Author Topic: Projector as a backdrop? (Read 29338 times)

Magnum · « **Reply #25 on:** May 02, 2009, 15:04 »

Yeah true... Hmmm. I need to change to my smart brain

It seems so easy.

What if you just tell the model to be still ? and shoot without a flash.

batman · « **Reply #26 on:** May 02, 2009, 15:05 »

Quote from: travismanley on May 02, 2009, 11:43

who/what is Malak? What equipment are you talking about here so I can Google it.

Thanks

Travis, just wikied Malak and found this...http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malak_Karsh

travismanley · « **Reply #27 on:** May 02, 2009, 15:07 »

Quote from: batman on May 02, 2009, 15:05

Quote from: travismanley on May 02, 2009, 11:43

who/what is Malak? What equipment are you talking about here so I can Google it.

Thanks

Travis, just wikied Malak and found this...http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malak_Karsh

thanks

batman · « **Reply #28 on:** May 02, 2009, 15:08 »

if you're good and using SE, try to find his works for the Tulip Fest in Holland, I remember my H.O. sent me a couple of books from Holland where Malak had lots of photos shot using the product that the company I worked loaned him to use. These would be in the 80's, of course. (Geesh, I'm feeling old like T Rex already, lol)

astrocady · « **Reply #29 on:** May 03, 2009, 08:22 »

Quote from: travismanley on May 02, 2009, 14:49

im not sure why im having a hard time getting this to work. If you stick a gel in front of your light it projects the color onto your subject, why wouldnt this work with a slide? Maybe I should try some different slides.

Im using my canon 430ex with a custom gel holder I made and a sketch on some clear plastic I put in the gel holder. (the sketch is just for testing, ideally I would print an image on a transparency and use that)

You need a lens to focus the image.

travismanley · « **Reply #30 on:** May 03, 2009, 10:27 »

Quote from: astrocady on May 03, 2009, 08:22

Quote from: travismanley on May 02, 2009, 14:49
im not sure why im having a hard time getting this to work. If you stick a gel in front of your light it projects the color onto your subject, why wouldnt this work with a slide? Maybe I should try some different slides.

Im using my canon 430ex with a custom gel holder I made and a sketch on some clear plastic I put in the gel holder. (the sketch is just for testing, ideally I would print an image on a transparency and use that)

You need a lens to focus the image.

Im guessing you are probably right. Maybe im in over my head on this one. Im not sure how I would put this whole thing together.

Magnum · « **Reply #31 on:** May 03, 2009, 10:46 »

Copy the slide to a micro-film and put it between the lens and camera. Don know how but...

batman · « **Reply #32 on:** May 03, 2009, 10:53 »

sounds like you desperately want to succeed in using projection.
ok, travis, the cheapest way is to rent an overhead projector, and get one of those gel to project. with these gel or transparency, actually, that what they are called,
you can draw, paint, whatever on these transparency and it will project without any problem. these equipment are cheap, and can be found anywhere, as during my days selling AV equipment, HR managers of companies buy them for training their employees, or Accounting people use them for boardroom.
( found this on wiki so you can see the equipment i mean)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overhead_projector

Once again, you have to test shoot how to balance the contrast.
I don't know how you are going to balance the subject in the portrait, though.
because you need all the lights off for these overhead projector to work.

hey, it makes great silhouettes with the transparency projection on the person standing in the way of the screen. so who knows, you could start a niche with these kinds of body painting images without using paints.

good luck. you sound so eager . PM me some of your results, maybe i can help further ..

cdwheatley · « **Reply #33 on:** May 03, 2009, 10:58 »

Combining two images looks probably more realistic but its a lot of work. I've never tried to shoot in a studio and then combine with an outdoor scene, I would think it would be tuff to get the lighting/shadows right as mentioned. I do a lot of image combining, here is a couple that I did in photoshop recently that I thought came out alright.

http://www.istockphoto.com/stock-photo-9023912-woman-lounging-at-beach-in-paradise.php

http://www.istockphoto.com/file_closeup.php?id=9041578

batman · « **Reply #34 on:** May 03, 2009, 11:05 »

Quote from: cdwheatley on May 03, 2009, 10:58

Combining two images looks probably more realistic but its a lot of work. I've never tried to shoot in a studio and then combine with an outdoor scene, I would think it would be tuff to get the lighting/shadows right as mentioned. I do a lot of image combining, here is a couple that I did in photoshop recently that I thought came out alright.

http://www.istockphoto.com/stock-photo-9023912-woman-lounging-at-beach-in-paradise.php

http://www.istockphoto.com/file_closeup.php?id=9041578

yes Christian, that is excellent. i know your images and you master them well.
with PS available today, i would go that way.
as for combining the right layers , it's not that difficult esp. for you as you shoot in a lot of different situations . i would simply shoot plain background wherever you shoot on location, so you have a library of different lighting situations to match the master layer you want.

it's so much simpler using layers because you have full control of level, contrast, cc,etc..
unlike the ancient days of background projection. your work of just getting the correct slide would take up a lot of time, then it's combining the lighting with the studio lighting,etc...
believe me, if i had to do it all over again, i'll tell you, "forget it, give me Photoshop layers ".
i 'd rather spend the rest of the time saved laying on the beach next to your lovely model and offer her a Guiness to enjoy the sunshine with her

cdwheatley · « **Reply #35 on:** May 03, 2009, 11:37 »

Good advice to get a few shots of the plain background, I don't know how many times I've forgot to do that and kicked myself later (must have been the rum?). Agree that photoshop is the way to go these days with endless possibilities. As long as the images are shot in a similar situation with similar depth and angle it seems to work out pretty good.

travismanley · « **Reply #36 on:** May 05, 2009, 10:14 »

Quote from: batman on May 03, 2009, 10:53

sounds like you desperately want to succeed in using projection.

I hate when I come off sounding desperate, lol.

Im just a little obsessive I guess. I get an idea and its all I can think about. After talking about this and mulling it over im pretty much convinced blue screen or PS is going to be the way to go. I am pretty good at isolating in PS, its just takes so much time. I am looking at getting some new lights that im hoping will allow me to knock out the backdrop in camera with no PS, so that could potentially be better than projecting a backdrop that I am stuck with. Also like was mentioned before the images quality on the projected image would probably suck, so im better off compositing in PS where I have more control.

Thanks for all the tips guys!

batman · « **Reply #37 on:** May 05, 2009, 10:35 »

yes, for sure. if you don't spend on getting the proper background projection unit, i can guarantee not too many of the images will get approved. the contrast of a makeshift unit is horrible to say the least.
as i said, if you can find one of these units we sold in the 80's , maybe some movie houses, or university that teaches movie production, etc.. you might get it cheap, as they will be buying new ones and better ones .
if not, PS is so much cheaper, faster, and less headaches. the bottom line, your production cost , if you do PS yourself , is far lower. for micro especially, i won't even bother spending money anymore, the way things look.