The “Dave Hill Look” Revisted, Part One
The image above is from a promo shoot I did last week for rapper “10 Minute” and I wanted to apply a “Dave Hill” like look to the images, but I cheated—I used a plug-in. (click on it for a much larger view).
Now, let me say this up front: From the research I’ve done, I don’t believe photographer Dave Hill actually uses a Photoshop plug-in; I believe he creates his look without a plug, using a series of layer blend modes, High Pass Sharpening, Skin Smoothing, and Dodging and Burning (and I am working on that whole Photoshop-only workflow as we speak, and will do a post on it when I’m finished), but since I needed to get this job done fast; I used the Lucis Art Pro 6.0 plug-in, and I feel like it got me pretty close to the look (a mini-review of the plug-in is coming up tomorrow in the 2nd and final part of this post).
First things first: I was able to use something that I learned previously when researching this look; when Dave Hill says a lot of the look is in the lighting—he’s not exaggerating. This look requires a specific type of lighting, and if you don’t light it that particular way (which we’ll discuss in a moment), the plug-in, or the Photoshop-only technique, just won’t look right. It’s a formula that requires a combination of both the right lighting, and the right Photoshop moves.
THE LIGHTING
We’ll start with the shoot, and I gotta tell you—-it was a train wreck (and that’s being kind). First, we got to the location a little late, so we were already losing daylight. Then once we got our strobes set-up in place, we realized that we forgot to pack flags (large black 24″x36″ panels that you use to keep the light from flashes placed behind the subject from creating lens flare), so we had to run back to the studio and grab them.
Once we got our flags on the set, then we learned that we had a lighting problem—there’s something wrong with our main battery pack—-we accidentally dropped it a while back, and it needs to go in for service, but since it usually works…….well…it didn’t, and we didn’t have time to track down the problem.
Anyway, it just wasn’t working, and now we had maybe 15 minutes left to shoot (the sun was nearly down, and we were already under a roof, so light—or lack therof–was really becoming an issue). Luckily, my assistant (and general boy wonder) Brad Moore had thought to bring some Nikon SB-800s and 900s as a back-up, with some lightweight stands and an umbrella. So, we quickly tore down the strobes and we went with off-camera flashes. It’s not the ideal set-up for this shoot, but we had to get it done.
There are a number of ways you can set-up the lighting, and it will change depending on location, your subject, blah, blah, blah but basically you want two flashes behind your subject —one on each side—bare bulb (we would have used two strobes with just reflectors—no softboxes—if all had worked as planned). You want hard, bright light coming from behind skimming the edges of both sides of your subject (see the set-up image below–click on it for a larger view).
Ideally, you’d put them fairly far back—like 10 or 12 feet back, up high aiming downward (the farther back you go, the sharper the light), but since he was down in front of the car, we had to quickly improvise and we wound up having to place them right up on “10″ (that’s short for “10 Minute.” By the way; we were lucky—he was a really great guy; incredibly patient, and when we got ready to shoot, he just turned it on. He really couldn’t have been better to work with).
So, here was the lighting set-up: Our main light was one SB-800, mounted on a lightstand, and shooting through a 43″ Optical White translucent Westcott shoot-thru umbrella. This was aiming down at “10″ and was off to my right side (as seen in the photos above and below).
In the image above, you’ve got a better view of the SB-800 shooting through the umbrella, and you can see how the flags work to blog the light from the bare SB-800/900 in back.
We had two more Nikon flashes on stands just behind and on either side of him. We had them down pretty low, and we had spent so much time trying to fix the strobe situation, we didn’t really have time to try and position them just right, so we just played the hand we were dealt. (Note: Some photographers shooting with this lighting set-up use a Ring Flash as their main light instead of a regular strobe with softbox). I triggered the flashes using an SB-900 sitting in my camera’s hot shoe—it didn’t fire—I just used it to trigger the other SB-800s and 900.
Now, I do want to make this clear; what I just detailed is NOT the recommended lighting set-up to get this look, and certainly not a “here’s how to do it.” It’s just a “here’s how we did it.” Ideally, we would have used more powerful strobes, and had the time to aim and position the lights correctly, but….sometimes you gotta do what ya gotta do.
CAMERA SETTINGS
There’s nothing too interesting here. It was shot with a Nikon D3, with a Nikon 24-70mm zoom lens in Manual Mode at f/6.3 at 1/60 of a second at 400 ISO. My actual focal length was 31mm, so I was shooting pretty wide. I told you it wasn’t too interesting.
Oh, another thing we messed up; we forgot to bring music to the shoot, so Brad quickly pulled his car up right next to where we were shooting, and put in the new CD from T.I. (from his new album Paper Trail, shown at left) and cranked up his car stereo. The funny thing was; it was the filthiest thing you ever heard! The lyrics we so explicit, when it started we were all just cracking up (and Brad was hugely embarrassed—it was the first time he popped it in his stereo, which made it all the better). I’d be setting up to take shot, and then this T.I. song “Every chance I get” came on (Here’s the link—warning; even the preview is explicit), and and it was so nasty Snopp Dogg would probably blush. You just had to shake your head and laugh or you’d die from embarrassment (especially with all the people we had on the set).
Here’s the before shot (shown above) of the shot you see at the top of this post.
ABOVE: Here’s another where you can see the side lighting a little better. While the side light looks kind of subtle here, look what happens after you run the plug-in (see below). NOTE: The plug-in isn’t the whole technique (but the whole thing only takes about 5 minutes at best), but it certainly does a lot of the work, as you can see below.
Anyway, the shoot part was kind of a bust, and I’m even embarrassed to show you the unretouched shot (shown above), but I felt I needed to, especially for Part Two tomorrow, which is a step-by-step on the post processing, and includes my mini-review of the Photoshop plug-in Lucis Art Pro 6.0. In the meantime here’s a link to 10 Minute’s site (Warning: Explicit lyrics).

























I don’t know how to express this without sounding negative, because I don’t intend to, but it’s just one point of view I guess. I like this look, and I’ve used this filter on some stuff because it’s cool (but from the original ‘gritty look’ tutorial you did months ago). But this Lucasart filter is making careers for so many photographers now. I see it everywhere. It’s the hot thing and I’m already catching myself finishing shots and opening that plug in, then changing my mind because it makes the shot look to “cartoonish” and “Photoshoppy”. Completely non-compelling images are winning awards because they have been run through this plug in. People who don’t know that it’s a plug-in and takes 20 seconds to create this effect with one slider are giving photographers way too much credit by thinking that it was some huge process. It’s cool and all, but it’s number 1 on the over-used list. I’m a HUGE student of this blog, and all your books, so don’t take it wrong or personally, it’s just one person’s observation/opinion. Also, if you listen to T.I., offensive or not he’s got some real straight up stuff in his lyrics. Listen to the song “What You Know” becuase it’s just cool. I’m glad you posted the link to his album, I never would have thought I’d see that on this blog. You’re one all right-cat Scott.
10 Minute- show us what you got- I’m listenin’. Forgive me for sounding disruptive to the tutorial, I don’t mean any disrespect. I’m ready to shut up and learn what’s next. -M
I agree with you, Matt; it’s a style I don’t use because of its overuse, and I know eventually it’s going to date the work. I’m worried in ten years we will think of this like those soft, glowing, vignettes 80s portraits with big haired women we look back at now. I appreciate Dave Hill’s work and think it’s a great style, but like you said, it is being devalued by how accessible and overused it is, and that could backfire.
Right now it’s a trend, and eventually it will go away… but on the flipside, if it’s huge right now and a client wants it, I guess we have to be able to pull it out. And sometimes, the style just fits, as in this case. Over the past few years the style of hip hop photography seemed to be leading up to this. Using the Dave Hill style on wedding photos though? I’ll pass.
And @ Scott, kudos on pulling that off through all the technical problems! It looks great, despite my criticisms of the style.
I am glad you post this before me. I am running late today readying my blogs but If I had comment before you I probably would have wrote the same response. Not a big fan of that effect, it is been overly used and I would never have it on a photograph of me that I agreed to promote.
Scott, I don’t know if you remember when we met and you told me that you used to play in band and I told you that I used rapped….well I still do it on the side for fun. I am sure you made music about what you enjoyed and what your target audience listed to. Your opinion it was the filthiest thing you ever heard..probably true for you but that’s the way T.I chose to express himself as an artist rapping about a certain life style. If I get really deep in to that topic I will be here writing all day to you. But I must give credit to T.I for the songs, “Whatever You Like”, “Live Your Life” and “Swagga Like Us”.
10 Minute – Keep doing your thing.
Scott I hope I am making myself clear to you; Like Matt Timmons, you know what I love your blog, big fan, student to the blog everything. Just saying that T.I is an artist and choose to express himself like that therefore let it be..his art is his opinion and opinions are neither right or wrong. But like you said the music was just the wrong choice for a professional environment…Haha I wish I was there to see your expression when you heard the album..priceless…I do music as a hobby not a fan of the typical stereotyped rappers. You listen to Lupe Fiasco then you understand my style.
Can’t wait for part two of this post.
Thank you for the photo of how you set up that shoot.
Hope everyone learn to plan ahead.
Or you better be as good as Scott and make same great last min decisions (not the music, but as far as the set up goes)
Dwayne D.C Tucker II
Nassau,Bahamas
Scott – If you want to hear my music I never sent you the link but got to http://SPITTAmusic.com
Email me a link where I can hear your old music please
IF YOU ARE NEW TO SCOTT’S BLOG IT IS GREAT AND COME BACK BECAUSE THIS IS ONE OF THE REALEST PLACES FOR PHOTOGRAPHERS ON THE WEB!!!!!
Hey Matt, Michael Murphy here. I just read your post on Scott’s site. I thought it was great how respectful you were about what you had to say. It’s just a nice change to have someone say something without being an A hole about it. Take care, Mike.
Awesome post. Thanks for showing us the setup shots.
Great post although this Lucis Pro is pretty darn expensive!
I agree with Andy. $550 for a plug-in is outlandish. (I noticed that a dongle is required to run the software. This is usually a clear indication that something is overpriced.)
Scott, can you cook us up a Photoshop action to get us close? Or even better how about a Lightroom preset?
Go ahead and add this to the Lightroom 3.0 wishlist and get the folks over at Adobe thinking.
Randy: Matt Kloskowski has a collection of “Surreal Edgy” Develop presets for LR that get you in the ballpark. Head on over to http://www.lightroomkillertips.com and do a search for “Surreal”. If I recall, they’re pretty similar to what Scott’s described elsewhere for the ACR general sliders (pushing Recovery, Fill Light, Contrast, Blacks, Clarity, and Vibrance all the way to the stops, and Saturation way down to the left…then adjust to taste).
Matt’s presets are a great place to start. But as Scott and others have pointed out, for these presets to be of any use, you gotta light it right.
Jon
Hey Scott,
No need to feel embarrassed, as you probably saved a lot of us photographers quite a bit of frustration by posting your experience.
I was a little surprised to see that you went with the SB800 as a main light over the SB900 since the SB900 is a little more powerful.
Nevertheless, thanks for the great post!
Stephen – I’m a lighting noob so I may be totally wrong here, but I’m thinking the choice was due to the fact that the hard side light is so important to this type of look. The main light almost looks more like a fill in for the side light.
Honestly, it was such a rushed experience that I was just throwing up whatever lights we had left wherever we needed them. It was literally, “We need a light here, very quickly. What do we have that’s not being used right now?”
Plugin or not the photo’s effect is perfect. The overall look is just what I think makes this shot. Now…..the the bad thing I see in this shot is I would have moved him over just a bit so that the car emblem doesn’t look like it’s coming out of his hat. I keep looking at the shot and my eyes seem to be fighting for attention between him and the emblem.
Great post, as it really start some good discussion on shots like these.
Yet another great post! I love the set-up posts. Are you really up at 2am to post this! you really must suffer from sleep deprivation! We all thank you for it anyway!
I was wondering if you would ever revisit this. Its a great look when used sparingly. I have to agree that its over used, but I dig what you are doing Scott, because you can take bits and pieces of it to add to your arsenal. Tonal contrasting, lighting, edge lighting are all great techniques to know and have in your bag of tricks as a photog, cant wait til tomorrow. Always learning, thanks for sharing!
I hate when that happens. Good save, Brad. Scott, thanks for making yourself look human for just a minute. Now back to being Superman.
http://gizmodo.com/5015730/emperor-workstation-belongs-in-the-death-star-my-office
Could be the neat Photoshop chair/Monitor system available.
I love working with speedlights. I know they aren’t as powerful as full on strobes but they are often more versatile (and reliable) in a pinch or in a spot where you have to setup, shoot and tear down in a short amount of time. Great job – love the wide shots that show off the setup.
Great post Scott! Glad to see you can pull this technique off with speedlights. I’ll have to admit though, I was surprised to see that your key light was in an umbrella and not in a ring flash or a beauty dish.
Also, I’m looking forward to seeing your workup for the DH effect using Photoshop only. That Lucis Art plugin is cool but coming in at over $500 I can’t justify the expense.
Has anyone tried Topaz Adjust? It’s only $39 and creates a similar look. Check out their website topazlabs.com. They also have a discussion on Flickr. Can’t beat the price!
Leslie,
I was thinking the exact same thing… Topaz Adjust gives a similar look for $39 and doesn’t require a dongle.
Terry
Sorry, but i really do not think it’s DH’s look.
it’s not even close.
not even close… :/
It’s really bad – for me – to see some ppl using Lucis at this level.
it does not work. it does not work.
i think the print version of this image gonna look so ugly.
and even the thumb web jpg looks dirty.
seriously no, this is not the good way… at all.
look just your ‘raw’ picture, that is not right at all.
you CAN’T achieve a dhlook-like with a raw like this.
you just can’t.
or you just don’t care how your picture will look once printed or on the web.
sorry mate, but its not close at all.
do not use lucis. well, maybe use it, but not at this level.
So, so, sorry, but no.
That doesnt work. :/
I just looked the raw hey, and no.
You CAN’T.
I agree with Matt. This is a great look for the guy who invented it. Then a pile of photographers see it and mimic it and its passé and dated. We saw this decades ago with the old “Nancy Brown” effect (low saturation, lots of grain), HoseMaster look anyone? The only guy who really did it super well was the guy who invented, Arron Jones and he was smart enough to sell a bunch to photographers who stopped using it because it was over used and Art Directors quickly and correctly decided this was over and done. Polaroid Transfers (or something that’s supposed to look like Polaroid Transfers).
I always give the creative photographers who came up with a look, did great work with it and moved on huge credit. Those who like the look and use a whoopee filter, not so much. If you want to create images that look like someone else, mimic their style, then build a collection of images that will look severely dated a few years later, go for it. Or better, create your own style (not easy).
A tug on Vibrance doesn’t make my shots look like Jay Maisel and a B&W conversion with dark shadows doesn’t make me Greg Gorman.
>Forgive me for sounding disruptive to the tutorial, I don’t mean any disrespect. I’m ready to shut up and learn what’s next. -
Me too. But I think you’re spot on!
Thank you so much for your honesty, Scott. It’s so great to hear how you worked around the challenges you faced in this. I appreciate hearing that, even with your years of experience, you still run into problems and less-than-ideal scenarios. And, you’re humble enough to share them with all of us. I just spent the day yesterday working through your 7-points book, and am so psyched about all I’m learning. Waking up to this post makes me respect your knowledge, experience, openness and sense of humor even more. Thank you SO much….I am truly inspired.
Scott,
I think you did a great job with the pic and I think that this technique fits perfectly with the subject matter. It is a very popular technique and it is seen a lot, but you are not going to go to every shoot and try to come up with the next big effect style…after all the main goal is to please your customer and I would be willing to bet your customer absolutely loved this pic, especially the way this effect brought out that scar on his arm…that should buy him a little more street cred.
I tend to think “G” might have a man crush on Mr. Hill with his defensiveness and all. It was meant to be a Dave Hill “LIKE” effect…and personally I don’t see how you couldn’t look at this and not see that the styling was inspired by Mr. Hills technique.
Thanks Scott for all you do!
Dewayne
I love the look, have Lucius 3.0 & Nik Color Efex 3.0 and I use them a lot. They help make a good photo something unique. If you don’t like it, don’t use it. I think 10 Minute’s pix is great (didn’t notice the emblem) and I can’t wait for the 2nd tutorial. I won’t buy Lucius 6.0, rather get CS4, but I enjoy using the plug ins on my shots.
I am not a professional, just looking to have fun!
The real issue for me is what the image is saying – ghetto, fat car, money, rapper, ‘bad’ attitude. Considering that the image is posted on a Federal holiday honoring Martin Luther King Jr. Is this what his dream is about? Blatant display of over-consumption?
Katrin
I agree with you.
You people need to mellow out—it’s just a photo, a good one at that, who cares.
alanvalek, you are free to disagree with whatever she says, but please try to show
a little bit more respect for Katrin in your disagreement.
B.
Thanks, Katrin, for giving us the reminder about conspicuous consumption. I don’t think this was part of MLK’s dream. I don’t think it’s part of Obama’s either.
I think that’s reading an awful lot into a photo, personally. I doubt it was a political or social statement about the MLK holiday. This was intended as a demo shoot to show a Photoshop technique, for heaven’s sakes. These types of images are a huge part of rapper’s public personas. MLK fought for equal rights and freedom of expression. While it’s true he might not agree with the way people now choose to exercise those freedoms, it’s hard argue with the fact that without his efforts, it’s unlikely they would have the opportunity to do so.
Well said Todd.
Thank you Scott for your knowledge.
Great post Scott. I always enjoy going along for the ride with your photographic or design discoveries. I always learn something and am grateful that you care enough to share your experiences with us. I also am put off a bit by some of the hatin’ that’s going on above. If you don’t feel that this tutorial is worth your time, you don’t have to say negative things. Simply don’t say anything at all. Take it with a grain of salt and wait for the next informative tutorial that you do like. That’s all. Ive learned a great deal from Scott and many, many others in the blogosphere about how to be a better photographer and I am appreciative of the information that is freely given.
Nice to see that even the big-time pros can make a mess of a shoot every once in a while. The difference is that Scott comes away with great shots out of a train wreck, whereas I would probably just have had the train wreck. Nice job. Wish I had an assistant like Brad.
I agree that this look is becoming overused, but in this instance it works because of the subject and the subject matter. I see it used way too much on images that would look better with a more natural feel. I also see it used on images to hide obvious flaws. It’s kind of like this — I love key lime pie. I think the reason that I love it so much is that I don’t eat it with every meal. Once a month at most and it keeps my appetite whetted. Same thing with this look.
By the way, I agree with Leslie. I’ve used the Topaz adjust plug-in (bought it at Photoshop World in Las Vegas back in Sept.) and it rocks for this look (plus many others). Very easy to get it to look at least decent. And, like Leslie said, the price is great!
>Is this what his dream is about? Blatant display of over-consumption?
Good point Katrin. It asks a serious artistic question we should all be asking before reaching for the Photoshop plug-in menu or any other effect. It goes beyond my initial take on all this; that photographers can jump on a look bandwagon they had no creative input on. So the question becomes, does applying some canned look that someone else came up with work well for YOUR style and your point which is even deeper: Does this image benefit from the canned look. That’s even a more important question to ask the artist.
This kind of reminds me of an event early in my Photoshop career. Early 1990’s, a LA Lab owner who processed my E6 film and knew I was working in Photoshop asked if he could bring a really big time celebrity shooter to my office to see what Photoshop could do. Of course I said yes, wanting to meet this shooter. He thought Photoshop was awesome, went out and purchased a copy. Then he took years of his excellent photographs and basically ran them through the old Gallery Effects plug-in (at the time, it was the first and only 3rd party plug-in for Photoshop which was around version 1, maybe 2). The results? Awful IMHO. He took what were classic images and just made them look hooky. That turned into a book which I suspect anyone today would look at and say “circa 1990 Photoshop gallery effects” and completely bypass the content of the images which were very strong. The good news is this was just a fad and as far as I know, he abandoned this “look” if I can kind enough to call it that. History repeats itself again but with a different “look” and group of photographers.
The most interesting thing I’d love to see is what this Dave Hill comes up with next. Will he break the style envelope again? Even if he doesn’t, once in a career is more than many achieve.
Scott, Enjoy your blog. Its bookmarked so I can check in often. I am not a professional photographer but I do shoot tons of images for my blog and enjoyment. I do not use any plug-ins. I just shoot raw and enjoy what I can achieve in Photoshop. Thanks. Richard
Great post SK. G, take a chill pill buddy. Who care’s if “it’s not even close.” Looks pretty darn good to me. But it doesn’t matter what i think. If the client likes it, that is all that really matters, right?
-Bob
(Boston)
Scott,
I just got back from Nashville and forgot the bracket that holds my camera on my tripod, had to shoot with a monopod….a low light deal………..I made it, but with the results I wanted
Ken in KY
Thanks for the post Scott, I’m really interested to see how that Dave Hill guy gets his effects too. To me it looks like a combo of all or some of the following:
· HDR
· Shot with a ring light
· The High Pass Filter
· Desaturation of colors, but leaving others vibrant
· Increased contrast, especially in the blacks
Any one know for sure?….
Hey Scott, love the Dave Hill style and did some reseach, too.
For some photos this Lightroom settings work quiet good:
http://limeliteimages.wordpress.com/2007/10/30/dave-hill-tutorial/
btw. on Daves page you can finde some videos of his shootings.
greetz from germany
xack
hi Scott
i like Dave Hills style and so i seached for a way and found this:
http://limeliteimages.wordpress.com/2007/10/30/dave-hill-tutorial/
works fine for some shots.
greetz from germany
xack
About the effect, there’s no chance I’ll ever come up with something as striking and recognizable myself. I wouldn’t want to anyway. I fear showing a picture to someone and having them say, “Oh you just did that XYZ thing that you always do.”
In my case, that XYZ thing is one miscue or another.
However, I love the main content of the blog post. I’m just fascinated by the adventures of shooting on location with problems encountered and how they were solved.
You’re incredibly generous to document and share you lighting setup for this shoot. Unfortunately I think the “Dave Hill” look is already dated. I expect it will soon go the way of digitally generated beveled edges on pictures.
But again, thanks very much for sharing your knowledge.
This look is just like all the other photographic / photoshop tricks one can create. Some people will love it and some people will not. I happen to be one of the people who LOVE this look and I’m really looking forward to the “Photoshop only” tutorial because $500+ is way too much money for a plug in.
Thank you for sharing with us Scott. I look forward to Photoshop World Boston!
It seems that people either love the “Dave Hill ” effect or hate it. It defiantly has a distinctive style that is very popular right now. I reminds me of the bullet time effect in the Matrix movie. Once people figured out how to do it, it was everywhere, even when it wasn’t needed.
And while I would love a plugin that does all those neat tricks, I would not use it enough to justify the price tag. It doesn’t fit with my style or customers. If it did, I would get it today.
As for Brad having a box of speed lights, I think that he probably sleeps with a SB900 close by. Years of being Joe’s assistant could do that to a person.
I think this blog entry and shoot description illustrates one point that photographers should always keep in mind.
Things go wrong.
It is how you deal with it that is important. I would be interested in reading how the client/model reacted to the changes.
Scott – y’all definitely should’ve turned the “20″ in 10’s front pocket into a C-note.
P.S. Thank you for your candor on this experience. You are the man. I love your books (I own three of them and refer to them constantly).
This is no where near Dave Hills look. This just looks like an over decorated christmas tree to me. IMO I would expect more from you Scott. I give you much credit for showing us the strobist stuff, but save the explanation with the post process.
There is nothing really special about this image at all. It looks like some amateur using and abusing LUCIS and then putting it up on flickr and getting the “explore” award for outstanding image. I expect more from you Scott. As a teacher, a mentor…I look up to you but you should definitely be one of the guys setting an example for all of us.
You took it way over board with the Whyeth. I’m pretty sure you were using this filter. But just use a touch of Lucis. Thats what I do with my images, and they come out a million times better. I’ve read every book you’ve produced and they were fantastic…but this Scott. I’m beginning to think Barbara from Image technology paid you to do a post like this
Sam,
First of all, if you are going to reference your own images, step up and put a link to them so we can see how incredibly professional yours look. Secondly, if you go to Dave Hill’s web page and look at his images you will find that Scott’s image is very similar in the look and feel, including the lighting, of some of his images. Third, you are pretty self-centered to think that you are the only person being served by Scott’s blog. Just because you find no value in something he posts doesn’t mean that there aren’t a few thousand that do. I invite you to do some google searching on the Dave Hill “look” and you will find that there is a huge audience of people that are interested in achieving his style.
Scott, thanks for representing!!!
You ROCK!
Oh dang Scott! You just can’t avoid controversy can you?
I like the look. I think you clearly said it wasn’t a great representation of the Dave Hill style. But you did give credit to him in that it was something he inspired in you. That seems honorable to me.
Thanks for your “cut to the chase”, simplified approach to teaching. Please keep teaching us who want to learn.
I didn’t think you were endorsing a lifestyle, lyrics, bad attitude, or over consumption as a recommended path. I thought you were taking a picture and telling us how you did it. That’s seems like a good thing to me.
I personally don’t like rap and have never met a real live rapper. I hate to say this publicly but I still like disco. I would love to take a picture of a disco band, but would not want to come off as endorsing key board players that wear white boots, and fingerless gloves. If every picture is an endorsement of a person or their lifestyle we are all gonna end up with very few pictures.
blessings and peace
simon
ps is that 24-70 a VR?
Fed up with the Dave Hill look it has its place, and yes it is all to do with lighting.
Thanks for sharing anyhow and have learnt something new today, get my kit serviced!
Rich
I like the shots and the effect; it reminds me of some of Matt’s Lightroom pre-sets, which I’m appreciating all the more at the moment since they’re free.
The WordPress geek in me is dying to know if it’s a plugin you’re using that’s creating this fascinating comments-within-comments comment area.
I’m just going to take your word for it about that CD. Not even tempted to click that link. =)
Your Wordpress Geek can be fullfilled by moving to Wordpress 2.7. Scott must have moved to 2.7 when he updated he blog a while back. Threaded comments is a new feature. Many themes have been updated, but I found it not too hard to update the theme I was using. Some themes will show the “Leave a Reply” dialog right at the point the comment will be inserted too. (with the right javascript included)
This is the second time I tried to respond, so sorry if I appear twice. Lag? Comment monitoring?
Anyway, Dawn, Scott must have moved to Wordpress 2.7, probably with the recent facelift. It supports comment threading on themes with support for it. If your theme is not yet upgraded, it isn’t too hard to do.
Oh dang Scott! You just can’t avoid controversy can you?
I like the look. I think you clearly said it wasn’t a great representation of the Dave Hill style. But you did give credit to him in that it was something he inspired in you. That seems honorable to me.
Thanks for your “cut to the chase”, simplified approach to teaching. Please keep teaching us who want to learn.
I didn’t think you were endorsing a lifestyle, lyrics, bad attitude, or over consumption as a recommended path. I thought you were taking a picture and telling us how you did it. That’s seems like a good thing to me.
I personally don’t like rap and have never met a real live rapper. I hate to say this publicly but I still like disco. I would love to take a picture of a disco band, but would not want to come off as endorsing key board players that wear white boots, and fingerless gloves. If every picture is an endorsement of a person or their lifestyle we are all gonna end up with very few clients.
blessings and peace
simon
ps is that 24-70 a VR?
I very mild simulated DH look in RAW only can be achieved on wedding portraits ..
my go at it here from a while ago..
http://flickr.com/photos/rexyinc/3065304446/
what do you think Scott ?
Nice job man.
Scott, I love ya buddy, but I really hate that image on so many levels.
Scott -
I love the look you achieve here and the story of the shoot inspires me to keep at it and try anything – I’ve always improvised at (cough) shoots as I like calling my mistakes a learning experience and my happy accidents a clutch stroke of genius and educated improvisation.
As for yet another batch of folks complaining – this time about the Dave Hill look, this look works perfectly for the subject and conveys a powerful feel and gritty look – again perfect for the subject. I don’t understand why people get so worked up? It’s art, subjective – there’s loads of “work” that doesn’t appeal to me, I don’t rant about it – in fact I usually appreciate the talent and skill that goes into it. Country music, not for me – but some of those slide steel guitarist are truly gifted.
For the overly sensitive; please may we some day do away with all the over the top PC viewpoints and opinions. The shot is not disrespectful or a swipe at Dr. King, it’s a commercial photo shot for a musician – nothing more. It would never have occurred to me to see that individual and think in terms of race. ???
Oh well…
Scott – thanks for the great post!
Doug
Doug, I have read all the posts tonight as I just jumped on and found yours to be very eloquently written. I couldn’t agree more.
I am still trying to figure out why it seems Ms. Eismann took a swipe at Scott. What’s all that about?
I’ve worked towards a similar look on some of my images at http://www.doggettstudios.com.
It’s location lighting, it’s ambient vs. strobe, it’s the use of flags on set, it’s post-processing, it’s more than just lucis, and it’s never (for me) lucis all over the whole image.
For my shots like “Baby and the Tramp” (a dangerous-looking shot of two kids on a trampoline), I literally have a document with 10 steps I go through after the shoot to get a similar look.
Lucis is best when it doesn’t look like it was the only action taken on an image.
Eric
Nice shots on your website!
Thank you Alan!
Damn Scott, you might want to go back to reviewing the D3X!
Thanks for the technique tip. I may or may not use it but at least now I know how.
Damn, Scott. You need to go back to reviewing the D3x.
A love it or hate it look. It’s a unique look and Scott’s photo is representative. He showed a way to do something similar during his lightroom 2 tour in Orlando. I’ve been playing with the effect because it is so hot right now. But I do think it is a case of supply and demand. The demand is there for this fad. Would I use it? Yes. Do I want to build my portfolio/career around it? No. It’s one more photographic tool that I can use when needed but not something that I think will be a bedrock of my style. So it’s good to see how scott achieved the look and that it can be done. That might come in handy one day. But many of us don’t want to be the next Dave Hill — no matter how striking his work. Thanks Scott.
you can do this in lightroom ?.. please do show and tell~!!
You can get something close to the look without paying for a $600 plug via lightroom.
I imported scott’s untouched original and moved exposure +.5, recovery 100 percent, fill light 100 percent. blacks 43 and, clarity 100 and then toned down sat and vibrance, -63, -53. Adjust to your own preference. There are definite differences but it is close — to my eye. Scott showed this on his lightroom tour. Thanks Scott.
Thanks for sharing your lighting setup. Its the missing component to many a “Dave Hill / Greenberg” tutorial thread.
Ha Ha, This is great!!! You’ve, ….excuse me….We’ve all been had. This is a fantastic post on so many levels. The hating, the bickering, the taking up for Scott. I love it. I’ll clue you all in on something. Scott Kelby is a fantastic photographer and teacher and doesn’t need any of you (us) to validate his achievements or ability. Here’s the secret….the one thing that Scott is even better at than photography or photoshop is that he is a master businessman and he has everyone foaming at the mouth over this blog post…taking sides…rolling up sleeves….it’s sheer brilliance…and you’ve ….uh, we’ve all taken the bait. Nearly Sixty comments and counting! Ya gotta love this guy!!! If you choose not to learn anything from the Dave Hill look on this blog post, don’t be disheartened. You’ve also just gotten a free lesson from Scott in how to run a successful blog. The irony is that the haters, that seemingly have disdain for this post, are actually the catalyst for breathing extended life into the post they so dispise. Brilliant!!!
I think it’s mighty nice of Scott to show folks who may not know how to get this look, regardless of how many pros out there consider it dated already. Remember folks, not everyone is at the same skill level.
You never know….The client may have asked specifically for this type of shot. Everyone whose complained about has already mentioned that it’s in high demand. Besides, you don’t see anything else like this in the slideshow at the top of the screen. So I wouldn’t go criticizing and making judgemental remarks just because a look is “dated.”
Personally, I think it’s just another weapon in Scott’s already impressive arsenal of Photoshop techniques and I’m extremely appreciative that he takes the time to show those of us who aren’t as “in the know” how to get a look that may land some of us our next job.
Thanks Scott!
thanks for sharing your shoot with us. it’s encouraging to see even you have your less than perfect day.
and I agree, this look is getting over-used.
I came back to read the posts after mine. Everyone is so funny. Martin Luther King Jr, how did he get it this mess. How presumptuous to try to know what he would think.
Let’s face it Scott, you were just giving us this awesome tutorial of your cool photo shoot to draw attention to MLK day and to stir up harsh feelings about a technique that most people are loving. You are some tricky marketer, yes you are. Controversy! I know you were thinking that the whole time you were taking the pictures and writing the blog – “Boy Oh Boy, this is going to be a doosey of a blog. Everyone is going to get up in arms about it. I am brilliant!”
It is a cool technique – I saw it a few months ago & fell in love with it – Overused? I have rarely seen it and when I do – those pictures become my favorite, esp. on the NAPP gallery.
I, personally, am tired of the same old shot of the same old place, if it can be made interesting and different, then isn’t that art? Some of you people really need to get a life and get off Scott’s back. Holy canoli – is this 9th grade?
I don’t do this sort of thing so I don’t even know who Dave Hill is. The image is certainly interesting and dramatic – if folks become jaded, well, that’s life. But I must say my reaction is to ask if this is still photography or now computer art?