Results 1 to 13 of 13

Thread: america's next top model

  1. #1
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    www.zonzon.sg
    Posts
    476

    Default america's next top model

    did you guys catch the show on 080304? anyway for those who caught it, do you know what camera the photograher was using? it looks huge with a big ring flash but yet most prob digital cause the shots were view instantly on the monitor.

  2. #2
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    www.zonzon.sg
    Posts
    476

    Default

    A pic of the photographer with his cam at the bottom of the site ...

    http://www.upn.com/shows/top_model/e...isode_04.shtml

  3. #3
    jcryan55
    Guests

    Default

    The pictures seems to show that he's using a Mamiya model, maybe like the 645AF or Pro TL with a Phase One digital back.....

  4. #4

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kentaroC
    did you guys catch the show on 080304? anyway for those who caught it, do you know what camera the photograher was using? it looks huge with a big ring flash but yet most prob digital cause the shots were view instantly on the monitor.
    It was a monster cam!! quite a nice show, nice models :P~~. the poses that came out were fantastic, given the extreme cold etc.

    must be most photog's dream to be in Douglas Bizarro's shoes.

    shall follow this show closely.

  5. #5
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    984

    Default

    yeah guesed so though i did not see it.... the sound of the shutter was so loud... clack!

  6. #6

    Default

    Darn! For the first time in any "beautiful babes" kind of show, I was looking more at the camera and the prints rather than bothering about how cold the models were or how good they looked! I was trying to figure out the photographer's style and how he captured the image.

    The camera looked like a MF but the prints were more like 35mm kind. Whatever it is, the prints were awesome! The light falling on the models were extremely good and all I can say is.... the shots were too good!

    I dunno... I have to give it benefit of doubt that it's a show, so maybe there was time to do some Photoshopping in between.

    Then again... HOW DID HE DO IT?!?!?!

    Must learn the magic of light... again....

    That's what makes photography so challenging right?

  7. #7
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    984

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by engineermunn
    Darn! For the first time in any "beautiful babes" kind of show, I was looking more at the camera and the prints rather than bothering about how cold the models were or how good they looked! I was trying to figure out the photographer's style and how he captured the image.

    The camera looked like a MF but the prints were more like 35mm kind. Whatever it is, the prints were awesome! The light falling on the models were extremely good and all I can say is.... the shots were too good!

    I dunno... I have to give it benefit of doubt that it's a show, so maybe there was time to do some Photoshopping in between.

    Then again... HOW DID HE DO IT?!?!?!

    Must learn the magic of light... again....

    That's what makes photography so challenging right?
    how did you tell the diff between 35mm prints and mf prints? size? cannot be because they were huge... quality? could you see the quality? anyway, it is MF used with an imculate mixture of natural and artificial light.

    i reckon underexposure of the background to get those glorious blue skies and dark buildings and the use of portable flash generators to provide the forground lighting. one would need loads of positive flash compensation and a large enough source to prevent that amount of light from seeming harsh.

  8. #8
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Clementi
    Posts
    6,580

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by showtime
    how did you tell the diff between 35mm prints and mf prints? size? cannot be because they were huge... quality? could you see the quality? anyway, it is MF used with an imculate mixture of natural and artificial light.

    i reckon underexposure of the background to get those glorious blue skies and dark buildings and the use of portable flash generators to provide the forground lighting. one would need loads of positive flash compensation and a large enough source to prevent that amount of light from seeming harsh.
    In short u need money. And talent. Perhaps not in that order, talent first then money to get those shots. The closeps were incredibly detailed (as viewed from web) and very matte.... but in any case, most of the shots in any glossy magazine goes through lots of photoshoping altho must say that the original product is already great to begin with.... otherwise hardly any of the models have perfect skin (with their hectic schedule, smoking habits, and partying...)

    Err..... anyway, a bit blur.... is this a reality show? I thought it was a one-off competition but looking at the webapge, it seems like it's a reality show...

  9. #9
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    www.zonzon.sg
    Posts
    476

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by engineermunn
    Darn! For the first time in any "beautiful babes" kind of show, I was looking more at the camera and the prints rather than bothering about how cold the models were or how good they looked! I was trying to figure out the photographer's style and how he captured the image.

    The camera looked like a MF but the prints were more like 35mm kind. Whatever it is, the prints were awesome! The light falling on the models were extremely good and all I can say is.... the shots were too good!

    I dunno... I have to give it benefit of doubt that it's a show, so maybe there was time to do some Photoshopping in between.

    Then again... HOW DID HE DO IT?!?!?!

    Must learn the magic of light... again....

    That's what makes photography so challenging right?
    yeah me too looking at the photographer more than the babes !
    anyway can anyone explian to me the flash he was using? what i can see is a huge ring flash (i thought ring flashes are for marcro shots?)... or is it a typical flash for mf?

  10. #10

    Default

    it could be a ring flash

    who says ring flashes are only for macro shots ?

    as long as they flash, they flash.

    ringflashes gives a circular catchlight in the eyes (duh). and they sort of enhances the silohette of the model.

  11. #11
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    www.zonzon.sg
    Posts
    476

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by sequitur
    it could be a ring flash

    who says ring flashes are only for macro shots ?

    as long as they flash, they flash.

    ringflashes gives a circular catchlight in the eyes (duh). and they sort of enhances the silohette of the model.
    thanks for sharing ... any ring flash websites/brand to reconmend?

  12. #12

    Lightbulb recordee on tape?

    Quote Originally Posted by kentaroC
    did you guys catch the show on 080304? anyway for those who caught it, do you know what camera the photograher was using? it looks huge with a big ring flash but yet most prob digital cause the shots were view instantly on the monitor.
    anyone recorded the show on tv(i assume) on tape ? care to lend it to me?

  13. #13
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    3,911

    Default

    Ring flashes are not anything new in fashion work. There are several in wide circulation in the fashion industry, two of the popular ones being made by Bowens and Hensel. The units used for fashion are generally far more powerful than the low intensity units used for macro work. And also less portable than the macro units, a completely different beast and in completely different price ranges.

    The advantage of ring flashes for fashion work is similar to macro work; quick even lighting.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •