Lit Photography around the ship

[peety3]

I'm contemplating taking my battery-powered studio light and a 1'x3' softbox on our upcoming cruise so we can do some private/independent formal shots without having to pay ship prices and/or wait in lines, etc. Has anyone done this before or seen anyone doing this before?

 

(For all of the naysayers, I'd pick a spot less traveled, nowhere near the piazza, and hopefully a spot less likely to gather a crowd of people thinking we were one of the ship's photographers. The light is wireless, and I'll take our grey aluminum stand so it's a little more visible than a black stand.)

[pierces]

If such pictures are very important to you and you are polite about placement, it's up to you. I know of no rules against it.

 

To be honest, you would likely get a discreet eye-roll form me if I happened upon your impromptu studio. :)

 

Dave

[havoc315]

I suspect you might get a crew member asking you to move your equipment, especially if it is obstructing any passageway. Seems like a lot of extra gear to carry on vacation.

 

Indoors, you really can do quite a bit with bouncing a speedlite...

And how big is your traveling party? I like having a human lightstand... Someone who can simply hold up a speedlite off camera. Then no long set up, no big light stands to carry and get in the way.

[donaldsc]

Although I do not know, I would guess that the ship would consider it a professional setup and tell you to take it down.

 

DON

[FRMPEI]

Not to mention the line up of people that will form wanting their pictures taken.:)

 

Regards,

Kevin Reid

[peety3]

Although I do not know, I would guess that the ship would consider it a professional setup and tell you to take it down.

 

DON

There's nothing in the cruise contract that forbids professional photography. Even if there was, if I hand my camera to someone else and ask them to push "this" button, that's not any sort of professional arrangement, so their claim of professional is completely without merit.

 

I take a lot of professional-grade equipment on board an Alaska cruise, and hang out along the railing during glacier viewing, whale times, etc. Ship's photographers come to chat, never to say I must stop.

[peety3]

I suspect you might get a crew member asking you to move your equipment, especially if it is obstructing any passageway. Seems like a lot of extra gear to carry on vacation.

 

Indoors, you really can do quite a bit with bouncing a speedlite...

And how big is your traveling party? I like having a human lightstand... Someone who can simply hold up a speedlite off camera. Then no long set up, no big light stands to carry and get in the way.

We're already taking five DSLRs and 10+ lenses, so "one light" and a fold/roll-up softbox is not a significant add-on. We live 35 minutes from the cruise ship dock, so we can take as much luggage as we wish.

 

Bouncing a speedlight is at the mercy of the room. Aiming a softbox is a lot more predictable. There's also the matter of power - if, perhaps, we wanted to get pictures taken on the patio outside Sabatini's with an Alaskan sunset behind us, the only way a speedlight can try to keep up is direct and harsh light. An off-axis softbox, perhaps with a grid to avoid lighting the shiny panels of the ship, is going to create much better results.

[Maligator]

You're probably not looking to invest in any new gear, but I would pack a "super" speedlite with a diffuser, personally. I picked up the 360 Ws StreakLight (Adorama house-brand version of the Quantum Qflash). While it is more than I want to pack for an overseas cruise. Even with the battery packs it would be easily packable. Certainly more compact than a studio light set-up.

 

eric6 by Matt Barnette, on Flickr

[pierces]

You're probably not looking to invest in any new gear, but I would pack a "super" speedlite with a diffuser, personally. I picked up the 360 Ws StreakLight (Adorama house-brand version of the Quantum Qflash). While it is more than I want to pack for an overseas cruise. Even with the battery packs it would be easily packable. Certainly more compact than a studio light set-up.

 

eric6 by Matt Barnette, on Flickr

 

Very nicely lit. Subject(s) are awesome too!

 

Dave

[havoc315]

We're already taking five DSLRs and 10+ lenses, so "one light" and a fold/roll-up softbox is not a significant add-on. We live 35 minutes from the cruise ship dock, so we can take as much luggage as we wish.

 

Bouncing a speedlight is at the mercy of the room. Aiming a softbox is a lot more predictable. There's also the matter of power - if, perhaps, we wanted to get pictures taken on the patio outside Sabatini's with an Alaskan sunset behind us, the only way a speedlight can try to keep up is direct and harsh light. An off-axis softbox, perhaps with a grid to avoid lighting the shiny panels of the ship, is going to create much better results.

 

Ok then!!

 

I'm struggling to find the right balance of gear for Alaska later this summer. Certainly not all that, lol.

I'm leaning towards: Nikon d750, sb500 flash, Manfrotto tripod (though might skip), 18-35g, 85/1.8 or 50/1.8 (doubt both), 300mm/4, 1.4 and 2x teleconverters, some nd filters.

 

Being left behind: 105/2.8 macro, 24-85, 70-200/4 (generally my favorite lens but skip for this trip), the 50 or 85, all my light stands and umbrellas, sb700.

 

So I'll be set for wildlife telephoto with the 300, ultra wide landscapes with the 18-35, shipboard normal view with the 18-35 and maybe the 50. Portraits with the 50 or 85.

Debating the extra weight of the tripod... Night shots of the ship... But can live without those. Especially since motion would prevent me from getting the mountain backgrounds. Thinking more of nd filtered waterfalls in the Yukon. But worth bringing the tripod just for that?

[GUT2407]

I don't expect you will have any problems, unless you start obstructing others or taking photos for others.

[peety3]

I'm struggling to find the right balance of gear for Alaska later this summer. Certainly not all that, lol.

I'm leaning towards: Nikon d750, sb500 flash, Manfrotto tripod (though might skip), 18-35g, 85/1.8 or 50/1.8 (doubt both), 300mm/4, 1.4 and 2x teleconverters, some nd filters.

 

Being left behind: 105/2.8 macro, 24-85, 70-200/4 (generally my favorite lens but skip for this trip), the 50 or 85, all my light stands and umbrellas, sb700.

 

So I'll be set for wildlife telephoto with the 300, ultra wide landscapes with the 18-35, shipboard normal view with the 18-35 and maybe the 50. Portraits with the 50 or 85.

Debating the extra weight of the tripod... Night shots of the ship... But can live without those. Especially since motion would prevent me from getting the mountain backgrounds. Thinking more of nd filtered waterfalls in the Yukon. But worth bringing the tripod just for that?

Hard to say if the tripod is worth it. We've booked a private photo tour in Haines (ferry from Skagway), so not only do I plan to bring our tripod/ballhead so my wife can do macro stuff that she enjoys, I'm planning to rent another with a gimbal head for bear/eagle photography.

 

I'm also a little surprised you'd leave your 70-200 home. If you're going with one body, obviously you'd have to change lenses for anything/everything, but I just can't imagine having to choose between the 300 and at best an 85 prime as your only option before an 18-35. Whales are big animals, and last year I felt that the 200-400 (on FF) was almost too much and I was reaching for my 70-200 occasionally.

 

If you're curious, here's my overall plan at the moment (some owned, some I hope to own, other stuff rented): five cameras (two "slow" FF, two "fast" FF, one crop), lenses include 11-24/4, 16-35/4IS, 24-70/2.8, 24-105/4IS, 70-200/2.8IS, 70-200/4IS, 70-300IS, 100-400IS, 600/4, 1.4x TC, 14/2.8, 35/1.4, 85/1.2, Zeiss 50/2 Macro, maybe a 17mm tilt-shift (we're a Canon family if the 11-24 or 85/1.2 wasn't a giveaway). The 70-200s would have stayed home, except for our evening/night whale watch in Victoria. The "gear uses" breaks down like this:

 

For the times when we can/will "share":

general "at the ready" in the cabin: 11-24 and 24-105 on slow FF, 100-400 and 600&1.4x on fast FF

daytime shots around the ship: one FF, 11-24, 16-35/4 or 24-105, 50/2Macro

nighttime shots around the ship: one FF, 14/2.8, 35/1.4, 85/1.2, 50/2Macro

lit portrait work: one FF, 14/2.8, 24-70/2.8, light/softbox/stand, tripod/ballhead, PW triggers.

 

For the times that we're in our zone and it's not so convenient to share:

whale watching from the promenade: I get a slow FF and two fast FF cameras with 16-35, 100-400, 600&1.4x on tripod/gimbal, and she gets a slow FF with 11-24 or 24-105 and a crop camera with 70-300 on tripod/ballhead or monopod/head

day excursions: I get a slow FF and two fast FF with 16-35, 100-400, 600&1.4x on monopod, she gets a slow FF with 11-24 or 24-105 and a crop camera with 70-300

night excursion: I get a slow FF with 24-70/2.8 or 14/2.8, two fast FF with 70-200/2.8IS and 600/4IS (no 1.4x), she gets a slow FF with 11-24 or 24-105 and a crop camera with 70-200/4IS.

 

Obviously we're well-adapted to carrying multiple cameras. Before our last cruise, someone asked if I was trying to be the Lego guy seen here: http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/how-to-spot-an-amateur.htm - honestly, no, but I'm at a point now where I can comfortably go with essentially 16-840 with two reasonable gaps (that I can shrink by carrying just a 50/2 and by taking out the 1.4x) with one camera on my left side, one camera on my right side, and one camera on a big lens on a monopod that's either extended and on the ground or collapsed and on my shoulder. I won't run, but I can happily hike a mile or two, and everything's at the ready.

[zqvol]

Don't know how anyone can enjoy a cruise carrying all of that gear.

[TLCOhio]

You're probably not looking to invest in any new gear, but I would pack a "super" speedlite with a diffuser, personally. I picked up the 360 Ws StreakLight (Adorama house-brand version of the Quantum Qflash). While it is more than I want to pack for an overseas cruise. Even with the battery packs it would be easily packable. Certainly more compact than a studio light set-up.

 

zqvol: Don't know how anyone can enjoy a cruise carrying all of that gear.

 

havoc315: I'm struggling to find the right balance of gear for Alaska later this summer. Certainly not all that' date=' lol. I'm leaning towards: Nikon d750, sb500 flash, Manfrotto tripod (though might skip), 18-35g, 85/1.8 or 50/1.8 (doubt both), 300mm/4, 1.4 and 2x teleconverters, some nd filters. [/quote']

 

Appreciate this super wonderful picture with the law officer and dog. Super well done!!

 

YES, getting the "right balance" is very important. You are not shooting cover photos for Vogue magazine. Having done in the past couple of years a number of programs with National Geographic photographers, they recognize that the "technology" is changing. Being lighter and more mobile has its advantages in allowing for more "creativity" and flexibility to go locations and places that can yield first-rate results.

 

There is an important saying to consider . . . "Less is More!"

 

THANKS! Enjoy! Terry in Ohio

 

Enjoyed a 14-day, Jan. 20-Feb. 3, 2014, Sydney to Auckland adventure, getting a big sampling for the wonders of "down under” before and after this cruise. Go to:

http://boards.cruisecritic.com/showthread.php?t=1974139

for more info and many pictures of these amazing sights in this great part of the world. Now at 109,818 views for this posting.

[peety3]

Don't know how anyone can enjoy a cruise carrying all of that gear.

Clearly you need to go exercise more. Start with walking around the block daily, then increase your mileage and soon you'll see the wonderful health benefits of living an active lifestyle!

 

Seriously, to each their own, but if you slow down and read it, it's not as ridiculous as you make it out to be. When I go on an excursion, I use a BlackRapid Double strap to hang two cameras from my shoulders. Right side is a 100-400, left side is a 16-35: comfortable, at the ready, and a great range to start with. I then have a 600 on a monopod. If I shrink the monopod, I get a nice handle a little higher than my waist if I rest the lens on my shoulder, and I still have the other hand free to open doors, etc. On my belt is a lens exchange case holding a 50mm macro lens. There's also a utility case with spare batteries and memory cards, gloves, and my hat. Done. See for an action shot. Meanwhile, my wife uses the same strap, carrying two cameras and two lenses. She also carries a "shootsac" (Google it) with her other two lenses handy, plus batteries, cards, etc.

 

When I walk around the ship, I have one camera on a classic-style BlackRapid strap, and a shootsac with 2-3 lenses. Piece of cake, everything at the ready, yet I can have both hands free if I wish.

 

When we start/end the cruise, everything fits in two backpacks plus a rolling duffel. We live 40 minutes from the Seattle cruise terminal, so we just put it all in our vehicle and my parents are happy to drop us off.

[Maligator]

Ok then!!

 

I'm struggling to find the right balance of gear for Alaska later this summer. Certainly not all that, lol.

I'm leaning towards: Nikon d750, sb500 flash, Manfrotto tripod (though might skip), 18-35g, 85/1.8 or 50/1.8 (doubt both), 300mm/4, 1.4 and 2x teleconverters, some nd filters.

 

Being left behind: 105/2.8 macro, 24-85, 70-200/4 (generally my favorite lens but skip for this trip), the 50 or 85, all my light stands and umbrellas, sb700.

 

So I'll be set for wildlife telephoto with the 300, ultra wide landscapes with the 18-35, shipboard normal view with the 18-35 and maybe the 50. Portraits with the 50 or 85.

Debating the extra weight of the tripod... Night shots of the ship... But can live without those. Especially since motion would prevent me from getting the mountain backgrounds. Thinking more of nd filtered waterfalls in the Yukon. But worth bringing the tripod just for that?

Personally, I'd try to take the zooms, plus the 300mm with the TCs. The 70-200mm would be a shame to leave home, as it covers quite a range and is generally thought of as one of the best in Nikon's stables. The 50mm and/or 85mm should be compact and light enough that you could tuck one or both into your kit without sacrificing a lot of weight and space.

 

Is your tripod aluminum or have one of those big gimbal heads? I picked up a Sunpak carbon fiber that fits in a suitcase like a champ and weighs next to nothing. I recall it was less than $150.

[97t-bird]

I did it....found a little nook overlooking the promenade, I used one shoot through umbrella and another speedlight with diffuser. I just used nikon SB-900's instead of a studio strobe.

 

People thought we were working there but a short laugh later turned out to be fun, the few people around asked if I'd take their photo....I said sure grab your memory card and used there card....Was actually a fun time.

 

Sorry for the horrible quality, it is a compressed low res copy off my friends facebook.

[donaldsc]

I did it....found a little nook overlooking the promenade, I used one shoot through umbrella and another speedlight with diffuser. I just used nikon SB-900's instead of a studio strobe.

 

People thought we were working there but a short laugh later turned out to be fun, the few people around asked if I'd take their photo....I said sure grab your memory card and used there card....Was actually a fun time.

 

Sorry for the horrible quality, it is a compressed low res copy off my friends facebook.

 

Shooting photos w professional equipment for yourself was marginal. When you started taking pictures for other people, they should have confiscated your equipment or certainly your memory chip as well as the memory chips of the people you took photos for.

 

I hate to say it but people like you give photographers a bad name. There are professional photographers who have paid the cruise lines to take pictures on board. You do not have to buy stuff from them but you do not bring professional equipment w lights on board and steal business from them.

 

DON

[GUT2407]

Some of the new gear is so compact it doesn't matter anyway.

[GUT2407]

Some of the new gear is so compact it doesn't matter anyway.

 

 

Ooops was quoting Terry's post above but quote didn't work.

[GUT2407]

Shooting photos w professional equipment for yourself was marginal. When you started taking pictures for other people, they should have confiscated your equipment or certainly your memory chip as well as the memory chips of the people you took photos for.

 

I hate to say it but people like you give photographers a bad name. There are professional photographers who have paid the cruise lines to take pictures on board. You do not have to buy stuff from them but you do not bring professional equipment w lights on board and steal business from them.

 

DON

 

 

As someone who has made a $$$ with a Camera I must agree with Don.

[GUT2407]

Don't know how anyone can enjoy a cruise carrying all of that gear.

 

 

I carry it on then use what I want when I want.

[peety3]

Shooting photos w professional equipment for yourself was marginal. When you started taking pictures for other people, they should have confiscated your equipment or certainly your memory chip as well as the memory chips of the people you took photos for.

 

I hate to say it but people like you give photographers a bad name. There are professional photographers who have paid the cruise lines to take pictures on board. You do not have to buy stuff from them but you do not bring professional equipment w lights on board and steal business from them.

Wow, Don, how much stock do you have in the ship's photographers? And have you looked at the pictures the ship's photographers actually take? They're all medium-resolution JPEG (even the Platinum Studio shoots JPEG, last I saw). Although "it's not the equipment that gets the shot", they use relative junk lighting gear that has horrible consistency to its white balance (many of our shots have a pink tint to them), and since they're shot in JPEG it's too late to fix it right.

 

The ship's photographers are set up in fixed locations with backdrops. Their lights are stuck wherever they're at. I agree that it's wrong to ask to sneak into their setup and mooch off their backdrop, worse if you slap a Pocket Wizard on your camera and attempt to use their lights. However, unless they're willing to be mobile to another spot that I prefer, shoot in RAW (even if that means paying $150+ for the digital files), and bring in lighting gear that's got a lot better color consistency, their work just doesn't cut it.

 

I would agree that shooting photos of others for a fee would be considered stealing business from the ship's photographers, if they offered a similar vista, real or fake, at one of their stations, or if they were mobile. However, as soon as any of those elements disappears, it's no longer anti-competitive, and offering a grade of picture above what they offer is also enough to differentiate (in my opinion).

[peety3]

As someone who has made a $$$ with a Camera I must agree with Don.

I've made money with my camera, and I disagree (obviously). I fully respect the business that's happening by the ship's photographers, and I wholeheartedly want to preserve that intact. However, just because they're taking some (high-volume, low-quality, poorly-lit, unedited) photography in location 1, does not create a blanket prohibition on photography (of self, of others for free, or of others for a fee) elsewhere on the ship.

 

If a photographer takes a client into a park for a senior photo shoot, should the park immediately prevent anyone else from doing photography (even for free) anywhere else in the park? No.

[donaldsc]

Wow, Don, how much stock do you have in the ship's photographers? And have you looked at the pictures the ship's photographers actually take? They're all medium-resolution JPEG (even the Platinum Studio shoots JPEG, last I saw). Although "it's not the equipment that gets the shot", they use relative junk lighting gear that has horrible consistency to its white balance (many of our shots have a pink tint to them), and since they're shot in JPEG it's too late to fix it right.

 

The ship's photographers are set up in fixed locations with backdrops. Their lights are stuck wherever they're at. I agree that it's wrong to ask to sneak into their setup and mooch off their backdrop, worse if you slap a Pocket Wizard on your camera and attempt to use their lights. However, unless they're willing to be mobile to another spot that I prefer, shoot in RAW (even if that means paying $150+ for the digital files), and bring in lighting gear that's got a lot better color consistency, their work just doesn't cut it.

 

I would agree that shooting photos of others for a fee would be considered stealing business from the ship's photographers, if they offered a similar vista, real or fake, at one of their stations, or if they were mobile. However, as soon as any of those elements disappears, it's no longer anti-competitive, and offering a grade of picture above what they offer is also enough to differentiate (in my opinion).

 

I have no stock in the ship's photographers. They do lousy mass production work with limited or no retouching. I never buy stuff from them. It basically stinks.

 

However, that does not you the right to set up equipment and shoot pictures of others regardless of whether you charge or not. They have paid for the right to shoot "professional" pictures on the ship using "professional" equipment. You have not.

 

Whether you can set up your equipment and take pictures for yourself is not clear although I am also uncomfortable with that. It is the act of shooting free pictures for others where the OP went over the line.

 

DON