How to Shoot Fashion in a Small Studio
When preparing to embark on a fashion shoot, it is important to know what kind of environment and shooting space you will be working with. For the sake of clarity, I will commence with a classic fashion shoot in a moderately sized studio.
Location and studio fashion shoots require very different approaches to the choosing of your focal length. In both cases, however, it is important to be sufficiently prepared for all of the possible permutations that you may consider during the shoot.
Keep in mind that, when shooting in studio, you are often limited by the size of the workspace, the width of the background and the distance from the subject. If you are in a small space using the standard back drop, you may find that you are compromising between the distance of the model from the background and the focal length required to get the entire subject in to the frame.
This makes for some expected constraints, but there are problems that, being less obvious, may only present themselves once you actually begin shooting. For example, say you are thinking of back drop lighting as well as back lighting the model. The compromise between the focal length and getting the coverage required within the width and height of the backdrop may be problematic.
If you are in a position to work in a large space, these limitations will be pretty well eliminated, except for the width of the backdrop. If you have the luxury to work with a full “Cyclo” studio, where you can paint the backdrop, then the possibilities become pretty well limitless. In the most positive of conditions, where space is not a limitation, the choice of focal length will have more to do with effect than necessity. Your only limitation will be the height of the studio. Ideally you will have a studio 18-20 feet high. This will allow you to sit on the floor and shoot up into the subject if desired, without having to Photoshop in the backdrop above the models head.
When shooting in a smaller studio using the standard backdrop and working within a distance of around 12 to 20 feet from the subject, I find that a 40-50mm APS, or between approximately 50-80mm in Full Frame format, to work very well for full silhouettes of a 178-180cm 5′-9″-5′-11″. You will find that the model will be around 6 to 10 feet in front of the back drop, allowing you to light the background. This is usually what I find works when attempting to get the model and the backdrop in to the frame without having to Photoshop in the background texture. Thus, a minimum of 25 feet in length is the minimum for a classic studio set up, for me at least. More is always better of course. You will need at least 15 feet in width to be able to set up side lights and back lights.
In the classic fashion shoot studio situation, one can get away with just three focal lengths from 24 through 35 to 50mm in APS format, or 36-75mm. Thus a good zoom might do the trick, like a Sigma 24-70 or any other brand with a constant aperture between 24-70mm. In some cases, some of the better kit lenses (18-55mm) can work quite well if stopped down to optimum aperture.
I also suggest that the backdrop go up in height to a minimum of 9 feet. Ideally 12 feet would be better.
Note: There are a number of online calculators that can help you with these calculations. The Dimensional Field of View Calculator “computes the field of view, measured in feet or meters, for a lens of a specified focal length on a 35mm camera.”
This article is republished from Benjamin Kanarek’s blog: Which Lens and Shooting Space are Required for a Fashion & Beauty Shoot?
Benjamin Kanarek
Benjamin Kanarek is an international fashion and beauty photographer. Ben is currently based in Paris, where he shoots for several of the International Editions of Harper's BAZAAR and VOGUE Magazines, and L’Officiel Paris etc. View more of his work at BenjaminKanarek.com and BenjaminKanarekBlog.com.
Follow Me:
April 10, 2017 at 10:38 am, Kala said:
And if you think minimum distance from Backdrop to model is 6 feet and minimum distance from model to camera is 12 feet, your minimum studio depth would be 18′, not 25′.
But a lighted background doesn’t need the model that far away from it. You want your model farther away from unlit backdrops so light doesn’t fall onto it, especially black backdrops. With lit backgrounds that isn’t really a consideration, so you can go as close to the Backdrop aa you can without casting shadows, which could be just 2 or 3 feet.
Using a 50mm lens, you can fit a whole silhouette of a model into view at around 6′ away. Your image width above is only around 4′ wide, you don’t need additional room for Backdrop lighting beyond primary lighting. Your primary lighting can be set just outside of the 4′ view. Thus, minimum dimensions for a shot like that one above would actually be more like W=7-8′, H=7-8′ D=9-10′
April 07, 2017 at 7:15 am, Kala said:
There’s absolutely nothing wrong with photoshopping the background. You’ll be photoshopping everything anyway, background included. I can’t think of a situation where a non-photoshopped background would be preferable to a background that’s had some sort of post processing done to it.
Your dimensions for the smallest studio being 25 feet wide are a bit dramatic. You’re not actually talking about small space studios, but your own idea for a studio that doesn’t have 20′ high walls. Did you just measure your basement?
Your studio size can be anything that fits your model and lighting /reflector equipment. And photoshop is king, stop pretending like you’re above it, you’re not. It does a better job than lightroom anyway. And unless you have 200 different backgrounds requiring an additional 25′ of storage space, photoshop is the only way to go.
Stop showing off your basement.
May 18, 2012 at 10:23 pm, Jtousey said:
I’m with Kgphoto on this. Sometimes the information needs to be stated and stated for people to really take notice. The only thing i would ask, if you are shooting 80mm on full frame while would you need that much space?? 25′ is huge in my opinion and 15′ from subject to lens is good for about 135mm on full frame.
March 15, 2012 at 10:32 pm, impbox said:
metric system (even in parenthesis) please =)
March 15, 2012 at 2:37 pm, Kgphoto said:
I don’t care if this is a recycled post. It has good information in it. Thank you for sharing.
March 15, 2012 at 1:46 pm, John Exposure said:
Not very serious… Real fashion photographers don’t shoot with APS or Sigma lenses… They work with Hasselblad, Phase one etc. If not, it’s a joke.
March 15, 2012 at 6:00 pm, Benjamin Kanarek said:
Where do you get your information??? I know a lot of Professionals who shoot with Canon, Nikon, Sony, Pentax etc. that are either full frame or APSC format camera’s. I just shot a Harper’s BAZAAR cover with a Pentax K5 and K20 camera’s. I have been doing this for 30 years and have shot for everything from ELLE to VOGUE and from Harper’s BAZAAR to L’Officiel. Terry Richardson has shot with Canon compact digital camera’s and has been published in BAZAAR & VOGUE with those images. What ever works, WORKS!
http://www.benjaminkanarekblog.com/about/
April 12, 2012 at 11:53 pm, TheCulinaryPoet2011 said:
Bruh that’s really telling it how it is. Photography requires more creativity then it does a particular type of lense. wise words benjamin, wise words.
March 15, 2012 at 9:37 pm, Marc Adrian said:
Real fashion photographers aren’t defined by the camera system they use but instead by their creativity, vision & most importantly the resulting images they produce… a camera is merely a tool, in itself its meaningless unless you know how to wield it.
Benjamin has been shooting fashion editorial work for multiple editions of VOGUE, Bazaar etc for years… I doubt very much that just because he doesn’t shoot with a Hasselblad or Phase he would be considered a joke! LOL
Equipment snobbery always makes me smile… sure I shoot with a Hasselblad but its purely the tool I choose… next month I may change to something else if it gets the job done they way i need it doing… & if that means a Pentax camera & Sigma lens I’ll use it 😉
May 03, 2012 at 1:00 am, Andymartinphoto said:
AMAZING WORK MARC
March 16, 2012 at 4:17 pm, Rjmarsh01 said:
So, John where is your contribution? such a wise ass..
January 09, 2013 at 1:02 pm, Keith said:
I don’t just smile when it comes to equipment snobbery but laugh out loud. I have worked with many fashion photographers who shoot canon and many who shoot Hasselblad and at the end of the shoot it’s the photos that count. You aren’t a real photographer because you have a Hasselblad, you’re a guy with a Hasselblad.
John Exposure, if you look at a photo in, say, Vogue Magazine, can you tell what camera was used?
Oh and can you post a link with some of your work?
March 15, 2012 at 7:42 am, Mullslucalamma said:
24-to will be great, orelse 50mm fix also will do
May 03, 2012 at 11:00 am, Manvolta said:
Getting stuck in that fixed 50 without being able to zoom in or out can be very frustrating. Great for portraits but not when you need different photos of full body to head shot.
March 14, 2012 at 11:51 pm, Google said:
Another recycled blog entry fro 2008. How about something original?
March 14, 2012 at 7:56 pm, Julian Wilde said:
Excellent info for people getting into the biz. -JULIAN
March 14, 2012 at 5:23 pm, Hollywood3DPhotos said:
I have a small studio with 9′ high ceilings. This is an issue with fashion model since the client wants an upward view with the camera at about 30″. I just have to watch when the model puts her hands above her head.
March 14, 2012 at 5:01 pm, Julia said:
Thank you for your post. This really helps. I’ve a very small studio and struggle with fashion shoots all the time.