/p/ - Photography » Thread #3194633

[6 / 2 / ?]

156KiB, 640x498, large.jpg

Anonymous Sun 26 Nov 2017 20:38:19 No.3194633 View View Reply Original Report

Quoted By: >>3194635

I'm attempting to shoot something similar to Crewdson's natural wonder series and am wondering how can I create a painterly effect as he did? I'm shooting with digital and would prefer it if I can get it done in the camera, but I'm open to shoot ideas. Anybody have any tips for me, I would appreciate it.
>Pic related.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 26 Nov 2017 20:46:54 No.3194635 Report

Quoted By: >>3194756

>>3194633
He shoots digital too, the main thing behind his work is the cinematic lighting. Look up lighting ratios and light shaping. That painterly effect is from the limited tonal range of the lighting. In natural light the ratio between the specular highlights and the shadows is much larger than depicted in painting/cinematic lighting. Contrast and saturation in the different areas also has to be carefully controlled to avoid the HDR look that can come out of artificially expanding the apparent tonal range. The main idea here is that the range of values in the shadow areas should have very limited overlap with the range of values in the midtones while still retaining contrast.

It's a pretty expensive method, same with cinema lighting.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 27 Nov 2017 00:35:57 No.3194756 Report

Quoted By: >>3194758

>>3194635
>He shoots digital too
how about you dont talk about shit you dont fucking know anything about?

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO download (1).jpg, 3KiB, 199x112

Anonymous Mon 27 Nov 2017 00:41:06 No.3194758 Report

Quoted By: >>3194761

>>3194756
>You used to shoot 8 x 10 for many years, and now you are shooting digitally. What’s your system now, and do you miss 8 x 10, or do you feel liberated?

>Yes. I used to have this expression, because I’ve worked with 8x 10 for so long in my life, that you live and die by the 8 x10. It’s such a limited camera, but it also has such clarity and beautiful description. Yet it’s a beast — it’s cumbersome and has limited focus. I can honestly say that when I was finished with Beneath the Roses, I was finished with the 8 x 10. I don’t miss it in any way, and I can’t imagine ever going back to it. But that doesn’t mean I regret using it. I loved it. Now I shoot with a Phase One camera, but it’s set up like a view camera.

>https://petapixel.com/2016/05/18/interview-gregory-crewdson/

>mfw

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 27 Nov 2017 00:47:51 No.3194761 Report

Quoted By: >>3194762

>>3194758
https://www.artsy.net/artwork/gregory-crewdson-untitled-natural-wonder-series
>GREGORY CREWDSON "Untitled (Natural Wonder Series)", 1995
>1995
>1
>9
>9
>5

what look did OP wanted to emulate? very recent crewdson or 1995 crewdson? hows that retardation going on?

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 27 Nov 2017 00:53:26 No.3194762 Report

Quoted By:

>>3194761
>Thinking film vs digital matters more than anything else when taking photos like this
Dude you should totally apply to his Yale program, be sure to send in a box of 8x10 with your portfolio. I'm sure it will make up for the lack of literally everything else.

Capcode	All Only User Posts Only Verified Posts Only Moderator Posts Only Manager Posts Only Admin Posts Only Developer Posts Only Founder Posts
Show Posts	All Only With Images Only Without Images Only Spoiler Images Only Non-Spoiler Images
Deleted Posts	All Only Deleted Posts Only Non-Deleted Posts
Ghost Posts	All Only Ghost Posts Only Non-Ghost Posts
Post Type	All Only Sticky Threads Only Opening Posts Only Reply Posts
Results	All Grouped By Threads
Order	Latest Posts First Oldest Posts First

On these archives

Your latest searches