Briggs Photography wrote:
I'm not looking for step by step. But how does he get this look? Is there a name for it?

http://www.davehillphoto.com/

His use of lights and the way he captures the images.  Then some photoshop.

Jeff Cohn::X-Pose.net:: wrote:
Not the exact "Dave Hill" technique, but Im happy with the results. I will only be using this on this new "Dysfunctional family portraits" package, its getting over-used already, but I think it works for these. This was done with LucisArts and some Dodgeing and burning, Initial lighting makes a huge difference though.

Did you count out 1 2 3 before each shutter click? I think that may be the secret to his success.

Jeff Wayne Photography wrote:
as i already mentioned the look is achieved by obtaining a higher than normal dynamic range. the fact of the matter is that every other photographer on the site is in essence a competitor. whether you wanna look it that way or not, thats the reality of the situation. if i were to give away a step by step process to how i post my images it would be the same as coca cola giving away its secret recipe. Its just bad for business. Ill point somebody in the right direction, but holding there hand along the journey? not a chance

Wow, do you realize how arrogant and self-absorbed you sound in your posts?  Or do you just not care?

Koray wrote:
Jeff...can I see a crop of the original size especially one of the faces?

I always wondered how these look 100% view

Sent PM

Kevlar Vest Girl wrote:

Did you count out 1 2 3 before each shutter click? I think that may be the secret to his success.

I tell em 3 but click at 2, keeps em on their toes

WENSON wrote:
I don't care for this style,it's stepping to the realm of illustration. 

That is the most short sighted lunatic statement of the week! Consider for one second that the man may actually prefer to work as if he is an illustrator. Oh my God, I can hear the synaptic junction between the two sides of your brain snapping from here.

biwa wrote:

Thats awesome , I might be in the minority but I really want to pull off one Dave Hill type shot in my repetoire.  Can you ask them to put down on paper the process with the DH technique? I would really like to do it .   Not even joking here.   I was let down a bit when I read that Scott Kelby article on how to do it and Scott mentioned he could get close but still wasnt 100 percent sure what Dave Hill does.
  I am not interested in  the JoeyL , or the Dragan "look" (which many on the net can do easily) but specifically the DH because I have yet to see one person on the net that claims to be able to do it actually do it . And you have 3!!   Thanks in advance .

I sense that you are feeling a bit superior to me, and that you don't believe I can do what I say. Possibly because you might think "Hell, if that Randall asshole is so good and can do the DH shuffle, why doesn't he have anything like it in his folios? After all it's the ultimate key to success, isn't it?"

You provide the DH picture from his website and I'll tell you how to replicate it. I'll only deal with the lighting and the post, because I have to admit, the guy is on his toes with physical production tricks, and they are laid out nicely in his videos anyhow.

Shane C Reed wrote:

hey there's no need to be a smart ass... i'm just letting people know it isn't as difficult everyone thinks it is...there is no big mystery behind the Dave Hill look...there are a few good tutorials out there that nail the look...maybe you should just stick with product shooting...hmmm ( :

He wasn't being a smart ass, he was cutting you to shreds.

Brooks Ayola wrote:
If someone told you exactly how Kelly Slater surfed, do you think you could surf like Kelly Slater?

Believe!

Brooks Ayola wrote:
People seem to feel that knowing the exact techniques of people like Dave Hill will get them images like Dave Hill's. If someone told you exactly how Kelly Slater surfed, do you think you could surf like Kelly Slater?

Wit me own steeze!

Brooks Ayola wrote:
People seem to feel that knowing the exact techniques of people like Dave Hill will get them images like Dave Hill's. If someone told you exactly how Kelly Slater surfed, do you think you could surf like Kelly Slater?

One of the problems for me in giving out a diagram of DH techniques is how many people are going top call me a liar because nothing I or they can use as an example will be lit (or unlit) like DH's stuff. Nothing will be propped like his stuff, nothing will be cast like his stuff, no one will be ward robed like his stuff. Basically, I'm agreeing with you, but everyone is inclined to copy the guy, so I'll lay it out for them. It'll be fun watching all the little DH contests that will break out.

Kevlar Vest Girl wrote:

One of the problems for me in giving out a diagram of DH techniques is how many people are going top call me a liar because nothing I or they can use as an example will be lit (or unlit) like DH's stuff. Nothing will be propped like his stuff, nothing will be cast like his stuff, no one will be ward robed like his stuff. Basically, I'm agreeing with you, but everyone is inclined to copy the guy, so I'll lay it out for them. It'll be fun watching all the little DH contests that will break out.

Beyond all that, no one is going to put the same pressure to Wacom stylus in quite the same way. When it comes to things that are so subjective as dodging and burning, it makes it just that much more difficult to get the same effect.

JLC Images wrote:
Briggs, I have a few HDR & Dragonized images in my port.  If you see any that are close enough to what you are looking for shoot me an email and I will tell you how I got the effect.


To those who are here to:

1. Make the OP feel stupid about asking a question
2. Complain about a repeat thread
3. Show off
4. Rub in everyones face how you will not share your awesome/instant success technique

Why are you here in this thread?

My thoughts exactly

Kevlar Vest Girl wrote:
One of the problems for me in giving out a diagram of DH techniques is how many people are going top call me a liar because nothing I or they can use as an example will be lit (or unlit) like DH's stuff. Nothing will be propped like his stuff, nothing will be cast like his stuff, no one will be ward robed like his stuff. Basically, I'm agreeing with you, but everyone is inclined to copy the guy, so I'll lay it out for them. It'll be fun watching all the little DH contests that will break out.

Brooks Ayola wrote:
Beyond all that, no one is going to put the same pressure to Wacom stylus in quite the same way. When it comes to things that are so subjective as dodging and burning, it makes it just that much more difficult to get the same effect.

You're right, but ever since that dunce Scott Kelby told everyone to put a 50% gray layer in soft light over every thing they do, I have wanted to beat his brains in. Here is my chance to prove he's a dunce and get BIWA all tucked in for the night as well.

Scott Aitken wrote:
"Draganizing".

No.
Totally different effect.

Kevlar Vest Girl wrote:

Think about what you're saying for just a second. Up until a few years ago most photographers made their living from the use of the same tools as everyone else. Camera, film, darkroom and not too much else. During the few hundred years that photographers used that equipment, a fair number of people made their chops with completely different styles and approaches. Brady was different from Steiglitz was different from Penn was different from Weston was different from LaChappelle, and so on. All those guys knew exactly what the other was doing, yet they seemed to survive quite nicely on their own merits.

Along comes Digital and all of a sudden everyone is afraid to tell their secrets because they think letting the info out is going to bite them in the ass. I've given away the house when it comes to digital secrets and what I've found is that the people I've tutored have gone on to do things completely different from me in terms of style. Like a hammer, the digital tool box is still just a tool. My friend Jack is a carpenter. Do you suppose he handles his hammer the same way Robert Hague handles his? Never!

I'm not suggesting you go ahead and divulge your trade secrets, I'm suggesting you don't really have any. I could replicate you avatar in about 10 minutes given the tool set I possess. Many of the folks on this site could do the same thing. The folks that can't do it, like the OP, probably aren't willing to jump into the same market you want to get into, so where is that competition. Guys like me have been doing imaging for so long we can do jobs in our sleep, so we will never be your competition. By the time you learn what we know, we'll be dead and you'll be doing stuff in your sleep. What I'm suggesting is that people will be less likely to come to your aid if you aren't willing to come to theirs.

Hey KVG,

I gots to know- Is that you in your avatar? Everytime I read oneayour posts I think I'm looking at you! And it just fuckin' cracks me up!
Steve Anderson

Jeff Wayne Photography wrote:

JLC Images wrote:
as i already mentioned the look is achieved by obtaining a higher than normal dynamic range. the fact of the matter is that every other photographer on the site is in essence a competitor. whether you wanna look it that way or not, thats the reality of the situation. if i were to give away a step by step process to how i post my images it would be the same as coca cola giving away its secret recipe. Its just bad for business. Ill point somebody in the right direction, but holding there hand along the journey? not a chance

If you think that you're photoshop skills are a secret recipe you have another thing coming. There is no harm in helping someone develop their PS skills...and if you think that  doing that will create less work for yourself maybe you should just stop now....IMO Everywhere you go in the world there is competition - get over it!

Briggs Photography wrote:
I'm not looking for step by step. But how does he get this look? Is there a name for it?

http://www.davehillphoto.com/

please tell me this is just a lame attempt at humor...

Kevlar Vest Girl wrote:

You're right, but ever since that dunce Scott Kelby told everyone to put a 50% gray layer in soft light over every thing they do, I have wanted to beat his brains in. Here is my chance to prove he's a dunce and get BIWA all tucked in for the night as well.

Your challenge is going as well as my $100 offer to anyone who could steal one of my clients by asking me for my contact's info. No takers yet. I even offered Eastwood $1000.00 figuring that he probably wipes his ass with hundreds. :-)

NSE Films wrote:
I'm never really bothered by people starting topics like these, asking these kinds of questions; learning is great and no one knows everything from the get go...  But these threads quite often contain the same arguments that similar threads before them contain; you can pretty much guess the posts before they happen.

Exactly.  Which is why it would be soooo nice if people wold use the search function prior to asking questions.  But hey, that's just me.

Kevlar Vest Girl wrote:
I sense that you are feeling a bit superior to me, and that you don't believe I can do what I say. Possibly because you might think "Hell, if that Randall asshole is so good and can do the DH shuffle, why doesn't he have anything like it in his folios? After all it's the ultimate key to success, isn't it?"

You provide the DH picture from his website and I'll tell you how to replicate it. I'll only deal with the lighting and the post, because I have to admit, the guy is on his toes with physical production tricks, and they are laid out nicely in his videos anyhow.

haha superior?  Only in my mental abilities , I sux at photoshop.   You never did until now state that YOU could do it ,  only that you knew 3 others that could. So the thought of why wouldn't you have it in your port never crossed my mind. 
Lets see , I figured out the lighting all by myself from reading other threads , in fact I mention right in this very thread that side lighting is crucial and about 90 percent of it .   So hit me with the post , thats where I lack .  Ok gee if I gotta pick one I would say the Nerd guy in the hallway .

*crawls into bed *

Brooks Ayola wrote:

Your challenge is going as well as my $100 offer to anyone who could steal one of my clients by asking me for my contact's info. No takers yet. I even offered Eastwood $1000.00 figuring that he probably wipes his ass with hundreds. :-)

Right, from a Monopoly game.

biwa wrote:

haha superior?  Only in my mental abilities , I sux at photoshop.   You never did until now state that YOU could do it ,  only that you knew 3 others that could. So the thought of why wouldn't you have it in your port never crossed my mind. 
Lets see , I figured out the lighting all by myself from reading other threads , in fact I mention right in this very thread that side lighting is crucial and about 90 percent of it .   So hit me with the post , thats where I lack .  Ok gee if I gotta pick one I would say the Nerd guy in the hallway .

*crawls into bed *

For the sake of clarity and time, is this your select?

Kevlar Vest Girl wrote:
For the sake of clarity and time, is this your select?

Seems like the easiest of the lot to me.

biwa wrote:
haha superior?  Only in my mental abilities , I sux at photoshop.   You never did until now state that YOU could do it ,  only that you knew 3 others that could. So the thought of why wouldn't you have it in your port never crossed my mind. 
Lets see , I figured out the lighting all by myself from reading other threads , in fact I mention right in this very thread that side lighting is crucial and about 90 percent of it .   So hit me with the post , thats where I lack .  Ok gee if I gotta pick one I would say the Nerd guy in the hallway .

*crawls into bed *

First, some observations…

I didn’t watch the nerd video, if there was one, because I didn’t want to be affected by anything other than the image itself. If I’m wrong about some of my observations, well tough shit.

The nerd wasn’t shot at the same time the hallway or other students were shot. Check for missing side highlights on other students.

DH seems to favor wider lenses, which lend a great deal of impact to his already surreal approach.

I’m thinking he does a lot of his post in CMYK, mostly because it appears the colors are in gamut, which is difficult to obtain using the techniques I’m going to outline for you.

I’m still reeling over his technique of calling out  “1 2 3 smile” to his subjects.  But it does seem to jive with his somewhat casual lighting format.

His lighting is very simple, but as is the case in this image, it’s not always with a camera mounted ring flash. Although from what I’ve seen in his videos, he probably had someone holding the ring flash off camera.

This particular image has the main on the nerd coming from high camera right. This light subtly helps to separate the others from the main nerd. The others are lit from a source that was probably behind the spot the nerd was inserted in front of. If you consider the placement of the ceiling lights, the scene is believable.

His final style is possibly aided by the placement of the lights, but more relevant are the white and black points he uses and the way he compresses the mid tone to off set the highlight, making the highlight the king of his scenes. Take away that one aspect and his pictures look like everyone else’s, well, except maybe for the scene, the casting, the wardrobe, the expressions, the composition, the color palette, the wardrobe… you get my drift.


Notice the ceiling and how it separates from the sidewalls. This was done with some sort of selection and tone control. This is referred to as local contrast control.

Notice blown out highlight on low locker left. Nice way to separate the subjects from the scene and give everything an added dimension.

Notice how nothing I’ve said so far has anything to do with any fairy tale dragon filter.

Now, how he does it…

First of all, forget all about any dumb ass High Pass techniques you’ve been thinking of, because from what I can see, he doesn’t use them. Nor does he use a huge amount of Unsharp Mask. He uses local contrast controls through selections and masks.

For instance, look at the back pack on the other guy camera a right.  Normally that item would be blocked up and lacking detail.  Make a lasso selection around the back pack and ask for a layer curve. Brighten to taste. Next go to the same guys pants and do the same thing over for the pants. Now go to the sweater. Now go to the next guy and do the same thing to his little blue bag, then his sweater. Cross the hall to the guy and his leather jacket. Curve that, then his pants and then his hair.  Do this local selection curve technique to anything you feel like, when finished pumping up the local contrast, go get something to drink. Come back and judge whether you’ve gone too far or not far enough, and then fix stuff to taste.

Next, make a Highlight mask like this…



Load it to make it active, and then ask for a layer curve. Bring highlight up slightly.

Next, make a Highlight Mask like this…



Load it to make it active, and then ask for a layer curve. Bring highlight up slightly more. Notice how the picture starts to take on a sense of depth and life that you’re not familiar with. Fun, huh?

Next, make a Shadow mask like this…



Load it to make it active, and then ask for a layer curve. Bring shadow down just a little bit, don’t get carried away here, it isn’t the right time for it.


Next, make a Shadow mask like this, or darker yet…



Load it to make it active, and then ask for a layer curve. Now play with killing any detail you might have in this local select area of the shadow. This move sets up the down side of the picture just like the HL mask sets up the upside. By now you should be experiencing a sense of depth that will keep you off the porn sites for at least an hour. We’re not done yet!

Next make a difference mask like this…



Load it to make it active, and then ask for a layer curve. Now you can play with adding or detracting density from the midtone area to help create the illusion of more density. Usually this is a darkening move, but it can go the other way too.

Now ask for an empty layer and change its mode to softlight. Note that you can also use hard light or overlay if you prefer. Wherever you see a highlight that you want to embellish, start painting white with a brush, wrinkles, teeth, cheeks, lips, what ever you like, paint until you’re eyes bleed.  My way of doing this is to then blur the painted layer and add a Highlight Mask from the selection I gave you above. This is why my pictures don’t look like Jill Greenberg’s or Dave Hill’s. I use control over my painting emotional out bursts. Paint those arm and leg highlights too, don’t miss a thing!

Now do the same think with black paint on another softlight layer. Use a mask, don’t use a mask, it’s completely up to you.

If you still think there is room to screw the pooch a little harder, create a compound layer of all you have done and de-saturate it. Change the mode to soft or hard light and watch your contrast go through the roof. Still not enough? Make another compound copy and de-saturate it. Change the mode and ask for a HP filter. Give it a number of between 2 and 250 and watch that picture go thermo nuclear on you. Go to the closest mirror you can find and say the words “Fuck Dave Hill, you’re the man!”.

Any rational person at this point will note there are a thousand ways to skin a digital cat. What I’ve laid out is the basis for how young Mr. Hill achieves his look. I haven’t given you every nuance, because that could take days, and I may have missed a small point or two. But you should have learned at least one major point; there is no shortcut filter available that will do this. Also, you aren’t Dave Hill and even armed with this info, your pictures won’t look like his. But hopefully they will look like yours.

Okay, I’m ready for every malcontent know nothing wanna be that feels a need to challenge me on my DH dissection. Let me say in advance… fuck you, you don’t know what you’re talking about.

Kevlar Vest Girl wrote:

First, some observations…

I didn’t watch the nerd video, if there was one, because I didn’t want to be affected by anything other than the image itself. If I’m wrong about some of my observations, well tough shit.

The nerd wasn’t shot at the same time the hallway or other students were shot. Check for missing side highlights on other students.

DH seems to favor wider lenses, which lend a great deal of impact to his already surreal approach.

I’m thinking he does a lot of his post in CMYK, mostly because it appears the colors are in gamut, which is difficult to obtain using the techniques I’m going to outline for you.

I’m still reeling over his technique of calling out  “1 2 3 smile” to his subjects.  But it does seem to jive with his somewhat casual lighting format.

His lighting is very simple, but as is the case in this image, it’s not always with a camera mounted ring flash. Although from what I’ve seen in his videos, he probably had someone holding the ring flash off camera.

This particular image has the main on the nerd coming from high camera right. This light subtly helps to separate the others from the main nerd. The others are lit from a source that was probably behind the spot the nerd was inserted in front of. If you consider the placement of the ceiling lights, the scene is believable.

His final style is possibly aided by the placement of the lights, but more relevant are the white and black points he uses and the way he compresses the mid tone to off set the highlight, making the highlight the king of his scenes. Take away that one aspect and his pictures look like everyone else’s, well, except maybe for the scene, the casting, the wardrobe, the expressions, the composition, the color palette, the wardrobe… you get my drift.


Notice the ceiling and how it separates from the sidewalls. This was done with some sort of selection and tone control. This is referred to as local contrast control.

Notice blown out highlight on low locker left. Nice way to separate the subjects from the scene and give everything an added dimension.

Notice how nothing I’ve said so far has anything to do with any fairy tale dragon filter.

Now, how he does it…

First of all, forget all about any dumb ass High Pass techniques you’ve been thinking of, because from what I can see, he doesn’t use them. Nor does he use a huge amount of Unsharp Mask. He uses local contrast controls through selections and masks.

For instance, look at the back pack on the other guy camera a right.  Normally that item would be blocked up and lacking detail.  Make a lasso selection around the back pack and ask for a layer curve. Brighten to taste. Next go to the same guys pants and do the same thing over for the pants. Now go to the sweater. Now go to the next guy and do the same thing to his little blue bag, then his sweater. Cross the hall to the guy and his leather jacket. Curve that, then his pants and then his hair.  Do this local selection curve technique to anything you feel like, when finished pumping up the local contrast, go get something to drink. Come back and judge whether you’ve gone too far or not far enough, and then fix stuff to taste.

Next, make a Highlight mask like this…

http://www.robert-randall.com/MM/HL%20mask%201.jpg[/img]

Load it to make it active, and then ask for a layer curve. Bring highlight up slightly.

Next, make a Highlight Mask like this…

http://www.robert-randall.com/MM/HL%20mask%202.jpg[/img]

Load it to make it active, and then ask for a layer curve. Bring highlight up slightly more. Notice how the picture starts to take on a sense of depth and life that you’re not familiar with. Fun, huh?

Next, make a Shadow mask like this…

http://www.robert-randall.com/MM/shadow%20mask%201.jpg[/img]

Load it to make it active, and then ask for a layer curve. Bring shadow down just a little bit, don’t get carried away here, it isn’t the right time for it.


Next, make a Shadow mask like this, or darker yet…

http://www.robert-randall.com/MM/shadow%20mask%202.jpg[/img]

Load it to make it active, and then ask for a layer curve. Now play with killing any detail you might have in this local select area of the shadow. This move sets up the down side of the picture just like the HL mask sets up the upside. By now you should be experiencing a sense of depth that will keep you off the porn sites for at least an hour. We’re not done yet!

Next make a difference mask like this…

http://www.robert-randall.com/MM/diff%20mask%201.jpg[/img]

Load it to make it active, and then ask for a layer curve. Now you can play with adding or detracting density from the midtone area to help create the illusion of more density. Usually this is a darkening move, but it can go the other way too.

Now ask for an empty layer and change its mode to softlight. Note that you can also use hard light or overlay if you prefer. Wherever you see a highlight that you want to embellish, start painting white with a brush, wrinkles, teeth, cheeks, lips, what ever you like, paint until you’re eyes bleed.  My way of doing this is to then blur the painted layer and add a Highlight Mask from the selection I gave you above. This is why my pictures don’t look like Jill Greenberg’s or Dave Hill’s. I use control over my painting emotional out bursts. Paint those arm and leg highlights too, don’t miss a thing!

Now do the same think with black paint on another softlight layer. Use a mask, don’t use a mask, it’s completely up to you.

If you still think there is room to screw the pooch a little harder, create a compound layer of all you have done and de-saturate it. Change the mode to soft or hard light and watch your contrast go through the roof. Still not enough? Make another compound copy and de-saturate it. Change the mode and ask for a HP filter. Give it a number of between 2 and 250 and watch that picture go thermo nuclear on you. Go to the closest mirror you can find and say the words “Fuck Dave Hill, you’re the man!”.

Any rational person at this point will note there are a thousand ways to skin a digital cat. What I’ve laid out is the basis for how young Mr. Hill achieves his look. I haven’t given you every nuance, because that could take days, and I may have missed a small point or two. But you should have learned at least one major point; there is no shortcut filter available that will do this. Also, you aren’t Dave Hill and even armed with this info, your pictures won’t look like his. But hopefully they will look like yours.

Okay, I’m ready for every malcontent know nothing wanna be that feels a need to challenge me on my DH dissection. Let me say in advance… fuck you, you don’t know what you’re talking about.

Are we getting a little fed up with the kids here saying experience doesn't mean anything?

Koray wrote:
I cant believe you actually did give out how to for real haha...but if one gets past the DH look there is more valuable info there that can be used and are being used alot.

never thought of a difference mask before...gotta experiment with it

I don't think giving out that kind of info is going to bite me in the ass. When I use those techniques my mind is on auto pilot and I'm able to multi task away. I know that most of the people that try to do this are going to develop bleeding ulcers trying to understand the flow of it.

For instance, the part about selecting the back pack... Most of the folks that try that are going to spend an hour outlining each item. Their eyes will dry up and fall out by the time they are finished. I can do that in 2 seconds with my hands tied behind my back, and you'll never see a hint that i stepped there. I'm helpful in a most devilish kinda way!