How does Luke Fontana (or whoever processes his stuff) achieve this look? It seems like just 1 or 2 lights but how's the color grade done? I can't put my finger on it.
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make NIKON CORPORATION Camera Model NIKON D300 Camera Software Adobe Photoshop CS6 (Windows) Maximum Lens Aperture f/1.7 Sensing Method One-Chip Color Area Color Filter Array Pattern 790 Focal Length (35mm Equiv) 52 mm Image-Specific Properties: Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 240 dpi Vertical Resolution 240 dpi Image Created 2014:02:06 13:14:20 Exposure Time 1/200 sec F-Number f/7.1 Exposure Program Manual ISO Speed Rating 200 Lens Aperture f/7.1 Exposure Bias 0 EV Metering Mode Spot Light Source Flash Flash No Flash Focal Length 35.00 mm Color Space Information Uncalibrated Image Width 750 Image Height 1000 Rendering Normal Exposure Mode Manual White Balance Manual Scene Capture Type Standard Gain Control None Contrast Normal Saturation Normal Sharpness Normal Subject Distance Range Unknown
another example
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Camera Software Image-Specific Properties: Image Width 750 Image Height 1000
![Star.Trek.TNG.S03E13 - Déjà Q.mkv_snapshot_06.28_[2015.11.30_14.36.31].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/cMHcxym.jpg "Star.Trek.TNG.S03E13 - Déjà Q.mkv_snapshot_06.28_[2015.11.30_14.36.31].jpg")
>>2725604
and
last
>>2725606
why? what have i done?
>>2725604
>large, soft light off-axis
gee that was hard. does your mother dress you in the morning?
![Star.Trek.TNG.S07E04 - Gambit Part I.mkv_snapshot_21.16_[2015.12.19_06.02.04].png](https://i.imgur.com/8fj4in0.jpg "Star.Trek.TNG.S07E04 - Gambit Part I.mkv_snapshot_21.16_[2015.12.19_06.02.04].png")
>>2725610
>>2725604
I can't put my finger on a lot of stuff. Your mom's clit ain't one of them.
bt it's just banter m8
>>2725670
god dammit
>>2725631
no shit, i acknowledge that in the OP if you read it. this is about post processing.
>>2725782
There's very very little post going on in these. It's almost entirely the light, and purposeful styling (light faces, dark clothing) and then just some unification of tones in post. Obviously there's some artistry going on, but it's going to be different in every photo.
>>2725604
in curves, lower your highlights (or clip it, like in OP) but also lever up the mid-to-high tones. then you also level up you mid-to-dark tones, but restraining your black point. using an additional layer in the "soft light" mode, set a brush to white, 10~15% opacity; use it to dodge the eyes, cheekbones, noseline and such. add another layer to the "overlay" mode, set a brush to black this time, 10~15%; and use it to darken shadowed areas such as jawline, eyebrows, philtrum and such. merge all layers, and adjust overall contrast if necessary. add a layer to the "color" mode, paint bucket it to grayish-bluish color; set opacity low (<6%). if your skintones are still a tad too tan, adjust on the color balance tool, midtones.
this should do it. also, remember he used a huge softlight + gray background and clothing. this helps getting really neutral. if your background or clothing is more colored than that, it will be more difficult to achieve the effect.
>>2725793
muh layers
>>2726193
the easiest way to burn/dodge in photoshop, huh
Soft light layer filled with 50% grey. Easiest way IMO. paint black and white at low flow/opacity on one layer.
This can be done easily with a single, warmly toned, diffused, large light source. That light source can be a lamp that is always on. It can also be a huge ring flash or umbrella with a filter to change the white balance. Many ways lead to Rome.
>>2727003
Why not WB in post? It's not like you're not going to do it regardless.
