How'd he do that? #1

Mike McCarty · 02-25-2005, 03:48 PM

I thought it might be instructive to examine this remarkable photograph. This photograph of the "Beatles pillow fight" was taken by the legendary Harry Benson in 1964 at the hotel King George V in Paris.

Aside from these obvious and remarkable circumstances, I'm struck by the technical difficulty that this scene presents. There is a great deal of of movement which seems to have been sufficiently stopped. It shows an adequate depth of field, which the position of the subjects would require, and yet there doesn't seem to be a frontal flash.

There could, however, have been a good window / balcony door light source coming from behind and to the right of the camera, but still this seems remarkable to me that the motion was stopped.

Maybe you could answer the question:

How'd he do that?

Allan Rahbek · 02-25-2005, 04:19 PM

Hi Mike,

The photographer must have used a fast film. He apparently used a large soft-box or a big umbrella and flashlight, judging from the soft transitions from light to shade. A direct flash would have left sharp edges in these transitions.
He used artificial light for sure, positioned left and high. A window light would not be enough.

Allan

David Draime · 02-25-2005, 04:25 PM

Can't answer your question, but I did stumble across a Harry Benson exhibit in some gallery in Santa Fe last year. What a treat!!! So many great Beatles images - being the diehard Beatle fan I am ( as a kid, I wanted to be a Beatle when I grew up - then, a few years ago, when I finally accepted that that wasn't going to happen, I thought I'd try to be a good portrait artist) - I was in heaven. I wanted to buy one - they were for sale, signed & #'d - but I didn't have ten thousand dollars in my pocket.

Sigh...

Garth Herrick · 02-25-2005, 04:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Allan Rahbek

Hi Mike,

The photographer must have used a fast film. He apparently used a large soft-box or a big umbrella and flashlight, judging from the soft transitions from light to shade. A direct flash would have left sharp edges in these transitions.
He used artificial light for sure, positioned left and high. A window light would not be enough.

Allan

Wow! How fast could film have been anyway, in 1964!?!

Was Kodak Tri-X (iso 400) already in use? This photo does not look grainy.

Perhaps a huge flash output was bounced off the wall behind the camera.

I got my first camera, a Kodak Brownie, when I turned seven the following year.

Garth

Mike McCarty · 02-25-2005, 04:47 PM

Allan, Garth,

I agree that there must have been some artificial light set up going on high left.

Who knows what kind of camera equipment was used. If it was a 35mm I would guess that 400 ASA film would have been available, but my memory is that the faster speeds -- 800, 1600, and above, were brought out much later.

He could also have "pushed" the 400 to 6-800.

David,

I too will admit to being a Beatles fan. I was late for work one night because I stayed in my car in the parking lot to finish listening to "Come Together" for the first time. How could I leave? Regardless of the consequences.

Harry Benson was huge. He was there to photograph JFK moments after he was shot. He then photographed his brother Bobby as he lay on that kitchen floor dying. He took the infamous photo of Richard Nixon as he gave the double peace sign from the helicopter. He was always present when history was taking place. Like this remarkable image of the M. L. King family just after his death.