A new way to shoot a photomag spread

Mel Enriquez · May 4th, 2009, 08:59 PM

To all:

I think this will interest many:

Gizmodo - Megan Fox Esquire Cover Shot In Video, Not Stills - Megan fox esquire cover

What are your thoughts?

Tim Polster · May 4th, 2009, 11:24 PM

Interesting, but it does require some lighting gymnastics!

If you shoot video for still use you don't have the benefit of the flash fire which freezes all movement if the aperature is closed enough.

This takes care of the need to shoot at higher shutter speeds.

With video, you would need to shoot at at least 1/250th or better yet 1/400+ to stop motion with a moving model and a highly visible front cover. Motion blur does not fly at that level.

If you need any depth of field, that will be a lot of light to put on the subject.

It looks like they made it work, but it does not seem practical for controlled studio shoots. Some things evolve for a reason.

Jyrki Hokkanen · May 5th, 2009, 03:35 AM

I think we will see more of this in the near future. Having a continuous series of images is just so practical. Muybridge wanted this. With the bigger, more sensitive chips soon-in-the-works, why not?

Actually we have occasionally used 1080i50 HDV frames for our magazine, also on cover but then as a composition of several frames, so even HDV grabs work if no photos exist of the subject - see the following 1080i50 "semi-action" frames, for example (a little motion blur is not always a bad thing)

Picasa Web Albums - Jyrki Hokkanen - Madagascar 2008
Picasa Web Albums - Jyrki Hokkanen - Madagascar 2008
Picasa Web Albums - Jyrki Hokkanen - Madagascar 2008

Ed David · May 8th, 2009, 01:12 PM

got the magazine - quality of the stills does not look too good. Especially the hair is quite pixelated. Interesting experiment. Photog said he did it so he wouldn't distract Fox with a still camera shutter. I don't know - I think why not shoot photos when you need photos - more color space, less compressed - larger frame sizes, etc etc

Dylan Couper · May 9th, 2009, 09:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ed David

Photog said he did it so he wouldn't distract Fox with a still camera shutter.

LOL, because she's never heard a still camera shutter near her before... and might explode. :)

I'd say he did it for the publicity and street cred, that's it.

Thomas Smet · May 10th, 2009, 02:06 PM

This is kind of cheating in a way. The key of a good photographer is that he/she knows how to capture the right moments. You take away this precise skill then you just killed the art. Welcome to humans getting even more lazy.

Evan Donn · May 10th, 2009, 10:39 PM

Absolutely. We really need to get back to hand-drawn artwork for things like magazine covers.

Edward Phillips · May 11th, 2009, 10:22 AM

I expect this will end up being something that many celebrities will say no to so that the videos can't be leaked. If everything is captured like that a few goofy frames of a sneeze, yawn, whatever is going to spread like wildfire on the internet. A professional photographer with controlled and ready poses, then the clicks start will still be common practice.

May 4th, 2009, 08:59 PM	#1
Mel Enriquez Regular Crew Join Date: May 2007 Location: Philippines Posts: 129	A new way to shoot a photomag spread - use video To all: I think this will interest many: Gizmodo - Megan Fox Esquire Cover Shot In Video, Not Stills - Megan fox esquire cover What are your thoughts?

May 10th, 2009, 10:39 PM	#7
Evan Donn Major Player Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: Philadelphia Posts: 795	Absolutely. We really need to get back to hand-drawn artwork for things like magazine covers. __________________ My latest short documentary: "Four Pauls: Bring the Hat Back!"

May 4th, 2009, 11:24 PM	#2
Tim Polster Inner Circle Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Arlington, TX Posts: 2,231	Interesting, but it does require some lighting gymnastics! If you shoot video for still use you don't have the benefit of the flash fire which freezes all movement if the aperature is closed enough. This takes care of the need to shoot at higher shutter speeds. With video, you would need to shoot at at least 1/250th or better yet 1/400+ to stop motion with a moving model and a highly visible front cover. Motion blur does not fly at that level. If you need any depth of field, that will be a lot of light to put on the subject. It looks like they made it work, but it does not seem practical for controlled studio shoots. Some things evolve for a reason.

May 5th, 2009, 03:35 AM	#3
Jyrki Hokkanen Regular Crew Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: Helsinki, Finland Posts: 35	I think we will see more of this in the near future. Having a continuous series of images is just so practical. Muybridge wanted this. With the bigger, more sensitive chips soon-in-the-works, why not? Actually we have occasionally used 1080i50 HDV frames for our magazine, also on cover but then as a composition of several frames, so even HDV grabs work if no photos exist of the subject - see the following 1080i50 "semi-action" frames, for example (a little motion blur is not always a bad thing) Picasa Web Albums - Jyrki Hokkanen - Madagascar 2008 Picasa Web Albums - Jyrki Hokkanen - Madagascar 2008 Picasa Web Albums - Jyrki Hokkanen - Madagascar 2008

May 8th, 2009, 01:12 PM	#4
Ed David Regular Crew Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Brooklyn, NY Posts: 119	got the magazine - quality of the stills does not look too good. Especially the hair is quite pixelated. Interesting experiment. Photog said he did it so he wouldn't distract Fox with a still camera shutter. I don't know - I think why not shoot photos when you need photos - more color space, less compressed - larger frame sizes, etc etc

May 10th, 2009, 02:06 PM	#6
Thomas Smet Trustee Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: Milwaukee, WI Posts: 1,719	This is kind of cheating in a way. The key of a good photographer is that he/she knows how to capture the right moments. You take away this precise skill then you just killed the art. Welcome to humans getting even more lazy.

May 11th, 2009, 10:22 AM	#8
Edward Phillips Regular Crew Join Date: May 2008 Location: Memphis, TN Posts: 118	I expect this will end up being something that many celebrities will say no to so that the videos can't be leaked. If everything is captured like that a few goofy frames of a sneeze, yawn, whatever is going to spread like wildfire on the internet. A professional photographer with controlled and ready poses, then the clicks start will still be common practice.