Steve Mills wrote:
All I have, based on what little you've said, is more questions.


Have you asked this producer on what basis he chose you?

Have you seen photos of the bands he produces (promotes?)?

Have you ever photographed a group of people in your studio?

Do you know how to control shadows on your backdrop?

By hot lights, do you mean you only have flood lamps?

I sought the producer out and he likes my work and said that they need another photographer. He will be sending my one band as a trial run to see how it goes. Yes, I have seen some photos of pands that he produces. They are good, but I think I can step up to it. I just want to gather all the information and advice that I can ahead of time so that I blow him away with that first band. I have not set up my studio yet, I am getting ready to move and will be setting it up in a garage. I have done mostly on location stuff in the past and am not expanding my knowledge of studio work (check out my first studio shoot, the first few pics in my port.)  I know some about controling light and shadows, but that is part of what I am still trying to learn. I will not be doing this shoot for about 3 more weeks so I am trying to learn as much as I can before that time.  I have a 3 light kit from Ritz. What I mean by hot lights is that they are not stobe. That is what I used in those studio shoots that I have in my port with the silvertone backdrop.

Steve Mills wrote:
Your experience level and equipment sounds so very much like where I was about the late 80's or so. I started out with a set of Smith Victor floods and stands that I had bought through Sears and Roebuck, believe it or not, which I carried around from job to job in their neat little cardboard case. Yeah, this is taking me down a path I had almost forgotten.

Of primary importance, if you want this to be less error and more trial, is to set up your lights, whatever you use, and get a working knowledge of the relationship between background, subjects, camera position, and angles of shadows. The distance between the subject and the background can be the hardest thing to control, while at the same time it's vital to where the shadows fall.

Next to that, learn how far from your subjects you need to be in order to make them fit your backdrop. I'm thinking that in a garage setting, you might want to set your camera outside in the driveway. Seriously. It takes a lot of distance to avoid problems. Even a 12' paper backdrop is tough in a tight space.

If you can afford to drop a couple hundred bucks, get some simple monolight strobes with modeling lamps. The floods work, but they are so harsh and cause people to squint a lot. This would be the biggest step away from almost certain disappointment. Floods are ok for still life, but they are not people friendly. Opt for strobes as soon as you can afford them.

Thank you, I am actually ready to buy the proper lighting. I have about $1000 to spend, what do you think would be my best investment?

Mark Heaps wrote:
1) NEVER HAVE THEM STAND ON RAILROAD TRACKS!!!!

HEY I RESEMBLE THAT REMARK! haha.

umm make sure you get paid up front for any shoots you do. i learned the hard way from working with a rap record label.

just be creative man. use their music to inspire you for shoots.

as for lighting you can get cheaper from alien bees, and if your shooting outside in the sun of course just use the sunlight.

as for copyright, if they are employing you, (i.e. if your on pay roll you get a check and a w-2 form) they will retain the copyrights. if its on a case by case contract by contract basis you will retain rights and you can negotiate usage rights.

good luck!

DanaK Photography wrote:

Thank you, I am actually ready to buy the proper lighting. I have about $1000 to spend, what do you think would be my best investment?

Shadows will hurt you as much as anything.  If you have to, get friends or family members to stand up and you can test with them.  Two things I'd think of to add to that killer list up there is that you don't want them all posing the same way.  You don't want them linebacking the camera either.

Get something in writing relating to what the guy is going to use the images for.  I'm sure they'll be published, used for posters, CD sleeves or whatever.  I'd factor in how well known the bands are, whether they're making $500 a gig or $40,000 and base my fees on that.  On a few things I have printed I asked that I have photo credit on whatever it was too.  One band I have shot for almost a year asked to use my images on a CD sleeve.  I told them $100 a picture and they went to Glamour Shots to have some generic work done instead of accepting my offer.  Sucks to be them right now I guess.

Joe Tomasone wrote:
Find railroad tracks running alongside a brick wall, and you're all set.    Maybe throw in some caution tape to mix overused cliches? 


You will definitely need strobes; you may wish to consider renting a studio instead of trying to do it in your garage.  First, it will look more professional (and you can add the costs into the fee you charge going forward).   Second, it will be cheaper (normally) than buying the equipment up front before you know that there's revenue behind the purchase.   Third, you will likely find more backgrounds/set possibilities than you'd be able to whip together on short notice.   Lastly, isn't is damned hot in your garage?   Anyone I took in my garage to shoot would have to sit on blocks of ice.

I am going to get stobes. That is a good idea, how would I go about renting a studio? I have not moved yet, I was planing on putting an air unit in the garage. I am still playing with ideas, so I appriciate the options.

DanaK Photography wrote:
That is a good idea, how would I go about renting a studio?

Google, or check/post in the MM Market for a studio that's available for rent. 

DanaK Photography wrote:
I have not moved yet, I was planing on putting an air unit in the garage.

Well, keep in mind that most garages have zero insulation, so it will be hard to keep the cold in and the heat out - meaning you'll need a much bigger A/C unit than a small window style one - and it will likely be cranking the entire time it's on during the day, which will show up as a nice bump in your electric bill. 

I'd look into dedicating a room in your new place as a studio instead, unless you plan to convert the garage into living space with insulation, interior walls, etc.

Figure you'll need at the absolute minimum a 20x15 foot space to put up a roll of 12' seamless (or a muslin) and shoot - and that limits your creativity horribly since you are limited in where you can place your lights.    More realistic is 20'w x 15'd, and the larger you go from there the better off you are.

Higher ceilings will also help from a lighting perspective, and most garages are usually low - but compensate by usually having dark surfaces that will help contain reflections.

FKVPhotoGraphics wrote:
I haven't shot bands for a long time. Back in the mid 70's to mid 80's I worked for a number of entertainment magazine and shot many bands. Some you have probably either see or heard.

Bands are like fingerprints. Now two are alike, at least none that want to make it big. Originality is the most important ingredient of a bands success.

Originality is what you must provide. Not saying you won't need strobes but don't get sucked into studio shots that have been done to death. You may never need a studio or strobes.

I'd suggest you find out what types of bands you're expected to work with. If possible go see the bands, listen to their music, talk with the band members. As creative people in their own right I'm almost positive they themselves have a pretty good idea as to the image they wish to project. Do a little brainstorming first before buy equipment that will only produce the same old shots.

Be original and most of all BE CREATIVE! The band members will certainly understand and appreciate the effort.

I think most of your sugestions are fine Frank but I would take issue with asking the bands themselves what they want.  I'd say that's route one to telling them you don't know what you're doing.  And it's also a great way to producing some very boring photos.

Personally I think you can ignore almost all advice if what you do is done in an interesting enough way.  Photographers like Mark Seliger or Anton Corbijn could take any of the cliches already referred to and still make great photos.  Brick walls, sunglasses and everything.

(Thinking about it, maybe not caution tape though).

The biggest problem I think you'll have is engaging the minds of the musicians long enough for you to do a decent job.  Irrespective of who is actually paying for the session, some bands might give you two hours, some may only give you two minutes.

So often you have to make sure you do something very special very quickly.

Kristine Kreations wrote:
A lot of bands should be able to help you and be the creative directors for their own shoots.

See, the operative word here is "should."

IMVHO they probably won't.  For a start, mostly they don't want to be there.  And many of them don't have a clue.  The ones that do have ideas are usually of the deeply tedious cliche variety.  Like brick walls and railway tracks.  That's why they're musicians and we're the photographers.

The problem is, once you ask them, can you then ignore what they say they want?

Furthermore, even if you produce what they said they wanted exactly, when they see it they may decide it wasn't what they wanted.

And whose fault will it be then?

Mark Heaps wrote:
What ever you do...DO NOT DO THESE THINGS! I've promoted bands for years, and toured with many.  These are the most common things I've seen where people are being extremely generic.  And I mean, hundreds of bands do these!

Top ten worst band shots ever, mostly because they are overdone!

10) Have them all point at the lens...
9) Running and jumping into the frame...
8) Sunglasses shots, don't do sunglasses shots.
7) Girls everywhere around their legs... (Unless girl band, limitless potential there!)
6) Sitting on Motorbikes or Hotrod.
5) All passed out around a bunch of beer cans/bottles etc...
4) All playing with some type of raw meat, or like material.
3) Sitting on the stairs together!
2) Please don't have them line-up against a Brick Wall!
1) NEVER HAVE THEM STAND ON RAILROAD TRACKS!!!!

Obviously these ideas can be reproduced well, and genre plays a huge part of styling but I've literally seen these top 10 shots listed at least a hundred times with each major tour booker office I've sat in.  They are repeated constantly, and often poorly.

This at least made me chuckle...have fun with your shoot.

hahaha, awesome list, I had a flash of like damn I don't even know how many bands did one or a combinations of these poses / setups.

Wicked list.

Derek Ridgers wrote:
I think most of your sugestions are fine Frank but I would take issue with asking the bands themselves what they want.  I'd say that's route one to telling them you don't know what you're doing.

I'm a bit surprised at that statement. After a long time of aiming my camera at people I have found it a good idea to see what's on their mind rather than not asking a few basic questions. I'v alway hated walking into a dark room without a flashlight and being asked for directions. But that's just me!

FKVPhotoGraphics wrote:

I'm a bit surprised at that statement. After a long time of aiming my camera at people I have found it a good idea to see what's on their mind rather than not asking a few basic questions. I'v alway hated walking into a dark room without a flashlight and being asked for directions. But that's just me!

The problem, as I see it Frank, is that a lot of musicians have huge egos and an over inflated view of their own abilities.  And once you ask them what they want, it's always that much harder to then back out of it, if it sounds pathetically cliched. 

Especially if they're well known, household names.  Once they've spoken, that's what they must have.

Then, if the photos are terrible, it's only ever your fault never theirs.

IMVHO a lot of musicians are surprisingly very visually unsophisticated.  Unless they're also photographers - like Michael Stipe or Dave Stewart.  Or, I suppose, well known collectors like Elton John.

They should not give you much trouble.  Or, at least, not with the photographic ideas.  Maybe other things.

FKVPhotoGraphics wrote:

I'm a bit surprised at that statement. After a long time of aiming my camera at people I have found it a good idea to see what's on their mind rather than not asking a few basic questions. I'v alway hated walking into a dark room without a flashlight and being asked for directions. But that's just me!

More importantly, bands are gonna tell the photographer want THEY want.  Most are so keenly aware of image that they come to the table with a pretty concise idea of branding an imagery.

DanaK Photography wrote:
I have recently been asked to get on board with a band producer. He has close to 20 bands. I need advice on how to make my photos stand out. The producer prefers studio shots to on location. I have a backdrop, but only have hot lights. I don't want to just go out and buy a bunch of stuff that I don't need. What should I get to make the most out of my studio. Also, what other things should I consider while shooting? 
What should I charge and how do I handle copyright. I have an idea about some of this, but I would love some feedback. Any advice would be greatly apprieciated!!

Most important to me would be hire a great assistant to help out.   Shooting multiple personalities leaves very little room for "oh, give me a few minutes to work it out".....
and if you don't know any great assistants, bring along a friend or two to help carry or set up stuff.  Makes you look more professional too.

JimGL wrote:
More importantly, bands are gonna tell the photographer want THEY want.  Most are so keenly aware of image that they come to the table with a pretty concise idea of branding an imagery.

Okay well all I can say is that your experience is very different to mine.

In my experience the bands are very seldom paying for the session themselves and often they find doing any photos to be an imposition.

The want the finished product, they just don't want to facilitate it's being done.

Mostly the session will be commissioned and paid for by either (1) a record company, (2) a magazine or similar and (3) occasionally band management.  Personally I've never heard of it being commissioned by a bands producer before.

Either way, whoever is paying for it usually says what THEY want, and this could and often is subtly different to what the band want.

So - if the band turn up and you ask them what THEY want to do and it is different, you've given yourself the first problem.

Black and Blue wrote:
I like what this guy does with bands

http://www.widelec.org/foto_by_dave_hill,id,1178.html

Go to the last few sets of images...(its NOT just his style, but the approach and ideas behind the images as well)

I have seen his work before, it is amazing? I know he must do a lot of photoshop work, how does he get his images to look like that? any advice there?

Karl Blessing wrote:
Hrm I only shot one band in the past... I wonder if I broke one of the cardinal rule.

Vivitar 283 and a house lamp.

Dude, you totally stole Helmut Newton's lighting scheme (except for the house light).

DanaK Photography wrote:
That is great!! You mean, everyone doesn't want to stand against a brick wall or sit on steps? I have to delete half my pics now, oh yeah, and the rail road tracks.  Love it!!

ha ha ha, sorry didn't mean to kill your direction...isn't funny that everyone, including myself, have gone down that road...bad, bad, photographers.