For Part 5 of our How Was This Picture Taken series, I present to you: this portrait.
This is Sander. We worked together to create some high school senior portraits a few years ago and this has to be one of my favorite images from the day. While it might look like a fairly straightforward portrait, I’ll admit that there was a bit of work done on it in post production. My question to you is: how was this picture created?
A few things to consider:
- What camera and lens were used?
- What camera settings were used?
- What was the light source (or sources)?
- What was done in post production?
- What was the setting where this image was taken?
- Just for fun, at what point in our portrait session was this created? (thanks to Spencer’s post for making me think of this question)
You can now see the answer to how this picture was made here.
Sony a7r ll and zeiss lens 35mm 1.8
F4, 1/125, iso 100
Sun was lightsource
Exposure increased in post pro
Taken in the garden
Taken before the portrait actual shoot
Maybe look at the exif data first? The picture does not look like it was shot with a 35mm lens.
Nikon D800
85mm 1.4
1/640 shutter speed, ISO 200, spot metering
Light source was sunlight from behind. Model’s face was in shade.
I think the photo was underexposed a the time of shooting. in post production, a mask was created to isolate the model and the model was then brightened while leaving the background unchanged.
Are you kidding me? Exif data? Boy, hope they don’t make detective out of you since you would no see beyond the obvious.
You can actually see the EXIF info if you download the picture and look the info in LR, PS or any EXIF supported software. And he is right with all the EXIF info.
Nikon D810, 35mm 1.4
F 1.8, ISO160 1/160
Backlighting is natural sunlight, LED panel in front to eliminate heavy shadowing
Mistiness added in LR
Park at Golden Gate Bridge CA
Taken about 8:00 am near beginning of shoot
It’s back lit by sun. But there is a soft light coming from 45° left of the camera. Looking at catch light, it’s not a reflector. It’s like a long one, may be a strip box?
85mm 1.4 with the sun as a backlight, and a softbox high up camera left to light the model. They front light was not strong, so the image was initially quite hazy. In post the image was dehazed with contrast added and possibly warmed up a bit.
I think a long lens was involved, 300mm at least, looking at the background blurr.
Resolution is not very high, so maybe not a pro lens. DOF looks like FF, maybe D700
Lighting from left behind (sun) en top right (softbox/umbrella), or lighted for background and
Pushed the shadow lever in LR. Left light is reflected from something then
Camera: Nikon D800
Lens: 85mm 1.4
Manual Exposure Mode
Aperture: 1.4
Exposure: 1/640
ISO: 200
Metering: Spot
Time: 16:47 h
Sun behind / front silver reflector.
Basic color adjustment, higlights/shadows adjustment, desaturated.
Yep, from EXIF all this is a cinch. Also: processed in LightRoom afterward, and probably only some basic small adjustments. I think yes, reflector in front, sun behind.
Personally, I don’t like lens flare. I think it reduces contrast and distracts the viewer’s eye from the actual subject.
Exactly. If you do this kind of things, it is probably wise to strip EXIF data… Also the flare could be added in pp.
Did you deliberately leave all of the EXIF data (including editing information) in the JPEG file? Too easy!
Very shallow depth of field and a tight framing -> light telephoto wide open, could have been the 85/1.4 on 35mm
Sun from behind, quite likely Iso 100 and shadows in the face opened a bit in post
Reflexion in the eyes shows some kind of light source from the models right side, looks a bit like a reflector (bend to lighten up the face only) but I can’t tell for sure
Definitely a Fuji X-E2 with 50-140mm f2.8…I would be shocked if this is not correct.
flare on the right side of the photo is too strong and too distracting. I would use a gradient to make it a little more even. I like portraits where you do not think or notice the technique, but composition and the subject are what makes the image strong. This is good but without backlight and flare it would be a stronger image.
Ok this is a hard one for me, zero exp with portraits :)
What camera and lens were used? – I dinnae ken, but if you’re telling us it’s that smartphone lens thingy that you reviewed the other day I’m gonna eat my hat :)
What camera settings were used? – HI would wager a wider aperture based on his blurry shoulders.
What was the light source (or sources)? – Wild guess, but judging by the background colours it looks like outdoor/nature
What was done in post production? – Maybe his face needed more brightness, it must have been a lot darker due to being backlit. Also his ears and shoulders are suspiciously blurry, this may have been more than just a wider ap…
What was the setting where this image was taken? – Outdoors?
Just for fun, at what point in our portrait session was this created? – At the end – he doesn’t look too happy and kinda has a “Can I go now?” look in his eyes :)
Looks like the EXIF gave it away, but before seeing that my guess was 85mm, large aperture, manual exposure and spot meter the face because of the back light, and a bit of post to dodge/burn and keep the reds in the skin tones controlled. For the lighting – the left side is better lit and there is a soft shadow from a light source in that direction, so I’m guessing a simple reflector to the lower left catching the sunlight.
The kicker could also be a strobe on a lightstand hidden in the bushes, with a CTO gel on it.
It could be a test shot at the beginning of the session, when you’re not directing the model yet, and just checking lights.
EXIF was left in photo – no brainer… Only thing I would say about lighting. He is standing in the shade, sunlight from behind and those beautiful catchlights in his eyes are from open sky in front of him. No artificial light or reflector. :)
Exif data is forged.
Haven’t got a clue, I opened this post on Facebook to learn how this picture was made…
You’ll have to wait a few days for the answer :)
I agree with the long lens guesses.
85-100mm range.
Sun as backlight
Left side fill with reflector
Over exposed a bit in post
Temp warmed up in post
Polaroid One Step OneStep Instant 600 Film Camera. Scanned at Kinkos. Edited in Microsoft Paint.
– 85mm, wide open
– Background maybe 1 stop underexposed
– Larger silver reflector camera left, up high (reflection in the forehead and under the eye / over the cheekbone)
– Warmth added in post