# Sharpie (C&C please)



## kdthomas (Jan 21, 2015)

I'm just venturing into product shots, I'd like to see what everyone thinks of this, and how I can improve it.


 

Would it help if I uploaded the SOOC image, or a shot of the table, etc?


----------



## Parker219 (Jan 21, 2015)

Sorry, I don't like it. 

The reflection of the bright light is almost  "crossing out" the sharpie name.

Can you use a less harsh light, so it doesn't create that reflection?


----------



## kdthomas (Jan 21, 2015)

Parker219 said:


> Sorry, I don't like it.



No, that's great ... I want to fix it and get better.



Parker219 said:


> The reflection of the bright light is almost  "crossing out" the sharpie name.
> 
> Can you use a less harsh light, so it doesn't create that reflection?



Is this better?


----------



## qleak (Jan 21, 2015)

kdthomas said:


> Parker219 said:
> 
> 
> > Sorry, I don't like it.
> ...



IMHO yes!

however your pen will dry up without the cap on! lol


----------



## Parker219 (Jan 21, 2015)

Yep. Nice fix.


----------



## Bitter Jeweler (Jan 21, 2015)

Is your monitor calibrated?


----------



## Rick58 (Jan 22, 2015)

Much better


----------



## kdthomas (Jan 22, 2015)

Bitter Jeweler said:


> Is your monitor calibrated?



Yes I use i1 color checker ... Does it look funny?


----------



## Braineack (Jan 22, 2015)

2nd needs a little bit of reflection added back.


----------



## kdthomas (Jan 22, 2015)

Braineack said:


> 2nd needs a little bit of reflection added back.



Where were you thinking? On the cap, along the clip?


----------



## kdthomas (Jan 22, 2015)

Braineack said:


> 2nd needs a little bit of reflection added back.



OK, here's another one.... got a little more light on the cap to the right, and the bright line is still there but much more subtle, I think.

Thoughts?

Seriously, I'm thinking about actually doing this, I want to get this right and I really need good advice. Is it catalog/shutterstock worthy?

Bear in mind I know I gotta clean up the dust & scratches, but is it a good *image*?


----------



## qleak (Jan 22, 2015)

kdthomas said:


> Is it catalog/shutterstock worthy?



Compared with what sharpie currently buys:

Sharpie Permanent Markers | Fine Point Permanent Marker

I'd say it's pretty damn close. It looks like they prefer slightly less dark of shadows and more detail on the tip [/QUOTE]


----------



## kdthomas (Jan 22, 2015)

Yeah their blacks don't look as deep. And is it me, or does that shadow underneath look artificial? It's just as dark at the white portion of the pen as the black ... 

Would a company like that expect a transparent background?


----------



## W.Y.Photo (Jan 23, 2015)

Ok. the only problem I have with the 3rd one is the way the highlight wraps around this black area in the cap.. can you figure out how to fill that without changing where the highlight falls?


----------



## snerd (Jan 23, 2015)

I was going to say, that's a sharp Sharpie! But it seems just a tad soft to me. Of course, I could be mistaken. Anyone else?


----------



## W.Y.Photo (Jan 23, 2015)

snerd said:


> I was going to say, that's a sharp Sharpie! But it seems just a tad soft to me. Of course, I could be mistaken. Anyone else?



Could use some more DoF..

I think its focused on the name not the edges.


----------



## Austin Greene (Jan 23, 2015)

kdthomas said:


> I'm just venturing into product shots, I'd like to see what everyone thinks of this, and how I can improve it.
> 
> View attachment 93774
> 
> Would it help if I uploaded the SOOC image, or a shot of the table, etc?



You need to fix that highlight. Actually, IMO, you need to re-approach the image altogether. The pen doesn't have a good outline, try some side-lighting like a soft-box and use a piece of foam core to strip it. Or just use a light above left, mostly flagged with foam-core, and then have another light bouncing in off some foam core to provide fill on the logo. You should also have detail on the tip contours, and on the lettering on the cap. 

Generally speaking, avoid crazy highlights like that, especially when they cross a logo. Even when you do have highlights, keep them to 240 and below.


----------



## snerd (Jan 23, 2015)

W.Y.Photo said:


> snerd said:
> 
> 
> > I was going to say, that's a sharp Sharpie! But it seems just a tad soft to me. Of course, I could be mistaken. Anyone else?
> ...


To my eyes, the "AP" letters look sharpest. Maybe subjective, though. I did an unsharp mask and despeckle in my ancient PSP 7 and it looks a little sharper.


----------



## kdthomas (Jan 23, 2015)

Lens was an 85mm 1.8 which only goes to f/16, I was just about at the closest focal distance, and even then had to crop. Part of the pen was slightly closer to the lens than the other. May be a better idea to shoot it straight on.


----------



## Austin Greene (Jan 23, 2015)

kdthomas said:


> Yeah their blacks don't look as deep. And is it me, or does that shadow underneath look artificial? It's just as dark at the white portion of the pen as the black ...
> 
> Would a company like that expect a transparent background?


As for the background, what I've learned from shooting products 8 hours a day for the past 4 months is that most companies expect a perfect 255 white background. Black backgrounds happen, but only for more styled products, more catalog than web integration. Get that 255 when you're shooting it by blowing out the background with an extra light and flagging the object, or do what most people do and get good at removing it in post (and sometimes adding realistic shadows in post as well). The key to the second option here is that it has to be done in a realistic way. I usually mask the object to a background, add a drop shadow, and then erase the shadow where needed at different brush opacities.

As for lens choices, for a sharpie-type object we typically use anything from a 50 1.4 to a 100 f/2, or 100 macro. The item should be sharp throughout.


----------



## kdthomas (Jan 23, 2015)

Austin Greene said:


> kdthomas said:
> 
> 
> > I'm just venturing into product shots, I'd like to see what everyone thinks of this, and how I can improve it.
> ...



Are you talking about the very first image? I made a couple of changes & I think I got rid of the highlight splitting through the logo.

Also (Again, I'm a newb) by "240" do you mean the RGB value?


----------



## W.Y.Photo (Jan 23, 2015)

255 is white, anything below it is technically gray. It stands for the K value which adds or subtracts light using grayscale. When you look at a histagram you are looking at a chart of the tonal values from 0 (black) to 255 (white) everything in between is actually gray.


----------

