# Life's a Drag C&C Welcome



## KAikens318 (Aug 30, 2012)

So I photograph drag shows at a local gay club. Do NOT turn this into a political or religious debate please. I would love some C&C on the technical, don't need judgement on the content though!! (I had this problem before when I posted in this forum so I am hoping those people stay away). I know at least one technical 'problem' with the photo is the shadow. Crappy club lighting. Lol


----------



## Jaemie (Aug 30, 2012)

What type of flash and what flash settings/angles did you use? The light is very harsh, especially on her face. That wall/ceiling shadow appears to be from the flash, not the club lights.


----------



## rokvi (Aug 30, 2012)

The shadow and background is distracting. That ceiling looks like it would have been ok to bounce off. When I think of "drag", I think of vibrant colours and wild make up and such, so I'm thinking it might have been better in colour.

Just my 2 cents.


----------



## tirediron (Aug 30, 2012)

^^ That, as well as shoot down from a higher position rather than up from a lower one.  I don't care what the club's light-racks look like!


----------



## Designer (Aug 30, 2012)

KAikens318 said:


> Crappy club lighting.



1.  A good photographer will figure out a way to compensate for "crappy" club lighting.  In this shot, you should have used bounce flash at the very minimum, and more lighting equipment if you can.  The shadow is from your flash, not the "crappy" club lighting.


2.  A good photographer would shoot these in color.

3.  A good photographer would try to frame the entire subject while avoiding much of the distracting background.


----------



## CaboWabo (Aug 30, 2012)

I am lost is this a HDR photo or something else , if its hdr how many shots did you take , Did I miss something i have never used a flash in HDR I didnt think you could maybe I missed that part ?


----------



## rokvi (Aug 30, 2012)

CaboWabo said:


> I am lost is this a HDR photo or something else , if its hdr how many shots did you take , Did I miss something i have never used a flash in HDR I didnt think you could maybe I missed that part ?



What made you think this was HDR?


----------



## zombiemann (Aug 30, 2012)

rokvi said:


> CaboWabo said:
> 
> 
> > I am lost is this a HDR photo or something else , if its hdr how many shots did you take , Did I miss something i have never used a flash in HDR I didnt think you could maybe I missed that part ?
> ...



Because its in the HDR area of the forum.


----------



## KAikens318 (Aug 31, 2012)

Designer said:


> KAikens318 said:
> 
> 
> > Crappy club lighting.
> ...




1. It is a tone mapped HDR (so technically a 'fake'HDR)
2. I did shoot this in color. I just  decided to turn it black and white because it is a darker subject (dark  in nature, not dark lighting)
3. I KNOW the shadow is caused by my  flash. Duh. I am saying that the club lighting is crappy and that even  bouncing off the ceiling I couldn't get a good enough exposure, even  with the flash in manual mode turned all the way up and the ISO cranked.  The ceiling above where I was was black TVs...not so great for  bouncing. This was a first of many events that I will be covering, and now that I know what I am up against, I can take better care next time.
4. I don't appreciate your snarky comments Designer however I will take your criticism for what it is. I will try a more wide frame next time and try to get eye level instead of looking up at the performer. 

That said, the client was pretty damn happy with them, so I must at the least be a  "good photographer"

Here is the photo in color






And here is another


----------



## tirediron (Aug 31, 2012)

KAikens318 said:


> I KNOW the shadow is caused by my flash. Duh.


Now who's being snarky?  Glass houses and all that, right?



KAikens318 said:


> I am saying that the club lighting is crappy and that even bouncing off the ceiling I couldn't get a good enough exposure, even with the flash in manual mode turned all the way up and the ISO cranked. The ceiling above where I was was black TVs...not so great for bouncing. This was a first of many events that I will be covering, and now that I know what I am up against, I can take better care next time.


Diffusers, off-camera flash...  to be honest, I can't see what's difficult about this.  A remote flash cable, (perhaps not even necessary if your system supports wireless triggering) hand-hold the flash high and left, heavy diffuser in places, flag slightly if necessary, and Voila... photograph.



KAikens318 said:


> That said, the client was pretty damn happy with them, so I must at the least be a "good photographer"


 Well, don't forget, people here are going to judge your work based on its' merit and the technical skill of the execution, not simply because they like it or don't like it.  When you don't know how to do something people often think that even a simple task is impressive because it's not something they could, but to other experts and knowledgable people, not maybe so much.

The image isn't bad per se, but it has a lot of room for improvement, and with some very basic procedural changes and a little practice, I think you'll be turning in good work soon.


----------



## Bitter Jeweler (Aug 31, 2012)

KAikens318 said:


> That said, the client was pretty damn happy with them, so I must at the least be a  "good".


I can't believe you said that!


----------



## Designer (Aug 31, 2012)

KAikens318 said:


> 1. It is a tone mapped HDR (so technically a 'fake'HDR)
> 2. I did shoot this in color. I just decided to turn it black and white because it is a darker subject (dark in nature, not dark lighting)
> 3. I KNOW the shadow is caused by my flash. Duh. I am saying that the club lighting is crappy and that even bouncing off the ceiling I couldn't get a good enough exposure, even with the flash in manual mode turned all the way up and the ISO cranked. The ceiling above where I was was black TVs...not so great for bouncing. This was a first of many events that I will be covering, and now that I know what I am up against, I can take better care next time.
> 4. I don't appreciate your snarky comments Designer however I will take your criticism for what it is. I will try a more wide frame next time and try to get eye level instead of looking up at the performer.



2. I see that since the outfit was almost entirely black, I now understand and support your decision to present a monochrome version.
3. You were the one who complained about the ambient lighting.  I can't imagine even a beginner not moving or getting a better angle on the shot.  Seems like it should be intuitive.  Since you were already aware of bounced flash, I don't understand why you couldn't make it work.
4. If it seems my remarks were "snarky", I was responding to the fact that you felt it necessary to launch into a tirade in your first post, then ask for a review of the technical aspects of the photo, when it clearly wasn't well executed.  Your post made it seem as if you were an arrogant know-nothing with a chip on his shoulder.  So in case you're not, I apologize.


----------



## rokvi (Aug 31, 2012)

zombiemann said:


> rokvi said:
> 
> 
> > CaboWabo said:
> ...



Doh!


----------



## KAikens318 (Aug 31, 2012)

Designer said:


> KAikens318 said:
> 
> 
> > 1. It is a tone mapped HDR (so technically a 'fake'HDR)
> ...



I am far from arrogant, trust me. Lol.

I wish I could have moved to get a better bounce, however these drag shows bring in a LOT of people so there isn't much room to breathe let alone move. The owner set up an area for me, and then that is all I get. So as I am aware now that I am going to have to bounce the flash in order to get a good photo, I will ask for different placement so I am under the white ceiling in order to do so. I had a diffuser and used it, but it was far too dark still. I think I will be investing in a Gary Fong lightsphere-ish device. 

As for the "tirade" in the first post, I was just trying to get my point across that I wanted feedback on the technical aspects of the photos and not "oh my gosh, drag queens, that is a sin blah blah blah". I had that happen the last time I posted photos of drag queens here and never ended up getting feedback on the actual photo because people were too busy gay bashing.


----------



## CaboWabo (Aug 31, 2012)

I am still lost I dont understand a flash in HDR did I miss something here I have never read or seen anyone use one . Is it possible to use a flash in HDR ?


----------



## zombiemann (Aug 31, 2012)

CaboWabo said:


> I am still lost I dont understand a flash in HDR did I miss something here I have never read or seen anyone use one . Is it possible to use a flash in HDR ?



I am far from an expert but to the best of my knowledge flash doesn't work with HDR.  What we are seeing in this thread isn't a multiple exposure HDR, it's a tone mapped single image.


----------



## 2WheelPhoto (Aug 31, 2012)

dude, softer lighting may allow him to look more feminine, rather than out of a horror script


----------



## PhotoWrangler (Aug 31, 2012)

Drag queens need special makeup to make them look feminine - you should know what racing stripes, contouring,  and blending are if you're around drag. The same is true with lighting. Direct flash doesn't work because all you do is cancel the contouring makeup. Get you a few light stands and some cheap radio triggers. This was done in a studio setting at After Dark, but you could do nearly the same thing with some speedlights and some grids or snoots. Put them at the end of the runway, over head, facing down. Nearly a butterfly lighting-ish affect.


----------



## rexbobcat (Aug 31, 2012)

ChristopherCoy said:
			
		

> Drag queens need special makeup to make them look feminine - you should know what racing stripes, contouring,  and blending are if you're around drag. The same is true with lighting. Direct flash doesn't work because all you do is cancel the contouring makeup. Get you a few light stands and some cheap radio triggers. This was done in a studio setting at After Dark, but you could do nearly the same thing with some speedlights and some grids or snoots. Put them at the end of the runway, over head, facing down. Nearly a butterfly lighting-ish affect.
> 
> <img src="http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=18958"/>



Idk. I've seen some very naturally feminine drag queens lol.


----------



## Jaemie (Aug 31, 2012)

What brand/model of flash and what flash settings did you use?

I know I already asked, but I'm still curious.


----------



## amolitor (Aug 31, 2012)

Can't you do HDR from RAW files without multiple exposures? The problem is the same, squashing a bunch of tonal range into a smaller one. I don't see that multiple exposures are required for "real" HDR.


----------



## PhotoWrangler (Aug 31, 2012)

rexbobcat said:


> Idk. I've seen some very naturally feminine drag queens lol.





I've seen some that can give Pam Anderson a run for her money. Have you ever watched Crystal Summers perform?

But 90% of queens need, or usually use some form of highlight/shadow contouring techniques - which is what I meant.


----------



## rexbobcat (Aug 31, 2012)

ChristopherCoy said:
			
		

> I've seen some that can give Pam Anderson a run for her money. Have you ever watched Crystal Summers perform?
> 
> But 90% of queens need, or usually use some form of highlight/shadow contouring techniques - which is what I meant.



Yeah I understood.  I was just being funny.

There's a drag queen where I live who is just local but does very little (that I can tell) to get dressed up. He naturally has a feminine bone structure.


----------



## rexbobcat (Aug 31, 2012)

amolitor said:
			
		

> Can't you do HDR from RAW files without multiple exposures? The problem is the same, squashing a bunch of tonal range into a smaller one. I don't see that multiple exposures are required for "real" HDR.



Yeah. It's just that shadow noise could possibly be an issue.


----------



## zombiemann (Aug 31, 2012)

amolitor said:


> Can't you do HDR from RAW files without multiple exposures? The problem is the same, squashing a bunch of tonal range into a smaller one. I don't see that multiple exposures are required for "real" HDR.



Not trying to debate "real" but I don't really see how?  If I expose a shot with a shutter speed of 1/125th I can "fake" a higher or lower exposure but the bottom line is I still am stuck only with the information gathered in that 1/125 whereas with a bracket I have information from 1/125 and (just for example) 1/250 and 1/60.  Sure you can reduce to 1/250, but how can you increase to 1/60? RAW isn't a magical process that automatically obtains all the light ranges possible with 1 click of the button.  The photons still have to reach the sensor.  With that being said it is possible to create a nice looking "fake" via tone mapping etc


----------



## amolitor (Sep 1, 2012)

RAW does capture more range than can be rendered on any normal output medium, though. It captures a High Dynamic Range image. Maybe only "pretty high" to be sure, but there's usually a 2 to 4 stops of information that is usable which you have to throw away (normal processing) or figure out what to do with (HDR-style processing). Does that make sense?


----------



## zombiemann (Sep 1, 2012)

amolitor said:


> RAW does capture more range than can be rendered on any normal output medium, though. It captures a High Dynamic Range image. Maybe only "pretty high" to be sure, but there's usually a 2 to 4 stops of information that is usable which you have to throw away (normal processing) or figure out what to do with (HDR-style processing). Does that make sense?



Actually, I've been thinking about this. I think your best bet would be to figure what your longest exposure should be, shoot that, and then work backwards from there, as opposed to the typical shoot neutral and then worry about the ups and downs.


----------

