Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Hi all,

 

I'm very impressed but this portrait of Tim Cook by Joe Pugliese. Particularly by the colors. I was wondering how it was done. I'm new to portrait photography so it's not clear to me what's the setup employed. I imagine a softbox and reflector... But what part is due to post processing? Is the beige color added afterwards or was it the lighting? Or even the background?

 

What's your opinion?

 

Thanks

 

Simon

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

To me it seems like a window light.

I think there is some split toning going on as I imagine the wall in reality was white.

 

 

I agree. I'm guessing window light with some sort of reflector, or maybe a larger softbox. The catchlights in his eyes make it look like some kind of square light source.

 

I think there was a fair amount of processing going on. It definitely has that VSCO look. Looks like there was some split toning used to warm up the highlights and make them a pastel yellow colour, and it looks like he used the tone curve to crush the blacks and whites to flatten the image.

 

Colour-wise, it looks pretty natural (as far as the HSL balance goes, not counting white balance or the split toning), and it looks like he pushed the vibrance and maybe desaturated the image slightly. It looks like he added grain, too.

 

Long story short: VSCO preset. :lol: I really like the portrait, but I'm not a fan of the look he went for with his processing.

Edited by Phil
Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for all your answers.

VCSO preset, really?

Had it been with a white background, with the color of the shirt, hair and everything, it would have been very cold. I like this portrait because it make Tim Cook someone warm, human, and trustworthy. 

It terms of marketing (that's my job) it's perfect.

I have to shoot portraits of 20 professionals soon and I need them to look like serious specialists in their field while remaining human, accessible and trustworthy.

So... VSCO preset? If it's a preset then I should be able to do it without the preset :) Split toning and softboxes, that's a start point. I'll try to reproduce that before I go shoot my clients. Thank you all for your helpful comments.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Similar Content

  • Posts

    • I found the reddit topic i refere to :  https://www.reddit.com/r/davinciresolve/comments/1pc3f1e/cant_apply_new_fujifilm_gfx_55_lut/ "Update for y'all, It's just like what @ExpBalSat said, it's because of the backslashes in the names break them. I changed the file name and it works now. "   For me it was the solution. Realy annoying if it doesn’t work for you 😕  
    • Here is the solution to using the Eterna 55 file simulation LUTs in Davinci Resolve.   In general, do not use the FLog2C to film simulation LUTs as they are not supported by Davinci Resolve for two reasons: 1) Davinci Resolve does not support Fuji Gamut Color Space and 2) Davinci Resolve does not support FLog2C gamma.  Instead, use Flog2 which is supported by Davinci Resolve.  Here is an example.  Let's say that you want to use Classic Chrome simulation.  Do the following: Complete your color grade and use a CST to get to Rec 709. Add a node.  Use a CST to convert from Rec 709 to FLog2.  Output Color space is Rec 2020 and Outout Gamut is FLog2. Add a node.  Apply the FLog2 to Classic Chrome LUT Create a combination node from node in steps 2 and 3. Apply a Key to the combination node and adjust the Key Output Gain to get the amount of the combination node that you want applied. So that you do not have to do this over and over again, generate a LUT for the combination node.  Remember to turn off all other nodes before generating the LUT. Hope this helps others. Don  
    • Thanks for the insights. I think it's really hard to make a decision without having the two side by side! 
    • I don’t have the 23 f2 but I have read several times that it is considered a little soft at close distance, compared to the 23 f1.4 lenses. These will also focus at shorter distance from the subject, esp. the new one. So that might make a difference. The new 23 f1.4 LM WR  has better resolution, esp. in regard to the 40Mpix sensors, which you don’t have on the X-T2. What practical difference that makes for the value of the pictures one makes is disputable and subjective.  f1.4 will gather more light but with a smaller DOF, which may be desirable in some situations but not so in others, depends. If you like to shoot close ups, you will probably use higher f numbers to get a bigger DOF. Same for landscapes. If you are a bokeh fan, yes the f1.4 lens are better.  The older 23 f1.4 lens that you are considering is a very good and respected lens. The f1.4 vs f2 aperture per se is perhaps not so important. The 23 f2 is very small, light and practical and a great lens for travel and landscapes. So, go figure. I am afraid I just sent you further down the road to insanity !
    • First post here but long time fuji shorter. I use the XT2 with the 23mm f2 / 35mm 1.4 / 16-80mm f4 I'm considering the 23mm f1.4 r (Non-WR) About me: - I shoot black and white only. - I like macro details to wide open landscapes and everything in-between. - I shoot mostly for art, intrigue and creativity of the image. My question - is the 23mm f1.4 going to offer me any meaningful difference over the f2 for the above scenarios Thanks and sorry for bringing it up again...
×
×
  • Create New...