Chris Rifkin wrote:
Bored,a bump from Paradise Challenge in Miami a few weeks ago(kinda local model actually,Amanda Rodriguez)

Very nice Chris!

Koryo Photography wrote:
Happy Old-school Friday

Is that Mamie Van Doren from 1955 Mr. K  .  .  .



.  .  .  she's a "looker", ain't she  .  .  . 

SOS

sospix wrote:
Is that Mamie Van Doren from 1955 Mr. K  .  .  .

.  .  .  she's a "looker", ain't she  .  .  . 

SOS

I'm surprised that a fella as young as you, would even get that reference, SOS

Koryo Photography wrote:
I'm surprised that a fella as young as you, would even get that reference, SOS

Jake says he and I ain't all that young Mr. K  .  .  .  in fact, we get REAL old in about three weeks  .  .  .    Sides, I still got my PB mags from the 50's and 60's  .  .  .  strictly for the articles of course  .  .  .    AND  .  .  .



.  .  .  the cartoons  .  .  .



.  .  .  especially the ones about models  .  .  . 

SOS

Koryo Photography wrote:
Haha...I feel your pain

I hope not, for your sake  .  .  .  this gettin' old stuff is tough  .  .  . 

SOS

sospix wrote:

I hope not, for your sake  .  .  .  this gettin' old stuff is tough  .  .  . 

SOS

Yeah. Gettin' old ain't for sissies, ya know. If ya ain't tough, ya ain't gettin' old...

Carl Roberts wrote:
One of my dad's favorite sayings was... It's hell to get old...

...but some would argue that it beats the alternative...

Charles Howse wrote:
This weekend!  A workshop in a studio for a small group of photographers to allow for organized, rather than paparazzi style shooting with three lovely and experienced models.

Syrena Fury ---> https://www.facebook.com/pages/Syrena-F … 0442211127
Syrena on MM : https://www.modelmayhem.com/3576628

Liz Wiz ---> https://www.facebook.com/LizMierschModeling?pnref=lhc
Liz on MM: https://www.modelmayhem.com/2549737

Taylor White ---> https://www.facebook.com/TaylorWhiteMod … hy…
Taylor on MM : https://www.modelmayhem.com/3487306

https://www.facebook.com/events/381041125432785/

https://www.modelmayhem.com/forums/post … st19368313

Cross posting for our central Florida brethren

Chris Rifkin wrote:
Ick....despise studios,

Have you ever shot in a studio?

Koryo Photography wrote:
Yep, love studio time

But if it's natural light, is it really studio???     Actually that's what I like about G's is the ability to do some natural while in a studio setting..


Actually studio is much easier than location.. Once shit is set, it doesn't change.. No clouds to move in/out and change your exposure, no wind to contend with, the main issue is just knowing how to get your ratios set and using a light meter.. Now, with digital you can eyeball the ratios, but still best to use a meter..

The tough part, if you want to call it that, a studio is a blank canvas and you have to fully create the concept.. Location will give you certain elements.. But if you're creative and can visualize what you want, gather the props it's a breeze.. With the right props you can create an outdoor setting indoors without the pitfalls.. Granted, you probably do have to have a better understanding of how to set your lighting up since it's up to you to set every aspect.. Whereas outdoors, you're deciding if the sun is main/fill or kicker..

Tropical Photography wrote:

But if it's natural light, is it really studio???     Actually that's what I like about G's is the ability to do some natural while in a studio setting..


Actually studio is much easier than location.. Once shit is set, it doesn't change.. No clouds to move in/out and change your exposure, no wind to contend with, the main issue is just knowing how to get your ratios set and using a light meter.. Now, with digital you can eyeball the ratios, but still best to use a meter..

The tough part, if you want to call it that, a studio is a blank canvas and you have to fully create the concept.. Location will give you certain elements.. But if you're creative and can visualize what you want, gather the props it's a breeze.. With the right props you can create an outdoor setting indoors without the pitfalls.. Granted, you probably do have to have a better understanding of how to set your lighting up since it's up to you to set every aspect.. Whereas outdoors, you're deciding if the sun is main/fill or kicker..

And I think that is why I like the outside (or even indoors not in a studio setting,especially with sunlight coming through windows and ambient lighting)..I like to be challanged.Every shoot will not be the samethough from experience I kinda know what my settings will be when I start out..Those partly cloudydays where there are clouds moving across the sky...frustrating at first till I know which settings I need to be at when the cloud Iis overhead or notand to time each exposure before Iit changes...(of course when I have a helper he scrim comes out)granted....noon on the beach perfectly sunny with no helper for said scrim and I can't improvise.......egads.....I begin to rethink about why I decided to schedule a shoot for that time before figuring out how to make it work.

I actually find it amusing when photographers do not count the sun as a light source (figured I would throw that in because I see this quite a bit at these events I have been going to lately ....)

Chris Rifkin wrote:
I actually find it amusing when photographers do not count the sun as a light source

Lol... Wut?

Carl Roberts wrote:

Lol... Wut?

Ever see Keith's rants about how it should be required that photographers should have to take a written test and have a liscence to go into buisness as a professional photographer (or something like that)

Its fools like this that make me agree with him 100% when I hear this bullshit(where is the kermit meme where he is drinking JD and saying"fuck tea,I need something hell of a lot stronger to listen to this bulshit)...
and answering this question wrong(no matter how you word it)is grounds for imediate failure


The stupid is real carl

Chris Rifkin wrote:
Ever see Keith's rants about how it should be required that photographers should have to take a written test and have a liscence to go into buisness as a professional photographer (or something like that)

Its fools like this that make me agree with him 100% when I hear this bullshit(where is the kermit meme where he is drinking JD and saying"fuck tea,I need something hell of a lot stronger to listen to this bulshit)...
and answering this question wrong(no matter how you word it)is grounds for imediate failure

I was told once that in Europe, you must apprentice then pass a test to be licensed as a photographer.

The Professional Photographers Association has a Certification program, it includes a 100 question test. I wonder how many photographers on this site can calculate lighting ratios for a typical 5-6 light studio set up???

If I recall, the question on the test was for a three light set up.

Chris Rifkin wrote:
Ever see Keith's rants about how it should be required that photographers should have to take a written test and have a liscence to go into buisness as a professional photographer (or something like that)

Its fools like this that make me agree with him 100% when I hear this bullshit(where is the kermit meme where he is drinking JD and saying"fuck tea,I need something hell of a lot stronger to listen to this bulshit)...
and answering this question wrong(no matter how you word it)is grounds for imediate failure

joeyk wrote:
I was told once that in Europe, you must apprentice then pass a test to be licensed as a photographer.

The Professional Photographers Association has a Certification program, it includes a 100 question test. I wonder how many photographers on this site can calculate lighting ratios for a typical 5-6 light studio set up???

If I recall, the question on the test was for a three light set up.

My guess is less than 5%...  The 101st question should be figure out the ratio of a typical Arny Freytag centerfold set up!!!  54 lights!!!  BBBBWWWAAAAHHHHHAAAAAA!!!

Tropical Photography wrote:

Chris Rifkin wrote:
Ever see Keith's rants about how it should be required that photographers should have to take a written test and have a liscence to go into buisness as a professional photographer (or something like that)

Its fools like this that make me agree with him 100% when I hear this bullshit(where is the kermit meme where he is drinking JD and saying"fuck tea,I need something hell of a lot stronger to listen to this bulshit)...
and answering this question wrong(no matter how you word it)is grounds for imediate failure

My guess is less than 5%...  The 101st question should be figure out the ratio of a typical Arny Freytag centerfold set up!!!  54 lights!!!  BBBBWWWAAAAHHHHHAAAAAA!!!

Heh...hell..if you answer question 101 correctly you can just turn in the test with the first 100 questions blank and still ,pass

My college physics ll finals is probably easier than figuring that out

joeyk wrote:
I'm confident that Sean could figure it, I walked in the studio the day I got my 5D and he was shooting a yard flamingo for the catalogue and had 17 lights hitting it...lol

Yep, sounds like Arny lighting. 😂😂. But by Sean's admission, he wasn't all that fond of the big light in the sky. Seems if he couldn't move it or put 30 degree grid on it, wasn't worth the bother. LOL.

Tropical Photography wrote:

Yep, sounds like Arny lighting. 😂😂. But by Sean's admission, he wasn't all that fond of the big light in the sky. Seems if he couldn't move it or put 30 degree grid on it, wasn't worth the bother. LOL.

Is that a WWII vet you have as your AVI Mr. K  .  .  .  boy, them "guys" really had snappy uniforms, didn't they  .  .  .    Watt's all this talk about lighting, I got one o' them "point & shoot" cameras that does all my thinkin' for me  .  .  .  so, bring on the danged test, I'll jest have me camera do it fer me  .  .  . 

SOS

Tropical Photography wrote:
Yep, sounds like Arny lighting. 😂😂. But by Sean's admission, he wasn't all that fond of the big light in the sky. Seems if he couldn't move it or put 30 degree grid on it, wasn't worth the bother. LOL.

sospix wrote:
Is that a WWII vet you have as your AVI Mr. K  .  .  .  boy, them "guys" really had snappy uniforms, didn't they  .  .  .    Watt's all this talk about lighting, I got one o' them "point & shoot" cameras that does all my thinkin' for me  .  .  .  so, bring on the danged test, I'll jest have me camera do it fer me  .  .  . 

SOS

Why yes it is!!  And she's a commander... Made me say, "YES, MAME!!!", after every shot.. LOL!!

joeyk wrote:
I'm confident that Sean could figure it, I walked in the studio the day I got my 5D and he was shooting a yard flamingo for the catalogue and had 17 lights hitting it...lol

Tropical Photography wrote:
Yep, sounds like Arny lighting. 😂😂. But by Sean's admission, he wasn't all that fond of the big light in the sky. Seems if he couldn't move it or put 30 degree grid on it, wasn't worth the bother. LOL.

He wasn't a fan of natural, you're correct, liked controlling it, many its...lol

Wasn't thrilled about shooting people either, liked it to stay put...

joeyk wrote:
OK hotshots, pop quiz. ( Bonus point for knowing the movie, extra bonus point for the actor speaking )

So sharpen your #2 pencils and go...

In order to achieve the correct exposure when using an electronic flash, what is the
correct formula to use in order to determine the appropriate f/stop?
A. Guide number ÷ distance
B. Distance x guide number
C. Shutter speed ÷ distance + guide number
D. Watt seconds x distance x shutter speed

Well, since it's all about the almighty Inverse Square, and Guide Number is aperture x distance...............I'll just go natural light, and bounce a reflector off Miss November

joeyk wrote:
OK hotshots, pop quiz. ( Bonus point for knowing the movie, extra bonus point for the actor speaking )

So sharpen your #2 pencils and go...

In order to achieve the correct exposure when using an electronic flash, what is the
correct formula to use in order to determine the appropriate f/stop?
A. Guide number ÷ distance
B. Distance x guide number
C. Shutter speed ÷ distance + guide number
D. Watt seconds x distance x shutter speed

Let's just say I'll give Teach and apple and I'll guess it's One Hour Photo and Robyn Williams...

joeyk wrote:
OK hotshots, pop quiz.

Tropical Photography wrote:
Let's just say I'll give Teach and apple and I'll guess it's One Hour Photo and Robyn Williams...

Think 8 years older.

One Hour Photo was released in 2002, the movie with the quote, 1994.

And 2 bonus points for going with a photo related movie, Williams looks just like, I mean JUST like my dad in that film...

Tropical Photography wrote:

Yep, sounds like Arny lighting. 😂😂. But by Sean's admission, he wasn't all that fond of the big light in the sky. Seems if he couldn't move it or put 30 degree grid on it, wasn't worth the bother. LOL.

I bust don't get it...granted there are times I prefer adding flashguns,my ring flash,ect,

But
1.The sun is free,doesn't cost a dime
2.Doesn't need batteries or power pack
3.Moving the model is like moving the sun
4.you can diifuse it with a scrim
5.Manipulate it with a reflector
6.use it as a rim light without needing a helper if I'm shooting in water
7.instantaneous recharge time between snaps
8.it doesn't break when it touches the water

joeyk wrote:

I was told once that in Europe, you must apprentice then pass a test to be licensed as a photographer.

The Professional Photographers Association has a Certification program, it includes a 100 question test. I wonder how many photographers on this site can calculate lighting ratios for a typical 5-6 light studio set up???

If I recall, the question on the test was for a three light set up.

I just put my camera on "P" for professional!

Chris Photography wrote:

I just put my camera on "P" for professional!

I just figure out the "don't suck" settings and break the controls off

Tropical Photography wrote:
Yep, sounds like Arny lighting. 😂😂. But by Sean's admission, he wasn't all that fond of the big light in the sky. Seems if he couldn't move it or put 30 degree grid on it, wasn't worth the bother. LOL.

Chris Rifkin wrote:
I bust don't get it...granted there are times I prefer adding flashguns,my ring flash,ect,

But
1.The sun is free,doesn't cost a dime
2.Doesn't need batteries or power pack
3.Moving the model is like moving the sun
4.you can diifuse it with a scrim
5.Manipulate it with a reflector
6.use it as a rim light without needing a helper if I'm shooting in water
7.instantaneous recharge time between snaps
8.it doesn't break when it touches the water

1)  True

2)  Umm, actually it does.. If that fusion core stops, it gets mighty dark.. Not that we'll notice because we'll all be dead before it totally dies...  Granted, I'd like my camera and flash batteries to last as long..

3)  Not exactly...  Moving the model then effects the background and if you have a specific set up that needs the model in that position, you're screwed..

4) True.. But you are a bit limited to the amount of diffusion you can use, it may also cast a slight shadow, and if there are any clouds, they can move in and totally alter the exposure..

5)  True, but again, you don't have control over output..  Therefore it's not precise..

6)  Again this is true, but again, you don't have control over output and potentially position..

7)  This is the major plus!!!  It's still faster than the faster Profoto pac..

8)  You must have a different sun than I do.. Every time it hits the water, very shortly it's pretty damn dark...    Sorry, couldn't resist that one.. 


The reality is, you have ABSOLUTE TOTAL CONTROL in the studio...  Rather than moving a model, you move the light.. Because your set may not allow you to move the model.. Just ask Arny..  Also, you can control the light very specifically.. Do you know that Arny, to continue him as an example, would have a right calf light? A left ass cheek light???  You can't concentrate the sun in the same manner as you can the light in the studio.. There's still waaaaay too many variables with location and using the sun.. Forget the fact, that bitch is always moving!!!!   

Don't get me wrong, I love shooting on location.. It offers many things that the studio doesn't.. But if you want absolute control, the studio is the only way you're going to get it.. And as Joey will attest, Sean was a lighting control freak!!!! LOL!!   
I remember he did a shoot down here in Sarasota for the company he was working for and he let another photographer take the lead and just assisted.. Why, it was outside and he didn't want to have to deal with that big light in the sky!!!   

Tropical Photography wrote:
You can't concentrate the sun in the same manner as you can the light in the studio.. There's still waaaaay too many variables with location and using the sun.

Is this the secret scrim for highlighting many different body parts with the sun?