Welcome to the forum!
As an adjunct to the Tangents blog, the intention with this forum is to answer any questions, and allow a diverse discussion of topics related photography. With that, see it as an open invitation to just climb in and start threads and to respond to any threads.
I am wondering what lighting might have been used for this photo of Shaun White in Sunday's NY Times magazine? It looks like it was more than natural light. The sun appears to be behind him to our right? Wide angle lens? I doubt anyone here knows but just wondering if anyone cares to speculate on how exactly this photo was taken. I think it's great and has a really nice dreamy yet starkly realistic quality to it.
PHOTO CREDIT: FINLAY MACKAY, NY TIMES.
Comments
The highlights in his hair is most likely from a secondary light source like an off-camera speedlight.
As for the rest, I agree with Mike, that it just looks like light from all around because of the snow.
Could be reflector MikeZ, but if so a mighty subtle one, like white. Nice exposure work whether the reflector is the snow or a handheld. And I doubt a newspaper photographer travels with more than one assistant, which would argue for natural light on face.
http://www.boredpanda.com/animal-children-photography-elena-shumilova/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/75571860@N06/with/10949174803/
As well hoyaterp!
The thing I notice is that the ambient is nearly always 'overcast' style which will lend itself to great even (although generally flat) lighting but some tweaks in post to bring in some contrast and bingo.
Plus the little bit of sunshine is judiciously positioned perfectly. Certainly not by accident.
Beautiful imagery for sure.
There are lots of layers, dodging/burning, blurring, selective contrast, etc taking place there. The SOOCs would leave you scratching your heads...
How do I know this? I have seen enough Joel Grimes, Calving Hollywood, et al to know what the behind the scenes look like.
If you are on facebook, join this group for some amazing before and after shots:
https://www.facebook.com/groups/688512357855919
Warning: You will loose some of the amazement for photography once you know what goes on behind the scenes. You cannot un-see what goes on here folks.
Having said all this, her work is amazing but post work is responsible for 60+ % of the impact...without the proper comps and use of light, the 60% post work would be useless....most of us are still struggling with the 40%...
hand held, 99.999999% sure. tripod or monopod would have 0 impact on any of her work. Shutter speeds are always high enough...
very, very skilled! I looked though her flickr and there are a few shots where you can see some minor editing flaws (additional Gaussian blur, etc)
no HDR just great post work.
again, do not join the group unless you want to see the "Wizard of Oz"....
Rudy
Safe to say, our Russian friend has got it goin' on.
I could not agree with you more. The group was made for learners but the pros do jump in on occasion and post stellar work.
But it is talent and skill. Post work is a talent on its own and one I wish I had. When the two worlds collide, magic happens!
Well, it may not be SOOC but it may be how she sees the scenes. Don't let the post work take away from enjoying her photos. Cameras just can't capture what we see and post work such as hers get it closer to how we see...
I honestly do no think that is how she did it...but you can add light/exposure/texture post. While this pic is not meant to compete with her marvelous work, it does illustrate what can be done in about 10 minutes in CS6.
NOTE: I took this years ago before I had a clue about digital cameras, additional lighting, etc.
Rebel T1i and plastic 50mm lens. The AFTER is a print edit so if the eyes seem to bright, it is your monitor. Really.
Rudy
Before:
After: