Random Guitar Pics

[Archie]

I'm practicing/learning photography in the new studio. I'm going to post the results in this thread.

These pics are 2 mega pixel shots from the camera, via my iPad. The full RAW's are still in the camera on SD card. I'll get to those later on.

I hope these bring some enjoyment. Any comments/critiques are more than welcome. I can tell that the Campellone needs more light on the tail piece for example.

[Archie]

[darkwaters]

Surprisingly to me, the grey background is perfect.

[John A.]

Looks real nice to me.

[QsDuesBlues]

Very nice pics - the Guild 'Duane Eddy' photo has reminded me of a memorable moment of guitar appreciation, aesthetic obsession - call it what you will. And I have a special thing for the Guild DE-400 redburst variety, c. 1965/1966 - reason being...........

During a spell of unemployment in the 1980's, I once walked from Hendon, North London, over the Hampstead Hill to central London's guitar mecca Denmark Street.......ogled a magnificent but unaffordable redburst 'Duane Eddy' DE-400 from all possible visual angles..... for about 10 minutes..........and then walked back over the Hampstead Hill to Hendon again. Total distance - about 14 miles........

[pingu]

good pics
you’re giving me jp20 lust

but the bridge angle bothers me ....

[Hammertone]

Consider:
-side lighting to highlight the curvature of the archtop guitar face;
-a less visible method of positioning the guitar so that the stand is not part of the photo;
-something in the background to clearly establish that these are your photos.

[whiskey02]

something in the background to clearly establish that these are your photos.



like this?

[Archie]

Consider:
-side lighting to highlight the curvature of the archtop guitar face;
-a less visible method to position the guitar so that the stand is not part of the photo;
-something in the background to clearly establish that these are your photos.

Thanks Hammer.

- The guitars are lit on both sides. I have been wanting to capture the curves of the top and back as my main goal. I had it all in my head but in reality, it's actually very hard to do right. The light usually comes off as white on reflection so you lose colour and you have to work it perfectly so you get the right thickness of reflection. Otherwise it looks like the guitar has a defect.
It's much easier to achieve this when the picture is taken from a slight angle. As a compromise I'm trying to get a tear shaped reflection on one side of the lower bout, to show off the gloss on the finish and to give a hint of arch.

Archtop guitars are difficult to photograph because they reflect everywhere. The light source hitting them has to be large to avoid the source or light box, showing up on the top. For example if you take the above picture, I resorted to spreading two even light across the face of the guitar, in order to lose the shadows crated by the tail piece, pots and pick guard.
That goes back to picking up the curves of the body. In order to do so you will likely need a stronger light on one side and that throws shadows.

- Yes true. I've thought about string. I'll try that this week and we'll see how it goes.

- Interesting point. I thought the water mark would do the trick but if you're talking about something that is instantly recognisable then yes, you have a point. Could you give some examples and how can I rotate that background out to keep things fresh whilst retaining my identity?

Worth baring in mind. If you look at the X400 picture, there's actually quite a lot of technical detail in there that isn't obvious because (and I might be wrong), the picture looks ok.
Look at the details. Nothing is over blown in the whites, there is separation from the guitar and the grey backdrop. You cannot see the light source (to the point you didn't know where it was coming from). There are no real shadows being cast by the appointments in the top. There is no post processing what so ever; that pic is straight out of camera. The background has some nice vignetting because I shone a small powered light into the centre of it. The headstock is well lit; the tail piece is reasonable well lit.

Now compare that pic to some more professional shots done by shops. I did so yesterday as I wasn't happy with my results and I noted that, everything I was avoiding (shadows, reflections etc..) were present in the majority of the pics I found; in fact almost all had, for example, the soft box square reflecting on the arched top.

But you're right Hammer. I need to bering some arch into play. I'm working on it!

[oldane]

This was shot with a single speedlight mounted on top of the camera and the light bouncing from a white wall to the left of me in order to show the curvatures of the top.

[Archie]

Professionals work towards management of highlights and shadows others work towards elimination of highlights and shadows!



I would recommend some of the old Linhof Technica manuals or perhaps some of the older Kodak Technical Publications as sources of information on how to get the best effects. A lot of the newer fully digital publications are so geared to that workflow that they ignore much of what came before. If you could shoot something on film, process it and have it come out in mechanical print then you were well ahead of the game; if you could do it now while adding the digital benefits you would be even more ahead.

So; work from the same principles that served the masters and then expand on them, look at the industrial/commercial photographers from the early days of colour and see how they overcame the challenges. Decide whether you want purely "advertising" shots or whether you want emotive shots that can evoke the sound of the instrument. Your image should provoke some kind of emotional response for musicians, not just the admiration of fastidious woodworkers -- well at least that is my opinion.

I agree; I want to do both.

These pictures are for the sake of archiving what the guitar looks like.
Thanks for the advice. I will investigate further. I enjoy a lot of film work. It has a certain look that digital can't reproduce.

Perhaps a plant or two, or some rustic props will add more interest to an otherwise clinical approach.

That's an interesting quote and quite apt.

"Professionals work towards management of highlights and shadows others work towards elimination of highlights and shadows!"

"Food for thought".

[Archie]

This was shot with a single speedlight mounted on top of the camera and the light bouncing from a white wall to the left of me in order to show the curvatures of the top.

Beautiful guitar.

Yes I've been able to recreate this effect, just not in a way that I'm happy with yet. I'll show you some examples.

[Archie]

This one is for Hammer.

It's getting there!

On the full length picture, I placed a piece of white cardboard on the floor, in front of the guitar. That reflected a little bit of light up onto the hinge of the tail piece. Enough to show there is light but not enough to light up the new chrome finish on the harp (which would look out of place).

The problem I have is that there is not enough light being shone on the front of the guitar to being out the 'G' logo in the pots and add some more texture and colour to the pickups and tail piece.

If I can pick those up, I'd be 95% happy with the shot. Although saying that, the headstock needs stronger back lighting and a little more front light.

[2bornot2bop]

You’re truly progressing. Are you shooting in RAW? It’s all about the processing. I use Capture One, but I’ve never had the space to light or shoot the way I’ve wanted to.

It’s interesting, but I’m not a fan of the largely typical gray backdrop. I’d use a large 10’ x 10’ cloth backdrop, which are more modern, with highlights, and softening them with a hint of bokeh. But that’s all a matter of taste.

I have several I could send you if you want to pay the freight. In fact, I’ve a fabulous gray and white cloth backdrop in tye-dye if gray is your thing.

Here it is close up.

[Archie]

Hey 2bop.

Your offer is too kind.

Also thanks for your advice and critique. I agree with you on the grey backdrop. It's an eye roll for sure. I think people like it or use it because it adds some shade or 'colour' without adding any colour. If that makes sense?
It's not white or black, it's more interesting than that but it also doesn't conflict with the colour of the guitar, you put in front of it.

It's a cop out for a learner like me but what with the lighting going on and taking the camera off 'Auto', I could use something that 'plays along'. I've also got an Oxford bluer backdrop; I'll have a go with that tomorrow.

I like your back drops. They remind me of a plush lined case, which is perfect really.

I'll DM you my address and perhaps you can find out the costs for shipping? I doubt it will be that much.

P.s 'The Rose' is such a beauty.

[Sam Sherry]

I'm practicing/learning photography in the new studio. I'm going to post the results in this thread.

Your guitars look great and your photos look great.

That said and meant it's possible you might find something helpful in this 2015 thread about guitar photography.

Some of the best amateur guitar photography I've seen is by Charlie Daughtry, the Texan attorney and guitar collector who is one of the owners of Les Paul Forum. It helps that he owns real-deal Gibson LPs but he's good enough that people bring him their real-deal Gibson LPs to shoot. A nice taste of Charlie's work is right over here. Really, it's all over LPF.

Edit: Check this out!! Drool-worthy guitar photos by owners of drool-worthy guitars!

[Archie]

Your guitars look great and your photos look great.

That said and meant it's possible you might find something helpful in this 2015 thread about guitar photography.

Some of the best amateur guitar photography I've seen is by Charlie Daughtry, the Texan attorney and guitar collector who is one of the owners of Les Paul Forum. It helps that he owns real-deal Gibson LPs but he's good enough that people bring him their real-deal Gibson LPs to shoot. A nice taste of Charlie's work is right over here. Really, it's all over LPF.

Edit: Check this out!! Drool-worthy guitar photos by owners of drool-worthy guitars!

]]

Thanks Sam I'll check it out now.

I was low key hoping that if I get good enough, people will want me to take pics of their archtops too and I can perhaps sell prints. I'm sure over the years I'll amass quite a collection.
That being said I can't take on too many projects; I need to focus on the business.

There is or was a professional photographer on here who took some amazing pics. I remember one was a guitar reflected in a Christmas tree decoration.

[Archie]

[citizenk74]

The archtop guitar is a lovely 3-dimensional object that can be tricky to photograph. Kudos to all who can retain the elegant proportions and depict the volumes and curves with proportionate clarity. You're doing a fine job, A.H.! Thank you!