Of good beards and bad ones

P

payasam

a.k.a. Mukul Dube
Local time
10:34 AM
Joined
Sep 16, 2005
Messages
4,445
Over the years I have photographed many bearded people. Salt and pepper beards test resolving power about as much as clean and shiny dark ones do. White ones, however, are a disaster, photographically speaking, in most lighting. Because light bounces about between the hairs, what I get in the picture is a white without texture. I wonder what has been the experience of other members.
 
Reduce your developing time 20%, that should hold the highlights. You'll probably need to give an extra stop of exposure to prevent loss of shadow detail from the reduced development, but the neg will have less contrast and the bright whites will print better.
 
Dang! I thought this was going to be a "show us your good/bad beard" thread....

attachment.php
 

Attachments

  • Sherril-Cazuelas-1.jpg
    Sherril-Cazuelas-1.jpg
    40 KB · Views: 0
It's not just beard hair! White or light grey head hair does the same, as does light blonde hair, so be glad that you live in India and not northern Europe! Going to a lower contrast will put some tone in the hair as Chris suggests but still won't define the hairs. I prefer burning in the whites through a higher contrast filter. Sometimes just exposing the entire picture through your highest contrast filter for a few seconds after your first exposure through a mid range filter will do it, no burning or dodging, but it intensifies the shadow side of the hairs.

Having some side light in the original exposure helps by putting specular highlights on the hairs
 
Hmm, "Good Beard/Bad Beard" sounds slightly suggestive, like "Truth or Dare."

Funny that no one mentioned the option of Grecian Formula for Men for the problem of white beards. Is this why Santa Claus looks like he's wearing cotton on his face - the hairs can't be resolved? Oh, wait, maybe that IS cotton on his face. You mean Santa Claus isn't real?

~Joe
 
Chriscrawfordphoto said:
Reduce your developing time 20%, that should hold the highlights. You'll probably need to give an extra stop of exposure to prevent loss of shadow detail from the reduced development, but the neg will have less contrast and the bright whites will print better.
Click to expand...

Would you believe that I've had better luck going the other way? I know it's counter-intuitive, but when I know I need detail in the highlights, I usually give film a one stop push. When exposing, I meter off the highlights, and let the shadows fall where they may. For portraits, I think this works particularly well. A compensating developer like dilute rodinal or even something like xtol that gives the shadows a little bump helps.

I got the idea from reading this:

http://unblinkingeye.com/Articles/Mortensen/mortensen.html

The under exposure moves the highlights down off the shoulder of the neg, leaving you with better separation in the upper values. You get thin shadows, but in many situations, the shadows are pictorially interesting anyway.
 
Christopher, what you suggest is the approach usually taken with white wedding dresses. It works, but I cannot use it for two reasons: one, each roll generally has pictures of different kinds; and two, the C-41 I use exclusively is processed at pretty dumb labs.

While I defer to the expertise of Pitxu, I'm not entirely ignorant. The attached photo was taken by Sean Moran, RFF member, on his last visit to India. M3 with Summicron 50, I think. Other details not known. Incidentally, it illustrates what Al said about side lighting and specular highlights.
 

Attachments

  • md_sean.jpg
    md_sean.jpg
    83 KB · Views: 0
Rolleiflex 2.8F, 80mm Xenotar, Delta 400, Rodinal
 

Attachments

  • bai_rolei_delta400_rod_7_08.jpg
    bai_rolei_delta400_rod_7_08.jpg
    43.7 KB · Views: 0
I'm confused!
What does Pitxu look like?
No Santa? Careful what you say there, son, he's makin' a list.
Here's my beard, salt & pepper, never looks right in photos.
 

Attachments

  • photog.jpg
    photog.jpg
    43.8 KB · Views: 0
Here in Miami I've seen a few guys with "Male Pattern Baldness" who still manage to get a decent growth of 'dreads on the sides and rear. If you wear one of those oversized knit caps to stuff your dreads in you can arrange the pile to make it look like you have hair growing on top too. What most of us uptight Americans don't want to admit to is that ganga contains hormone like chemicals that tend to prevent male pattern baldness. Now PULEEEEZE pass that spliff, John. I have an image to maintain!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom