Replies

1. 
   Tao | Dec 20, 2003 03:44am | #1

   I shot our catalogs for years, because I couldn't find anybody locally who could make our products look as good as they did in real life - that I could afford, at least.

   The first thing is, a flash on the camera won't do the trick.  The furniture has to be lighted evenly and with minimal glare.  I used about 4 studio lights with "barn doors" to  keep the light from going where I didn't want it.  You don't need fancy flash units if you have a digital camera that you can white-balance.  500 w.tt incandescents work OK.  If you use halogen work lights, bounce them off a reflector or through a diffuser.  They are way too harsh, otherwise.  Regular incandescents can benefit from reflectors and diffusers, too.

   Next thing, wood isn't as reflective as it looks, and usually has to be shot "high key", that is, overexposed.  Bracket from 1 to 2 stops overexposed to bring up the figure in the wood.  If you are using a plain background, you don't have to worry about it, but if you are shooting it on a set, you have to reduce the light on the backgraound to keep it from looking too light -- thus the barn doors to regulate where the light goes.

   I usually put the main lights on one side of the camera, lighting the most important side of the furniture, with the fill lights on the other side of the camera about twice as far away, or half the wattage.  Experiment till you get the amount of contrast you need.  I used other lights as spots to fill dark areas or highlight other areas.

   You'll want a lot of pixels if you re going to be printing high res photos, and Adobe Photoshop Limited is great for making those small adjustments in cropping, contrast, and color balance.  It comes bundled with a lot of digital cameras.

   I used a 4x5 view camera because you can adjust for vertical perspective and make the vertical lines all parallel.  There's no doubt a digital way to do that now, but I haven't looked for it.

   Having burned a lot of 4x5 film of several brands, as well as loads of 35mm and 120, let me say that most digitals, Canon especially, render colors and light gradients much better than any film.  Some of the digital work I have seen lately is absolutely stunning in how it allows a good photographer to render light, shadow, and color.  I haven't used any of the professional setups yet, but even a 4 megapixel semi-pro camera is pretty amazing.

   This is more than I knew when I started sooting catalogs.  Hope it helps.  Almost any basic photography book will cover this, too.

   Michael R.

1. 
   Smearit | Dec 26, 2003 01:01am | #3

   Thanks for the feedback Michael.  Judging from what I've been reading and from the input you gave me, I'm reluctanly going digital - bought a 3.2 pixel camera.  I guess this means I can toss out my 35 yr old Rollei.  I guess thats whats called progress.

1. 
   SCFrankland | Dec 26, 2003 04:30am | #4

   Frank I went from a AE-1 Program to an Elan 2e and even though I love the camera I regret getting rid of my old one. I am now looking at a digital SLR body now but there is still something about the older manual SLR's that you have to love.Scott C. Frankland

   Scott's WOODWORKING Website"This all could have been prevented if their parents had just used birth control"

1. 
   SIMON | Dec 26, 2003 04:59am | #6

   Even with the digital SLRs, my favorite feature is manual focus. The focus on my previous digital camera drove me crazy, and being able to override is glorious.

   Interchangeable lenses and manual modes are great too.

   I still miss my Pentax K1000, though!

1. 
   yotonyb | Dec 26, 2003 05:23am | #7

   Frank, I'd hold on to that film camera.  You may need slides for a specific application...perhaps they're required for a juried competition, or a print job, or an appearance in Fine Woodworking! 

   Woodwiz, thanks for the pointers!  I'm shopping for a digital camera right and hope to find one of my final options on sale post-Christmas.

   tony b.

2. 
   Jamie_Buxton | Dec 26, 2003 10:39pm | #9

   I shoot digital now.  Compared to film, I have much more control.  I can quickly home in on my lighting.   I can inexpensively take zillions of shots and select the best.  With photoshop I can easily correct little faults.

   And when you need slides, it is real easy to get a digital file printed to 35 mm slide.   Any good photo processor should be able to do it for you for less than $10.   Also, there are places on the web that do it very painlessly.  You upload the file to their site, they make the slide, and send it back to you.   It costs $3-$4, and you never even have to leave your shop.  Google with "computer file slide" to find them.

2. 
   brnaclbil | Dec 26, 2003 04:59am | #5

   Frank,

   I would hang onto that Rollei for a while and wait until you haven't used it in a year beofre getting rid of it. Digital plotography is a lot different than with film.

   Bill

3. 
   jako17 | Dec 26, 2003 06:09pm | #8

   Keep the Rolliflex,The average SLR is the equivalent of 11mega pixil.I still shoot 2 1/4 sq for serious quality ,even to the point of renting professional equippment and have high res digital files done by the processing house.

2. 
   SCFrankland | Dec 20, 2003 03:52am | #2

   Frank I have a few books on photograhpy but it sounds like you got the basics covered. A good book is "How to Control & Use Photographic Lighting" by David BROOKS. I have some others on nudes but I have not found a use for them yet.

   Scott C. Frankland

   Scott's WOODWORKING Website

   "This all could have been prevented if their parents had just used birth control"