my stuff. I stopped myself and reminded myself not to be so mercurial. How could I be so fickle when just a week ago I'd been gobsmacked by the video performance of the GH4? All the cameras are so good now. It's just that they are all good at separate things....

©2014 Kirk Tuck
www.visualsciencelab.blogspot.com 

©2014 Kirk Tuck
www.visualsciencelab.blogspot.com 

©2014 Kirk Tuck
www.visualsciencelab.blogspot.com 

©2014 Kirk Tuck
www.visualsciencelab.blogspot.com 

©2014 Kirk Tuck
www.visualsciencelab.blogspot.com 

©2014 Kirk Tuck
www.visualsciencelab.blogspot.com 

©2014 Kirk Tuck
www.visualsciencelab.blogspot.com 

©2014 Kirk Tuck
www.visualsciencelab.blogspot.com 

©2014 Kirk Tuck
www.visualsciencelab.blogspot.com 

©2014 Kirk Tuck
www.visualsciencelab.blogspot.com 

©2014 Kirk Tuck
www.visualsciencelab.blogspot.com