FYI: This Is The Gear Used To Take Obama’s New Official Portrait
- Thread starter jp121
- Start date
- Status
If ever one needs advice about how many actual shutter actuations the 5D MK III can withstand before it gives up, I think Pete Souza (the guy who took this photo of Obama) would be one of the few guys to know ... apparently he shoots 20000 photos a week of the president, so in less than 2 months he goes through 150000 (the official minimum shutter actuations limit by Canon for 5D MK III) ... unless someone in Canonrumors has already crossed that number.
Upvote
0
Well, anyway, as Vincent Laforet says in his blog, there is NO reason to own the 85L if you're not shooting it between 1.2 - 2.0, as you might as well own the 70-200 II for only a few hundred $ more, with the ability to have the versatility of the zoom, much faster auto-focus, IS and pretty much equal sharpness.
If you can afford both, well, I'm jealous of you.
If you can afford both, well, I'm jealous of you.
Upvote
0
Jesse said:
If I'd have to take portraits all day long I would also take a portrait lens, and not a zoom that is slower, heavier, more expensive and has other trade offs. IS is a plus, but obviously Souza uses lighting, so it doesn't matter here.
That said, I'm even jealous of your gear...
Upvote
0
What I understood from the video (Presidents Photographer) is that he follows the President all day long and takes 20000 photos a week, so carrying a big heavy like 70-200, all day long, would be a bit too much (especially for a 59 year old like Pete Souza) ... also in that video I saw him work mostly with a 35 f/1.4 & 85 f/1.2 lenses ... the only other lens I saw him use in that video was 24-70 (if I am not wrong it was mostly used outdoors).Jesse said:
So don't be jealous ... be happy that you are a strong young person with the muscles and strength to carry a 70-200 all day long ;D
Upvote
0
LOL!Jesse said:
That was my 1st thought, too!...but it's America...you could not cream the background too much...we need to see those flags and be able to identify them!...plus f/7.1 is a nice safe aperture to get The Prez good and sharp and save the photographer's butt.
I like the shot. It is a conservative, it has to be. So it is perfect for the intended audience. Nice low angle so we get the feeling of power. (Color balance could be a tad warmer..but that is not a shot killer here). It makes The President look in-charge, but accessible (his expression conveys that). The shot is also somewhat relaxed, i.e. not stiff, so I think it captures Barrack's personality, too. Job well done in the short, stressful time Mr. Sousa had to shoot it!
The phone isn't a prop....Barrack demanded that the phone be there in case his office went into DEFCON 5 National Emergency Mode! 8)
Upvote
0
bdunbar79 said:
You seem to be very sure of yourself (which is probably a success recipe for a pro photog) but if you write something like this, would you please care to enlighten us why [email protected] != 70-200/[email protected] ?
Upvote
0
It's not often I see people flaming each other like this on CR. Quite amusing, but unnecessary I'm sure.
The portrait looks good to me. If someone paid me to take a photo of a president, I'd be wanting to make sure the darned thing was in focus - so I can understand why he'd be wanting to use f/7.1. Shoot at f/1.2 and you'd probably only get one eye in focus - how embarrassing... "Mr President? I need to come back to the White House to take your photo again because it's out of focus."
"You're fired."
The portrait looks good to me. If someone paid me to take a photo of a president, I'd be wanting to make sure the darned thing was in focus - so I can understand why he'd be wanting to use f/7.1. Shoot at f/1.2 and you'd probably only get one eye in focus - how embarrassing... "Mr President? I need to come back to the White House to take your photo again because it's out of focus."
"You're fired."
Upvote
0
Interesting. The smile says "Hey, I'm your pal" but the arms folded says, "barrier".
If you want to see some great portrait shots of world leaders (and world-class thugs) you should check out Planton's book "Power". Ask yourself how many of these people would you want to be stuck in a lift with?
http://platonphoto.com/portraits/politics/index.html
If you want to see some great portrait shots of world leaders (and world-class thugs) you should check out Planton's book "Power". Ask yourself how many of these people would you want to be stuck in a lift with?
http://platonphoto.com/portraits/politics/index.html
Upvote
0
smithy said:
I'd not consider this a flame, I generally like bdunbar79's posts, but this particular one didn't seem very thought through, thus the question. Plus often some posts don't hit the spot because not everyone is a native speaker, a problem I'm wrestling with.
smithy said:
I guess Mr. President didn't just allow for one shot, but for his official portrait would have had quite a lot of time to get an optimal one - he cannot be elected again, but still, top politicians are said to care about their public image
GuyF said:
There's always the "modify post" button...
GuyF said:
That surely has been thought through by the 10+ people of his personal publicity staff standing behind the photog... if anyone knows the 80s GB sitcom "Yes, Prime Minister" there's a good episode with the PM being announced on TV and wanting to be seen as authoritative and people's pal at the same time resulting in rather awkward mimic :->
Upvote
0
I'm guessing that that's probably a legal requirement related to Freedom of Information Requests etc. Not like deleting emails. He must carry a lot of CF cards though!
Rienzphotoz said:
Upvote
0
According to the video, all those photos are archived by the white house IT security in some "secure" location ... imagine having a a crappy out of focus photo of the president (or maybe of him scratching his family jewels ;D), archived in some secure location never allowed to be deleted ... wonder what they would wanna do with those photos?photogjack said:
Upvote
0
The reason for having a 1.2 lens is also because you have a larger lens with a wider diameter. This can theoretically give you sharper pics across the frame and less off axis illumination drop off as you stop it down to more sane apertures. Consider the tilt shift lenses which have superior straight on performance, because they have these big pieces of glass so in normal use you're using the best part of the glass (the center). AFAIK at least.
I wonder if he used 600-RT strobes. He probably was allowed a minute to make the shot and disrupt the oval office, so the biggest constraint would be time.
I wonder if he used 600-RT strobes. He probably was allowed a minute to make the shot and disrupt the oval office, so the biggest constraint would be time.
Upvote
0
Jesse said:
There's no reason to own a 70-200 if the only focal length in that range that you plan to use is 85mm. Fast AF and IS are not useful for this guys use case (subject is more or less stationary, and he would want to shoot at 1/60 or faster IS or not)
Upvote
0
FunPhotons said:
Well, theoretically - we'll see about that when the ~20mp Canon resolution doubles...
... but please do tell what exactly "off axis illumination drop off" is, I have an idea what "axis illumination" might be but I cannot google the whole concept :-o
Upvote
0
I was very surprised that no one commented on the composition/balance of the shot. There doesn't seem to be enough head room. I'm thinking this was probably due to not being able to backup and he had to make a quick decision to either making an unpleasant cut at the bottom of the shot or selling off his head room real estate. If this was the case he probably made the right decision, or maybe the 70-200 would have been a better choice to buy the extra headroom at 70 mm, and still have flattering compression. Who knows
Upvote
0
- Status
Similar threads
