-
Tired of adverts on RWI? - Subscribe by clicking HERE and PMing Trailboss for instructions and they will magically go away!
"How to photograph watches" - part one
- Thread starter pugwash
- Start date
Informative, thanks. Lighting is key.(reposted from Tea-Are-Sea)
Introduction
We've all seem the amazing photos dealers put up (yes, we're looking at you, Neil) to hock their wares and we've seen the eyecandy specials that make us drool inexplicably over yet another Panerai even though it looks just like every other one. We've also seen technical breakdowns with sharp details that truly are worth a thousand words.
And then we've all seen the rest. The blurry good-enough-for-ebay pics where you ask yourself if they make an orange Sub or a green PO, because honestly, it could be either.
And you sheepishly realise that you took one of those pics and you posted it here and got the mickey surgically extracted for your efforts. Or, you didn't post it because you realised the scorn that would be heaped upon your person if it ever saw the light of day. If this is you, this article was written with you in mind.
Everyone wants the quality of pictures to go up here, so I've decided to help people to take better pictures of their watches to increase the average pictures on this board, one reader at a time. I don't pretend to be the best photographer here, but if nothing else, you should be able to learn to take photos at least as good as this:
We'll get back to taking this kind of pic in part two, so let's speed through the essentials before we get there.
Equipment
What do you need? Well, let's start with a digital camera. Oh, and a watch. The question always arises about which camera to get, and the answer is usually the same: It doesn't matter, as long as it's a camera. No, not a phone, a camera. That's better.
There are several kinds of cameras, but I'll keep it simple and use three groups: SLR, SLR-like and Snapshot.
SLR is the one where you look through a viewfinder and it bounces through a prism and shows you the view through the same optics that the camera uses. It's the big fancy one with changeable lenses and the high price-tag. Common models are the Canon EOS-350 and ... the others. Yes, the Canon is that popular.
SLR-Like, or Prosumer, high-end or any of the other titles is the pricey one with a big lens on the front and all the toys. It's not quite as flashy or expensive as the SLR, but it's nearly as good. Models include the Fuji Finepix S9000, the Sony DSC-R1 and the Panasonic DMC-FZ30.
Snapshot cameras are the sort everyone has. Designed for carrying around and taking the occasional pic, the lens on the front is much smaller than the SLRs and Prosumers, but hey, at least they take pictures, right? In fact, in the hands of most users, these cameras will take pictures that are just as good as their more expensive brethren. There are too many of these to mention, but we'll assume you have one.
Controversially, for the purpose of this article, I'm going to lump the SLRs and Prosumer SLR-alikes in the same group and not even discuss them yet. If you believe you can tell the difference in quality of photograph between those two, this article is not for you. We're talking to the beginners here. You'll get your turn in the comments section.
So, let's start on a snapshot camera and take a pic of a watch. No messing straight into it! I'll grab my FinePix A204 snapshot camera and snap away!
Yeah, rubbish, isn't it. What went wrong? I pointed the camera at a watch and pressed the button. The flash went off and everything!
Where do we start?
Firstly, out of focus. Reason? Not enough light for the auto-focus.
Second, boring! Reason? No background or anything interesting apart from a watch at a flat angle. If you're determined to just have a picture of a watch and nothing but a watch, you can either do a TTK and use lots of black, or you can go press shot and use white that can be photoshopped out later. Or, you can go for an interesting angle, composition or detail.
Third, the shadow is too harsh and the metal too crappy-looking. Reason? Flash. Eww, flash. Horrible things that should be avoided wherever possible unless you really know what you're doing. How this happens is, once again, not enough light. Spotting a pattern here?
Yes, light matters, especially with close-ups like this.
If you don't have enough light, get some. There's very little you can do in low light levels... or is there? In photography you can trade time for light, so we need to keep that in mind, however we need to remember that slower pictures are also blurry as your hands wobble, and we don't have a fancy tripod just yet.
So, what we need to do is cheat. Set up your camera with the flash turned off and on the best resolution possible. If you need to, you may need to turn macro mode on, but let's not do that just yet, as it's a distraction. Next, set the self-timer on the camera to ten seconds, put the camera on the surface close to the watch and make sure it looks ok in the viewfinder. Now, press the button to take the pic and stand well back. In ten seconds, it will take a picture on a slow setting due to the lack of light, but this is ok as it's solid on the desk and won't wobble.
And there you have it, one picture to crop to a nice, simple picture of your watch. Sure, it's not perfect, but it's a thousand times better than the last one.
In part two, we'll deal with ... um, more stuff like reflections and composition, but you have the basic secrets of how to take an acceptable picture with an average, cheap camera.
ps. In case anyone is wondering, the camera I took the picture of the camera with is my regular tool, the amazing Panasonic DMC-FZ20. I used the cheap-ass camera because there's nothing I hate more in articles than the writer saying "it doesn't matter what you use, but I'm going to use something much better than you have and you'll never really know if it's me or my equipment."
pps. In the Irony section, I noticed afterwards that the watch glass had a smudge on it, but because I wanted to show you the actual pic taken with the camera pictured, I decided not to take it again. Mea Culpa.
Awesome read, l take a lot of pics of my watches and alwasy try to dress the shot with other bits to make it interesting but not taking the attention of the watch. Still not an expect but have taken some pretty cool shots but still learning for sure. What’s your take on out side pics of? Better for lighting?(reposted from Tea-Are-Sea)
Introduction
We've all seem the amazing photos dealers put up (yes, we're looking at you, Neil) to hock their wares and we've seen the eyecandy specials that make us drool inexplicably over yet another Panerai even though it looks just like every other one. We've also seen technical breakdowns with sharp details that truly are worth a thousand words.
And then we've all seen the rest. The blurry good-enough-for-ebay pics where you ask yourself if they make an orange Sub or a green PO, because honestly, it could be either.
And you sheepishly realise that you took one of those pics and you posted it here and got the mickey surgically extracted for your efforts. Or, you didn't post it because you realised the scorn that would be heaped upon your person if it ever saw the light of day. If this is you, this article was written with you in mind.
Everyone wants the quality of pictures to go up here, so I've decided to help people to take better pictures of their watches to increase the average pictures on this board, one reader at a time. I don't pretend to be the best photographer here, but if nothing else, you should be able to learn to take photos at least as good as this:
We'll get back to taking this kind of pic in part two, so let's speed through the essentials before we get there.
Equipment
What do you need? Well, let's start with a digital camera. Oh, and a watch. The question always arises about which camera to get, and the answer is usually the same: It doesn't matter, as long as it's a camera. No, not a phone, a camera. That's better.
There are several kinds of cameras, but I'll keep it simple and use three groups: SLR, SLR-like and Snapshot.
SLR is the one where you look through a viewfinder and it bounces through a prism and shows you the view through the same optics that the camera uses. It's the big fancy one with changeable lenses and the high price-tag. Common models are the Canon EOS-350 and ... the others. Yes, the Canon is that popular.
SLR-Like, or Prosumer, high-end or any of the other titles is the pricey one with a big lens on the front and all the toys. It's not quite as flashy or expensive as the SLR, but it's nearly as good. Models include the Fuji Finepix S9000, the Sony DSC-R1 and the Panasonic DMC-FZ30.
Snapshot cameras are the sort everyone has. Designed for carrying around and taking the occasional pic, the lens on the front is much smaller than the SLRs and Prosumers, but hey, at least they take pictures, right? In fact, in the hands of most users, these cameras will take pictures that are just as good as their more expensive brethren. There are too many of these to mention, but we'll assume you have one.
Controversially, for the purpose of this article, I'm going to lump the SLRs and Prosumer SLR-alikes in the same group and not even discuss them yet. If you believe you can tell the difference in quality of photograph between those two, this article is not for you. We're talking to the beginners here. You'll get your turn in the comments section.
So, let's start on a snapshot camera and take a pic of a watch. No messing straight into it! I'll grab my FinePix A204 snapshot camera and snap away!
Yeah, rubbish, isn't it. What went wrong? I pointed the camera at a watch and pressed the button. The flash went off and everything!
Where do we start?
Firstly, out of focus. Reason? Not enough light for the auto-focus.
Second, boring! Reason? No background or anything interesting apart from a watch at a flat angle. If you're determined to just have a picture of a watch and nothing but a watch, you can either do a TTK and use lots of black, or you can go press shot and use white that can be photoshopped out later. Or, you can go for an interesting angle, composition or detail.
Third, the shadow is too harsh and the metal too crappy-looking. Reason? Flash. Eww, flash. Horrible things that should be avoided wherever possible unless you really know what you're doing. How this happens is, once again, not enough light. Spotting a pattern here?
Yes, light matters, especially with close-ups like this.
If you don't have enough light, get some. There's very little you can do in low light levels... or is there? In photography you can trade time for light, so we need to keep that in mind, however we need to remember that slower pictures are also blurry as your hands wobble, and we don't have a fancy tripod just yet.
So, what we need to do is cheat. Set up your camera with the flash turned off and on the best resolution possible. If you need to, you may need to turn macro mode on, but let's not do that just yet, as it's a distraction. Next, set the self-timer on the camera to ten seconds, put the camera on the surface close to the watch and make sure it looks ok in the viewfinder. Now, press the button to take the pic and stand well back. In ten seconds, it will take a picture on a slow setting due to the lack of light, but this is ok as it's solid on the desk and won't wobble.
And there you have it, one picture to crop to a nice, simple picture of your watch. Sure, it's not perfect, but it's a thousand times better than the last one.
In part two, we'll deal with ... um, more stuff like reflections and composition, but you have the basic secrets of how to take an acceptable picture with an average, cheap camera.
ps. In case anyone is wondering, the camera I took the picture of the camera with is my regular tool, the amazing Panasonic DMC-FZ20. I used the cheap-ass camera because there's nothing I hate more in articles than the writer saying "it doesn't matter what you use, but I'm going to use something much better than you have and you'll never really know if it's me or my equipment."
pps. In the Irony section, I noticed afterwards that the watch glass had a smudge on it, but because I wanted to show you the actual pic taken with the camera pictured, I decided not to take it again. Mea Culpa.
I guess i have to bust my SLR out as I just took some with my new Iphone and assumed it would be good enough. Thanks for the tips, on to part 2.
- 18/12/23
- 50
- 279
- 53
As a photographer, there are a few things to know about shooting watches. Most are BS and who cares. 
Ideally you want to have a small and somewhat controlled light source. You can buy "mini studios" on amazon or use a small diffused light. You can also only take a photo 1 time every minute to do it right. The time must be 10:10 and 30 seconds to properly show the face without obstruction to key elements. Anyway, Take a look at some I did for a client a while back and let me know what you think.
OH!!!! I forgot to mention the most important thing, you can't be in the photo. Remember that when setting up your camera. No reflection of the photographer or camera should be visible. Have fun.
I hate shooting watches.
Ideally you want to have a small and somewhat controlled light source. You can buy "mini studios" on amazon or use a small diffused light. You can also only take a photo 1 time every minute to do it right. The time must be 10:10 and 30 seconds to properly show the face without obstruction to key elements. Anyway, Take a look at some I did for a client a while back and let me know what you think.OH!!!! I forgot to mention the most important thing, you can't be in the photo. Remember that when setting up your camera. No reflection of the photographer or camera should be visible. Have fun.
I hate shooting watches.
Last edited:
- 18/12/23
- 50
- 279
- 53
That was at the clients request. He wanted the watch to be the focal point. Typically, this is how I shoot a watch. Similar lighting but with a white backdrop.
I bought one of those foldable lightbox with a led on top.
Issue is that the direct light is too strong and reflects on the crystal.
I put a sheet of paper on the led. it's a bit better but the light ring is still there.
any tips?
Issue is that the direct light is too strong and reflects on the crystal.
I put a sheet of paper on the led. it's a bit better but the light ring is still there.
any tips?
- 18/12/23
- 50
- 279
- 53
Get a piece of white plexiglass from any hardware store and create a diffuser. I know this isn't a watch but similar problem. The white LED's reflected off of the glass in the bottom of my light box making this impossible to shoot. I did the plexiglass trick and this was the end result. No glare.
Last edited:
1mm can do. Translucent, which light can go through but not the shape of the LED rail.
During my time as a photojournalist 20 years ago, I've tried worse. I used toilet paper as a diffuser and rubbed face oil onto the protection lens as softer...
this?
Made me laugh, but really good tips so thank you. I always try to get no reflection on the crystals but it's just impossible. Give up most of the time and just tilt the watch to suit.During my time as a photojournalist 20 years ago, I've tried worse. I used toilet paper as a diffuser and rubbed face oil onto the protection lens as softer...
Huge reflection from my light source here:
