# Need quick advice!



## Austin Greene (Aug 13, 2014)

Ok guys, im posting from my phone so please excuse typos. 

Long story short I just got a callback on a photo job I applied for. They're impressed, but want to see a product photo done on a white background. Two things I rarely do, and have never done together. I have to take the photo and send it to them this evening. Its a big bay area company that doesn't like waiting, and I really want to impress them so I need your best tips on shooting products on white. I'm going to run around trying to find some white paper, else ill have to use a sheet. I'm at a remote field station so supplies are limited, but they don't care about the product I use, they just want a clear photo, not too much styling. I'm thinking an Apple in a bowl or chopsticks with a bowl, or maybe a bottle of wine. I've got three stands, a reflector, two speedlights, two umbrellas and a softbox. 

Thanks! I'll post my photos later so you all can help me snag the best.


----------



## Austin Greene (Aug 13, 2014)

Update: I've sourced about 6 ft of matte white butcher paper. That should give me a gentle curve to the backdrop and about 2-3 ft vertical shooting space with a bit for the product to sit on. Now I need lighting and product tips.


----------



## JoeW (Aug 13, 2014)

Lots of soft light with the right angles to avoid glare and hot spots, a DoF so the grain of the paper in the background isn't in focus, and a gentle curve/cyc to the paper and you're fine.  You might get a couple of clamps to hold the paper to the chair or table or stand or whatever you're using to get it to go up.

Just a suggestion--flaws in fruit can stand out really well in situations like this.  So either buy a couple of apples.  Or shoot variations (some of apples, some of your chopsticks).  I'd suggest looking at things like your phone or watch or a pair of glasses or even a piece of camera gear...as long as it's in good shape and looks new.


----------



## tirediron (Aug 13, 2014)

One light for the background, one for the product.  If you're going to use wine, then I'd make sure it was red wine, but I would actually look for a matte product just to make your life easier so that you don't have to deal with annoying reflections.


----------



## Austin Greene (Aug 13, 2014)

Gotcha. I'm also considering some flasks or glassware from the lab here for some personality. Maybe with food coloring and or dry ice? Otherwise I might try a phone...


----------



## Designer (Aug 13, 2014)

Is it a requirement that the object(s) are reflective?

IOW: I would stay away from anything shiny such as glass unless that is what they specifically want.  Make it easy on yourself and use something that isn't shiny.


----------



## orljustin (Aug 13, 2014)

Austin Greene said:


> Ok guys, im posting from my phone so please excuse typos.
> 
> Long story short I just got a callback on a photo job I applied for. They're impressed, but want to see a product photo done on a white background. Two things I rarely do, and have never done together. I have to take the photo and send it to them this evening. Its a big bay area company that doesn't like waiting, and I really want to impress them so I need your best tips on shooting products on white. I'm going to run around trying to find some white paper, else ill have to use a sheet. I'm at a remote field station so supplies are limited, but they don't care about the product I use, they just want a clear photo, not too much styling. I'm thinking an Apple in a bowl or chopsticks with a bowl, or maybe a bottle of wine. I've got three stands, a reflector, two speedlights, two umbrellas and a softbox.
> 
> Thanks! I'll post my photos later so you all can help me snag the best.



Honestly, if you've never done it and have to fudge a resume, are you really the best pro for the job?


----------



## JohnnyWrench (Aug 13, 2014)

orljustin said:


> Austin Greene said:
> 
> 
> > Ok guys, im posting from my phone so please excuse typos.
> ...



If he can pull off the shot, how is he fudging it?  Nothing wrong with asking for help.


----------



## vintagesnaps (Aug 13, 2014)

I'd keep it simple since it has to be done tonight. Some plastic containers or cups? maybe plain with no lettering/company's name? and not shiny or reflective. Picnicware? a scoop of some sort? Look around and see what has some nice color and no reflective surfaces. 

And if you're not sure on setting up your lighting, this is like cramming for a test. I probably wouldn't overpromise if you get into an interview, and it sounds like you'd need to be thinking about how you can learn product photography if that's going to be part of the job (I wonder if you might have to be prepared to discuss how you'd be willing to learn any part of the job that's new to you or that you don't yet have a lot of experience doing).


----------



## D-B-J (Aug 13, 2014)

Nothing reflective, and as tirediron said one for the main and one for the background.  Shouldn't be too difficult--I have faith in you!


----------



## Austin Greene (Aug 13, 2014)

I appreciate all the ideas. Let me make a few things clear: 

1. I'm confident in my lighting ability regardless of shooting style, they share that feeling and simply want to see me apply it to a white background product photo.

2. I've done product photos before, but I simply haven't done them on a white background, this category isn't entirely new. Most of my shots before were conceptual, and they are looking for more categorical. 

3. I'm mainly just compiling a list of item suggestions, that's the purpose of this thread. I've got glassware that I'll give a shot, and I've got other items such as an old Canon AE -1 and a few others.

4. I've in no way fudged a resume, or anything at all. They know I don't do products typically, and if anything, they like that variety. They want to see how flexible I can be, and this is how. 

Thanks to those that have been helpful, I really appreciate the ideas.


----------



## D-B-J (Aug 13, 2014)

Austin Greene said:


> I appreciate all the ideas. Let me make a few things clear:
> 
> 1. I'm confident in my lighting ability regardless of shooting style, they share that feeling and simply want to see me apply it to a white background product photo.
> 
> ...



I look forward to the result!


----------



## tirediron (Aug 13, 2014)

D-B-J said:


> I look forward to the result!


^^This!!^^


----------



## D-B-J (Aug 13, 2014)

So??


----------



## Browncoat (Aug 13, 2014)

orljustin said:


> Honestly, if you've never done it and have to fudge a resume, are you really the best pro for the job?



Yawn. This type of response is so old and tired. Don't be such a Debbie Downer.


----------



## robbins.photo (Aug 13, 2014)

Browncoat said:


> orljustin said:
> 
> 
> > Honestly, if you've never done it and have to fudge a resume, are you really the best pro for the job?
> ...


Did somebody here call for a Debbie Downer?

Ah crap, I guess not.  Oh well, just so you know if you need me I'm more than happy to rain all over your parade, or for a small surcharge pee on your leg while insisting it's raining.

Just let me know...

Lol


----------



## astroNikon (Aug 13, 2014)

How did it go ??



what does Debbie does Dallas have to do with this ?


----------



## Austin Greene (Aug 14, 2014)

Ok, here we go. I had about an hour and a half or so in total to do my shooting. After speaking to the recruiter again, they want more than a single photo and some variety in terms of objects. I found working with the limited selection of objects a little constricting, it was interesting what I could scrounge up around the lab, especially the old geiger-counter. Especially so when compounded with the white background and the fact that they told me they don't want aperture control demonstrated for these images, just sharp throughout the object (or mostly). In their words, keep the "styling" and composition at bay, just show some lighting skills, the rest comes later in the hiring process. All in all I wanted to pick objects that wouldn't be technically too easy, nothing that makes someone think "he took the easy way out on that one."

I didn't want them to all be so "standardized", so I decided to do something with the apple. My goal was to leave a memorable image, something to make someone take a second glance, but just subtly so. They're all single exposures between 1/50 and 1/160. 

They've requested several photos, so I plan on sending 4 of the 5. If you all could pick one or two that you would toss, it would be a big help. I have my opinions, but I'm curious what you think. 

1. 






2.





3.





4.





5.


----------



## orljustin (Aug 14, 2014)

Well, none of them have a pure white background.  So you'll have to do some photoshop work.  Once you do that to the vial, it will be an obvious mismatch through the glass compared to the background.  Also, you'll have a hard time with the white porcelain bowl.  You should have used a darker color.   You've got bleed around the top of the lens and the white balance is off a bit.  The only one I would use is the geiger counter.


----------



## robbins.photo (Aug 14, 2014)

I'd go with 2, 3, 4, and 5. Background looks fine to me


----------



## D-B-J (Aug 14, 2014)

Background looks fine to me as well. I would ditch the beaker, for sure. There's not enough to define the edges of it.


----------



## tirediron (Aug 14, 2014)

orljustin said:


> Well, none of them have a pure white background. So you'll have to do some photoshop work. Once you do that to the vial, it will be an obvious mismatch through the glass compared to the background. Also, you'll have a hard time with the white porcelain bowl. You should have used a darker color. You've got bleed around the top of the lens and the white balance is off a bit. The only one I would use is the geiger counter.


I agree that the geiger counter is definitely the best.  The apple & brown bowl shots could both be improved with a little post work.  The backgrounds look about 1/3 stop under to me.  Both the lens and the beaker should be ditched.


----------



## Browncoat (Aug 14, 2014)

tirediron said:


> I agree that the geiger counter is definitely the best.  The apple & brown bowl shots could both be improved with a little post work.  The backgrounds look about 1/3 stop under to me.  Both the lens and the beaker should be ditched.



Pretty much my sentiments as well. If you have to send 4/5, then ditch the beaker.

Also, these are pretty darn good considering you had to toss all of this together at the last minute.


----------



## D-B-J (Aug 14, 2014)

Browncoat said:


> tirediron said:
> 
> 
> > I agree that the geiger counter is definitely the best.  The apple & brown bowl shots could both be improved with a little post work.  The backgrounds look about 1/3 stop under to me.  Both the lens and the beaker should be ditched.
> ...



That's what I forgot to add. You not only A) stuck it to the haters and made some damn good images given the time, but also B) showed you can work well under pressure. They better hire you!


----------



## JohnnyWrench (Aug 14, 2014)

Love the bowl and chopsticks but I'll agree the background is a touch under exposed. Ditch the lens. The top edge is a bit hazy and not well defined. Nice work under pressure.


----------



## orljustin (Aug 14, 2014)

robbins.photo said:


> I'd go with 2, 3, 4, and 5. Background looks fine to me



Sure, the background is fine if you want an uneven, grey-ish purplish background.


----------



## Browncoat (Aug 14, 2014)

orljustin said:


> Sure, the background is fine if you want an uneven, grey-ish purplish background.



Oh, look. It's Debbie.

Let's see your product shots.


----------



## orljustin (Aug 14, 2014)

Browncoat said:


> orljustin said:
> 
> 
> > Sure, the background is fine if you want an uneven, grey-ish purplish background.
> ...



Oh look, it's the white knight.

I'm not sure how you can disagree with my assessment.  Maybe your monitor needs calibration.


----------



## D-B-J (Aug 14, 2014)

orljustin said:


> Browncoat said:
> 
> 
> > orljustin said:
> ...



OR maybe..... Just maybe... Yours does...


----------



## robbins.photo (Aug 14, 2014)

orljustin said:


> robbins.photo said:
> 
> 
> > I'd go with 2, 3, 4, and 5. Background looks fine to me
> ...



Well it's fine if you just look at it like a normal human being does, using the eye - if you want to nitpick, pixel peep, and use the eye dropper in photoshop to sample and check RGB levels well you can find plenty of problems with any picture.  Yes, even yours.  

For product shots these are all very good.  If you can produce better and have something constructive to say on how you go about doing that, feel free to respond.  If all your into is posting snark just for the sake of stroking your own ego, don't bother.


----------



## tirediron (Aug 14, 2014)

Okay folks, enough is enough... the backgrounds are what the backgrounds are, and if the OP is happy with the result...


----------



## orljustin (Aug 15, 2014)

tirediron said:


> Okay folks, enough is enough... the backgrounds are what the backgrounds are, and if the OP is happy with the result...



Sorry, I thought we were discussing making the client happy with the result.  I'm out.


----------



## Austin Greene (Aug 15, 2014)

I thought I'd give an update, I decided to send in all five photos to the recruiter. The ones I liked, others didn't, and vice versa so my gut just told me to go for it and send them all. That was Wednesday night. 

Yesterday afternoon, Thursday, I got a call back for an in person interview on Monday. It's at Google HQ. 

Thank you to eveeryone that helped, especially to those who took the time to tamp down some of the classic snark that finds its way out of the box every now and then. 

Crossing my fingers, I'll let you know what happens!  You all have been a huge help!


----------



## D-B-J (Aug 15, 2014)

Austin Greene said:


> I thought I'd give an update, I decided to send in all five photos to the recruiter. The ones I liked, others didn't, and vice versa so my gut just told me to go for it and send them all. That was Wednesday night.
> 
> Yesterday afternoon, Thursday, I got a call back for an in person interview on Monday. It's at Google HQ.
> 
> ...



Google HQ?! Sweet deal dude! Best of luck!


----------



## waday (Aug 15, 2014)

Good luck!


----------

