[NSFW] Lardroom's room of lard and dolls.

This is a stupid thread for stupid people who just got obsessed with dolls. Rather than clutter up any other thread, I'll just post here. Feel free to critique any of the photography, composition, posing, etc. as this is just going to be me learning the basics of photography, composition, posing, fashion, human anatomy, and arts and crafts. I'm using a beginner friendly Nikon D3500 DSLR camera with a 18-55mm and 55-200mm kit lens and a very clear lack of good light.

NSFW tag is on because occasionally there will be a scandalous amount of doll flesh on display, or if you want to be artsy about it, tasteful erotica.

20200211_194654_edited by Lardroom, on Flickr

Profile pic, because close up.

20200217_163622 by Lardroom, on Flickr

Her default costume, with a 2B and 2P to play with. This scary scary black costume thankfully came with a full body stocking.

 

toobs18-2 by Lardroom, on Flickr

Playing around with the mermaid dress and some precarious posing on a bookshelf ladder.

 

Toobs17-4 by Lardroom, on Flickr

One of the other compositions that I liked with 2B in an oversized comedy coupe glass. I love craft cocktail stuff so there may be a lot of classy drinking props. The angle is better on this one, but the exposure was off and the dress doesn't drape perfectly on Toob's tumtum. I'll probably recreate this with a martini glass.

 

 

 

 

 

NSFW NSFW NSFW NSFW NSFW!

 

 

 

 

 

20200214_195709_edited by Lardroom, on Flickr

She was so expecting silk lingerie and a delicate corset. Those are coming, but shimapan will do for now.

 

20200208_060308_edited by Lardroom, on Flickr

She looks so vulnerable and innocent in this one. This photography session started off as her wearing a full three piece navy suit, then pieces started coming off...

 

More to come!

Edited March 8, 2020 by lardroom

Lovely photos of your girl!  I really like that shot of her in the glass and the last one in the white striped shirt.    And that's a good setup you have for a camera!  I use a Nikon as well!  

 

 

Billy

6 minutes ago, baldylox said:

Lovely photos of your girl!  I really like that shot of her in the glass and the last one in the white striped shirt.    And that's a good setup you have for a camera!  I use a Nikon as well!  

 

 

Billy

The camera is great and matches my current skills. I really want a light diffusor to better control the lighting, though. No need to buy more a expensive $3500 mirrorless camera with $2000 worth of lenses that I can't take advantage off. All that money could be going to dollies instead.

4 minutes ago, lardroom said:

The camera is great and matches my current skills. I really want a light diffusor to better control the lighting, though. No need to buy more a expensive $3500 mirrorless camera with $2000 worth of lenses that I can't take advantage off. All that money could be going to dollies instead.

Very good points!  I found some very nice professional studio style lights off Ebay a few years back that came in their own carrying cases with bulbs and everything for like $200 for two of them.  They are so nice for getting the right amount of light for doll pics. 

And yes, any money you can save ALWAYS goes to the girls!   

 

 

 

Billy

1 hour ago, lardroom said:

Toobs17-4 by Lardroom, on Flickr

Suggestion: Iron the sheet you are using for a backdrop here. The gentle flowing folds are a decent way to have a non-intrusive background that still has some interest, but all the wrinkles and creases are pretty distracting.

Another possibility, if you have the room, is to put your subject further away from the background, use your 55-200mm at somewhere near the longer end, at least 100mm or so, and use a wide aperture. I'm not sure if that lens goes wide enough to make the background go out of focus like that but it may work.

Otherwise, your posing is quite nice and natural-looking. Lighting is pretty good without harsh shadows, though I think the last picture is a bit harsh and looks a bit overexposed. Pale skin + very dark background is a challenging combination though.

General photography comments, all of which may or may not be applicable since while there are things I can tell from looking, there are things I can't know:

• You have a nice DSLR, so use it and not the phone camera. It's immediately obvious to me which pictures were taken with the DSLR and which are the Samsung phone.
• Assuming you have the working room, longer focal lengths are generally considered better for people (doll) photography because you'll get a more natural-looking perspective. For real people photography, on full-frame typical focal lengths used for portait and fashion photography are 85-100mm or even 200mm. On your crop sensor, 50mm or so is about equivalent to that 85mm. The EXIF data shows you tended to stay towards the shorter end of the 18-55mm. Try using it nearer the long end or try using the 55-200mm. Those are just guidelines and there's not a wrong way to do it.
• Given the shutter speeds shown in the EXIF, I assume you're using a tripod? If so, try using whatever the camera's base ISO is (probably 100, it would be the lowest numbered one, not one called something like "LOW"). Your subject isn't moving and with a tripod your camera isn't, so slow shutter speeds are fine, and lower ISO will give the lowest noise and cleanest image. If you're not using a tripod, generally something around 1/30 second is the slowest that can be handheld stably. Image stabilization changes that though and I'm not sure what the numbers are there. I saw one said it was 1/5 which is why I figured you are on a tripod.
• Following on the last point, if you are using a tripod, that's still not rock stable unless it's a really large one and you're not on carpet, so it's a good idea to use the camera's self timer where you press the shutter release and then step away from the camera and it takes the picture a few seconds later.
• Especially if you are using a tripod where shutter speed doesn't really matter, use aperture priority mode (probably called A) so you control the aperture directly. That or shutter priority are fine and give the same results it's just easier to use whichever one directly controls the thing you're more interested in. Don't use program (P) mode.

 

Edited March 8, 2020 by cfx

2 hours ago, lardroom said:

Playing around with the mermaid dress and some precarious posing on a bookshelf ladder.

Nicely posed, the dress looks as good on her there as it does on my SD16.

 

1 hour ago, cfx said:

Iron the sheet you are using for a backdrop here. The gentle flowing folds are a decent way to have a non-intrusive background that still has some interest, but all the wrinkles and creases are pretty distracting.

You can also get photographic backdrop paper, or relatively inexpensive collapsible backdrops in a variety of colors and patterns. Solid colors should cost you less than the mermaid dress, but patterned ones can run between $150 - $250 for a small backdrop.

Any decent photo store should carry the paper and other backdrops, or you can get them on B&H.

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/buy/seamless-paper/ci/23680/N/3659994690

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/buy/collapsible-backgrounds/ci/23697/N/3659994688

Sorry for the double post, but I didn't want this to get missed in an edit on the prior post.

The collapsible backdrops won't be able to flow from the wall down onto the floor the way a cloth backdrop or a paper backdrop do. I do my photos on a workbench so it's less of an issue to me, because the backdrop just hangs down behind the bench. I really need to get one of the patterned collapsible ones, but Volks keeps making clothes I like so...  -.-

The drawback to the paper one is you have to work harder to hang it, and it gets creased easily which kind of ruins it, or forces you to clean it up in photoshop. I use the paper stuff, and I have it stapled to a strip of wood, and I hang it with wire and a hook for a picture frame.

Edited March 8, 2020 by BeyondTime

1 hour ago, cfx said:

Suggestion: Iron the sheet you are using for a backdrop here. The gentle flowing folds are a decent way to have a non-intrusive background that still has some interest, but all the wrinkles and creases are pretty distracting.

Another possibility, if you have the room, is to put your subject further away from the background, use your 55-200mm at somewhere near the longer end, at least 100mm or so, and use a wide aperture. I'm not sure if that lens goes wide enough to make the background go out of focus like that but it may work.

Otherwise, your posing is quite nice and natural-looking. Lighting is pretty good without harsh shadows, though I think the last picture is a bit harsh and looks a bit overexposed. Pale skin + very dark background is a challenging combination though.

General photography comments, all of which may or may not be applicable since while there are things I can tell from looking, there are things I can't know:

• You have a nice DSLR, so use it and not the phone camera. It's immediately obvious to me which pictures were taken with the DSLR and which are the Samsung phone.
• Assuming you have the working room, longer focal lengths are generally considered better for people (doll) photography because you'll get a more natural-looking perspective. For real people photography, on full-frame typical focal lengths used for portait and fashion photography are 85-100mm or even 200mm. On your crop sensor, 50mm or so is about equivalent to that 85mm. The EXIF data shows you tended to stay towards the shorter end of the 18-55mm. Try using it nearer the long end or try using the 55-200mm. Those are just guidelines and there's not a wrong way to do it.
• Given the shutter speeds shown in the EXIF, I assume you're using a tripod? If so, try using whatever the camera's base ISO is (probably 100, it would be the lowest numbered one, not one called something like "LOW"). Your subject isn't moving and with a tripod your camera isn't, so slow shutter speeds are fine, and lower ISO will give the lowest noise and cleanest image. If you're not using a tripod, generally something around 1/30 second is the slowest that can be handheld stably. Image stabilization changes that though and I'm not sure what the numbers are there. I saw one said it was 1/5 which is why I figured you are on a tripod.
• Following on the last point, if you are using a tripod, that's still not rock stable unless it's a really large one and you're not on carpet, so it's a good idea to use the camera's self timer where you press the shutter release and then step away from the camera and it takes the picture a few seconds later.
• Especially if you are using a tripod where shutter speed doesn't really matter, use aperture priority mode (probably called A) so you control the aperture directly. That or shutter priority are fine and give the same results it's just easier to use whichever one directly controls the thing you're more interested in. Don't use program (P) mode.

 

Thanks so much for all these tips. I was ironing that sheet today in fact. To the camera phone were taken before I got a DSLR. I'll try longer lengths, but since I'm learning I'm treating my lenses like a prime lense and move my body.

I dont have a tripod, so this is all me getting as stable as possible and breathe control.

42 minutes ago, lardroom said:

I dont have a tripod, so this is all me getting as stable as possible and breathe control.

Getting a tripod would be a good idea.

You want one that is stable, and which has a stable head. If you only plan to do indoor stuff you can get a metal one that will cost less, but weigh a lot more. If you want to do outdoor stuff away from your transportation, spend the extra money on a graphite one. I recommend Manfrotto, but they are on the expensive side, and you will be buying the head separately. Check the stats for compatibility between tripod and head. It boils down to the size of the bolt the head screws onto, but B&H does a good job of showing you compatible stuff for a particular purchase. You don't need a video head, those tend to be very expensive.

Both together can run $500 to 600 for a graphite setup. I've had my oldest Manfrotto for 20+ years though, so they are worth the money. 

You can also improve things with a lighting kit. They can be gotten inexpensively, and will include lights, stands, and a diffusion tool of some sort like a softbox or umbrella. They often have a storage / carry case too. The key thing with indoor lighting is diffusion, it softens up artificial light.

You can search online for tips on assembling you own kit. This is one area where buying cheap will get you stuff that works, but it won't hold up to use. That said, if you are on a budget, then get what you can and upgrade as money allows.

Edited March 8, 2020 by BeyondTime

14 minutes ago, lardroom said:

I'll try longer lengths, but since I'm learning I'm treating my lenses like a prime lense and move my body.

Haha. I'd likely do the same. I originally got into photography in high school, which was ~45 years ago so I was using 35mm film cameras and prime lenses (which weren't called that back then) because zooms were crappy back then so to be avoided unless you absolutely needed the function. As such I never used or got used to them, and still only use primes now.

16 minutes ago, lardroom said:

I dont have a tripod, so this is all me getting as stable as possible and breathe control.

That's impressive then, if you managed to do 1/5 second. Stick with what you're doing in terms of ISO in that case, possibly experiment with going a bit higher and see if that is noticably detrimental. In that case, since your 55-200mm is likely heavier and harder to hold steady at lower shutter speeds, probably stick to the 18-55mm for the most part but just experment with using it toards the longer end and see how you like that, especially when you're doing pictures that aren't full body.

As @BeyondTime says, a tripod is a good idea. Cheap ones are pretty much worthless garbage though, so until you are at a point where are comfortable with paying for something like a Manfrotto, you might look at one of the small tabletop tripods like a Gorilla Pod. They're decently made for what they are, and if you later want a regular tripod, it would still be usable for some types of photography so it's not a redundant purchase.

24 minutes ago, lardroom said:

To the camera phone were taken before I got a DSLR.

Oh, so you got the DSLR fairly recently? Then I think you've done a great job so far, because all of the important basics look right in your pictures, in focus, etc.

1 minute ago, cfx said:

Haha. I'd likely do the same. I originally got into photography in high school, which was ~45 years ago so I was using 35mm film cameras and prime lenses (which weren't called that back then) because zooms were crappy back then so to be avoided unless you absolutely needed the function. As such I never used or got used to them, and still only use primes now.

That's impressive then, if you managed to do 1/5 second. Stick with what you're doing in terms of ISO in that case, possibly experiment with going a bit higher and see if that is noticably detrimental. In that case, since your 55-200mm is likely heavier and harder to hold steady at lower shutter speeds, probably stick to the 18-55mm for the most part but just experment with using it toards the longer end and see how you like that, especially when you're doing pictures that aren't full body.

As @BeyondTime says, a tripod is a good idea. Cheap ones are pretty much worthless garbage though, so until you are at a point where are comfortable with paying for something like a Manfrotto, you might look at one of the small tabletop tripods like a Gorilla Pod. They're decently made for what they are, and if you later want a regular tripod, it would still be usable for some types of photography so it's not a redundant purchase.

Oh, so you got the DSLR fairly recently? Then I think you've done a great job so far, because all of the important basics look right in your pictures, in focus, etc.

I got a DSLR in mid February because I wanted to take better dollie pics. I'll definitely think about a tripod because itll let me set my ISO low, so thanks to to you and @BeyondTime

28 minutes ago, lardroom said:

I got a DSLR in mid February because I wanted to take better dollie pics.

I think the two hobbies go together for quite a few people. I know for myself, I've had my camera for a few years but rarely have taken pictures of anything, but dolls have made me want to take pictures and get better at it.

I'll put in a plug for @Orchid's website which has some photography info: Orchid Dolls

One other bit of advice I would give is take lots of photos, and spend lots of time posing your doll. Both are arts so they are learned by doing.

Your posing is pretty creative as is, so what I would recommend is browse dolltwitter for photos of dolls in interesting poses and then try and recreate them. Work with the nude doll at first so you can see how the body moves and what it's limits are. It also helps when clothing isn't getting in the way of movement. Try different things you see in photos and then try combining them into new poses. If you create a pose you like take a picture from a few angles so you can recreate it later.

This link is to one user on twitter who does interesting things with their dolls, and retweets images from other users. https://twitter.com/nono_nogisaka

You can follow those links to even more images, but be warned... the Japanese have a lot of awesome doll stuff we have no access to. ><;

 

I agree with the above and want to add one thing about posing, though I think you already have gotten this bit right. DDs can move in some ways, or with more range, in ways that real humans cannot. For instance, I fairly often see pictures where the wrists are bent inwards at angles greater than 90 degrees. I don't know about anyone else, but my own wrists don't bend that far, and even if they did it wouldn't actually look natural. Another suggestion I have for reference in what looks good in posing is fashion magazines or catalogs.

Something I notice as a recurring thing on those random twitter accounts with the lovely pictures is how important accessories are to making your doll look like a little living person. Things like necklaces and purses can add so much to a photo. Random example:

I've failed in buying stuff like this because I end up just concentrating on outfits, and probably because I'm not a girl so I don't know how to fashionably coordinate and accessorize.

Edited March 8, 2020 by cfx

1 hour ago, cfx said:

and probably because I'm not a girl so I don't know how to fashionably coordinate and accessorize.

 

If you want to know a secret, a lot of very fashionable ladies copy their looks from magazines and pop stars. Nothing wrong with doing that, and some guys also get their style from magazines like GQ. 
 

I would look at the pictures on those twitter feeds and start making lists of things to shop for. I’m sure those folks didn’t get all that stuff overnight.

Edited March 8, 2020 by BeyondTime

These tips are all so amazing. I'm going to implement some of them right now...as soon as I wake up fully. Grrr...spring forward. Also, looking at those twitter doll photos makes me incredibly jealous of everything and the amazing craftiness of everything. I've gotten lost for 4 hours in a Tokyu Hands and a Hobby Lobby doesn't even compete with that store and how much it enables crafty people.

I've actually already started looking at fashion magazines to try to recreate poses, style, and some lighting. I have a small fill light attachment on order, but I'm looking at a larger light diffusor kit, and checking on tripods. I need to find a tripod that can stablize as low to the ground as possible, but I may get a gorilla pod for that.

3 hours ago, lardroom said:

makes me incredibly jealous of everything and the amazing craftiness of everything.

One thing you can do is check all of the doll clothing shops; a lot of them sell accessories and jewelry. You can also check Etsy for doll stuff, but be mindful of the listed scale. Unfortunately a lot of stuff on Etsy is for 1/6 scale, which I am pretty sure is Barbie doll sized.

Some folks have had luck looking for props at Target in the American Girl section of the toy department, but that's probably only useful if you are in the US. Those aren't realistic enough for my taste, but folks do have fun with them. Check baldylox's photo stories, and you can see examples of props he's found outside of Japan just by looking around a bit.

 

3 hours ago, lardroom said:

but I'm looking at a larger light diffusor kit, and checking on tripods.

If you have an off camera flash unit, getting a sync cable, a stand with an umbrella, and an adapter for attaching the flash's hotshoe to the stand, is a very good start. I would get a sync cable that is long enough to go around the diffusion device and is long enough to give you the freedom to put the flash wherever you want to put it. The one I have right now is too short.

Just getting the flash off camera tends of improve lighting. Currently, I use a Fresnel Spot, and an off camera strobe for fill flash to soften the shadows created by the spot, and to light the eyes.

I would also suggest using your camera for more than dolls, just because creating interesting doll photos is not dissimilar to creating interesting photos of people and places. Taking a lot of pictures of all sorts of things will make you better at doll photos. Try different perspectives too. Photographing stuff in your home from a high angle or while lying on the floor can really change things up. A good tripod will let you get very low, and some of them will have have a boom feature which is nice.

I would also avoid the trap of telling yourself that you "don't have talent, and therefor can't get really good." Talent is an edge, but it's not a replacement for hard work, and hard work at an art will generally get you good.

My last doll photos:

 

Are way better than my first: http://www.dollfiedreams.com/viewtopic.php?f=16&t=11758&start=0

Not that I don't still have a long way to go, and I'm not trying to suggest that I am "really good" either. XD

Toobie and I are reading fashion magazines for reference. She is not impressed with all them skinny bitches.

Toobs19 by Lardroom, on Flickr

This kit lens comes with vibration reduction/image stabilization, so it does allow me to get a really low shutter speed. I'll try my other lens with a low aperture to see if I can get that lovely bokeh.

Edited March 8, 2020 by lardroom

2 hours ago, BeyondTime said:

One thing you can do is check all of the doll clothing shops; a lot of them sell accessories and jewelry. You can also check Etsy for doll stuff, but be mindful of the listed scale. Unfortunately a lot of stuff on Etsy is for 1/6 scale, which I am pretty sure is Barbie doll sized.

Some folks have had luck looking for props at Target in the American Girl section of the toy department, but that's probably only useful if you are in the US. Those aren't realistic enough for my taste, but folks do have fun with them. Check baldylox's photo stories, and you can see examples of props he's found outside of Japan just by looking around a bit.

 

If you have an off camera flash unit, getting a sync cable, a stand with an umbrella, and an adapter for attaching the flash's hotshoe to the stand, is a very good start. I would get a sync cable that is long enough to go around the diffusion device and is long enough to give you the freedom to put the flash wherever you want to put it. The one I have right now is too short.

Just getting the flash off camera tends of improve lighting. Currently, I use a Fresnel Spot, and an off camera strobe for fill flash to soften the shadows created by the spot, and to light the eyes.

I would also suggest using your camera for more than dolls, just because creating interesting doll photos is not dissimilar to creating interesting photos of people and places. Taking a lot of pictures of all sorts of things will make you better at doll photos. Try different perspectives too. Photographing stuff in your home from a high angle or while lying on the floor can really change things up. A good tripod will let you get very low, and some of them will have have a boom feature which is nice.

I would also avoid the trap of telling yourself that you "don't have talent, and therefor can't get really good." Talent is an edge, but it's not a replacement for hard work, and hard work at an art will generally get you good.

My last doll photos:

 

Are way better than my first: http://www.dollfiedreams.com/viewtopic.php?f=16&t=11758&start=0

Not that I don't still have a long way to go, and I'm not trying to suggest that I am "really good" either. XD

All these doll specific photo tips are great, and I originally got this used Nikon to supplement this doll hobby. I'm finding that photography is really really fun, and once you get the basics down, is much more immediately satisfying than learning to draw or learning to sew. But, oh my god, the Camera is literally the cheapest part of the hobby.

I suppose it's similar to dolls, where the doll becomes the cheapest part in comparison to the clothes, accessories, displays, and customization.

 

These skits are great and very cute. Now that you point it out I like how your lighting is so even.

 

One of the things that has been stressed to me both in photographing dolls and people is to focus on the eyes. I've made a silver reflector out of aluminum foil and a cardbox box with an adjustable stand so that I can shine some soft light on those eyes. If I don't get good eyes, I'll usually junk the picture. Shame, because a lot of creative poses combined with my generally bad lighting and 2B's wig means that the eyes remain hidden.

Edited March 8, 2020 by lardroom

1 hour ago, lardroom said:

These skits are great and very cute. Now that you point it out I like how your lighting is so even.

You can do some interesting things with light that don't involve even lighting. I think uneven lighting that can be achieved with people is a bit harder to translate to dolls, because the doll is so small and the flash units are very powerful. I'm not saying you can't, but you will have to play with a bit to get good results.

If you check some of the stuff @foo has posted you can see what is possible with natural light that only lights a part of the doll.

Not all props need to be doll scale props either. For example some of the photos I see on twitter of dolls on a fuzzy rug are probably just a small sheepskin throw rug, and you can get those for $30 - $50.

1 hour ago, lardroom said:

But, oh my god, the Camera is literally the cheapest part of the hobby.

It certainly all starts to add up. I didn't have a camera for many many years and finally got a DSLR at the end of 2010. Never really did anything with it and sold it all early 2012 due to financial difficulties. Started over mid-2014, another camera and several prime lenses over the next few years, and still did nothing with the camera really, so once I got into dolls I thought that would be a way to actually do something with photography. Still haven't done anything meaningful but I'm trying to get there.

Anyway, as for the other needed stuff. I bought a tripod not too long after the second camera, but didn't ever buy a head for it so I could actually use it until years later, and only got the plate to mount the camera to the head about a year ago. I don't own a flash or any sort of lighting. I'm hoping I can just do things with natural light; I like the lighting like @foo gets more than what is typically gotten from flash, though I don't have a room with the kind of windows that is conducive to that. Still, for doll photography I'm hoping that just various types of normal/cheap lighting and reflectors can get me where I want to be. Since shutter speeds can be long this should be doable.

In a hidden tag since it's doll nudity and as to not clutter up this thread; this picture is just a crop out of a body reference picture I took so my only criteria for it was a technically good picture, not an artistic one by any means. It's just the room lighting in the room, which is a big overhead fluorescent light with LED bulbs in it. I made no attempt with the lighting other than just to verify it was good enough for what I was taking the picture for. So I was surprised that it's not awful, and it gave me some hope that I can get good results when actually trying.

Spoiler

The background there? I looked for anything flat and featureless laying around the house so I could hide the real background. That's just a piece of rigid foam insulation, about 3' x 3', and happens to be a pale blue in color. It's not pretty or anything, but it was functional enough for the purpose.

4 hours ago, BeyondTime said:

I would also suggest using your camera for more than dolls, just because creating interesting doll photos is not dissimilar to creating interesting photos of people and places. Taking a lot of pictures of all sorts of things will make you better at doll photos. Try different perspectives too. Photographing stuff in your home from a high angle or while lying on the floor can really change things up. A good tripod will let you get very low, and some of them will have have a boom feature which is nice.

That's good advice, though I don't have the personality to be able to do people pictures, which is a big part of the reason I never really used my camera before getting dolls. Taking lots of pictures is certainly the way to learn, and that's something I have to make a conscious effort to do because since I started out in the film world, the fact rolls of film were 36 exposures, and fairly expensive to get processed, I didn't do that then.

55 minutes ago, BeyondTime said:

You can do some interesting things with light that don't involve even lighting. I think uneven lighting that can be achieved with people is a bit harder to translate to dolls, because the doll is so small and the flash units are very powerful. I'm not saying you can't, but you will have to play with a bit to get good results.

The key to this I think is to find, or make, lights that are "to scale" for dolls.

For one example of that, see @Orchid's video here where a tiny LED light is used to make it look like the computer screen is glowing. Similiar lights could be used as a spotlight, or just taking something like black cardboard with a small hole in it put over a larger light. Video in spoiler tag to keep post size down:

Spoiler

 

 

2 hours ago, cfx said:

That's good advice, though I don't have the personality to be able to do people pictures, which is a big part of the reason I never really used my camera before getting dolls.

I don't do portraits of people, I don't have the training to do them justice, and I don't have the social skills to actually take a class in portraiture. At the school where I work you have to provide your own model, and I am not confident in approaching someone about doing that.

I do street photography though. Don't have to talk to people, you just take their picture while pretending to be photographing something else. 🤫

 

2 hours ago, cfx said:

Similiar lights could be used as a spotlight, or just taking something like black cardboard with a small hole in it put over a larger light. Video in spoiler tag to keep post size down:

This reminds me of an exercise I recommend. You need to do this indoors, and when it gets dark out.

Get a flashlight, ideally a colored LED light. Set your camera on bulb mode, or set a 1 minute exposure if it doesn't have bulb.

Draw the curtains, turn off all the lights to make it as dark as possible. The press the shutter.

Step in front of the camera and use the LED light to paint or write stuff in the air in front of the camera. Once your are done, if you are in bulb press the shutter again, otherwise wait for the exposure to end. Then check out the image you created.

It's called Painting With Light and you can use it a lot of different ways. Google it for more ideas.

This is an example of what you can do with it. Credit for this image goes to Akita Akitomo @AkiraAkitomo on twitter.

Edited March 9, 2020 by BeyondTime

4 hours ago, cfx said:

it. I made no attempt with the lighting other than just to verify it was good enough for what I was taking the picture for. So I was surprised that it's not awful, and it gave me some hope that I can get good results when actually trying.

  Reveal hidden contents

I'm also trying to get nice even lighting set up so I can just practice my technical skills. Might as well shoot dolls while I'm at it.

1 hour ago, BeyondTime said:

It's called Painting With Light and you can use it a lot of different ways. Google it for more ideas.

This is an example of what you can do with it. Credit for this image goes to Akita Akitomo @AkiraAkitomo on twitter.

This is amazing. I'd love to do this once I master pictures in low light settings...and posing...

 

I loved taking pictures of my friends but its usually with a camera phone. I brought my camera to a bonfire night and I actually found it easier and less awkward to take portraits with a DSLR than with a camera phone. 

 

The camera made me feel like an actual photographer. The phone makes me feel like a creeper.

2 hours ago, BeyondTime said:

I don't do portraits of people, I don't have the training to do them justice, and I don't have the social skills to actually take a class in portraiture. At the school where I work you have to provide your own model, and I am not confident in approaching someone about doing that.

Yeah. I don't have the option for a class either where I am.

But as portraits is something I am interested in, DDs, will be my models.

2 hours ago, BeyondTime said:

I do street photography though. Don't have to talk to people, you just take their picture while pretending to be photographing something else. 🤫

I'm in a small town where I don't think there are really opportunities for this. There's certainly not any "night life" to speak of; I'd probably end up finding I was taking pictures of something I shouldn't be, like a drug deal where photography would end up posing a risk to my safety. 😕

I'm not certain though as it's not really a type of photography I have much interest in so I haven't really looked into it.

2 hours ago, BeyondTime said:

[...] It's called Painting With Light and you can use it a lot of different ways. Google it for more ideas.

I've heard of this, and I've also seen it used as a replacement for normal lighting, like someone taking a picture of a car at night and lighting it this way. That must take some skill to do the ligthing evenly.

57 minutes ago, lardroom said:

The camera made me feel like an actual photographer. The phone makes me feel like a creeper.

Personally I'll never use a phone when I actually care about the photographs. It's ok as a tool to record something. My phone is older so the quality isn't the best even for a phone so that may color my opinion but there's some things that are just common to them all, like the wide-angle lenses. Holding something out in front of you to take a picture instead of having a viewfinder just sucks too.

That picture of Miku with the light painting illustrates something else I'll bring up here. Her hair is no doubt posed with stands or wires that were then edited out of the photograph. If you have an instagram account so that you can look back through these two accounts, there are a lot of examples of this, and showing the actual setups, on these two accounts:

https://www.instagram.com/zodake_ekadoz/

https://www.instagram.com/ken00423/

I think both of them may have twitter accounts too but if they do I no longer have the links to those.

I love the kind of surreality you get with those doll photos. More color and light and everything than what you normally get in real life, and a that strange wistfulness you get like the world isn't real.

Rather than try for a straight mimicry of portrait or landscape, I'll try emphasizing the "dollness" of it all. This has been a real inspiration.