Wine label horizontal -- Take 2

[Mike Buckley]

This wine is already explained and displayed in this first thread. I wanted to make a completely different photo of it and the image below is the result.

I expect the image to receive three specific criticisms. Once the thread initially dies down a bit, I'll let everyone know what they are. Even so, I think of the three characteristics I have in mind as attributes intentionally designed from the outset to be included in the scene.

Setup
Sorry for the very long explanation! It is much easier to make this setup happen than to explain it. The fundamental approach is the same I always use to create a dark background that defines the edges of glass in bright tones.

The capture was made in a vertical orientation only because it's so much easier to light the bottle from behind than below and because it was impossible to perfectly place the bottle on its side without it rolling out of position. The image was rotated 90 degrees during post-processing to present the subject horizontally.

The tabletop is transparent glass. I easily eliminated its horizon during post-processing, which explains why there is no evidence of a tabletop. (If I had lit the scene from below and captured the image horizontally, there would have been no horizon to eliminate.)

The background is black foam core positioned above and below the tabletop. It was lit by a handheld flashlight fitted with a blue gel. The brightness of the blue tones was controlled by removing the light from the scene during about the last nine seconds of the 13-second exposure.

The background filled the frame no less and no more. A circular diffuser larger than the background was behind it. One half of a medium continuous-light lamp was fitted with a red gel and the other half was fitted with a blue gel. That lamp was shining from behind the diffuser and background toward the subject and camera. That part of the setup mostly defined the edges of the bottle in bright tones. It also added the purple tones to part of the background in the form of flare. That's because I intentionally didn't put a flag in front of the lens to prevent the flare, as I would usually do. (See the edit below about the change in colors discussed in this paragraph and the one that precedes it.)

A small continuous-light lamp in the right front area was fitted with a diffusion sock to reduce its brightness. It was also flagged to prevent any light from falling directly onto the bottle. That light was shining toward a white reflector on the front left side. That reflector lit the bottom half of the label to help define its shape and to emphasis the name of the winery. It also added reflections to the bottom, shoulder and neck of the bottle to add interest and to help define its shape.

I have no idea what produced the small reflection between the top of the label and the top edge of the wine bottle and couldn't intentionally reproduce it if my life depended on it. I left that reflection in the image because I like that it counterbalances the offset position of the name, "donne."

EDIT: I changed the colors during post-processing that outline the edge of the bottle and the colors in the background to be more consistent with the warm tone of the winery's name. The first image was replaced by the revised image.

[mugge]

Mike, I like the controlled purple sheen around the bottle. I think that the bottle could be turned a tad clockwise (turned from bottleneck). Looking at it critically I think you have a difficult picture to produce. Looking forward its progress.
Cheers Ole

[Mike Buckley]

the bottle could be turned a tad clockwise

Thank you! Now corrected and replaced.

[bje07]

Nice shot and thank you for your explanations.

[Mike Buckley]

I changed the colors during post-processing that outline the edge of the bottle and the colors in the background to be more consistent with the warm tone of the winery's name. The first image was replaced by the revised image.

[Wavelength]

Fine

[bnnrcn]

WOW! I really love this image Mike

[xpatUSA]

Excellent work, Mike.

I admire your patience in setting up the lighting.

[Mike Buckley]

Thank you to everyone!

I admire your patience in setting up the lighting.

Heck, that's the fun part!

I've always been humored by the notion that so many people appreciate the time and attention to detail required to set up everything in a studio, even in a makeshift studio such as mine. Yet we all too often tend to think nothing of the people who drive and/or hike long distances in extremely uncomfortable weather to get to a particular landscape or seascape scene and then patiently wait perhaps for hours or even days for just the right light to appear, knowing all the time that it's very possible that nothing remotely close to attractive light will appear.

I only have to take a few steps into my makeshift studio to make everything happen. My patience is nothing in my mind compared to the great landscape and seascape shooters. When we begin talking about the immense patience required of a great street shooter, that just boggles the mind!

[billtils]

In a way, a testament to "Less is more". V1 has much more in it that creates a narrative, but V2 is excellent and wins my vote any day. And of course, your description of the set-up shows how much more effort has to go into creating a shot like this than one where elements are added to complement the object of interest.

In the best possible way - simply superb.

[Mike Buckley]

Thanks, Bill!

Just one comment...

your description of the set-up shows how much more effort has to go into creating a shot like this than one where elements are added to complement the object of interest.

I've seen setups of scenes more like the scene in the other thread that are far more complex involving the use of mirrors, flags, reflectors, several light sources and the like. And I should repeat that the setup used to make the image in this thread sounds a lot more complex than it really is, perhaps mostly due to my inability to concisely describe it.

[Shadowman]

Nicely captured.

[Mike Buckley]

I mentioned in my first post that I expected to see criticism of three characteristics that I intentionally included in the image. Considering that nobody has mentioned any of them, it's clear that at least for now I was wrong. Even so, I'll describe the three characteristics as promised.

1. The wine label is a rectangle. Yet notice that the right end of it is smaller than the left end. That's because I captured the image in a vertical orientation when the camera was slightly above the center of the bottle. That created some perspective distortion. When I temporarily corrected the perspective distortion, I didn't like the result. That's because the bottle (as opposed to the wine label) is bigger at the shoulder than at the bottom. Correcting the distortion reduced the emphasis of the widening bottle, so I settled for a slightly distorted wine label in favor of emphasizing the bottle being wider at the shoulder than at the bottom.

2. I thought sure that some people would object to the floating style of displaying the wine bottle; there is no opaque or translucent tabletop nor an horizon implying a transparent tabletop. I compensated for that by displaying a little more color in the background underneath the bottle as a means of grounding the scene. So, maybe that worked well for everyone to my surprise rather than just me.

3. There is more color in the background beneath the bottle than above it. The reason is explained in the item discussed immediately above. Even so, I thought some people would have preferred a more balanced background and am happy to learn yet again that I was apparently wrong.

[Mike Buckley]

Thanks, John!

[billtils]

... 1. The wine label is a rectangle. Yet notice that the right end of it is smaller than the left end. That's because I captured the image in a vertical orientation when the camera was slightly above the center of the bottle. That created some perspective distortion. When I temporarily corrected the perspective distortion, I didn't like the result. That's because the bottle (as opposed to the wine label) is bigger at the shoulder than at the bottom. Correcting the distortion reduced the emphasis of the widening bottle, so I settled for a slightly distorted wine label in favor of emphasizing the bottle being wider at the shoulder than at the bottom.

I did notice that Mike, but liked the effect! Neither of the other two that you mention struck me, and now that you point them out, they, like the bottle "distortion", contribute positively to the image as far as I am concerned.

[Mike Buckley]

Thanks for explaining your reaction, Bill!