Captured Moments wrote:
Leave a link to the workshop info.

No doubt.

Eric Haywood wrote:
Thanks for sharing.  I still have your other thread bookmarked.

Cool.

I kinda want to know what the MUA's think about the vid.  Does it help them any?  I mean it's mainly for photographers but I did try to showcase the make up as much as possible in the first part of the vid.

Gone Til  Novus-ember wrote:

Cool.

I kinda want to know what the MUA's think about the vid.  Does it help them any?  I mean it's mainly for photographers but I did try to showcase the make up as much as possible in the first part of the vid.

How long did it take for her to do the makeup?

LADY SWEET FACE wrote:

How long did it take for her to do the makeup?

Bout an hour maybe less.

Mainly cause the camera man kept telling her to get out of the way when she was applying it.

The first half took her about 25 minutes, then getting the sprinkles  to stick and stay the way i wanted them took another thirty or so.

Gone Til  Novus-ember wrote:

Bout an hour maybe less.

Mainly cause the camera man kept telling her to get out of the way when she was applying it.

The first half took her about 25 minutes, then getting the sprinkles  to stick and stay the way i wanted them took another thirty or so.

See, that's totally reasonable!

LADY SWEET FACE wrote:

See, that's totally reasonable!

You were expecting unreasonable?

Dave Atkinson wrote:
The most impressive part to me is how flawless her skin ended up looking.  Was there post processing to remove some of the slight imperfections that were visible in the video?  Or was the makeup artist that good?  Or did they all end up in the glare from the angled back lighting?

Great concept for a shoot, nice lighting, it looked like a lot of fun.. And that makeup artist seemed fantastic, too.

Actually, the same question popped into my head last night.  I know you detailed your post process in the other thread, but how much does it differ when you shoot in-studio?

Kevlar Vest Girl wrote:
I have a question... that pose in picture number three, after you get her set up to the camera, how do you keep your hands off of her.... whew, she rocks hard!

It helps when the model is such a fucking goofball that she kills any erection in the room by the sheer dork that exudes from her being.

Dave Atkinson wrote:
The most impressive part to me is how flawless her skin ended up looking.  Was there post processing to remove some of the slight imperfections that were visible in the video?  Or was the makeup artist that good?  Or did they all end up in the glare from the angled back lighting?

Great concept for a shoot, nice lighting, it looked like a lot of fun.. And that makeup artist seemed fantastic, too.

No MUA is so good that there is NO retouching that has to be done, but I was limited in  how much I had to do.  She applied no only face but body make up, to lessen the amount of post processing that i had to do later.  I was left with some minimal cloning, healing, dodging and burning.  Most major thing I did was remove a tattoo on the stomach i didn't like and some body sculpting.

Eric Haywood wrote:

Actually, the same question popped into my head last night.  I know you detailed your post process in the other thread, but how much does it differ when you shoot in-studio?

Doesn't differ much.

For the close up shots i spent a much longer time cloning healing and dodging and burning that on the full body or 3/4 shots, but that's typical.

Gone Til  Novus-ember wrote:

???

I thought it was a zoomed in 100% crop of the first image to show the detail in her eyes.  And if that were the case, you'd have the most insane camera/lens combo in history.  It was just my initial reaction then I quickly realized it's a separate close up image,  but shit did my heart skip a beat at first.

Lee K wrote:

I thought it was a zoomed in 100% crop of the first image to show the detail in her eyes.  And if that were the case, you'd have the most insane camera/lens combo in history.  It was just my initial reaction then I quickly realized it's a separate close up image,  but shit did my heart skip a beat at first.

HA!  No, I wish, but no.  Though the 100 percent crop isn't bad either

Eric Haywood wrote:
I don't think I saw you using a light meter in the video.  Do you use one, or just eyeball it?

He doesn't use one, he just eyeballs it.

MelissaLynnette LaDiva wrote:
He doesn't use one, he just eyeballs it.

F*ckin' G

Shastri Babb wrote:

F*ckin' G

Precisely.

Eric Haywood wrote:
I don't think I saw you using a light meter in the video.  Do you use one, or just eyeball it?

What Melissa said.  I never use one.

Eric Paul Owens wrote:
I love the colorful backdrops you use for some of these shoots... are they muslin or wallpaper?  are you making them?

Remnant cloth from the fabric store.

Frame O Mind wrote:
Great shot, I was curious as the the ratio of your rim lights to your forward light. Im guessing 2 stops difference maybe?

1 and a 1/2

Gone Til  Novus-ember wrote:

Bout an hour maybe less.

Mainly cause the camera man kept telling her to get out of the way when she was applying it.

The first half took her about 25 minutes, then getting the sprinkles  to stick and stay the way i wanted them took another thirty or so.

I work pretty quick on makeup. Plus I've worked with the model a ton of times so I know her face.

Gone Til  Novus-ember wrote:

There's only one and it was for the video.  I like my shots warm anyway so after color balancing, i felt it was doable.

If you have a decent video camera it would handle the light level from the modeling lamps and you wouldn't need to have a shop light screwing with your white balance. I shoot low level with my Panasonic 100A on 12db gain and get great results. If you're going to spend time and money making a video, do it with the same quality you seem to put into your still photography.

Bill Mason Images wrote:

If you have a decent video camera it would handle the light level from the modeling lamps and you wouldn't need to have a shop light screwing with your white balance. I shoot low level with my Panasonic 100A on 12db gain and get great results. If you're going to spend time and money making a video, do it with the same quality you seem to put into your still photography.

Awww that's cute.  But considering i made the video to HELP people that might want to learn a little something, and not to "make high quality video"  I think it served it's purpose.

But, you always gotta have one turd in the toilet.

Eric Paul Owens wrote:
I love the colorful backdrops you use for some of these shoots... are they muslin or wallpaper?  are you making them?

We always go raiding the clearance section of fabric stores. You'd be amazed at what you can find for $1-$2/yard.

Gone Til  Novus-ember wrote:

Awww that's cute.  But considering i made the video to HELP people that might want to learn a little something, and not to "make high quality video"  I think it served it's purpose.

But, you always gotta have one turd in the toilet.

He said "money"... LOL.

AFox Faces wrote:

He said "money"... LOL.

Like i said, you always gotta have one turd in the toilet.

Gone Til  Novus-ember wrote:
Keith Murray.  Says so in the credits.

My bad, didn't stick around for the credits! Kudos to you though!

Kings Media wrote:

My bad, didn't stick around for the credits! Kudos to you though!

Kudos to keith.

Gone Til  Novus-ember wrote:

Awww that's cute.  But considering i made the video to HELP people that might want to learn a little something, and not to "make high quality video"  I think it served it's purpose.

But, you always gotta have one turd in the toilet.

*chortle*


I have officially used it!