Photoclubalpha

Hi all,

I've been asked about a camera setup for a beautician's clinic allowing them to take before and after photos for client treatments.

Previously they had been using a point and shoot camera and complained of distortion when doing closeup shots. Harsh direct onboard flash is also an issue.

I'm thinking about moving them to a dSLR setup which will probably mean a mini "studio" situation with off camera flash (probably bounced off the white ceilings). My current thoughts are a basic live view camera (300 series), with the 30/2.8 SAM macro to give a normal view for full face shots and the ability to do some detail work (not likely to be as close as 1:1).

Are there any obvious flaws in my plan? Am I getting too complicated?

Thanks in advance,


Sim

try to get a 50mm macro and a ring flash / ring light -that's the way a dentist will work. you can always add a light bounced somewhere in order to get a better overall illumination. But use the ring light as your main light.
Regards

Thanks for your reply, Pako. I hadn't considered a ring light.

I'm not sure if their budget would stretch to include the 50mm macro but I'll try to test this setup at my local Sony Style.

Regards,


Sim

I would suggest they use the 30mm macro for 'before' shots and details, and the 50mm f/1.8 SAM lens (very low cost) for 'after'. The subtle difference in perspective will help. For lighting, it is almost essential to have a softbox or umbrella - 60cm/1m. Not so easy. If you can get them to work within a small well-lit area, they could install true daylight quality lighting tubes or bulbs, and not use flash at all.

David

I have to agree with DK--umbrellas are cheap enough and make great diffused light for portraiture, and light will be more important to clients' beauty pictures than the lens. From what you describe, it sounds like beauticians will be using the set-up, not necessarily photographers. So, for simplicity's sake, I'd stick with one prime lens. The 50/1.8 SAM should be just about perfect. Strobist might have some good tips in their Lighting 101 series for simple, low-maintenance set-ups. Some lessons on balancing strobe light with ambient indoor light come to mind [link].

David / Kevin,

Simplicity will definitely be the key, as Kevin noted they are not photographers.

They have a number of small, specialised treatment rooms where I think even a minimal umbrella setup will be too cumbersome. It's possible they may have daylight rated lighting already, I'll need to check.

I might go in on the weekend with a minimal setup of camera, 50mm lens, flash and tripod to see what I can achieve and go from there.

if they have small treatment rooms with white walls, use the old 'top corner' trick as an umbrella substitute - flash aimed at the corner of wall and ceiling, even better if it's a corner of the room, two walls and ceiling. Just aim the flash back over your shoulder right into the apex of the corner, and as long as the ceiling is not too high, you will get a good wrap-round quality of light as if from a large umbrella.

David

100% agree with David. Sorry Pako, but for such instances the 30mm is way more suitable than the 50mm, and that's why I'm going to get one.
50mm is suitable for FF (in such cases, of course), and much better than 90-100mm.
As for flash, you could even consider an on-flash bouncer/diffuser.
How about inviting me there (free of charge, just airplane ticket)...

Doc, this sounds like a beauty therapy clinic. Yours might be more concerned with clinically diagnosed skin conditions - problems of the body, not the mind

The 50mm will be much more flattering in perspective for full face shots. The 30mm will be excruciatingly sharp for details of nasty stuff.

David

Dr. Harout wrote:100% agree with David. Sorry Pako, but for such instances the 30mm is way more suitable than the 50mm, and that's why I'm going to get one.
50mm is suitable for FF

You might be right, from a "scientific" point of view. But the clients will look better on APS + 50mm! a sort of "normal" (APS+30mm) even if corrected for macro, will deform the features of the patients -and the beauty approach will vanish

OK, my opinion, from someone who has just moved from PnS to DLSR... Also, from someone who used to teach others to use PnS cameras in adult education classes...

Keep using the PnS and try these possible solutions.

1. Don't take really close up pictures. Step back and zoom in a little to reduce the distortion. Then crop in Picasa.
2. Put tissue over the flash to diffuse the light. It might take a couple of layers, but it works a treat. And there should be no shortage of tissues in a beauty clinic.

If this doesn't give the desired results, then go for the DSLR (or consider a bridge camera - DSLR may be overkill).

Ken

On camera flash will be bad news--it's just not flattering to anybody; Terry Richardson makes it work by putting teenage supermodels in front of the camera. No flash at all would be better than using on-camera flash. It is likely that the beauticians already have a place in the shop with pretty flattering light in it, so they might use a P&S camera there, but back off and turn off the flash. Other than that, go with an a330 and bounce the light from an inexpensive flash gun off of the ceiling or a corner.

David and Pako, you just ruined my invitation...

Sorry Doc, I'd pretty much decided on going the 50mm route anyway.

Thanks everyone for your thoughtful insights, I've got a few ideas to experiment with now.