[Trainwreck]

Now that looks like my kind of show clicker! And you nailed the “defining moment” with that shot!

I actually have a drop tarp system, a kiddie pool, and The Big Tub! Sometimes I cover all my modifiers with clear plastic wrap (Saran or Glad wrap) and a million clothspins and shoot with a long lens and wireless remote shutter release! I have even put up a plastic wall and cut a hole in it to stick the lens through! I haven’t experienced splinters and horse apples yet (thankfully) but I am definitely firmly planted in the “Whatever it takes to get the shot” camp! It’s a wonder I haven’t electrocuted myself or worse, trashed a light or strip box!

Beautiful water drop shot too cc.

[Trainwreck]

I think I agree with your assessment cc but our verbiage may be different!

What causes water (or any other transparent glossy substance) to photograph well are the specular highlights and the gradients to black. White light was shot into the lemon/knife shot and because of the spherical quality of a water drop they picked up speculars. Were it not for them the drops would be invisible, lost in the black BG. With a white BG the drops would have to have a negative outline (black) or else they would also be lost in the BG. Same with glass.

An example of a light field glass shot…

Without the black lines/gradients the glass wouldn’t be there and the same goes for clear liquid shot on a light field. No reflective lighting on the breaking wine glass here. The glass is lit by the BG lighting. Same with the green colored water. Only lit by the BG lighting.

I am a huge fan of splashing milk cc! Except I don’t! Milk doesn’t photograph well (tends to blue).

The phone shot is 1:1 Elmers glue and H2O and you can control the viscosity as needed! Talk about your mess! My feet were stuck to the floor!

I love Wieczorkiewicz’s work. Paul Buff uses his “Silver Angel” and “Right Scale” to advert his Einstiens, which were used exclusively in Wieczorkiewicz’s shoots.

[Trainwreck]

Not a problem. Usually my input isn’t asked for lol so I figured I would answer.

My kind of gal anon! I really do appreciate your take here.

I think your take on this is very important, crucial even. The “fauxtogs” cannot do business if there are discriminating clients such as yourself. Seems like every post I see slamming “fauxtogs” is followed by “I can’t believe anyone would pay for this crap” or something close. But the reality is that they do pay and there is a market for it. Supply and demand at its most basic.

As a stay at home mom pretty much the only adult contact I get every day is through the internet and when days are filled with a screaming baby sometimes you hit the brink of your sanity, lose your mind and some times use potty words. Most of the time people think bad language=uneducated and that is a perfectly fine thought though in this case pretty untrue. I am sure I make several grammatical errors but, don’t we all? I mean this is the internet right?

How you choose to represent yourself is up to you. Internet or no.

But I admire what you do and I know it ain’t easy anon!

[Trainwreck]

I apologize anon.

I was under the obvious mistaken impression that you might be a professional buyer for websites, maybe an ad consultant, media/art director, or anything else that didn’t include a stay at home mom only looking to get shots of the kids. And I wondered what that calibre of buyer would have to say. I listened to Doc and won’t make that mistake again (I hope).

I do, however, admire that you are here and have a good eye for what you want.

Thank you for responding to my question anonymoususer.

[Trainwreck]

Perhaps more spray, less cohesion, in the water?

Good suggestion camera clicker. You and Worst Case are right on the $$. This was a very slow splash and produced little high(er) velocity drops. I did clean up some of the ones that were produced by the ricochet! For this I wanted a fairly clean splash contained within the frame.

Another version featuring some high-velocity spray would be cool!

[Trainwreck]

Hi Worst Case!

So my next guess is that it’s a bottle floating in front of a green background that some one has just thrown some water at?

Bingo Worst Case! Sorry for the confusion! I don’t always feel the need to be overly literal. Especially when shooting for myself. But, as a product shot there are certain things that need to be very literal. The product itself and any associated labels/logos as the primary example. So no matter what else is going on I always endeavor to make sure the product gets the limelight. Dead balls-on accurate color, all attributes of the bottle and especially the label accurate and lit to accent. No one wants their brand photographed into obscurity! After that its kind of an “artistic licence” kind of thing!

Thank you for taking the time to shoot me some feedback Worst Case.

Could be there is too much green. It might look better with clear water, instead of green water.

Hi camerclicker!

Of course there could be. Just depends on what you, an art/media consultant/director, or I want to see! The green is taken from the color of the product.

As regards the water? It is clear. When shooting clear glass or liquids you don’t light the glass/liquid. You light the background. So the clear water is picking up the green BG. To be honest I wouldn’t have any idea how to shoot clear water on a colored BG and it not pick up the color. Even on a white or black BG the clear water will pick that up. Maybe I’m not understanding what you are saying? Would you have any suggestions?

Shots like that scare me because I don’t want to have to clean up after.

You have no idea the mess I make in my studio environment! Sometimes I have to cover everything and wear a hazmat suit with SCBA! But I have a great time doing it!

Here is one where I actually did color the liquid and shot on black. This was a shutter drag and the phone screen was shot as shown and not Photoshopped in.

Hey cameraclicker, thank you for chiming in sir. I value your opinion.

[Trainwreck]

The only plausible situations where this photo would be possible without manipulation or HIDDEN KNIFE SUPPORTS is where (a) the lemon is propelled TOWARD the knife, and the knife TOWARD the lemon with a rotational force with the fulcrum point approximately near the very bottom of the blade handle…

Now that blows me away Doc!

That is EXACTLY how I did it!

Thankfully I got it within the first 100 tries! My assistant, who was catching the knife, (can’t allow the product to be damaged you know) was starting to bleed pretty badly!

Interesting thought nesgran.

I would submit that rather than rotate the image the shot would be set up and taken in the aspect you are describing. That way the drips, drops, runs on the knife, etc. would look better (again with the physicists!) and more according to the laws of gravity.

Of course, I never studied law!

[Trainwreck]

Hi Mike!

Thank you for stopping in, having a peek and commenting.

I guess I can’t really answer for personal preference. Except to say that if folks here seem to prefer whiskey to lemonade then I am definitely in the right place!

Typical reason for negative space in product photography…

…adding copy!

https://www.flickr.com/photos/125044926@N07/14393978651/

[Trainwreck]

Thank you for commenting guys.

For the physicists the reflection is as shot and not manipulated or faked!

[Trainwreck]

You are of course right Worst Case!

The ice is acrylic props. No ice I can make looks that perfect and these cubes are great to work with. And I’ve tried! They do make floaters but the particular cube in question just dropped into the bottom of the glass to make the splash.

No worries about criticism! I am open to it and welcome any help I can get. Especially from a seasoned pro such as yourself. Which is why I post. Sometimes I figure a word of explanation may help to clarify so that critiques may be more targeted. Usually I am wrong but it doesn’t seem to stop me!

I just want you to know I appreciate you taking the time to comment. Thank you.

[Trainwreck]

Hope everyone had a good weekend!

Thank you for commenting Worst Case.

The liquid in the glass is the same color as the liquid in the bottle. It was matched before the shoot. As cameraclicker mentioned the liquid looks different because it is being displaced by the cube at the bottom of the glass, which did indeed cause the splash. There are spots of the liquid that actually do match. The differing colors are simply being caused by the back lighting in the liquid.

The scene is backlit (among a lot of other lighting) for separation purposes and also to give the liquid its glow. Otherwise the liquid would look unacceptably dark! There is a small reflector/diffuser, just smaller than the glass, with some slots cut in it behind the glass. The slots are to let some of the negative light of the black BG to come through in the liquid and the solid glass base of the glass. Without this the base of the glass would photograph as solid black. As an example you can see a solid black piece in the base of the glass. This corresponds to a slot in the reflector/diffuser behind the glass. To portray a glossy surface the gamut needs to run from solid black in areas to solid white in areas and tones in between. Otherwise it photographs as matte. There is also a reflector behind the bottle with no holes cut for a more even backlighting effect.

nesgran, I like to get as much as I can in one shot but this is a composite. It’s the only way really unless you want to clean up the set everytime between splashes until you get what you want. And I never get what I want the first time! And you can’t move things around once you get the lighting set. It is very precise and sometimes the lighting can change drastically with just a small movement of either the subject or light. But I certainly want as few shots as possible if compositing.

I don’t use a DoF calculator (admittedly I probably should!). Shot fairly well stopped down (f/16) needed the ISO value. I might have gotten away with opening up a bit but certainly everything in the shot needed to be in good focus. I didn’t fiddle with the settings too much as long as I could get the DoF/light/duration I needed and f/16 was an arbitrary decision. I always shoot tethered in the studio and just eye-ball the DoF! I don’t consider ISO 800 a big deal at all for this kind of work although its probably unheard of in studio portraiture I suppose.

[Trainwreck]

Now that you have me obsessing nesgran I believe you are absolutely right about that glass!

The glass appeared level on the bottom but the sides tell a different story.

A quickie correction on the .jpg (the .psd is archived at the moment) and a before and after. I didn’t reach exact perfection but you can sure tell a difference!

Great to have a fresh pair of eyes on it. I appreciate that nesgran. Good call!

https://www.flickr.com/photos/125044926@N07/14183990767/

[Trainwreck]

Hi nesgran!

Thank you for taking the time to view and comment. It is appreciated.

As regards the ISO value? When shooting motion (splash) I push the ISO in order to keep to minimum Ws on the strobes, which keeps the t.1 to minimum, which stops the motion. ISO 800 is not a biggie at all!

The glass grids out pretty much on the $$. I see what you mean though. What would you suggest?

[Trainwreck]

I don’t know what about the cringing IHF! Looks like you got some pretty detailed explainations on that link! If I had a nickel for every time I did something that made me cringe I’d be retired a long time ago!

And just so you know I am full of sh**! I have made it a Life’s Goal to make the front page!

[Trainwreck]

Problems with your keyboard legend?

[Author]

Posts