|
Forums >
Photography Talk >
Geographically dispropinquitious photography?
Hard to title this when MM truncates. This is probably an out-of-the-box question. I did a search and didn't find anything like this (maybe I didn't look hard enough). Preface: I think the answer to the question I'm going to pose is "No, it can't be done!" However, I'm going to ask anyway because there was a time when I thought the iPhone was an inappropriate phone for a shoot until I read articles that ask, "Is the iPhone the only camera you'll need?" Since it doesn't shoot RAW yet (that I know of) the answer is still No. But the fact that some are even considering it in writing leads me to ask in public form the following question. Beauty shots are not inappropriate so the tog can see what he/she is up against--unvarnished images for planning purposes. Like a Polaroid shot. One model and tog did FaceTime to get these shots. [Challenging, fun but ultimately not satisfactory]. Got me thinking--can we upgrade systems and do this for real? Some surgery is done remotely. Sometimes we capture nature shots remotely. We fly drones in different continents from the US. We do TV shows with guests in remote locations. QUESTION: Has anyone credibly tried to do the normal model photo shoot remotely and with what results? Example: model in Tokyo, tog in Taipei. [Disregarding the emotional reaction some of you are having, "This guy is nuts!" respond to the technical issues.] Thank you. Dec 07 12 06:05 pm Link Response via PM: "Mail them a camera, self timer and a prepaid return shipping box!" My response: it's not interactive, model can't see how s/he looks till later. I'm looking for something synchronous so that tog can actually control and direct the shoot. But does lead me to cogitate! :-) Percolating some thoughts. Dec 07 12 06:09 pm Link http://blog.pocketwizard.com/?tag=remot … triggering http://inciteimages.wordpress.com/2012/ … minitt1-2/ This is probably as close as I could imagine that currently working pocket wiz explained: http://phlearn.com/pocket-wizards Dec 07 12 06:12 pm Link before responding to the technical issues, one asks 'why?' they dont do remote surgery unless they have to. give us a technical reason to ponder this. Dec 07 12 06:52 pm Link AVD AlphaDuctions wrote: Oops, you're correct that I didn't take the time to expound on the rationale because I thought it somewhat self evident. Dec 08 12 06:24 pm Link The technology is there. Motorized web cams, heck they have a remote camera on Mars. The next thing is how good of a camera do you want on the other end? Somebody has to be there to set it up. You could have a studio set up in one location and have a shoot while you are in another location. The pictures could be sent to the web by wifi. Expensive equipment to be in another location. If you go with cheaper gear, you are back to web cams and facetime. I guess the bottom line is that it can be done if you have enough money you are willing to spend on it. Dec 08 12 06:37 pm Link Thanks for the explanation. The issue I see is that you have to transport basically a studio to the remote location, the model (or her escort) has to set it up and then move lights around to suit your concept. one of those eBay kits will get you the strobes and stands and softboxes. another kit will get you a backdrop. camera and tripod is another package (might fit in the bag with the strobes?). Shipping both will be costly but if its worth your while artistically why not? Once its there you can do all the direction via facetime but at some point the model is going to say to herself/himself "fkc this I can do a selfie". If you want a remote view of what the camera is seeing you need to ship a laptop set for tethering (and have a camera that does it). Then remote control software (comes with windows) to take over the laptop and you are done. unless the model is a lighting tech and really computer savvy count on at least 3 hours to set up for a shoot via direction. totally doable with existing technology but really not very smooth. Dec 08 12 06:48 pm Link Sounds like you're describing web-cam based modeling. I get spam from 'models' soliciting work in that genre on occasion. Ill forward it to you next time. They tend to take credit cards. Dec 09 12 06:06 am Link It's an interesting concept. Here are some thoughts. 1. Almost anything is technically possible. I could see doing something like this and making it happen. I've done multi-hour conferences between DC, NY, and Japan with just a residential net connection and PCs. To do a remote studio, the greater issue is cost on the "studio" side. 2. What type of photography are you considering? To the OP, if you're talking about the types of photos in your port, I find it difficult to imagine a cost-effective remote studio where you could do this. Note I said "cost-effective". In contrast, if you are doing something like an on-line catalog for someone like Neiman-Marcus, you could come much closer to something that is cost-effective. If you go to the link below, the dresses are extraordinary, and yet the photos are all essentially formulaic. http://www.neimanmarcus.com/category.js … =cat000727 3. What quality images do you want? Is this for fun, art, or business? For fun, an iPhone or similar could work, but why? In contrast, if it is for business, could you actually produce something a client would consider acceptable, even with professional equipment? Do you think Neiman-Marcus would trust a remote studio image to sell a $2000 Little Black Dress? 4. If you had a remote studio (whether yours or a commercial one), it would still likely need to be attended. Think "Walmart" photographer, not to put them down. (If someone is working and making money, more power to them!) You could direct both the model and the remote studio person, who is also basic security for the studio. Assuming the camera is tethered where the image is sent to you, you could certainly review the photos and evolve the process. The bottom line is that it could be done. There are variations you could do, but you'd really need to be trying to solve a problem. I cannot imagine this being inexpensive to set up, but I could imagine it being cost-effective under certain circumstances. Dec 09 12 09:22 am Link Robb Mann wrote: :-) No thanks. This is NOT MM quality. Pass. Doesn't meet spec. Thanks for offer. You've missed the mark! LOL Dec 09 12 10:49 am Link Graham Glover wrote: Graham: Dec 09 12 10:53 am Link FFantastique wrote: MM quality? Dec 09 12 10:59 am Link Dec 09 12 11:01 am Link Windows remote desktop, shooting tethered in Lightroom in liveview. Dec 09 12 11:04 am Link dispropinquitious isn't a valid word - propinquitious is a word using dis in this manner is akin to say disproximity, disnearness, or discloseness Dec 09 12 11:19 am Link FFantastique wrote: Robb Mann wrote: :-) No thanks. This is NOT MM quality. Pass. Doesn't meet spec. Thanks for offer. You've missed the mark! LOL Then you need to clarify, as what you described in your OP IS essentially "web-cam based modeling". If you need higher quality, use a better camera in place of the webcam. Dec 09 12 12:34 pm Link |
