# So I agreed to photograph the other attorneys at the firm...



## jwbryson1 (Mar 27, 2013)

As many of you know because I've been posting shots for C&C for the past 2 days.

I gotta tell you -- I did this to be "nice" and to "further my career" as an ATTORNEY, not as a photographer.

These people are a pain in the A$$!     No, I don't like that.  Shoot it again.  One guy has had me shoot 4 sets of him today.  We cannot seem to get the flash out of his Coke Bottle glasses :geek:  no matter what angle I try, so it's getting frustrating....

Tell me again why I agreed to do this?  Jeezus!!  layball:

Sorry, I just had to get that out....


----------



## runnah (Mar 27, 2013)

Sue them?


----------



## EIngerson (Mar 27, 2013)

I had some people at work try to get out of hand too. I said "Round one is free, add $50 to every subsequent attempt." They stopped showing up.


----------



## jwbryson1 (Mar 27, 2013)

runnah said:


> Sue them?



Not a bad idea, but isn't that like shooting yourself in the foot?


----------



## jwbryson1 (Mar 27, 2013)

EIngerson said:


> I had some people at work try to get out of hand too. I said "Round one is free, add $50 to every subsequent attempt." They stopped showing up.




No doubt.  When it comes to a cash outlay, the truly "interested" will turn out.  The others will turn and run away.


----------



## runnah (Mar 27, 2013)

jwbryson1 said:


> runnah said:
> 
> 
> > Sue them?
> ...



yes, but I thought lawyers couldn't feel pain?


----------



## jake337 (Mar 27, 2013)

Did you try your flash at 45 degrees to the side and up from the subject?


----------



## The_Traveler (Mar 27, 2013)

How do you get the camera under the rock?


----------



## jwbryson1 (Mar 27, 2013)

runnah said:


> jwbryson1 said:
> 
> 
> > runnah said:
> ...




We feel pain for the most part, but we can't see our reflections in a mirror.  It's a bit different...


----------



## jwbryson1 (Mar 27, 2013)

jake337 said:


> Did you try your flash at 45 degrees to the side and up from the subject?



I tried all angles.  I have been shooting with 2 softboxes 45* left and right of the camera.  No luck.  I raised the SB's, lowered the SB's, adjusted the angles of them, moved them around to the side of the guy, no luck.  I finally shut them off entirely and tried bouncing light off the ceiling with my speedlight in the camera hot shoe.  It helps a bit, but still not perfect.  

This is the best I could do bouncing the light around with the speedlight on camera...







[/URL] GH2 by jwbryson1, on Flickr[/IMG]


----------



## imagemaker46 (Mar 27, 2013)

jwbryson1 said:


> jake337 said:
> 
> 
> > Did you try your flash at 45 degrees to the side and up from the subject?
> ...



Looking at this guy, the glasses are the least of his problems.


----------



## jwbryson1 (Mar 27, 2013)

imagemaker46 said:


> jwbryson1 said:
> 
> 
> > jake337 said:
> ...



LOL.  ZERO social skills and goofy as hell, no doubt.  But this guy is sickeningly brilliant.  He graduated Summa Com Laude from an ivy league university and then finished 1st in his class from a top tier law school.  He did both his undergraduate degree + law school in 5 years, where ordinarily it would take 4+ years to finish undergrad + another 3 years to finish law school.  He's also a millionaire many times over, so make fun of him all you want....

EDIT:  Spelled "Com" incorrectly on purpose because it keeps editing out the other word....so stupid!


----------



## Steve5D (Mar 27, 2013)

I work for a small music store chain in Portland. The particular store I work in is the acoustic shop.

I pretty much keep my camera at the store, so I'm always ready to take some photos of something cool or high-end that we get in. I work on commission, so I do this to help generate business in our particular store. Photos go up on Facebook and into our blog (which I write). If someone comes in and buys something I photographed or wrote about, even if it's not purchased by a customer of mine, I get a cut of it.

Someone from one of the other stores asked me to take some pictures for them. I told them they would have to get the company owner to agree to my fee for doing it, and then I would be happy to oblige. He scoffed at the idea. He also now has no pictures.

When shooting "for free", I'm the one who decides what to shoot...


----------



## amolitor (Mar 27, 2013)

Either paint the reflections out in PS, and/or use a polarizer.

There's a REALLY SLICK thing you can do with a polarizer on the lens and another on the flashes. I think you get the light from the strobes polarized one way, then the polarizer on the lens polarizes another, so you kill almost 100% of the reflected (which is polarized) light.

Still, just an on-lens polarizer with some fiddling should help.

Evidently the keyword to search for is: cross polarization


----------



## jwbryson1 (Mar 27, 2013)

Steve5D said:


> When shooting "for free", I'm the one who decides what to shoot...



My hours are slow this quarter but I'm still employed.  So am I really shooting for free?  Hardly...


----------



## jwbryson1 (Mar 27, 2013)

amolitor said:


> Still, just an on-lens polarizer with some fiddling should help.
> 
> Evidently the keyword to search for is: cross polarization



Thanks for the post..  I don't have PS at work, just LR.  But I have CS6 at home so I'm going to try to fix it when I get home.  I really know nothing about using polarizing filters except when I'm outdoors on a bright day.


----------



## tirediron (Mar 27, 2013)

jwbryson1 said:


> Steve5D said:
> 
> 
> > When shooting "for free", I'm the one who decides what to shoot...
> ...


True, but what happens if someone accidentally trashes your background, or knocks a speedlight over and kills it?  Are you out of pocket?  Will the firm pick up the tab?


----------



## tirediron (Mar 27, 2013)

jwbryson1 said:


> amolitor said:
> 
> 
> > Still, just an on-lens polarizer with some fiddling should help.
> ...


A cut of polarizing gel on your speedlight and a CPOL on your lens will allow you to knock the **** out of those reflections, but based on what you said earlier, I'm wondering if those aren't the old, uncoated style of glasses, and if they've got really curved lenses, they will be MURDER to shoot without some reflection.


----------



## jwbryson1 (Mar 27, 2013)

tirediron said:


> jwbryson1 said:
> 
> 
> > amolitor said:
> ...



I think that's the conclusion we reached -- his glasses do not have the non-reflective coating.  This guy is so cheap that he'd NEVER pay for that type of "addition," so you gotta make do with what you have.  I told him "take off the damn glasses!"  He says "but I won't be able to see..."

I nearly fell over.  :lmao:


----------



## terri (Mar 27, 2013)

> He says "but I won't be able to see..."



But we appreciate lawyers with that vacant stare.


----------



## The_Traveler (Mar 27, 2013)

It's a bit disconcerting to read comments disparaging the looks of a subject.

That is a bit low, imo.


----------



## Steve5D (Mar 27, 2013)

jwbryson1 said:


> Steve5D said:
> 
> 
> > When shooting "for free", I'm the one who decides what to shoot...
> ...



So you're getting paid for the shooting you're doing?

Because, if not, your shooting has absolutely nothing to do with the fact that you enjoy continued employment...


----------



## kundalini (Mar 27, 2013)

I like the background you have, but think the subject needs to move further away.  Notice his shadow starting about the ear level to his shoulder.  This would also help with light fall off to darken it some and with his light hair color should create a bit more separation.

Suggest to him to buy some el-cheapo reading glasses in a frame that is similar to his and remove the lenses.


----------



## jwbryson1 (Mar 27, 2013)

The_Traveler said:


> It's a bit disconcerting to read comments disparaging the looks of a subject.
> 
> That is a bit low, imo.




I don't disagree, but we give him grief around the office too so I let it slide.  Not worth complaining about on an internet forum.


----------



## jwbryson1 (Mar 27, 2013)

kundalini said:


> I like the background you have, but think the subject needs to move further away.  Notice his shadow starting about the ear level to his shoulder.  This would also help with light fall off to darken it some and with his light hair color should create a bit more separation.



Oh, I totally agree.  He was right up next to the backdrop at that point because I kept moving him around to try to get rid of the flash issue and I was getting annoyed and desperate.  On my earlier shots I had everybody about 8' from the backdrop and shot around 2.8 or 3.2 to blur it a bit which also helped with the wrinkles.  That's a muslin backdrop...


----------



## jwbryson1 (Mar 27, 2013)

Steve5D said:


> jwbryson1 said:
> 
> 
> > Steve5D said:
> ...




This is not worth arguing about.  You win.  Okay?


----------



## runnah (Mar 27, 2013)

The_Traveler said:


> It's a bit disconcerting to read comments disparaging the looks of a subject.
> 
> That is a bit low, imo.



Huh?


----------



## kundalini (Mar 27, 2013)

jwbryson1 said:


> The_Traveler said:
> 
> 
> > It's a bit disconcerting to read comments disparaging the looks of a subject.
> ...


Regardless, it is in bad form and should be mentioned to the culprits.

Disparaging comments on lawyers in general, however, should be given free range.


----------



## jwbryson1 (Mar 27, 2013)

runnah said:


> The_Traveler said:
> 
> 
> > It's a bit disconcerting to read comments disparaging the looks of a subject.
> ...



He's referring to reply number 11 from ImageMaker46.


----------



## IByte (Mar 27, 2013)

jwbryson1 said:


> As many of you know because I've been posting shots for C&C for the past 2 days.
> 
> I gotta tell you -- I did this to be "nice" and to "further my career" as an ATTORNEY, not as a photographer



...they do exist.  Hell with him.  Some clients no matter how much you bend, will never be satisfied.  Have a few pints, wake up and keep shooting.


----------



## jwbryson1 (Mar 27, 2013)

kundalini said:


> jwbryson1 said:
> 
> 
> > The_Traveler said:
> ...




Yes, we do suck.  I must agree...


----------



## Steve5D (Mar 27, 2013)

runnah said:


> The_Traveler said:
> 
> 
> > It's a bit disconcerting to read comments disparaging the looks of a subject.
> ...



Post #11.

There's no place for it here, regardless of the guy gets grief for it at the office.

Unless, of course, we're going to be permitted to comment on someone's looks. If so, count me in because, I'll be honest, I see some _ugly _SOB's pictured on this forum...


----------



## kundalini (Mar 27, 2013)




----------



## jwbryson1 (Mar 27, 2013)

Steve5D said:


> I'll be honest, I see some _ugly _SOB's pictured on this forum...




Wait...why are we picking on Kundalini now?


----------



## Steve5D (Mar 27, 2013)

jwbryson1 said:


> Steve5D said:
> 
> 
> > jwbryson1 said:
> ...



I'm not interested in "winning" anything. I'm interested in making a point.

You say you're doing this to help your career as a lawyer. Why would you think taking pictures of others in your office is going to help you be a better lawyer?

You're shooting *for free*. If someone doesn't like what they're getting _*for free*_, stop shooting and invite them to go elsewhere to get something _*for free*_. 

Either way, I'm lost as to how this is supposed to help you be a better lawyer...


----------



## Steve5D (Mar 27, 2013)

I just don't see how this makes any sense at all: 



> _I did this to be "nice" and to "further my career" as an ATTORNEY._



How does it do that?


----------



## kundalini (Mar 27, 2013)

jwbryson1 said:


> Steve5D said:
> 
> 
> > I'll be honest, I see some _ugly _SOB's pictured on this forum...
> ...



*Totally agree.   
*


----------



## jwbryson1 (Mar 27, 2013)

kundalini said:


> jwbryson1 said:
> 
> 
> > Steve5D said:
> ...



:mrgreen:


----------



## jwbryson1 (Mar 27, 2013)

Steve5D said:


> I just don't see how this makes any sense at all:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Because I said so.


----------



## runnah (Mar 27, 2013)

Quit your job and move out if state. Best way to deal with awkward situations.


----------



## leeroix (Mar 27, 2013)

-back to the reflection part - Didnt kundalini have a solution for you (runnah) with reflections not too long ago? about putting the frames further up on the head to angle the glasses down to get out of the glare?


----------



## runnah (Mar 27, 2013)

leeroix said:


> didnt kundalini have a solution for you (runnah) with reflections not too long ago? about putting the frames further up on the head to angle the glasses down to get out of the glare?



Yeah, put them down further on the nose than normal.


----------



## tirediron (Mar 27, 2013)

leeroix said:


> -back to the reflection part - Didnt kundalini have a solution for you (runnah) with reflections not too long ago? about putting the frames further up on the head to angle the glasses down to get out of the glare?


I think there's a couple of issues here.  One is that the glasses don't have any of the modern non-reflective coatings (there's no evidence of them in the images) and the second is that they're thick and, I think somewhat concave on the outside, which is going to make it very, very difficult to get outside the family of angles.  I'm sure there's a sweet spot, but it might be a <female dog> to find.


----------



## Robin_Usagani (Mar 27, 2013)

Sorry man.. not digging the background.  This is 2013.


----------



## manaheim (Mar 27, 2013)

runnah said:


> Sue them?



Always johhny on the spot with the worst possible response.


----------



## kathyt (Mar 27, 2013)

imagemaker46 said:


> jwbryson1 said:
> 
> 
> > jake337 said:
> ...



That is so rude. Why would you say something like that about someones co-worker? I would rather be brilliant any day, then be a complete ass based on someones looks.


----------



## pgriz (Mar 27, 2013)

You know, there's way not to get any reflections - take the glasses out of the frames.  All it takes is two little screws.


----------



## runnah (Mar 28, 2013)

pgriz said:


> You know, there's way not to get any reflections - take the glasses out of the frames.  All it takes is two little screws.



Nope, those old style glasses require at least a cutting torch and 3 strong men.


----------



## pjwarneka (Mar 28, 2013)

best thread ever! 
everyone is on a roll !


----------



## vintagesnaps (Mar 28, 2013)

I wear glasses and can't see two feet in front of my face, I wouldn't let somebody start unscrewing my glasses (and with mine that have a partial frameless look there's nothing to unscrew that would make it possible to take the lenses out anyway). 

You could try positioning your subject w/the head tilted slightly downward so the person isn't looking up or straight at the camera and see if that helps with reflections. This seems framed or cropped a bit tight, it might have worked better to frame it differently. The photographer needs to show or direct/prompt the subject how to be positioned in whatever way works best for the portrait.


----------



## texkam (Mar 28, 2013)

> Looking at this guy, the glasses are the least of his problems.


Disagree. With different posing and lighting, this subject would create and awesomely interesting portrait. Don't pose him like a turtle.



> One guy has had me shoot 4 sets of him today.


I think he has a legitimate beef.


----------



## Derrel (Mar 28, 2013)

SO, these three attorneys walk into a lawyer-bar in the deepest reaches of Hell, and the first guy says, "Soooo, I hear some id'jot  has agreed to photograph us, to further his career," and the second attorney says, "Yeah, like THAT's gonna make up for all those ridiculous charges!" and then the third attorney bursts into flames and says, "Heh-heh-heh...wait'll they get a look at this massive tool!" and then he whips out his pitchfork and slams it on the table, and the entire bar points and laughs!!!!


----------



## manaheim (Mar 28, 2013)

I've heard you can borrow frames without glass in them from eyeglass stores, though I've never tried it.


----------



## runnah (Mar 28, 2013)

Having not seen the photo due to me being on the phone I have decided to take the high road on this one.


----------



## Steve5D (Mar 28, 2013)

jwbryson1 said:


> Steve5D said:
> 
> 
> > I just don't see how this makes any sense at all:
> ...



All that does is confirm that you can't be a very good attorney if you have to rely on photographic skills to progress as a lawyer. I'm not saying that to be snarky but, absent of any actual, reasonable reply to the question, it's the only conclusion one can reach. 

Does it do it because it will help you gain favor from the higher ups in the firm?


----------



## manaheim (Mar 28, 2013)

^  not to mention that's one HELL of a spectacularly poor argument from an attorney.


----------



## tirediron (Mar 28, 2013)

Steve5D said:


> jwbryson1 said:
> 
> 
> > Steve5D said:
> ...


I think that's a bit harsh; I think what we're meant to take away from that is, the reason he's doing it is none of our business.  We're here to help with the how, the why?  Not our concern!


----------



## kathyt (Mar 28, 2013)

Steve5D said:


> jwbryson1 said:
> 
> 
> > Steve5D said:
> ...



He is trying to be a team player. Do nice for others. Treat people with kindness. Go above and beyond. That is what successful people do. I work with equal parts all day long, and would do anything I needed to do to make sure my co-workers are doing okay. That is how we function.


----------



## runnah (Mar 28, 2013)

kathythorson said:


> He is trying to be a team player. Do nice for others. Treat people with kindness. Go above and beyond. That is what successful people do. I work with equal parts all day long, and would do anything I needed to do to make sure my co-workers are doing okay. That is how we function.



Sorry, you have to be a outright evil person to succeed in lawyering. The attorney general got where he is today by literally stabbing a dude with a 3-hole punch.


----------



## kathyt (Mar 28, 2013)

runnah said:


> kathythorson said:
> 
> 
> > He is trying to be a team player. Do nice for others. Treat people with kindness. Go above and beyond. That is what successful people do. I work with equal parts all day long, and would do anything I needed to do to make sure my co-workers are doing okay. That is how we function.
> ...



I have 9 lawyers in my immediate family. They are kind, intelligent, and extremely generous. There is not one evil tendency in any of them. I think you are stereotyping my dear friend.


----------



## Josh66 (Mar 28, 2013)

kathythorson said:


> runnah said:
> 
> 
> > kathythorson said:
> ...



To be fair to runnah, you did not list 'successful' in your list of attributes.  :lmao:


----------



## kathyt (Mar 28, 2013)

O|||||||O said:


> kathythorson said:
> 
> 
> > runnah said:
> ...



Oh, sorry. Highly successful, yet still humble.


----------



## o hey tyler (Mar 28, 2013)

Not sure if this has been mentioned, (tl;dr) but if you are having a difficult time with reflections on glasses... I would try asking the subject to tilt the glasses down slightly so that the bows rest on the top of their ears... Additionally moving the lights up after this would still help. Kind of hard to explain, but I think you can picture what I'm talking about.


----------



## Robin_Usagani (Mar 28, 2013)




----------



## tirediron (Mar 28, 2013)

Robin_Usagani said:


>


----------



## tirediron (Mar 28, 2013)

Okay everyone; we all have our opinions about lawyers - how's about we keep them to ourselves mmmmmkay?


----------



## tirediron (Mar 28, 2013)

Okay, this is going nowhere good.  Everyone go outside and take a picture!


----------

