[matthew]

My apologies for the title, but there was really nothing else I could have called it.

This was shot for my club, which has a 'motion' theme coming up. It was a very simple setup: camera on a tripod, 150mm (300mm-e) lens attached, iso100 1/250 & f/11, and a flash on low power triggered by a wireless remote. The camera was also triggered by an IR remote, so that I could drop the feather and fire the shutter. The flash was firing upwards, and to make sure I was over it when I dropped the feather I had a mini maglite shining upwards and snooted by a roll of paper towels. The background was irrelevant, since the exposure rendered everything black, but to shield the the camera and background from spill I had the flash placed between my ottoman and the couch. (I also like to set it up so that I can work sitting down.) Naturally I used manual focus, and just kept going until I had a bunch of shots that I liked. I then used Lightroom to tweak the exposures and Photoshop to combine them. All told it was about an hour to shoot, including set-up and tear-down times. (It would have been faster if I hadn't kept losing the feather...)

[enviroguy]

I'm not terribly good at critiquing the technical aspects, but image looks great to me. Composition wise, the photo is lovely in its simplicity and the feathers are placed in the classic positions according to the "rule of thirds". Also the rule of "odds vs evens" was applied, i.e. one or three objects are usually more pleasing to view that two or four. Quite a different picture, expertly rendered, with a great explanation (thank you for sharing that). Regards.....Dennis

[Toad]

I really like what I am seeing here. Composition wise, I would like it better if there was not quite so much of a triangle between the feathers, For example if the one to the right was a bit up or down from *center*. Maybe that's just me - but I like it when the composition isn't quite so formal. For example, I really like it that the bottom feather isn't vertically aligned with the top one. It's grand though as it is - really just debating about the icing on the cake...

[Wedding Shooter]

A patient man is rewarded - beautiful.

[Pavel]

A charming gentle, fragile photo Matthew. I would prefer a somewhat less monotonous but still non-distracting background (very faint bokeh circles?)

[matthew]

Dennis, thanks - and I felt like I needed to explain the setup a bit to redeem myself for the horrible title.

Toad, I like your idea, and I've tweaked the photo a bit. I changed the format to fit the display it will be seen on, and now the main lines within the feathers lead to the others. I'm not sure if it makes the composition more dynamic (good) or static (bad), though.

Chris, Patience is a virtue that I usually find in others.

Pavel, what you suggest would be possible with a second strobe to light a background, but would take more room than I have for the setup. Even a white-on-white would be tough with the room that I have, but you're right that there are a lot of variations possible.

Here's version 2:





I like it better, but I'm not sure that I like it best.

[Keith Alan]

I wouldn't presume to critique something like this until I tried it myself.

Love it.

[matthew]

Keith, with all of your off-camera flash work, I'm amazed that you haven't played with this. Compared to what you do, this stuff is simple.

And where's your internet spirit? Knowledge and experience isn't required as long as you have a keyboard.

[Kombisaurus]

And where's your internet spirit? Knowledge and experience isn't required as long as you have a keyboard.

Hey, with an invitation like that I qualify to offer my opinion (even though I've never tried a shot like this myself either).

I really like the idea behind this shot Matthew and I think it's worth pursuing, but as it stands I feel it's pulling me in two conflicting directions.
On the one hand I see feathers falling which evokes a very light airy feeling of movement.
But on the other hand I see a big heavy black area with three items spread out in a fairly static arragement, which evokes somewhat of a heavy, flat, static feeling.

While it's great you have tried to remove distractions from the background, I think Pavel's idea of a nicely blurred background would remove the "weight" from the photo and give it depth. This would give visual clues that the feathers are in fact falling through space (not just sitting on a black table for example). It doesn't have to be a white background, just not solid black.

I'm not quite sure how you've lit this scene, but personally I think backlighting the feathers might give a really nice airy effect and make the feathers seem a bit more weightless and floaty. Some dust particles suspended in the air might also help in this regard (not sure if that's a look you're after though, but dust would look great backlit too).

If the arrangement of the feathers were a bit more dynamic (ie off-centre and a bit more random) then it would also give it more flow and movement.

But it's easy for me to sit here and critisize when I don't know how many variations you tried before you got to this point, and I don't know how easy it is to shoot feathers moving past your camera. I can certainly appreciate what you've done here already. Great job.

Now you've got me thinking about this shot and I want to try it out when I get home!

[Keith Alan]

I Love a black background because is allows the viewer to imagine what belongs there.
A blank canvas for their own dreams in the night.

Every time I choose some other color, the mystery of it all goes away.

[Toad]

I like the flow of the feathers in #2 - and the less formal arrangement makes it feel more natural IMO. Great work.

[matthew]

I do think I see a version #3 in my future - I want to change the size of one of the feathers (not sure which one yet) and change the arrangement a bit.

Adrian, have you given this a try? It's actually a fairly simple setup, but it does need a remote for the flash and either an assistant or remote for the camera.

As for the background, I do appreciate the difference of opinion, because only solid white or black had occurred to me. White-on-white was actually my first thought, but I switched to black even before I shot anything. For one thing, it's technically easier - my camera has an X-sync of 1/250s, which just makes the background go away, so nothing needed to be done. White would have needed an even backdrop (I keep white sheets and bristol board with my lighting kit, no big deal) and a second flash, complicating the exposure and requiring more space. I suppose I could have shot the feather in my lightbox, but I wanted it to really be falling.

But the biggest reason for the white-on-black is the intended use of the image: it will be shown to detail&sharpness-obsessed judges, and projected on a screen. White-on-white is too subtle for that, but if I was shooting for a print, it's what I would choose.

[Kombisaurus]

Hey Matt,

I gave this a try a couple of days ago when I was out, but I used natural light instead of strobes.

Unfortunately the feathers I had were from an old doona and were fairly scrappy, and the wind was blowing a gale so I had great difficulty controlling their movement, focussing on them, or even freezing their movement in the light I was working with.
But the point of my exercise was to test out the lighting, so you'll just have to excuse the blurry mess that is shot #1 and that I'm actually holding the feather still in the 2nd shot. Just look at the lighting and the background.

Both shots were backlit by the sun with just the translucency of the feathers catching the sun to illuminate them. In the first shot I deliberately included the sun and a lot of flare to give that particular atmosphere, while the second shot was more about giving a blurred green background from the grass.



To be honest I was a bit disappointed with both of these efforts. They don't quite convey to me the light airy feeling I was hoping for.

This next shot is one I took at a wedding I was helping Chris (WeddingShooter) with a while ago, and I think better illustrates the kind of lighting I was talking about. Apart from the sunlight shining through the petals giving them life, the rest of the photo provides a context which I think really helps a photo like this.



Anyway, thanks for starting the thread - it got me thinking. I hope your submission goes well!

[matthew]

Adrian, thanks for that - and I really like photo #3. It certainly captures a more lively and interesting scene than my very clinical setup.

I've been experimenting a bit with the background in my existing shot, and have added a subtle texture to it. It gives me the impression of wood grain, so hopefully the powers-that-judge won't think that it's digital noise. The sighting of noise has been the downfall of photos much better than mine, and an obviously digital background would probably get me ostracized. That said, the effect is actually more subtle in the web-jpg than in the full-screen version.

[shuttertalk]

Hey Kombi, love your #3! Real sense of beauty and fun...