Ok well my friend just got signed to an agency that gets him gigs like for tv and commercials, hes just starting out and he wants some headshots. Hes pretty young so its harder for him to get the $$ for a pro to do it so im wondering what i might need to take some fairly good headshots for him? Im on a tight budget so, the gear needs to be fairly cheap. Also, how should the lighting be set up to get the best results? Im new to this so i need a little help lol
what?? that doesn't answer any of my questions lol :P Im wondering what gear id need to do his headshots.
edit: sorry i can see how that would be confusing, ill change it
I recently tried my hand at headshots for the first time....I used my living room and a bunch of available lamps, we also shot a few outdoors, If you want to see them they are mostly in my 30 Day Portfolio...Make what you have work for you if you are broke! ((like me, right now!!)
A bounced flash (off the ceiling or wall) is all you need to do headshots indoors. It helps to put a bounce card (can be a business card) on the flash to produce catch lights.
what aperture range would be best for optimum detail? Im still getting used to this so sorry if this is a dumb question lol :P I thought i heard something about anything like f/16-32 isn't the best idea, but i thought id ask.
what aperture range would be best for optimum detail? Im still getting used to this so sorry if this is a dumb question lol :P I thought i heard something about anything like f/16-32 isn't the best idea, but i thought id ask.
"What are you striving for in a Portrait," is where to start. Details in the expression and sharpness in the eyes. Background OOF.
This means you want a shallow DOF, but not the extremely narrow DOF available in the 50mm 1.8. Go for f/5.6-f/8 for the sharpness. Get in close. Almost fill the frame, but consider that you'll need to leave room at the top and bottom (shooting portrait format, right?) for cropping to an 8x10 format.
what aperture range would be best for optimum detail? Im still getting used to this so sorry if this is a dumb question lol :P I thought i heard something about anything like f/16-32 isn't the best idea, but i thought id ask.
"What are you striving for in a Portrait," is where to start. Details in the expression and sharpness in the eyes. Background OOF.
This means you want a shallow DOF, but not the extremely narrow DOF available in the 50mm 1.8. Go for f/5.6-f/8 for the sharpness. Get in close. Almost fill the frame, but consider that you'll need to leave room at the top and bottom (shooting portrait format, right?) for cropping to an 8x10 format.
If this is a legitimate and reputable agency that gets actual commercial work, then I'm not sure you're doing him any favors. Have him go through his agency to find a recommended photographer.
The biggest thing you want to remember about focus with portraits is to focus on the eyes. Now, you want the DoF to be deep enough to have the nose and other facial features to be in acceptable focus.
But after that, some people like the DoF to rather shallow (ie ears out of focus).
would thins like work lights give bad results (ie// yellow tinge)
I would try to work with natural light first. Window light, outdoors. Work lights are great for still lifes, but not so good for portraiture.
We're talking commercial headshots, not portraits. There are differences between a shot you'd hang on the wall and a shot that an agency can use to get someone work.
There are differences between a shot you'd hang on the wall and a shot that an agency can use to get someone work.
I do agree with you, but I've seen tons and tons of agency shots done with natural lighting. I did a lot of them when I was in college. It's not the HOW shots were taken, but the outcome of the shot.
I say kawanna has nothing to lose by taking the shots. If he stays objective about his work, he can judge whether he should let someone else do the final shots.
There are differences between a shot you'd hang on the wall and a shot that an agency can use to get someone work.
I do agree with you, but I've seen tons and tons of agency shots done with natural lighting. I did a lot of them when I was in college. It's not the HOW shots were taken, but the outcome of the shot.
I say kawanna has nothing to lose by taking the shots. If he stays objective about his work, he can judge whether he should let someone else do the final shots.
Actually I was commenting (though not very clearly) on the fuss over lighting usage in general and the concern over what's the most appropriate for commercial headshots. Natural, work lights, strobes, it doesn't matter - in the end the lighting's not as important as content and presentation.
