You know I love to deconstruct a photo. And I know from your previous feedback that you love it to, so let’s dig into another one.
I’ve said it before, but I’ll say it again. It’s always been one of the most helpful technical exercises throughout my career to try to dissect the images of others, and so here I am encouraging you to take your shot at this image today. (If you want to check out some previous versions of this exercise, check here and here.)
So now tell me–yes YOU–how in the hell was this shot made? Overexposed mess? Studio shot? Test shot? A masterpiece? How’s it lit? The circumstances? The camera settings? Tricks? This one is a bit more abstract than previous shots, so I’m dying to have you pick it apart. Especially the purists.
I’ll reveal the details in a followup post. The person who gets the closest gets a signed book and a shout out and whatever else I can muster. Don’t be shy. Love to hear your thoughts.
It seems to me, (and by all means am I an experienced photographer to judge very closely), that the model was nowhere near the wall. It looks inserted later in photoshop or other. Going by the shadow being casted on the shirt from the model’s chin, I can assume there is a light source pointed down from above and slightly right of the model. Then, there is another light pointed at the ball about 45 deg. from above. There could also be some king of gold reflector in front of the model reflectintg upwards towards his shirt. That is my take in this image. Either that, or the whole thing was burned out in PS to create the effect of hard light. Just my two cents worth. Keep it up Jarv.
OK here is my thought!
One light from above, done is studio against white background. Ball is rotated in post and upper background which could be a cement wall.
Cheers
kenny
Looks like a snap from an iphone with filters applied from your app. Not a big fan of this picture by the way.
p.s. Chase, loved your New Zealand B&W’s by the way. Can’t find the post again now, but they were MIGHTY impressive. I was wondering too about the type of equipment you were using – the camera in particular. And the film stock? Or, gasp, were those digital?
… photoshopped … composite … something very strange about the ‘background’ texture above the head/beside the ball, ie. upper right hand corner of image … it passed thru my head that it’s been ‘textured’ with an electric stylus …
HOWEVER, that sure doesn’t sound like something Chase Jarvis would do (does it???)….. so, have no clue, but fun to guess … 🙂