Moonlit Outdoor Portrait Of A Vampire?

filorp · 09-06-2009, 07:56 AM

OOOO!!!! Im taking a pictures 2 years - i didn't realise that using long focals will increase the size of background subject!!!! Thanks a Lot, Graet advice!!!!!

MJB DIGITAL · 09-06-2009, 08:11 AM

im not absolutely sure about it, but i have been wanting to do a moon composition for a long time.

im thinking i want to use my cheap ass 70-300 @ 300mm, and a 2x teleconverter if i can ever afford to get 'toy gear' (not for work). So, i'd be a 600mm and i would probably want to be at f/16ish (that includes the teleconverter aperture effect).

i would definitely have to have a wireless flash to cut the dark at that apeture.

anyway, the model would be as far away as she can be, so that you can be out at 600mm......

i dont know. i shot a wedding yesterday, my brain is mush.

ask falconeye, he would know the science. i just mostly do the art part.

Rich_A · 09-06-2009, 08:31 AM

Just to clarify the statement made about the moon's size relative to the horizon...

Originally posted by rule:

I Was Thinking Of Trying To Catch It Low In The Sky, At Its Biggest Appearance.

Uh... that's actually not true. The moon is the same size no matter where it is in the sky. It is perceived as larger near the horizon only because of it's proximity to other objects. It's never any bigger than the size of your thumbnail held at arm's length. There's no optical wizardry that makes it larger or smaller depending on where it is... sorry.

rule · 09-06-2009, 10:28 AM

Originally posted by Light_Horseman

You might also consider trying the picture next to water and getting the moons reflection there.

Brilliant!

stevebrot · 09-06-2009, 12:13 PM

Originally posted by octavmandru

What's With the Capitalized Typing???

bETTER tHAN tHIS i sUPPOSE!!!

sTEVE

stevebrot · 09-06-2009, 12:14 PM

Originally posted by joebob

Does she have...FANGS?

Don't they all?

rule · 09-06-2009, 01:42 PM

Originally posted by Rich_A

Just to clarify the statement made about the moon's size relative to the horizon...

Uh... that's actually not true. The moon is the same size no matter where it is in the sky. It is perceived as larger near the horizon only because of it's proximity to other objects. It's never any bigger than the size of your thumbnail held at arm's length. There's no optical wizardry that makes it larger or smaller depending on where it is... sorry.

Ya See This Is Exactly What I Wanted Out Of This Forum. Good Information

Bill B · 09-06-2009, 03:22 PM

I've shot some night scenes and a couple of things you can do to improve your shots are to shoot with the moon low on the horizon, like you were thinking, and as others say, use a long lens to help bring that moon into the scene. If you shoot the moon a couple times and check the results (that's where a digital camera really comes in handy - immediate feedback) you can work out the best shot for the moon. Then for your model, use fill flash to bring her in out of the dark.

The fill flash can be either your camera's own flash, a handheld, fireable flash, or even a handheld floodlight. The handheld flood is good for filling in some of the area around your model as well, especially if you can use aa exposure just long enough so you can use the flood to light up the areas you want to show and leave other areas in the dark.

As everyone's pointing out, the big problem is the amount of light that the moon reflects. If you can hide it behind a tree, cloud, something like that, where you can see the full moon is there but it's not dominating the scene, you might be able to shoot at a more model friendly setting. One solution mentioned is to use Photoshop or Gimp. For example, find the best shot that has the moon and your model will be underexposed. That's OK, with underexposed areas you can still pull out detail, but overexposed areas are a lost cause. Duplicate the layer that the original shot is on, mask the moon on the copy so you don't change it. Next, lighten the copied layer to bring out your model and landscape to your satisfaction. Then merge the two layers back into a single picture. That's a little simplistic, but that's the general idea.

To get a really big moon in contrast to the model, like someone else said you're going to have to merge in a good telephoto or zoomed shot of the moon with a good photo of your model.

Hmmm. You know, a shot of a rising, deep orange moon would be cool in this setup, wouldn't it?

You mentioned using 35mm, so I'm assuming film. To help you zero in on settings, take a digital camera out the night before, and use it to play around with various settings while shooting the moon. You can immediately check the results to see in what direction you want to change them and do so. Find the best moon shot, then transfer those settings to the film camera, and bracket.

Just some ideas.

seacapt · 09-06-2009, 04:37 PM

carefully focussed remote lighting? Hey whatever you decide I think we'd all enjoy a post featuring some Elvira shots.

rule · 09-06-2009, 08:35 PM

Originally posted by Bill B

I've shot some night scenes and a couple of things you can do to improve your shots are to shoot with the moon low on the horizon, like you were thinking, and as others say, use a long lens to help bring that moon into the scene. If you shoot the moon a couple times and check the results (that's where a digital camera really comes in handy - immediate feedback) you can work out the best shot for the moon. Then for your model, use fill flash to bring her in out of the dark.

The fill flash can be either your camera's own flash, a handheld, fireable flash, or even a handheld floodlight. The handheld flood is good for filling in some of the area around your model as well, especially if you can use aa exposure just long enough so you can use the flood to light up the areas you want to show and leave other areas in the dark.

As everyone's pointing out, the big problem is the amount of light that the moon reflects. If you can hide it behind a tree, cloud, something like that, where you can see the full moon is there but it's not dominating the scene, you might be able to shoot at a more model friendly setting. One solution mentioned is to use Photoshop or Gimp. For example, find the best shot that has the moon and your model will be underexposed. That's OK, with underexposed areas you can still pull out detail, but overexposed areas are a lost cause. Duplicate the layer that the original shot is on, mask the moon on the copy so you don't change it. Next, lighten the copied layer to bring out your model and landscape to your satisfaction. Then merge the two layers back into a single picture. That's a little simplistic, but that's the general idea.

To get a really big moon in contrast to the model, like someone else said you're going to have to merge in a good telephoto or zoomed shot of the moon with a good photo of your model.

Hmmm. You know, a shot of a rising, deep orange moon would be cool in this setup, wouldn't it?

You mentioned using 35mm, so I'm assuming film. To help you zero in on settings, take a digital camera out the night before, and use it to play around with various settings while shooting the moon. You can immediately check the results to see in what direction you want to change them and do so. Find the best moon shot, then transfer those settings to the film camera, and bracket.

Just some ideas.

Very Good Ideas!

09-06-2009, 03:22 PM	#23
Bill B Junior Member Join Date: May 2008 Location: Nampa, ID Photos: Gallery Posts: 33	Don't forget fill flash as a possible aid. I've shot some night scenes and a couple of things you can do to improve your shots are to shoot with the moon low on the horizon, like you were thinking, and as others say, use a long lens to help bring that moon into the scene. If you shoot the moon a couple times and check the results (that's where a digital camera really comes in handy - immediate feedback) you can work out the best shot for the moon. Then for your model, use fill flash to bring her in out of the dark. The fill flash can be either your camera's own flash, a handheld, fireable flash, or even a handheld floodlight. The handheld flood is good for filling in some of the area around your model as well, especially if you can use aa exposure just long enough so you can use the flood to light up the areas you want to show and leave other areas in the dark. As everyone's pointing out, the big problem is the amount of light that the moon reflects. If you can hide it behind a tree, cloud, something like that, where you can see the full moon is there but it's not dominating the scene, you might be able to shoot at a more model friendly setting. One solution mentioned is to use Photoshop or Gimp. For example, find the best shot that has the moon and your model will be underexposed. That's OK, with underexposed areas you can still pull out detail, but overexposed areas are a lost cause. Duplicate the layer that the original shot is on, mask the moon on the copy so you don't change it. Next, lighten the copied layer to bring out your model and landscape to your satisfaction. Then merge the two layers back into a single picture. That's a little simplistic, but that's the general idea. To get a really big moon in contrast to the model, like someone else said you're going to have to merge in a good telephoto or zoomed shot of the moon with a good photo of your model. Hmmm. You know, a shot of a rising, deep orange moon would be cool in this setup, wouldn't it? You mentioned using 35mm, so I'm assuming film. To help you zero in on settings, take a digital camera out the night before, and use it to play around with various settings while shooting the moon. You can immediately check the results to see in what direction you want to change them and do so. Find the best moon shot, then transfer those settings to the film camera, and bracket. Just some ideas.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
I need a crash course in outdoor event and outdoor portraiture	spystyle	Troubleshooting and Beginner Help	10	01-15-2011 07:13 PM
People An outdoor portrait	Falcons	Post Your Photos!	1	03-09-2010 06:24 AM
Outdoor family portrait	Ash	Post Your Photos!	8	05-01-2008 02:15 PM
Outdoor Portrait	ccallana	Post Your Photos!	3	02-28-2008 06:35 PM

09-06-2009, 07:56 AM	#16
filorp Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Aberdeen Scotland Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 398	OOOO!!!! Im taking a pictures 2 years - i didn't realise that using long focals will increase the size of background subject!!!! Thanks a Lot, Graet advice!!!!!

09-06-2009, 08:11 AM	#17
MJB DIGITAL Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: st. louis Posts: 1,170	im not absolutely sure about it, but i have been wanting to do a moon composition for a long time. im thinking i want to use my cheap ass 70-300 @ 300mm, and a 2x teleconverter if i can ever afford to get 'toy gear' (not for work). So, i'd be a 600mm and i would probably want to be at f/16ish (that includes the teleconverter aperture effect). i would definitely have to have a wireless flash to cut the dark at that apeture. anyway, the model would be as far away as she can be, so that you can be out at 600mm...... i dont know. i shot a wedding yesterday, my brain is mush. ask falconeye, he would know the science. i just mostly do the art part.

09-06-2009, 08:31 AM	#18
Rich_A Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2009 Location: Montana Photos: Gallery Posts: 213	Just to clarify the statement made about the moon's size relative to the horizon... Originally posted by rule: I Was Thinking Of Trying To Catch It Low In The Sky, At Its Biggest Appearance. Uh... that's actually not true. The moon is the same size no matter where it is in the sky. It is perceived as larger near the horizon only because of it's proximity to other objects. It's never any bigger than the size of your thumbnail held at arm's length. There's no optical wizardry that makes it larger or smaller depending on where it is... sorry.

09-06-2009, 10:28 AM	#19
rule Inactive Account Join Date: Sep 2009 Location: Pioneer Valley, Massachusetts Posts: 12 Original Poster	Originally posted by Light_Horseman You might also consider trying the picture next to water and getting the moons reflection there. Brilliant!

09-06-2009, 12:13 PM	#20
stevebrot Otis Memorial Pentaxian Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Vancouver (USA) Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 42,007	Originally posted by octavmandru What's With the Capitalized Typing??? bETTER tHAN tHIS i sUPPOSE!!! sTEVE

09-06-2009, 12:14 PM	#21
stevebrot Otis Memorial Pentaxian Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Vancouver (USA) Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 42,007	Originally posted by joebob Does she have...FANGS? Don't they all?

09-06-2009, 01:42 PM	#22
rule Inactive Account Join Date: Sep 2009 Location: Pioneer Valley, Massachusetts Posts: 12 Original Poster	Originally posted by Rich_A Just to clarify the statement made about the moon's size relative to the horizon... Uh... that's actually not true. The moon is the same size no matter where it is in the sky. It is perceived as larger near the horizon only because of it's proximity to other objects. It's never any bigger than the size of your thumbnail held at arm's length. There's no optical wizardry that makes it larger or smaller depending on where it is... sorry. Ya See This Is Exactly What I Wanted Out Of This Forum. Good Information

09-06-2009, 04:37 PM	#24
seacapt Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: North Carolina , USA Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,271	carefully focussed remote lighting? Hey whatever you decide I think we'd all enjoy a post featuring some Elvira shots.

09-06-2009, 08:35 PM	#25
rule Inactive Account Join Date: Sep 2009 Location: Pioneer Valley, Massachusetts Posts: 12 Original Poster	Originally posted by Bill B I've shot some night scenes and a couple of things you can do to improve your shots are to shoot with the moon low on the horizon, like you were thinking, and as others say, use a long lens to help bring that moon into the scene. If you shoot the moon a couple times and check the results (that's where a digital camera really comes in handy - immediate feedback) you can work out the best shot for the moon. Then for your model, use fill flash to bring her in out of the dark. The fill flash can be either your camera's own flash, a handheld, fireable flash, or even a handheld floodlight. The handheld flood is good for filling in some of the area around your model as well, especially if you can use aa exposure just long enough so you can use the flood to light up the areas you want to show and leave other areas in the dark. As everyone's pointing out, the big problem is the amount of light that the moon reflects. If you can hide it behind a tree, cloud, something like that, where you can see the full moon is there but it's not dominating the scene, you might be able to shoot at a more model friendly setting. One solution mentioned is to use Photoshop or Gimp. For example, find the best shot that has the moon and your model will be underexposed. That's OK, with underexposed areas you can still pull out detail, but overexposed areas are a lost cause. Duplicate the layer that the original shot is on, mask the moon on the copy so you don't change it. Next, lighten the copied layer to bring out your model and landscape to your satisfaction. Then merge the two layers back into a single picture. That's a little simplistic, but that's the general idea. To get a really big moon in contrast to the model, like someone else said you're going to have to merge in a good telephoto or zoomed shot of the moon with a good photo of your model. Hmmm. You know, a shot of a rising, deep orange moon would be cool in this setup, wouldn't it? You mentioned using 35mm, so I'm assuming film. To help you zero in on settings, take a digital camera out the night before, and use it to play around with various settings while shooting the moon. You can immediately check the results to see in what direction you want to change them and do so. Find the best moon shot, then transfer those settings to the film camera, and bracket. Just some ideas. Very Good Ideas!