Interesting! True, regarding her expressiveness. She seems able to do it effortlessly, and the shots look natural. Well done, (of course) Joe and Daniel!
OK...and having fun and lots of laughter is too the key here, right Joe..? I often say to my subjects (often grim bankers and business guys) about smiles, "If that smile is 20, give me 55".... and BANG they do it.. :):):)
I loved this! I've been a fan of Joe since I saw him at a seminar in Philly a few years ago. Daniel Norton shares the same comedic teaching style of my college professors. I really liked seeing more of the model and how she changed her expressions after each shot, than Joe squinting behind the camera. This is important because it teaches me how to direct models during portraits who aren't as talented as the one above, and "regular" people, who will keep the same expression for 1-6 shots if you're not careful. It also shows upcoming models HOW to pose within the frame without dramatic movements
Having just retired I am finally getting to view some of these great Adorama and Daniel videos. I have a small garage studio at home and I took a lot away from this video. One question, just a curiosity question, the decision for shooting Square format? Was there a reason? I remember those days with my Mamiya C330 and Kowa Six... loving the Square format... one of the reasons I like Instagram... but why for this session? Thanks!
Great, informative video. I also have the D850 and am wondering what the advantages are to shooting in the square format. I'm wondering if I should do the same. Again, thanks for all of the tips.
Lyle Cameron I love shooting square, in live view, using the flip out screen as a waist level viewfinder! Remind me of my hassleblad in the film days! Of course your cropping, so losing pixels, but you've got enough to burn!
Interesting to see Joe a little concerned that the 5.6 aperture would not carry the focus from the glasses to the eyes. It appears today that so many photographers are hung up on very fast 1.4 portrait lenses and getting great out of focus bokeh ( not a concern with this background ) that they forget that the most important thing is to get the subjects sharp, especially if you are photographing more the one person.
I chatted with a photographer who was doing headshots for my previous company. He was very proud of his 85mm f/.2. He showed me some of the images he was getting. Eyes were nice and sharp, but focus started to fall off around the front of the ears. I pointed it out, and he got a bit smug and said, "Well, it's a portrait, so you focus on the eyes, not the ears." I'm thinking, "It's a HEADSHOT. The whole HEAD should be in focus." And it's not like bokeh is going to enter into the equation shooting against a solid colored background. Shooting wide open from less than five feet away - the subject moving their head 1/4" between when you focus and click the shutter can mean the difference between sharp eyes and not sharp eyes.
Sam Comer Exactly . I had an 85mm 1.4 lens but for money shots I was afraid to use it wide open. I mostly used it f2 or 2.8. For families f 5.6 to f8 . Just sold it.
Rookie question here: What is a 24 7 and how does it relate to the square format. Is there a similar set up for a Sony A7RIII? Thank you. Learned a lot. Thank you.
Brilliant and inspirational video. Never tire of Daniel’s style of presentation. One question, how do you know when you’ve enough shots? Most we saw looked amazing
Thanks for an amazing informative vid guys . It means a lot to me and this may sound a bit mad but all we ever see is tutorials with young models ( and yes I get how amazing Mary is with her expressions) but for my part most folks are not pro 21 year old models and need lighting accordingly , also I have tried so hard at creating depth and dimension playing with lighting angles and the inverse square law and feathering not just on a horizontal plane but vertical too so that I can draw the eye with light to the head and chest area using one strobe , a 5 foot octo and large black or white side panel opposing the octo and yes on the one hand I am happy with the looks I created but they are not exactly open and airy which this is yet so soft too . So my question is because in the space I rent for a studio it has a very dark ceiling could I use my octo in the same position as the scrim for a similar look ? And gentleman may I leave one thought which may be of value to many which is , when you are wondering should I use more lights or not then stop and think for a moment there is only one sun and that will guide as which side to err on . I think there are specific reasons for accent and background lights but in general so much can be done with one main source yet there is so much confusion touted all over the internet which only serves to make life harder for someone beginning which is such a shame when they may be the future masters but on a very tight budget when a strobe a light stand and a decent modifier can all be bought for less than the price of many speedlights and as far as I know Rembrant only had one source of light in his painting studio . Knowledge is above everything but I find it is always in the fine detail of using the gear to a gut instinct in its artistic application . Also to you two perfect gentlemen sharing your knowledge I offer you this msg , art can be considered art within the context of some ones art but art is also an entity unto itself and it is a fluid continuum of ever evolving "communication" based upon influence and influencing teaching and learning hence I have so much respect for those who input back into the flow . Any way guys bye for now and Joe I can not think of anyone more appropriate to show those who may already have a speedlight just what could be achieved with that off cam and a cheap shoot through brolly and a piece of white card plus some other bits and pieces any one would have at home , and the rest of the gear , well a typical student on a budget dont have to worry about that and get all stressed over not having this or that as I noticed you do as \i do and used 5.6 to f8 which every kit lens can do yet companys try to convince that expensive lenses are essential , well they are for a pro in some situations but a real pro could get by with little gear and why , by gathering knowledge and practice and experience . So back to question guys , well I know I could come so close you could hardly tell the difference , give me a brolly a speedlight and some white card and for most purposes would be acceptable , but more importantly just the simplest gear will do fine for the most important thing which is learning using the physics of light as an artist .
You certainly could get good results from an Octabox, but not "the same" - the closest would be to shot the heads through the silk (vs bounce). But if an Octa is your tool, for sure, make it work!
Loved this! I am a total noob when it comes to studio lighting. Is there any one element in this setup that kept glare off the glasses, or was it the setup as a whole? (Assuming the glasses had lenses in them.) and the black frames were ingenious if that was a conscious decision. Photoshopping out glare is painful for me.
Another fabulous presentation and shoot by Joe and Daniel. I actually wondered why shoot at 200 iso and f/5.6. Each to their own but that decision to switch to f/8 was the best by far. And with 2 lights, there’s no reason not to have dropped iso one stop to 100. Awesome photoshoot.
I felt like an idiot sitting and watching a camera making beep beep beep and flash boom boom boom :) I do like your videos but couldn’t you pleas cut that part short? and to give more that idiot feel nothing else to see but the camera, set up is not in the frame.
Two lights into an scrim Jim is complicated Mr Expert? The fact is this series has shown a number of different lighting set-ups so that viewers have the opportunity to learn from a variety of options. Joe has shot for Nat Geo, Sports IIlustrated, Life etc. What have you done apart from trolling the Internet?
I have to agree with you about the lack of separation. Nothing but floating pearls from here! I don't think the pic will turn many heads but the banter was valuable (and entertaing) none the less. Thanks guys.
Love the BTS. Joe is just amazing to watch. Joe and Daniel have a wonderful teaching style.
Always look forward to Daniel Norton. Breaks it down and makes it fun.
Thanks Joe! and Daniel. Always a treat to watch Joe work.
Fantastic model, perfect light set and charmy tips. Really great.
Never thought you two could get along so well. You are killing it guys!
Humble man(Joe) !!
Big compliment he gave to Daniel!
I love these black background images! Welldone Joe and Daniël!
Mr and Mrs Big Shot 😊. She looked so serious I can't believe you got her to smile.
Always good to see Joe McNally!
You two are hilarious together! And why shouldn't learning be FUN. Great work and very entertaining. Thanks!
Joe's "Hot shoe diaries" was a huge inspiration on me!
The first photo that came up simply took my breath away!
Joe and Daniel make a great team. This was thoroughly entertaining
very interesting .... you guys work well together ... love your humor
Excellent, you had light 'Wafting, Dripping,Draping, Bouncing and Wrapping' Great show of knowledge..
Interesting! True, regarding her expressiveness. She seems able to do it effortlessly, and the shots look natural. Well done, (of course) Joe and Daniel!
Beauty models have their place of course, but "life" models or "stock" models have always been more interesting and fun to me, great vid guys.
Great adorama series with these 2 !
Al fin un buen fotógrafo en esa sección, grande Joe!!!
Great vid. Daniel you hair has suddenly grown.lol............Joe, awesome as always....
Very Observant.... i didn't even notice.
OK...and having fun and lots of laughter is too the key here, right Joe..? I often say to my subjects (often grim bankers and business guys) about smiles, "If that smile is 20, give me 55".... and BANG they do it.. :):):)
Lovely Model and Technique.. Thanks for sharing!!
What a great team you guys make, thoroughly enjoyed it.
I loved this! I've been a fan of Joe since I saw him at a seminar in Philly a few years ago. Daniel Norton shares the same comedic teaching style of my college professors.
I really liked seeing more of the model and how she changed her expressions after each shot, than Joe squinting behind the camera.
This is important because it teaches me how to direct models during portraits who aren't as talented as the one above, and "regular" people, who will keep the same expression for 1-6 shots if you're not careful.
It also shows upcoming models HOW to pose within the frame without dramatic movements
So entertaining!!!
Gosh these two would be so fun to work with.
Mary`s a beauttiful lady ✨👍
This video gave me that missing piece of my puzzle that I was looking for thank you guys!!
Great video! The portraits looked wonderful.
Fantastic work !
This was a great start to my day...love that Joe...you too Norton...met you last year at WPPI...great guy
Gorgeous lady. Also a very informative video.
Great work all round
Fun and informative, great video!
I love Joe McNally and Daniel Norton, true Americans!
Having just retired I am finally getting to view some of these great Adorama and Daniel videos. I have a small garage studio at home and I took a lot away from this video. One question, just a curiosity question, the decision for shooting Square format? Was there a reason? I remember those days with my Mamiya C330 and Kowa Six... loving the Square format... one of the reasons I like Instagram... but why for this session? Thanks!
Great, informative video. I also have the D850 and am wondering what the advantages are to shooting in the square format. I'm wondering if I should do the same. Again, thanks for all of the tips.
Lyle Cameron I love shooting square, in live view, using the flip out screen as a waist level viewfinder! Remind me of my hassleblad in the film days! Of course your cropping, so losing pixels, but you've got enough to burn!
Interesting to see Joe a little concerned that the 5.6 aperture would not carry the focus from the glasses to the eyes. It appears today that so many photographers are hung up on very fast 1.4 portrait lenses and getting great out of focus bokeh ( not a concern with this background ) that they forget that the most important thing is to get the subjects sharp, especially if you are photographing more the one person.
I chatted with a photographer who was doing headshots for my previous company. He was very proud of his 85mm f/.2. He showed me some of the images he was getting. Eyes were nice and sharp, but focus started to fall off around the front of the ears. I pointed it out, and he got a bit smug and said, "Well, it's a portrait, so you focus on the eyes, not the ears." I'm thinking, "It's a HEADSHOT. The whole HEAD should be in focus." And it's not like bokeh is going to enter into the equation shooting against a solid colored background. Shooting wide open from less than five feet away - the subject moving their head 1/4" between when you focus and click the shutter can mean the difference between sharp eyes and not sharp eyes.
Sam Comer Exactly . I had an 85mm 1.4 lens but for money shots I was afraid to use it wide open. I mostly used it f2 or 2.8. For families f 5.6 to f8 . Just sold it.
Hey guys if a career in photography gets stale for you, you’d do well at the comedy store as a double act, lol! Love both of your vids !
Love this light!
Rookie question here: What is a 24 7 and how does it relate to the square format. Is there a similar set up for a Sony A7RIII? Thank you.
Learned a lot. Thank you.
Love the expressions
Wonderful model.
Brilliant and inspirational video. Never tire of Daniel’s style of presentation. One question, how do you know when you’ve enough shots? Most we saw looked amazing
Dreamteam !
Thanks for an amazing informative vid guys . It means a lot to me and this may sound a bit mad but all we ever see is tutorials with young models ( and yes I get how amazing Mary is with her expressions) but for my part most folks are not pro 21 year old models and need lighting accordingly , also I have tried so hard at creating depth and dimension playing with lighting angles and the inverse square law and feathering not just on a horizontal plane but vertical too so that I can draw the eye with light to the head and chest area using one strobe , a 5 foot octo and large black or white side panel opposing the octo and yes on the one hand I am happy with the looks I created but they are not exactly open and airy which this is yet so soft too . So my question is because in the space I rent for a studio it has a very dark ceiling could I use my octo in the same position as the scrim for a similar look ? And gentleman may I leave one thought which may be of value to many which is , when you are wondering should I use more lights or not then stop and think for a moment there is only one sun and that will guide as which side to err on . I think there are specific reasons for accent and background lights but in general so much can be done with one main source yet there is so much confusion touted all over the internet which only serves to make life harder for someone beginning which is such a shame when they may be the future masters but on a very tight budget when a strobe a light stand and a decent modifier can all be bought for less than the price of many speedlights and as far as I know Rembrant only had one source of light in his painting studio . Knowledge is above everything but I find it is always in the fine detail of using the gear to a gut instinct in its artistic application . Also to you two perfect gentlemen sharing your knowledge I offer you this msg , art can be considered art within the context of some ones art but art is also an entity unto itself and it is a fluid continuum of ever evolving "communication" based upon influence and influencing teaching and learning hence I have so much respect for those who input back into the flow . Any way guys bye for now and Joe I can not think of anyone more appropriate to show those who may already have a speedlight just what could be achieved with that off cam and a cheap shoot through brolly and a piece of white card plus some other bits and pieces any one would have at home , and the rest of the gear , well a typical student on a budget dont have to worry about that and get all stressed over not having this or that as I noticed you do as \i do and used 5.6 to f8 which every kit lens can do yet companys try to convince that expensive lenses are essential , well they are for a pro in some situations but a real pro could get by with little gear and why , by gathering knowledge and practice and experience . So back to question guys , well I know I could come so close you could hardly tell the difference , give me a brolly a speedlight and some white card and for most purposes would be acceptable , but more importantly just the simplest gear will do fine for the most important thing which is learning using the physics of light as an artist .
You certainly could get good results from an Octabox, but not "the same" - the closest would be to shot the heads through the silk (vs bounce). But if an Octa is your tool, for sure, make it work!
So glad I found this video after hitting you up on instagram for advice on shooting my sisters white hair. Great shoot 👍
Nice would love to see more :)
Seems like you had a lot of fun on that day :)
She is very photogenic.
Loved this! I am a total noob when it comes to studio lighting. Is there any one element in this setup that kept glare off the glasses, or was it the setup as a whole? (Assuming the glasses had lenses in them.) and the black frames were ingenious if that was a conscious decision. Photoshopping out glare is painful for me.
It's simply the angle of the light vs the angle of the glasses.
You have to get the light on the light stand higher than the glasses.
You need a Joe McNally sock puppet. 😊
Very cool
Thanks for sharing this great Video! Might be even better without distracting background music.
Nice "The Big Chill" reference. :o)
From certain angles, I think Mr. McNally looks like an older Matt Damon, even kinda sounds like him :-)
Another fabulous presentation and shoot by Joe and Daniel.
I actually wondered why shoot at 200 iso and f/5.6.
Each to their own but that decision to switch to f/8 was the best by far.
And with 2 lights, there’s no reason not to have dropped iso one stop to 100.
Awesome photoshoot.
I think Joe was shooting at ISO 200 because it's the native ISO on Nikon cameras.
David Travis No, with the 850 you can shoot at ISO 64
Does Adorama sell wafting lights?
nice light for a beutiful Lady
"Duv", is proper grip slang. Good to hear ;)
Joe/Daniel - great shoot and enjoy watching/learning from you guys! What tethering software are you using? Are you shooting RAW?
I tether into Capture One, always shoot RAW :)
Sir good work i like sir
All I got is a sb600 🙁
This is defo NOT for the home studio photographer unless you have a 40 ft square spare room?
Book light
Seriously, Joe McNally is either Matt Damons father or an older version of Matt. Even the voice fits! Great video btw. ;)
Too much ramble almost turned off before photos started
I felt like an idiot sitting and watching a camera making beep beep beep and flash boom boom boom :) I do like your videos but couldn’t you pleas cut that part short? and to give more that idiot feel nothing else to see but the camera, set up is not in the frame.
Can u edit my pic i am big fan of your editing
Еще один пулеметчик
Sorry, but the results are NOT INTERESTING AT ALL..
insanely complicated for such a basic shot.
Two lights into an scrim Jim is complicated Mr Expert? The fact is this series has shown a number of different lighting set-ups so that viewers have the opportunity to learn from a variety of options. Joe has shot for Nat Geo, Sports IIlustrated, Life etc. What have you done apart from trolling the Internet?
Are you nuts ... bad lighting terrible posing no separation from background. What's happened to our profession?
Hyperbole much?
I have to agree with you about the lack of separation. Nothing but floating pearls from here! I don't think the pic will turn many heads but the banter was valuable (and entertaing) none the less. Thanks guys.
Outstanding lack of direction to the poor subject.