Beauty shots - Close Up

[johne]

Originally Posted by jimmyd

That's a very cool makeup technique and nicely executed. Hat tip to Kortney! Stirs the imagination in terms of the almost unlimited range of items that could be used as a template.

Thanks Jimmy. I'll pass your compliment on to Kortney.

John

[mcherry]

It's really hard to advise on this because "beauty shot" like "head shot" or "portrait" can mean so many things. So really you have to define what you are shooting.

In the most classic sense only a couple of these are beauty shots, and a lot of that has to do with the lighting. Beauty shots tend to be VERY flatly lit as you are showing off the makeup or the hair or just clean skin - think a Dove ad...
While that is not always the case today, it is still the rule and others the exception.

Here is an example of a portrait of mine, that could be considered somewhat of a modern beauty shot, but really it isn't, it's more of a headshot. The same shot lit much more flat, would be a classic beauty shot. See where I'm going? So we need to know what you shooting for, to be able to advise you on a lighting scheme.

EDIT: That first shot of John's IS a classic beauty shot. Not because of the cool and funky makeup, but because of the crop and the lighting. It is flat enough to be beauty and yet has enough depth were needed to create interest.

[jford]

Just a long-remembered hint:

Chung Lee, a NYC shooter who works with some remarkably beautiful women, once remarked that only a select few of the models are really suited for stunning beauty shots.

In other words, if at all possible, start with a subject with excellent features and skin.

You might search the archives for his work, and Kade Lam as well. And both people would probably be willing to answer a nicely stated e-mail question or two.

Good luck.

[ogpro]

I don't know, maybe it's just me but I kinda got the impression that the guy was asking if he should shoot in macro. That means to me that he's asking what distance you should shoot from. I'm curious about that too. In that first picture, how far back was the camera?

[johne]

Originally Posted by ogpro

I don't know, maybe it's just me but I kinda got the impression that the guy was asking if he should shoot in macro. That means to me that he's asking what distance you should shoot from. I'm curious about that too. In that first picture, how far back was the camera?

Soshanna was about 24" from the camera.

John

[Foto_Highway]

These are great . But I need to be much , much closer to the subject. I need Macro close ups of just individual parts of the face like lips , a single eye, lashes. Etc. If I get this close, I will probably block the light source, I was thinking maybe a macro ring flash maybe?

[CatCynic]

Originally Posted by Foto_Highway

These are great . But I need to be much , much closer to the subject. I need Macro close ups of just individual parts of the face like lips , a single eye, lashes. Etc. If I get this close, I will probably block the light source, I was thinking maybe a macro ring flash maybe?

You'll definitely need to be using a lens with macro function to get that close. I have taken a number of shots of single eyes using the EF 100mm f2.8 Macro lens, and no, you don't need a ring flash (although it might be useful). A softbox placed over your shoulder will work.

Big problem to keep in mind is that your depth of field is likely to be quite shallow (I have had eyelashes in focus, eyebrow out of focus), so focus is critical, and can be a matter of millimetres. It's worth having your model rest her chin on something to keep her head still, and definitely put the camera on a tripod - otherwise breathing can mess with your focus (been there, done that!).

The worst part is that eye shots can look perfect on the LCD on the back of the camera, then show up as out of focus in Photoshop - all part of the shallow depth of field problem.

Wish I could give you the perfect answer, but I'm still working on that

[That_Look_Photo]

[quote=johne]Here's one we did of Soshanna last year.

1-main light (Alien Bee 1600) at 1 O'clock, camera right and very close.
1-gold reflector to camera left
1-AB 800 for a little light on the background

Shot with a Canon 1Dsmk2, ISO100, f11, 1/200 and a Canon EF24-70f2.8/L

QUOTE]

I hope you can tell me why you went with f11 and not just f8 at 1/250 with that lens ? I can see I have plenty to learn with this stuff. I can't get enough of your work..it is just so awesome.

Mike

[ChipBulgin]

Originally Posted by Foto_Highway

These are great . But I need to be much , much closer to the subject. I need Macro close ups of just individual parts of the face like lips , a single eye, lashes. Etc. If I get this close, I will probably block the light source, I was thinking maybe a macro ring flash maybe?

There are a couple of ways you can approach this. Whether or not you block the light source(s) depends on where the light is in relation to your subject and the working distance between the camera and your subject. If you're only 12" from your subject then you have to rethink your lighting solution and set it up so that you don't block the light. Lens selection can help you here. A 60mm macro lens focuses to ~9". A 100 or 105mm macro lens focuses to ~12". A 180 or 200mm macro lens focuses to ~19". The further away you can get from your subject the more flexibility you will have with your lighting.

I'm going to assume that you're using a reduced-frame camera with a 1.5x (or so) crop factor and that you want to photograph eyes or lips. To fill the frame you're going to be in the neighborhood of a 1:4 to 1:6 magnification ratio. With a 60mm lens the sensor will end up ~17" from your subject. A 100/105mm lens will put the sensor ~24" from your subject and a 180/200mm lens will put the sensor ~36" from your subject. Ideally, you'd want to have something like a 150mm to 200mm macro lens.

You can also use extension tubes on a longer lens to reduce it's minimum focusing distance and increase it's magnification ratio. As a general example, using an extension tube on a telephoto lens that normally focuses no closer than 10' may allow you to focus as close as 5' and get the magnification ratio you need. Five feet of working distance helps you with your lighting solution.

Now, on to your lighting solution. With so little working distance you need to either use something like a ringflash or light your subject from the sides. If you equalize the lighting from the sides you can get quite a nice wrap-around effect. The trick is to place softboxes or umbrellas on either side and in front of your model.

The accompanying image, though not a macro shot like you're attempting, was lit like I described above. Also included is a lighting diagram. You can work 2'-3' from your subject without blocking the light. Use a lens hood to help deal with flare. If you want to punch up the colors I'd recommend silver umbrellas or softbox interiors.



-Chip

[Michael H Dean]

Took these the other day as a test. Never shot this close before so the Model & I did some testing.
Discovered you better have a good MUA when doing these..LOL

Mike





ASA 100
1/180 sec
F19
90 mm

30" X 40" softbox overhead on boom arm
Alien Bee400 to camera left, 7" reflector w/7" 10 degree grid
Overhead box inches above models head, 7" reflector light camera left about 18" -2'. Best I can remember

Almost forgot: Model Maggie Shirk