ART my first off camera lit "studio" attempt

mikeskillz

New Member
Jun 30, 2006
5,746
the equipment isnt hard to use but jeez posing the model is. it took a lot of practice to develop some terms to tell her exactly how to adjust her body to get what i wanted. pretty challenging.

softbox on the right (her left), umbrella on the left (her right), light catch light/fill-flash on the camera as well. 5D and 24-70/70-200

let me know what you think. i appreciate "negative" remarks as well.

#1
britmodel1t.jpg


#2
britmodel2t.jpg


#3
britmodel3t.jpg


#4
britmodel4t.jpg


#5
britmodel5t.jpg


#6
britmodel6t.jpg


(my roommates came into the garage to see what i was doing)
jacobthomast.jpg
 

Jbrown

Well-Known Member
Jun 15, 2006
44,435
Dallas
Some of them look kinda weird. PP some of her acne/moles out maybe. My shots looks sharper and all I have is a Rebel Xt/ 50 1.8 :dunno: # 4 could use some more light on the left side of her face. Maybe don't use the on-cam flash?


Pretty good for first attempt.
 
TS
TS
mikeskillz

mikeskillz

New Member
Jun 30, 2006
5,746
Some of them look kinda weird. PP some of her acne/moles out maybe. My shots looks sharper and all I have is a Rebel Xt/ 50 1.8 :dunno: # 4 could use some more light on the left side of her face. Maybe don't use the on-cam flash?


Pretty good for first attempt.

thanks for the feedback. weird how?
 

Jbrown

Well-Known Member
Jun 15, 2006
44,435
Dallas
thanks for the feedback. weird how?
Hmm I guess weird isn't the best word. Like number 1 could be really good, but it's just lacking something. Maybe a tighter crop, or some sharpening.


Did you build the seamless set yourself? Looks nice :coolugh:
 
TS
TS
mikeskillz

mikeskillz

New Member
Jun 30, 2006
5,746
Hmm I guess weird isn't the best word. Like number 1 could be really good, but it's just lacking something. Maybe a tighter crop, or some sharpening.


Did you build the seamless set yourself? Looks nice :coolugh:

its leftover material from a projector screen i built. sections of it are wrinkled permanently. :hsugh:
 

NOR*CAL

Well-Known Member
Oct 5, 2006
19,297
Hella
For a first timer, well done.

1. I don't like the neck shadow, otherwise pretty well lit.
2. Needs more fill camera left
3. Face still needs to lit better
4. Needs more light camera left
5. Nice, needs a bit more dept. You may need to stop down a bit, and increase flash output. This is a good shot, I suggest working around this light setup.
6. Tell her not to do that on camera, it's not pleasing.
7. Looks good, I like it.

My learning curve for seamless is a on a good incline, thanks to OTAP.

I'd post pics, but I've been having problems with people posting my pics in main.
 

jared_IRL

OT Supporter
Feb 12, 2006
21,171
The lights are too far away from the subject, giving everything a muddy look.

The majority of the picture should not be the in the same general brightness range.

You can tell that you had the light pretty far away, but cranked up to a very high power in order to light the shot.

This makes the light look harsh where it hits her directly, then fall of VERY quickly, causing her skin tone to look kind of muddy and unflattering...

If you bring the light a lot closer, and back off of the flash power, you'll get a MUCH more pleasing look.
 

adamlewis88

New Member
Dec 2, 2007
5,365
San Francisco, CA
The lights are too far away from the subject, giving everything a muddy look.

The majority of the picture should not be the in the same general brightness range.

You can tell that you had the light pretty far away, but cranked up to a very high power in order to light the shot.

This makes the light look harsh where it hits her directly, then fall of VERY quickly, causing her skin tone to look kind of muddy and unflattering...

If you bring the light a lot closer, and back off of the flash power, you'll get a MUCH more pleasing look.

Thats some really good information.
So getting the light closer with less power will give better results?
 

NOR*CAL

Well-Known Member
Oct 5, 2006
19,297
Hella
Thats some really good information.
So getting the light closer with less power will give better results?

The larger the light source relative to subject size will determine how harsh/soft your shadows are. The further away your light source, regardless of how large will become specular or harsh.

Having a large light source up close will result in nice soft shadows.

Setup a softbox and crank up the power to 1/1 8' away. Now set up that softbox up close and set it 1/4 power, and you'll get very soft shadows, and about the same amount of light falling on the subject. It's NOT always about how much power you can crank out.
 
Last edited:

jared_IRL

OT Supporter
Feb 12, 2006
21,171
Thats some really good information.
So getting the light closer with less power will give better results?

Yeah. Light falloff multiplies over distance. If the lightsource is 1 ft away, you can only move the light 6 inches or so before you significantly alter the f-stop the light hits at. But at 10ft away, you can move it 2+ feet closer or further and you'd never no the difference.

So by getting the light closer, you set the F-stop of your light where you want, and the quick fall off gives you some really nice shadows on the rest of the subject.

Also, getting the light closer increases the 'apparent size' of your light, which makes the light appear softer and gives more wrap around. This really helps to eliminate shiny spots on peoples faces that make them look oily...
 

adamlewis88

New Member
Dec 2, 2007
5,365
San Francisco, CA
The larger the light source relative to subject size will determine how harsh/soft your shadows are. The further away your light source, regardless of how large will become specular or harsh.

Having a large light source up close will result in nice soft shadows.

Setup a softbox and crank up the power to 1/1 8' away. Now set up that softbox up close and set it 1/4 power, and you'll get very soft shadows, and about the same amount of light falling on the subject. It's always about how much power you can crank out.

Learn something new every day
 

NOR*CAL

Well-Known Member
Oct 5, 2006
19,297
Hella
Yeah. Light falloff multiplies over distance. If the lightsource is 1 ft away, you can only move the light 6 inches or so before you significantly alter the f-stop the light hits at. But at 10ft away, you can move it 2+ feet closer or further and you'd never no the difference.

So by getting the light closer, you set the F-stop of your light where you want, and the quick fall off gives you some really nice shadows on the rest of the subject.

Also, getting the light closer increases the 'apparent size' of your light, which makes the light appear softer and gives more wrap around. This really helps to eliminate shiny spots on peoples faces that make them look oily...

This pretty much defines the inverse square law.

These are F-stops(duh!), but the F-stops also represent feet and light fall off.

2, 2.8, 4, 5.6, 8, 11, 16, 22


If you were to carry a incident light meter and point the meter directly at the light source, and calculate the distance in which it would take for it to lose a stop, you'd be counting back feet in f-stops.

Once you start to reach 11 feet from the subject distance, it'll take 3' to lose a stop, and another 5 to lose another stop from that. Whereas if you're at 2' it only takes .8 to 2.8 to drop a stop when you're up close.

Light falls off fast, when the source is up close, but it takes longer to fall off, once you reach about 5.6' away or so. So what this means is, if you're trying to light up a group of people, and don't want some crazy shadows, you'll want to bring the light source at about 11', and crank up the power.

I hope this makes sense.
 

adamlewis88

New Member
Dec 2, 2007
5,365
San Francisco, CA
Sorry, it's "NOT always about how much power you can crank out", it's about how big you can get your light source. In relation, larger softbox, generally means you need more power.

So given the same distance; More power from a larger softbox will yield softer shadows than less power from a smaller softbox?
 

NOR*CAL

Well-Known Member
Oct 5, 2006
19,297
Hella
So given the same distance; More power from a larger softbox will yield softer shadows than less power from a smaller softbox?

Sorry, if I'm confusing you.

The size of the softbox you use is determined by the subject, and the look you're going for.

I think I'm throwing you off because I'm mixing in power with size. Basically a 40" soft box needs more power than a 24" softbox to be equally lit. Like how you'd need more power to light up a 40' room to be the same brightness as a 24' room.

For a 40" softbox to throw out the same amount of power coming out of a 24" softbox, it'll take more power. IE if you use a 580ex and set it to 1/2 power in a 24" softbox, you'll get more light coming out of it, than if you were to put the same 580ex inside a 40" softbox, and set it to 1/2 power. That's what I meant by more power.
 

Jbrown

Well-Known Member
Jun 15, 2006
44,435
Dallas
I'd post pics, but I've been having problems with people posting my pics in main.

Yeah I saw one last night, but I couldn't remember who took it. I was lookign thru all the threads, but I'm guessing you deleted it.
 
TS
TS
mikeskillz

mikeskillz

New Member
Jun 30, 2006
5,746
thanks for all the input. im going to try it again with another subject in the near future.
 

adamlewis88

New Member
Dec 2, 2007
5,365
San Francisco, CA
Sorry, if I'm confusing you.

The size of the softbox you use is determined by the subject, and the look you're going for.

I think I'm throwing you off because I'm mixing in power with size. Basically a 40" soft box needs more power than a 24" softbox to be equally lit. Like how you'd need more power to light up a 40' room to be the same brightness as a 24' room.

For a 40" softbox to throw out the same amount of power coming out of a 24" softbox, it'll take more power. IE if you use a 580ex and set it to 1/2 power in a 24" softbox, you'll get more light coming out of it, than if you were to put the same 580ex inside a 40" softbox, and set it to 1/2 power. That's what I meant by more power.

Rawr. I see now. I misread what you had said :hs:
 

Users who are viewing this thread

About Us

  • Please do not post anything that violates any Local, State, Federal or International Laws. Your privacy is protected. You have the right to be forgotten. Site funded by advertising, link monetization and member support.
OT v15.8.1 Copyright © 2000-2022 Offtopic.com
Served by fu.offtopic.com

Online statistics

Members online
454
Guests online
88
Total visitors
542

Forum statistics

Threads
369,431
Messages
16,883,255
Members
86,873
Latest member
vitalesan