6.07.2014

Behind the Scenes at Our Green Screen Shoot. And a Few Notes About Some Patents Pending.


I wrote about our two shoots for Zach Theatre yesterday and I thought today I'd add some behind the scenes images to the mix just to show the set up. We're using two 4 tube fluorescent fixtures on the actual green screen. These are on either side of the green screed and about ten feet in front of its vertical plane. They are placed and turned to give an even spread of light across the background. We were able to achieve a fall off from center-to-side-to-side of about 1/10th of a stop. The small horizontal rectangle just to the right of the video camera is a small monitor which allows the clients to see what the image looks like and to show cameraman, Eric Graham, various things like a graphical representation of the fall off from one side of the green screen to the other.


This view angle shows our fill light on the left side of the frame (closest to camera). It's a 2 tube fluorescent fixture that's being diffused by a one stop silk diffuser. It's about twice the distance from the main subject as the main light which is on the other side of the camera. The soft, low level fill just serves to keep the shadow side of our actor's face from going into deep, noisy black. 


In this particular shot we're dong a zoom from a close up that frames just one of the actor's eyes and zooms out to reveal the actor from waist up. We chose to use a Sony EX3 camera in order to use a longer range zoom that has a power zoom feature. The lens is par focal which means that it stays in focus throughout the zoom range. Absolutely critical for this particular shot. 


I mentioned yesterday that one of the problems we're always trying to solve in shooting green screen is to keep the green color from reflecting off the background and wrapping around the subject. When that happens it nearly impossible to drop out the background cleanly and can ruin the effect you might have had in mind for your compositing project. Shown here is our solution. It's a Fiilex P360 LED light covered with a 1/2 minus green (magenta colored) gel. The gel helps to neutralize any bounce back from the green. It's mounted on a 12 foot stand on the back side of the background cloth and pointed out and down at the head and shoulders of our actor. 


In this shot you can see our main light just above and slightly to the left of the camera. It's a 6 tube fluorescent unit that belts out a lot of light. I have it covered with a thick, white diffusion material because I think it's cruel to have a bare light shining directly into the eyes of the talent. The diffusion helps take the edge off the light. I also like some diffusion on my lights to smooth out transitions. 

You'll notice that we don't have sand bags on our stands and I would counsel you to make it a practice always to sand bag your heavy lights. I took a chance since we were working on a closed set on the stage of a live theater and the crew and artistic personnel are used to working around possible hazards during rehearsal and stage creation. That being said, I was nervous about the high LED light until we finished the shoot and brought it back down. 


It is rare that we work this close to the actual green screen. Best practices call for getting the subject as far out in front of the screen as possible. We were limited by the width of the screen (about 9 feet) which, when we comped to mid thigh to top of head shot meant we were already at the side-to-side edges of our material. Our other limitation was our time with the space and with the actor. We had to shoehorn a still shoot, a lighting change and a video shoot all into the space of three hours. In a higher budget project with a more flexed out schedule we would have done this in a dedicated studio with a wide (twenty feet or more) cyc wall painted process green. 

If we had run out of space and it had been critical to get more on the sides but maintain very high resolution we would have turned the camera sideways, turn the file in post and then matted in more green on the edges. An additional burden for the editor but sometimes a trick to save the shoot from a host of technical maladies.  


Over the course of two hours of video shooting we ended up with three spot variations, any one of which would work for our fifteen second TV spots. 


We used a digital recorder with the EX3 camera so we could get 4:2:2 color which makes compositing easier. We used a small monitor so Dave Steakley (facing front in a blue t-shirt) could review the various takes to gauge the emotional feel of the clips. Eric, our camera man and director was looking at the same monitor for things like timing, zoom smoothness and accurate focus. I checked the monitor from time to time to gauge exposure and lighting aesthetics. All in all the projects were successful. The spots will run in  two weeks, the post cards will go out in a week and a half and all the edited and finished material will be up on the web during the final week of pre-production before the opening of the show. 


And the show is a re-imagined version of the rock opera, Tommy. 

All of the "behind the scenes" images were shot using a Sony RX10.  The RX10 is the most flexible camera on the market today. It's a great still camera, a great travel package and one of the best hybrid video/still cameras on the market. I hope Sony doesn't discontinue it before I pick up another one. 

On to more important stuff: Once Amazon patented the white background I couldn't stop thinking of potential stuff to patent. So, my I.P. attorney and I have been busy and here's what we have patents pending for at the moment, so please don't infringe or we'll come down on you like gangbusters and hasten my own yacht centered retirement at your expense. 

1. We were in a bit of disbelief when we discovered that no one, not even David Hobby, had patented the technique of using a battery powered flash off the camera. I found this amazing and my attorney thought it was a delicious place to start. We applied for two patents: One for using the flash off camera with a cable and the other for using a flash off camera with a radio trigger. Now, please understand, we aren't patenting the technology for getting the flash off camera, just the action of using the flash off the camera. You are now forewarned so put the damn flash back on your hotshoe and suck it up!

2. We were also amused that no one had patented the placing of photographic gear on a cart and using said cart to transport photographic gear from one place to a separate and different place. We rushed to patent the actual transportation ( or "movement" ) of photographic gear, including but not limited to, cameras, lights, stands, boxes, photographic equipment containers and other sundry devices, on a cart that is pulled or pushed from one location to another. If you like to bring a lot of equipment to your remote locations you'll need to lose the cart and hire more photo assistants or Sherpas. That or risk the wrath of our legal arm. 

3. We are close to owning HDR or "High Dynamic Range" recording. While some of the tools for creating the effect are patented we discovered that no one owns the patent for actually doing "Technicolor Vomit" (the technical term...) in post production or for actuating it automatically on your camera. We doubled down on this one and also sought to trademark the term, "HDR".  I figure every time Trey Ratliff shoots something I'll get a small royalty from him for the initial infringement and another micropayment from anyone who describes the resulting photograph using the term, "HDR." 

4.  While Amazon clearly owns the technique for creating images with white backgrounds they failed in their submission to extend their patent to the creation of images with color backgrounds and we were able to swoop in and lock that puppy down. The patent application is far ranging and includes the colors, red, yellow, blue, green, magenta, cyan and black. Or any mixture of these colors to create any other colors. We refer to this beautiful piece of legal work as "our money maker!"

5. You'll never believe this but while some camera straps are protected from being copied by pending patents no one has filed a patent for the actual use of a strap to suspend a camera from a human. Or animal, or "other."  Well, now we have. So whether you use a logical and straightforward strap to carry your camera, suspended from yourself, your heirs or your assigns,  or whether you use one of the camera-killing sling straps with a single attachment point that holds your precious camera in an inverted orientation,  you are now more than welcome to own the strap, and even argue the merits of each design but you will need to apply for a license in order to use said strap in the aforementioned manner. We're "pending" right now but with ground breaking precedence from Amazon it's really only a matter of time before we start a whole scale campaign to hunt down infringement on a mass scale.

6. Finally, we are attempting to get a patent for the use of tripods to provide a steady base from which to shoot images with a still or video camera. Now, just to be clear, it would not be an infringement to own a tripod or to even attach a camera of any kind to the tripod, but using it to provide a support during the shooting process will require a license. It's not the camera or the tripod themselves that are subject to this patent, only the intermixing of said articles in the pursuit of sharp photographs by application of photography while so attached. 

That's all we have for today but we are branching out. In the spirit of the Amazon patents for the white background we are looking into social media such as Twitter. While we can't patent the writing or sending of 140 character messages we may just be able to secure the patent for the actual reading of said messages on any sort of transmissive screen. Messages printed on paper fall outside the parameters of the filing but transmissive screens? That's a whole other ball park....

And would you believe that we just discovered that no patent currently covers the design and construction of baseball parks? Ah, the U.S. patent. The gift that keeps on giving for major corporations. Join the fun! What every day thing can you patent?

6.06.2014

First Assistant Makes Short Work of Twin Shoots.

Ben, on location at Zach Theatre.
Lighting: Elinchrom Monolights.
Camera: Panasonic GH4
Lens: 35-100mm X f2.8
©2014 Kirk Tuck 

Ben was between projects today and agreed to come along and assist me on the back to back, still photo/video project I had on the books for this afternoon. We hit the ground running at Zach Theatre and set up our background for the stills. This is a shot of Ben standing in for the actor who will be starring in Tommy in July. At this point we were still doing some fine tuning and I needed to bring up the levels of the background lights. But I liked the image of Ben so I kept it. 

Ben has done probably  a dozen or so serious video projects and maybe 100+ fun, goofing around video projects with friends and at school so he's very conversant with the role of director and producer. He also knows his way around lights and grip equipment. 

Once the stills were done we moved on to lighting for the green screen video. Again, he moved smoothly and quickly through the process all the while keeping his ears open for changes in the agenda. He likes to think a couple steps ahead...

The director on the set was happy with the lighting and got the shots he needed. The Theatre now has good building blocks for print, web and TV to use in promoting the upcoming show. As soon as the actor left the set Ben was wrapping cables, pulling down lights and packing up stands. 

After we dropped off our intern at his college dorm Ben and I headed home. He's not a cellphone addict so he left his phone at home during the shoot. He checked his messages when we got in, critiqued (at my request) my current edit on the restaurant video I've been editing and then headed out the door for a dinner party. 

I was able to teach him something new today. Not sure when he'll ever use it again. But when you light for green screen your biggest fear is that the green reflectance will "wrap around" your actor or talent and give you green edges on the main subject. Then it becomes a nightmare to composite. I learned a long time ago to put a high backlight at the back of the set, aimed at the subject's back. The light should be gelled with a magenta gel (opposite of green) which will help cancel out the color of the reflectance. You don't need a heavy magenta. A 1/4 to 1/2 minus-green works great. We looked long and hard at the video footage in an onstage monitor and couldn't find a trace of the dreaded green wrap. 

It's fun to work with the kid. He's been booked up with projects and social functions since the end of school and I feel like I barely get to see him. Nice to work with someone really good.



Packing for two, sequential, inter-related shoots. One still photography and the other video. Double the pain?


I had the highest hopes for what some on the web are calling hybrid imaging. The idea is that we'd find one camera that would do really great photos and really great video (done!) and then we'd find one type of lighting that would work for both types of imaging. We would happily switch between stills and video without ever having to change our lighting and everything would be quick, convenient and merry. I bought into it. But it's total bullshit----at least for now.

Let me backtrack... I bought into the concept because, for many of the jobs I do the new way can really work. If I go out to shoot an executive portrait and the marketing department also needs an interview I can set up LED or fluorescent lights, grab a Panasonic GH4 (or even a Sony RX 10) and get good stills and video content at the switch of the mode dial and with the attachment of a good microphone. Where things start to break down is when we move beyond the easy stuff and introduce subject motion and the need to freeze action in still images. All of a sudden we're back into the realm of flash.

I'm doing a job today that would be perfect for continuous lighting if it weren't for the fact that we'll need to create a feel of rock concert kinetics with our actor. We're doing marketing images for Zach Theatre's rendition of Tommy and we're going to try and get wild stage movements and swinging, Roger Daltry-esque microphone moves frozen on a white background and then we need to get the same kind of moves again for video, on a green screen background. Ouch.

The fast movements of the actor require the action stopping short exposure times of flash. He'll also be wearing a jacket with fringe all along the sleeves and the fringe will create even more movement as the actor rocks across the white background. I'm taking four Elinchrom flashes to deal with this part of the shoot. We'll set up two units to light the background, one unit for a main light and the fourth for fill or accent. We've done this a thousand times before and I have no fears that we'll be able to get exactly what we want for the stills. With flash.

But flash is, of course, useless for video. We're shooting the actor against a green background so the editor can composite some really cool animation into the background. And that means that the screen has to be evenly lit and as far from the talent as focal length and studio configurations will allow. We don't want the green from the background to wrap around onto our actor's gold,  highly REFLECTIVE, jacket.

I'd like to through a lot of light onto this shot so we can use 60 fps to make the video look sharper. And we need to be careful to match front and background exposures so we don't have issues in post production. I'll be using six, big fluorescent fixtures with modifiers, where necessary. Two directly on the background, two on the talent and one as a backlight. The backlight fixture will have a layer of magenta gel on it to combat any incursion of the dreaded green wrap. (The Mag. filtered light will serve to cancel out the green).

To do these shoots, one after the other, requires: A set of background stands. A white background. A green background. Clamps to tighten up the backgrounds and kill wrinkles. Eight or nine light stands (the continuous lights require more stands for the modifiers we put in front of them). Diffusion frames for modifiers. Four Elinchrom strobes with umbrellas and a soft box. Six (heavy) fluorescent lights. Filter gels. Four 25 foot extension cords. One still photo tripod with ball head. One video tripod with fluid head. One monster Gitzo tripod as a solid base for our video slider. One heavy duty cart to transport everything with.

Did I forget anything? How about cameras? I'm taking the GH3's and GH4 and  small sample of lenses. And, with green screen, always a light meter. Oh heck, always a light meter anyway.

The schedule is tense. We leave the studio at 12:30 and start unloading and setting up at the theatre at 1 pm. The still shoot is first. We fine-tune and get our still shots from 2 until three. At three on the dot we pull down the white background and exchange it for the green one. We pull all the flash units and replace them in new configurations with the fluorescent lights. The actor's make-up and costume gets refreshed while the director and I fine tune the video imaging and go over settings.

We're using the clean HDMI out of the camera into a digital recorder that writes 10 bit Pro-Res 4:2:2 because the editor is old school and got burned on much older video cameras many years ago. He wants to start with the cleanest, sharpest green screen files he possible can. I am more optimistic and I'm dying to try shooting in 4K and then importing in FCPX as 1080p (in Pro Res 4:2:2) but we're working as a team and the editing is his area of expertise so I bow to his experience.

We need to be lit, metered, color correct and ready to go by 3:30 pm. That's a really tight turn around. But I think we'll manage. We have both Ben (super assistant) and my new intern in tow. Ben will take charge in wrapping up the gear we used for the stills. We start shooting the video in earnest at 3:30 because we have a hard stop at 5 pm when we have to start packing and hauling stuff out. The theater needs the space back by 5:30 pm.

If we shoot to the digital recorder in the video sequence then my part of the video production ends them. My job is to get the director and editor the best technical content I can so they can concentrate on directing and editing.

Ben and I should be back at the studio by 6 pm and we'll unload before we head to the house. Saturday I'll come back to the studio after swim practice and unpack every thing and put each tool in its place. Trying to stay organized so we don't waste time getting ready for next week's projects.

It would be a lot easier to do this all with one set of lights but sometimes you just have to bite down and do things in the optimum method. For this shoot it's all about lights and making stuff sharp. For the video it's all about nailing the green screen. And as far as I can tell there's no way to hybridize the lighting tools. Sorry Hybrid Imaging. 


6.04.2014

Is a lens alone enough reason to get into a system? Maybe.

The Samsung 85mm 1.4 lens.
©2014 Kirk Tuck
www.visual sciencelab.blogspot.com

Downtown communications...
©2014 Kirk Tuck
www.visual sciencelab.blogspot.com

I recently discovered that the lens I've had in my equipment drawer for a couple months now may be the most fun 85mm 1.4 lens I've had the pleasure to own. It's solid and externally boring but it makes images that I find exactly in line with what I want. Longer than normal (120+ equiv.) Incredibly detailed and sharp in the middle, wide open. But is that enough to buy into a system?

When I was growing up in photography there were tons of photographers whose daily bread was made shooting Nikons and Canons. But a large number of them also had an additional camera around their necks. It was a Leica M3 or M2 or maybe an M4 and they generally had one lens for it. The guys who liked portraits had a 50mm Summicron and the people who were more inclined to shoot traditional photojournalism generally opted for a 35mm Summicron. No big system investment. A lot of the cameras were bought used. But the little outlier camera and lens was generally thought to be the shooter's "personal camera" or "art camera." The mechanism that aligned with his core vision. 

Now I am certainly not comparing the consumer-aimed Samsung NX30 camera to a Leica M3 but I must admit that even in my fervor to make the Panasonic GH4 and its family my primary shooting system I am happy to have the option of sticking a very well made 85mm 1.4 on the front of a camera with a slightly larger (and very detailed) sensor for shooting portraits. The combo of the NX30 and the 85mm has yielded some nice portraits for me and as soon as one of my clients makes their selections and launches some of the new people images on their websites I'll share them with you. 

While it is mentally convenient to "lock into" a system it's also nice to have options. The Samsung 85mm 1.4 is an option I like. Now I am waiting to see if the rumors are true. Will they introduce a professional caliber NX-1 at Photokina? Will it feature 4K video? Will it be affordable? 

In the meantime I'm heading back into the giant time vacuum that is known as Final Cut Pro to finish up a long and hesitant edit on a project. Hesitant because when given a huge range of choices it's alway harder to start.....

Camera Raw has come to the Panasonic GH4. In the form of a "Release Candidate." Whatever the hell that means.

Lauren Lane in "Vanya" at Zach Theatre. 
©2014 Kirk Tuck
www.visual sciencelab.blogspot.com
Shot in Jpeg with the GH4

No one has ever explained the term, "Release Candidate" to me but I'm guessing it means, 'we tried a bunch of different stuff and this is the one we think we're going to finally release but we are looking for adventurous stiffs to break it for us, just in case we screwed up mightily...'  Okay, I'm game. I'll download the "release candidate" of the new Adobe Raw 8.5 so I can use the Panasonic GH4 in raw file mode. I am a little nervous about the whole thing because Adobe put a little asterisk by the GH4 name on the list and noted that it was "preliminary" support. Again, as this was unexplained I'll guess that they are still trying to improve whatever it is they do to make the conversions pretty. 

Since all raw files seem to be modified Tiff files I'm a bit perplexed by the need for most camera makers to customize their raw code to the point that it becomes somewhat proprietary and requires the seasonal re-writing of the very software we want to use most in our jobs. If I remember correctly both Leica and Pentax give shooters the option of saving files in the ".dng" format which makes the files quite a bit more "universal" and pretty much ensures that even if the camera maker succumbs to the vagaries of the current market and goes away entirely there will always be a way to utilize raw files already shot. 

I guess every maker is looking for the tweak. According to Thom Hogan, Sony tweaks their raw files in the A7 series by making them lossy and encoding them as 11 bit files instead of 12 or 14 bit files like Canon and Nikon. Could be that Sony knows something the other two don't but it could also be that they are looking for some fast compression and more images on a card to serve to photographers who don't look under the hood much. Other makers seem to bake in some noise reduction that can't be turned off while some (medium format) even offer 16 bit files. 

At any rate I am happy to finally have a convenient way to work with the GH4 raw files. I'm heading out today to shoot some test shots so I can load a few and see if I can do a better job with sharpening and noise reduction than the camera does, on the fly with Jpegs. The update corrects a glitch for older Nikon compressed raw files and it provides support and lens profiles as detailed below. So....if you've got a GH4, an Oly M10 or one of the other beauties on the list you might consider heading over to Adobe:  http://labs.adobe.com/downloads/cameraraw8-5-cc.html

New Camera Support
  • Canon PowerShot G1 X Mark II
  • Fuji FinePix S1
  • Nikon 1 J4
  • Nikon 1 V3
  • Olympus OM-D E-M10
  • Panasonic LUMIX DMC-GH4 (*)
(*) denotes preliminary support
New Lens Profile Support
Lens Name
Lens Mount
Sigma 50mm F1.4 DG HSM A014
Canon
Sigma 18-200mm F3.5-6.3 DC MACRO OS HSM C014
Canon
Tamron 16-300mm F3.5-6.3 DiII VC PZD MACRO B016E
Canon
Fujifilm Tele Conversion Lens TCL-X100
Fuji
Nikon 1 NIKKOR VR 10-30mm f3.5-5.6 PD-ZOOM
Nikon
Nikon AF-S DX NIKKOR 18-300mm f/3.5-6.3G ED VR
Nikon
Sigma 50mm F1.4 DG HSM A014
Nikon
Sigma 18-200mm F3.5-6.3 DC MACRO OS HSM C014
Nikon
Tamron 16-300mm F3.5-6.3 DiII VC PZD MACRO B016N
Nikon
Tamron SP 150-600mm F5-6.3 Di VC USD A011N
Nikon
Sigma 30mm F1.4 DC HSM A013
Pentax
Sigma 50mm F1.4 DG HSM A014
Sigma
Sigma 18-200mm F3.5-6.3 DC MACRO OS HSM C014
Sigma
Sigma 30mm F1.4 DC HSM A013
Sony Alpha

Three cameras. Three photographs of medical practices. Three different looks.

Nurse with child in Premature Infant Unit.
©2014 Kirk Tuck
www.visual sciencelab.blogspot.com

I actually love making photographs of healthcare subjects. There's drama, compassion and it's all about the human condition. When I was younger I would faint at the sight of blood. As I've gotten older and had one health scare I've become less sensitive to things like injections and blood tests and more in tune with the idea of how vulnerable we all are when we present ourselves to our health care providers. I like that my images can help to demystify or humanize the experiences. That we can tell somewhat universal stories so that people can understand what they are getting into. 

These three images are some of my favorites from various shoots I've done in hospitals in Austin and San Antonio, Texas. I love looking at work that spans time and these span a decade. They were also done with three different cameras and three different lenses. It's interesting to see how the vision changes along with the equipment. 

The top image of the nurse and child was done most recently. We did it in 2012. I was using the Sony a99 at that point along with the 85mm 1.4.  With the progress in sensors I was able to shoot without having to supplement the lighting in the space. That made my job a bit easier and it was required on the preemie ward. Getting the right image required me to position the people in the right light since just about every place is top lit. It also required finding a background that wouldn't fight tooth and nail with my main subjects. The image was shot at f4 since that's both a sweet spot, performance wise, for the lens and also provided enough depth of field to cover what I wanted. With the good high ISO performance of the camera I was able to shoot at a high enough shutter speed to hand hold the camera. It's pretty straightforward documentation. 

Medical Technician. Austin Heart Hosptial
©2014 Kirk Tuck
www.visual sciencelab.blogspot.com

The image just above was done back in 2003 on a long, two day shoot for the Austin Heart Hospital. Our job was to fill a bucket list worth of images for an ad agency out of new Mexico. Back then we used two cameras primarily; the Kodak DCS 760 (larger APS-H sensor, 6 megapixels) and the Nikon D2H. I loved the low ISO image quality of the DCS 760 (think ISO 80...) and I used it wherever possible with flash or in daylight. But my "low light" camera was the D2H which allowed me to shoot images all the way up to a stunning ISO 800 with "containable" noise. This image was shoot quickly and hand held. The lens, if memory serves, was the really good, Nikon 28-70mm f2.8 (which I like much better than the 24-70mm that followed it). 

This woman was working with blood samples and needles and I was careful not to look down at her gloved hands...  I shot quickly. Probably no more than five frames. I chimped and then moved on. 
When I came across the image in post I realized that I had underexposed by at least a stop and back then cameras were much less forgiving about that. But the client liked the image and wanted to use it so I correctly the exposure and sent it along. While it has some pattern noise that show up on the solid areas the client didn't care. He said, "This looks like journalism. It looks real and not set up." Okay. I can go with that. I just love the raw feel of the image. 

Austin Radiology Associates Doctor in reading room.
©2014 Kirk Tuck
www.visual sciencelab.blogspot.com

The final shot is one I've always liked. I used it in one of my books and I've written about it before. It's lit almost entirely by flat screens in the small reading room. There is one flash directly behind the panels you can see in the background. There is a second light from the far corner of the room to provide some hair light and separation but all the light on the doctor's face is from the screen in front of her and a small reflector just to the right of the camera. 

The camera was one of my quirky favorites, the Fujifilm S5. I loved the way that camera handled flesh tones! It was magnificent. And I looked the tongue in cheek interpolation to 12 megapixels. It even said "12 megapixels" on the body so clients at the time were quite happy. But the real eccentric part of the image was the lens. I'd picked up a very old copy of the Sigma 24-70mm f2.8 for a couple hundred dollars. The focusing was sloppy and sometimes the zoom ring became withdrawn and recalcitrant but just look at the out of focus effect in the background and the sharp-but-not-too-sharp imaging of the main subject. 

The image was shot in 2007 just as I started writing my first book. The one about using battery powered flashes. The marketing director for this client had a lot of respect for the doctor's time. We usually needed to get in, set up a shot, light it, and shoot it in about 30 minutes. Less time wasted was better. The time constraints worked well with our "new" lighting techniques. Back then we called the little flashes on the nano stands "light on a stick." Now it's pretty much ubiquitous. Not so back in the days of 80 ISO.....

As I said, I love shooting medical marketing images. It's all about the people and their interactions with each other and with ever changing technology. And that makes everything more fun.

Three different cameras. Three different lenses. Two approaches to lighting. 

6.03.2014

Food shooting at Asti with an exhilarating lens. Yummy sharp.

Ravioli. Asti. ©2014 Kirk Tuck

First of all I'd like to thank everyone for the comments and e-mails congratulating my family on Ben's graduation. It was heartwarming to read all the good wishes for us. He's looking forward to one last, action packed Summer in Austin and then off for new adventures. 

And speaking of new adventures I wanted to give you a quick look at some food images that we did on the fly, during our video shoot, at Asti Trattoria here in Austin, Texas. Chef and owner, Emmett Fox does a fabulous job turning out wonderful food and we've got a handful of SD cards with many beautiful, moving shots of the beautifully plated food. Close up motion pictures of food is one area where I don't believe a slider can be over used....

But what I really wanted to show off was the 35-100mm f2.8 X lens for the Panasonic G cameras. When I made my switch over from the full frame Sony cameras I had a few concerns that I might not be able to get the same, luscious, shallow depth of field and biting sharpness that I used to take for granted with the 70-200mm 2.8 lens. I was wrong. If anything I think the lens for the Panasonic cameras is a much better optic, overall, than the aging Sony lens. It is discernibly sharper, wide open and the colors are wonderful. Especially welcome when you consider the differences in camera sensors. 

These images were all shot at either f2.8 or at f3.5. They started life as large Jpeg files and I've done very little post processing to them. If I were highly proficient at PhotoShop I'm sure I could do lots of little magic steps to make every image look just a little better but I am happy with the almost untouched files. What did I add? A little contrast and a tiny bit of shadow lifting. That's it.

I feel like I hit the jackpot with the 12-35mm and the 35-100mm lenses. They cover a great range, have the same look and feel, operate in the same way and even offer good, solid image stabilization. 
With the recent addition of the 7-14mm I am a bit disappointed because there are so few new toys to lust after. I guess when people bitch about a camera system having a limited range of lenses they aren't complaining because there is some sort of image they are unable to shoot, rather they are making a statement about how disappointing it is not to have more things to buy. 

While the GH4 is not a perfect camera (a bit too much noise as we move up the ISO ladder) and I'm sure I'll be first in line for the GH5, I am delighted with everything that's come out of the lenses. 

Finally, there is an old myth that says all food that gets photographed is doused with motor oil, burned with torches and covered with glycerin and food coloring. Happily that is never the case in my work on in casa de Asti. When Chris and I finished photographing this food we munched on it with happy abandon before moving on to our next shots. It was delicious. But we could see that through the lens.....

I should call images like this: Stuff we shoot between sliding the cameras.

Seafood and Risotto. Asti. ©Kirk Tuck

Ravioli, v2. Asti. ©Kirk Tuck

Seafood and Risotto v2. Asti. ©Kirk Tuck

Carpaccio Salad. Asti. ©Kirk Tuck



6.01.2014

Ben Graduates from High School. Headed east for college.


Over the years I used Ben as a model, an assistant, a sound engineer, a second camera operator in video, and so much more. He's a wonderful kid and he just graduated from one of the top three high schools in Texas. One of the top 50 high schools in the country. He was in the National Honor Society, a varsity cross country runner, awarded as a distinguished athlete scholar and so much more. He graduated with a grade point average over 100. Seven of his eight classes last semester were Advanced Placement classes.  He'll be attending a private college in upstate New York in the Fall. He earned a merit scholarship to the school that he chose. Suffice it to say I will miss the best assistant and most patient model I ever had. Without a doubt the smartest kid I ever met.  But I think he'll have a blast for the next four years. 

Makes every karate practice, soccer practice, swim practice, tutoring session, boy scout meeting,homework helping session and Pokemon card tournament I ever went to with him seem like it was all worth it. 

What does he shoot with? Still using a Sony a57 and a couple of inexpensive lenses. But he's mostly a video guy. Will be follow in my footsteps and pursue a career in the visual arts? Naw, I hope we've done a better job raising him than that...... :-)


It's a VSL tradition: The Sunday afternoon walk. Today it's all about Samsung's 85mm 1.4

©2014 Kirk Tuck
www.visualsciencelab.blogspot.com 

Early on I downgraded the Samsung NX30 for several reasons. The main reason was that the EVF is not spectacular and doesn't match the rear screen. The secondary issue was the silliness of dedicating so many resources to NFC and Wi-fi. Which I still consider a supreme waste of resources. So I was lukewarm about the camera and hell bent on making the m4:3 cameras work for everything. 

Then I shot a job for the people at the Appleseed Foundation and I realized that the combination of the really good 20 megapixel sensor and the insanely good 85mm 1.4 lens made the NX30 a very powerful tool for a portrait photographer. I grabbed that camera as I headed out the door today and walked around downtown just looking for stuff to shoot. 

The image on top is my favorite. Not because of the content but because of the wonderful way the building is rendered out of focus in the background, along with the almost impressionistic drawing of the clouds. Have a super fast lens combined with a detailed sensor is a nice thing. 

While I love the performance of the GH4 there's space in my photographic tool kit for a worthwhile combination like the NX30 + 85mm 1.4.  I've also discovered something uniquely interesting about this camera. The EVF is actually showing me the real parameters of the raw file. It's always a little lighter and less saturated than the jpeg file. I never realized this until I switched the camera to shoot raw+jpeg today. I'd look at the image in the finder, like it and shoot. When I chomped it on the rear screen it was darker and more saturated. I had chalked this up to a mismatch between screens but when I opened both files in PhotoShop I found that the Raw files matched the look I got on the internal, EVf screen while the jpeg versions matched (perfectly) what I saw on the external screen. Weird, right?

But knowing this I know have more leeway in deciding how to use and interpret the information. I'll be testing the EVF more and depending on it from now on. Not a fault but a feature not listed in the (damn) owner's manual. Now I have more respect for the camera. In addition the detail I'm getting in the raw files is astoundingly good. As good as what I used to get with the Sony a99 at 24 megapixels. I'll chalk it up the the 85mm maximizing the interplay between lens and sensor. I am smitten with the 85mm lens. I almost did the unthinkable and picked up the phone to call my contact at Samsung to see how cheaply I could get another NX30 body. I was mentally juggling the idea of making it into a full professional system for some of my stuff. I stopped myself and reminded myself not to be so mercurial. How could I be so fickle when just a week ago I'd been gobsmacked by the video performance of the GH4? All the cameras are so good now. It's just that they are all good at separate things....

©2014 Kirk Tuck
www.visualsciencelab.blogspot.com 

©2014 Kirk Tuck
www.visualsciencelab.blogspot.com 

©2014 Kirk Tuck
www.visualsciencelab.blogspot.com 

©2014 Kirk Tuck
www.visualsciencelab.blogspot.com 

©2014 Kirk Tuck
www.visualsciencelab.blogspot.com 

©2014 Kirk Tuck
www.visualsciencelab.blogspot.com 

©2014 Kirk Tuck
www.visualsciencelab.blogspot.com 

©2014 Kirk Tuck
www.visualsciencelab.blogspot.com 

©2014 Kirk Tuck
www.visualsciencelab.blogspot.com 

©2014 Kirk Tuck
www.visualsciencelab.blogspot.com 

©2014 Kirk Tuck
www.visualsciencelab.blogspot.com 

I had to buy a camera yesterday to use as a prop for the cover of the soon to be published Novel...

The Prop Camera.
Nikon F4s with ancient 50mm 1.4
©2014 Kirk Tuck

The novel, The Lisbon Portfolio, is out of my hands and in the hands of my book designer. My proofreader loved the story and had a grand time showing me each and every inconsistency and misspelling. We are nearing the finish line and everything is looking great. In two or three weeks, at the most, you'll be able to grab an electronic copy from Amazon. A short time after that you'll be able to order a printed copy from Amazon, if you'd rather read from real paper. 

The story takes place at the dawn of the digital age. The year is 1999. Our protagonist, Henry, is sporting a couple of Kodak professional DSLRs but his personal camera is still loaded up with film and clicking along. Henry is off to cover a corporate trade show in Lisbon unaware that he is about to be sucked into a world of corporate espionage and double dealing. It's an action packed story with enough twists and turns to rival a mountain road. Will Henry escape with his life? Will his photographs turn out? 

But, in order to get the book out we needed to have cover art. The cover design that won our in-house contest juxtaposes a man shooting with a camera up to his eye on one side with a hand pointing a gun on the other side. And in the background is a ghosted back image of Lisbon from my own archive. 

We had the image of the hand with the pistol and, of course, we have the image of Lisbon, but we needed a good, silhouetted shot of the man with a camera. Full length, in a dark suit. Holding a camera of the era....

All the design elements were bouncing around in my head yesterday as I walked into Precision Camera to torture myself with another peek at the Nocticron 42.5mm f1.2.  I went to Precision to buy a new camera strap to replace the promotional strap on my Sony RX10 (that's a good sign; it means I'll probably be keeping that camera for a while...) I also wanted to get a boom pole holder for my Gitzo microphone boom. And I wanted to replace an umbrella that was damaged on a shoot last week. It was one of the Westcott 43 inch collapsible umbrellas. They fold down really small and they're only $20. 

At any rate, I was nosing around, trying to avoid the huge and unexpected crowd who had come for the in-store Photo Expo when I stumbled across a beautiful Nikon F4s in the used cabinet. It's one of my favorite models since it has the MB-21 battery pack which runs the camera from 4 double "A" batteries. I thought that this camera, coupled with a vintage 50mm 1.4 lens would be the perfect prop for my book cover model to hold. Granted, it's not digital but it has the correct gravitas and I was pretty sure it would be inexpensive...

I bargained like a rug dealer in the Grand Bazaar and walked out the door with it. On Tues. or Wednesday we'll set up the shoot and use the new prop. My original intention, once the shot was done, was to put the camera on a shelf with some old Leica rangefinders, an ancient Alpa camera and Nikon F2's and F's. But then I made the mistake of loading a roll of Tri-X into the thing and.....away we go. At least a full weekend of nostalgically shooting film. I'm sure I'll be sobered up by the bill for processing I'll get sometime next week. Oh well. A small price to pay for the perfect prop. 

To reiterate: The book is in production. It's being beautifully designed and laid out. And it's being done by someone who, unlike me, does not procrastinate. For a certain demographic of photographers this may be the hot book of Summer 2014. Stay tuned.



Studio Portrait Lighting

A Sunday afternoon, off topic blog about making poached eggs.

Samsung 85mm 1.4 lens. NX30 Camera.

I opted to go to the 10am swim workout this morning and I found it packed with fast people. We did a lot of yards, circling in the lanes, packed in like sardines. My favorite set was a "golf" set.  One of the secrets to swimming long and fast is to make sure your stroke is very efficient. That means getting from one end of the pool to the other in as few strokes as possible.

The golf set is designed to make you concentrate on efficiency in your technique. In golf the low score wins. That's the premise of this drill. Count your strokes for 50 yards, add in your elapsed time to swim the 50 yards and you have your "score."  We did twenty 50's on a minute. It's a long interval and you get X seconds rest (depending on your speed). All totaled that's one thousand yards. 

Here's how we did the drill: You swim your first 50 and count your strokes (I averaged 15 per length or 30 total for the 50). Then on each successive 50 you try to drop your stroke count by at least one. When you hit the point where you can't improve or you miss your previous low you are required to sprint the next 50 hard and then start the stroke count descend over again. At the very end of the drill we each sprinted a timed 50 with the intention of combining speed and efficiency.

If you swim a 50 yard sprint in about 30 seconds and you can hold your stroke count to 30 then your overall score is 60. My best score today was a middling 68. Some of the fast guys (like the young Olympians in lane six) were actually "shooting" well under 60. As with everything it's a combination of technique meeting intention and practice.

After the "golf" set and a bunch of other, assorted, yardage I headed back home and I was hungry. I decided to make some poached eggs and serve them to myself on some toasted, sprouted grain bread. But first I had to look up how to poach an egg. It's surprisingly easy and may be the healthiest way to eat eggs. 

Here's how you do it: Use the best eggs you can get. The ones from chickens that are free-ranging omega 3 eating, organic-vegetarian feed eating birds. Let the eggs sit out for thirty minutes so you aren't putting them into boiling water cold. Boil two quarts of water in a deep pan and add a bit of vinegar to the water. Just a tablespoon full will do. Crack your egg and divide the shell in one quick motion so the egg drops into the water in a uniform structure. This is the spot that is crucial. If you "pour" your egg into the water in a long flourish it will have many tendrils and the white won't surround the yolk in an aesthetically pleasing way. 

With the water at a gentle boil let the eggs cook for three minutes. A bit longer if you want a solid yolk. I use a pasta scooper to gently pull the eggs out of the water and deposit them on my toast. Voila. You have poached eggs. Three are just right after a nice work out. 

If you intend to photograph your poached eggs I suggest a nice, longer focal length macro lens. My favorite "egg" lens is the Nikkor 55mm Micro lens from the 1960's. Sharp but not too contrast. Convincing and not overly edgy. That, and some big soft light.



Studio Portrait Lighting