How was this done? - Jeff Beck album cover "Wired"

raydm6

raydm6

Yay! Cameras! 🙈🙉🙊┌( ಠ_ಠ)┘ [◉"]
Local time
11:46 PM
Joined
Oct 20, 2006
Messages
3,184
Given Jeff's recent passing, the cover photo for "Wired" has been credited to Lock Huey but I cannot find any information on him other than the YouTube video below and a few references/pictures on the web. Here are his album/discography credits: https://www.discogs.com/artist/2258354-Lock-Huey

I'm curious how this was shot: specifically, how the smoky light trails were created moving to the right from Jeff's upper body area (recreated on the album title) and the direction of light trails downward (or upward with movement) from the fretboard dots.

Was Jeff moving right across the film plane (while the shutter was open for the exposure - or multiple exposures?) as the guitar swooped low to high to get those light trails?

What's interesting, is the guitar body ghosting trails doesn't exactly follow the guitar neck movement trails.

Really curious how this was created. Some airbrushing and special FX too perhaps?

iu



 
Last edited:
Ray,

My guess is use of a flash along with a long exposure, and likely some post manipulation.

I did some work back in the 70’s in art school where I “painted with light” using movement and slow exposures.

Combine that with a flash. Best to think of it almost like a double exposure.

I suspect this was ”performed” in a dimly lit room to get the black background.

Cal
 
To be honest, it looks like airbrush work to me. If it was motion trails / blur then you'd expect all the related lines to be precisely parallel, and that’s not the case with some of the ‘fret trails’ for example. There are also other highlights in the image like his finger rings that you’d also expect to have a trail.
 
d_c said:
To be honest, it looks like airbrush work to me. If it was motion trails / blur then you'd expect all the related lines to be precisely parallel, and that’s not the case with some of the ‘fret trails’ for example. There are also other highlights in the image like his finger rings that you’d also expect to have a trail.
Click to expand...
D-C

Thanks for pointing out that detail.

Perhaps maybe at least three exposures, two of them “light painting” and then a strobe or flash as the main exposure.

Your observation was keen. A good eye…

Cal
 
I always thought that this photo was a composite sandwich of 2 or more colour slide shots.
 
Calzone is pretty much on it.

In the mid 80’s I had an assignment to shoot a model in a white lab coat and clipboard to represent a physician running. It was in regard to time management for physicians for a publication called Physicians Weekly.

I shot it on Ektachrome with my SL66 using a combination of strobes and incandescent spot lights. I used a slow shutter speed and the strobes were on the leading side of the subject and incandescent on the trailing side. After the shutter opened and the strobes fired I panned the camera which left trails from his coat and clipboard in the trailing side.

I may still have a couple of the good transparencies and will hit a quick look later. I kept some of these kinds of shots and may still have it.
 
x-ray said:
Calzone is pretty much on it.

In the mid 80’s I had an assignment to shoot a model in a white lab coat and clipboard to represent a physician running. It was in regard to time management for physicians for a publication called Physicians Weekly.

I shot it on Ektachrome with my SL66 using a combination of strobes and incandescent spot lights. I used a slow shutter speed and the strobes were on the leading side of the subject and incandescent on the trailing side. After the shutter opened and the strobes fired I panned the camera which left trails from his coat and clipboard in the trailing side.

I may still have a couple of the good transparencies and will hit a quick look later. I kept some of these kinds of shots and may still have it.
Click to expand...
X-Ray,

Thanks for the validation, but you know there is some luck, some experimenting, and many possibilities.

Cal
 
BTW absolutely the finest guitar player I ever saw live and I've seen my share. As good as his records were he was so much better live.

RIP Jeff Beck.
 
Yes, so sad.

It looks like at least two separate open-shutter-constant-light exposures for the trails, one moving right to left for the body and another in sort of a U-shape for the guitar. Culminating in a second curtain sync of flash for the main image,
 
Last edited:
I've listened to this album countless times over the decades. Looking at the cover closely, I would guess that the suggested contrasting and isolated movements (along with the same treatment being applied to the typography) are the result of airbrushing.

Jeff was one of my guitar idols and like so many others I was very saddened by the news of his passing. I only got to see him once, but it was an amazing show as that was when he and Stevie Ray Vaughan co-headlined a tour. Seeing those two sharing the stage together at the end of the evening seemed like something out of a dream.
 
i wouldn't worry, thinking, about how the cover was done half a century ago...

Beck X Clapton, London, 2010 Live

Moon River


Audio is 'not too bad' with my new active
Hivi-Swans D1080 Mk IV-B
 
Last edited:
d_c said:
...If it was motion trails / blur then you'd expect all the related lines to be precisely parallel, and that’s not the case with some of the ‘fret trails’ for example...
Click to expand...
I think Calzone's and brusby's are the best suggestions so far. I don't think the different line directions mean Calzone was wrong. Beck moved his guitar while playing, with ease, so his lines and his guitar's wouldn't necessarily be parallel. Most likely they wouldn't be.
 
It's not just the varying line directions. If you look closely there are other things that stand out such as the cutaways of his Stratocaster somehow morphing in shape.
 
That is 100% retouching. No trails on his hands. His hair is fairly static. The lines across his chest make no sense. The lines trailing from his body have no correlation with the light/dark tones in his jacket. And the lines coming off his guitar were obviously freehanded.
 
It's also worth being aware that there are four other images on the back cover that are clearly from the same shoot as the front cover, all of which are what might be called 'straight' photos', i.e., no special effects. The cover would appear to be a heavily retouched image taken from this photo shoot.

116100936-2.webp
 
Last edited:
Andprayforrain said:
I think Calzone's and brusby's are the best suggestions so far. I don't think the different line directions mean Calzone was wrong. Beck moved his guitar while playing, with ease, so his lines and his guitar's wouldn't necessarily be parallel. Most likely they wouldn't be.
Click to expand...
The lines from the guitar itself, for example, would need to be parallel for it to be a photo effect, and they're not - the lines coming from the fret board on the guitar, particularly those to the right of his 'fingering' hand, have clearly been 'freehanded' with an airbrush.
 
Last edited:
d_c said:
The lines from the guitar itself, for example, would need to be parallel for it to be a photo effect, and they're not - the lines coming from the fret board on the guitar, particularly those to the right of his 'fingering' hand, have clearly been 'freehanded' with an airbrush.
Click to expand...
I would agree. It doesn't make sense the the fret dots (mother of pearl on a rosewood fingerboard?) would have that much specular characteristics over the more reflective surfaces which did not.

Cool cover anyway. Not sure if the light trails supposed to imitate a pseudo-guitar body or ethereal "wires"?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top