Subjects in front of bright projector screens?

Messages
3,030
Name
Tim
Edit My Images
Yes
Any tips on how to capture speakers in front of bright projector screens?

It’s happened a couple of times recently with bright white screens with information that needs to be in the picture. Lighting for the speaker totally blows the screen. Lighting for the screen makes the subject very dark.

So far I’ve gone with no flash and lifted the shadows in post. This keeps the information from the screen and the results are not bad....but they are not great.

One thing I will try next time is asked someone to hold an off camera flash angled to catch (or bounce) to just catch the speakers face and not the screen if possible.

Any other ideas?
 
Any tips on how to capture speakers in front of bright projector screens?

It’s happened a couple of times recently with bright white screens with information that needs to be in the picture. Lighting for the speaker totally blows the screen. Lighting for the screen makes the subject very dark.

So far I’ve gone with no flash and lifted the shadows in post. This keeps the information from the screen and the results are not bad....but they are not great.

One thing I will try next time is asked someone to hold an off camera flash angled to catch (or bounce) to just catch the speakers face and not the screen if possible.

Any other ideas?
Yes, that's about it.
The flash must be (well) away from the camera and aimed at the speaker. The angle must be such that the speaker is lit, but any light that also hits the screen will bounce off at an angle that doesn't reflect back to the camera, because the angle of reflectance is always the same as the angle of incidence.
All that you then need to do is to balance the power of the flash and the shutter speed so that both the speaker and the subject are correctly exposed.
 
Get a camera with a better dynamic range so you can lift the shadows?
 
Get a camera with a better dynamic range so you can lift the shadows?

Have canon, 1DXM2 and 5DM4 and it’s not bad...but not great in the this situation.
 
Have canon, 1DXM2 and 5DM4 and it’s not bad...but not great in the this situation.
Maybe you need a Nikon --- argh!!! Run for cover!!!

(Canon user since 1975)
 
Maybe you need a Nikon --- argh!!! Run for cover!!!

(Canon user since 1975)

Probably correct :)

(Nikon user since 1973)
 
Haha :) I inherited a Nikon from the 1950s...used Canon digital since 2003 or so and wouldn’t fancy swapping the whole system...
 
The conferences I have done have had reasonable lighting on the podium. However this doesn't help when the speaker moves around!

With shutter speeds there can be a problem with some projectors or screen types; you get banding or colour washes.
 
Haha :) I inherited a Nikon from the 1950s...used Canon digital since 2003 or so and wouldn’t fancy swapping the whole system...
Mine was a serious suggestion, believe they (Nikon) do have better DR, maybe rent one and try and perhaps just have one body and one lens for these specific situations if you need your own kit regularly?
 
Last edited:
The conferences I have done have had reasonable lighting on the podium. However this doesn't help when the speaker moves around!

With shutter speeds there can be a problem with some projectors or screen types; you get banding or colour washes.
Not with Canons :)
OK later ones admittedly.
 
there's very little that can be done, unfortunately. Careful stage lighting with source 4s can help if it's a big stage, not that that's your responsibility...and flash distracts of course.

It's a gross scenario. A colleague will occasionally, after a hero shot of a speaker in front of a screen full of sponsor logos, hold position for a while, get a great expression from the speaker, and then bracket a darker shot, and match it carefully in photoshop - not something you can do in bulk really though

A lot of the time, the best option is to drag the highs down and the shadows up, boost the contrast, maybe even paint the screen a bit darker....
 
Last edited:
Couldn't you have a word with whoever's doing the AV to turn the screen down a bit?

In practical terms it sounds like you've got the best workaround - just push the exposure as far as you dare, bearing in mind there's at least an extra stop of highlights headroom on Raws above the blinkies threshold.

If you could do something with flash, that might have an extra benefit of improving lighting on the speaker, too. Good luck with white balance and banding etc :D
 
Didn’t think of this...would be tricky with all the movement?
I see you have a 5D mk4 I'm sure that there will be a bracket mode where you can set the number of shots to be bracketed (Three should be enough.) and if you set the drive to "C Hi", or however Cannon designate it, you should get your three bracketed shots in a fraction of a second.
Other than that, if the DR of your camera can't cope with the conditions then the only way around it is to balance the light on your subject with that on the screen.
What I would do is what you're doing now. :)
 
Bracket and blend?

Yes, that's about it.
The flash must be (well) away from the camera and aimed at the speaker. The angle must be such that the speaker is lit, but any light that also hits the screen will bounce off at an angle that doesn't reflect back to the camera, because the angle of reflectance is always the same as the angle of incidence.
All that you then need to do is to balance the power of the flash and the shutter speed so that both the speaker and the subject are correctly exposed.

there's very little that can be done, unfortunately. Careful stage lighting with source 4s can help if it's a big stage, not that that's your responsibility...and flash distracts of course.

It's a gross scenario. A colleague will occasionally, after a hero shot of a speaker in front of a screen full of sponsor logos, hold position for a while, get a great expression from the speaker, and then bracket a darker shot, and match it carefully in photoshop - not something you can do in bulk really though

A lot of the time, the best option is to drag the highs down and the shadows up, boost the contrast, maybe even paint the screen a bit darker....

Couldn't you have a word with whoever's doing the AV to turn the screen down a bit?

In practical terms it sounds like you've got the best workaround - just push the exposure as far as you dare, bearing in mind there's at least an extra stop of highlights headroom on Raws above the blinkies threshold.

If you could do something with flash, that might have an extra benefit of improving lighting on the speaker, too. Good luck with white balance and banding etc :D

I see you have a 5D mk4 I'm sure that there will be a bracket mode where you can set the number of shots to be bracketed (Three should be enough.) and if you set the drive to "C Hi", or however Cannon designate it, you should get your three bracketed shots in a fraction of a second.
Other than that, if the DR of your camera can't cope with the conditions then the only way around it is to balance the light on your subject with that on the screen.
What I would do is what you're doing now. :)

Thanks very much for all the great ideas! Next time I'm going to go an hour ahead and try OCF and bracketing.

Discussing with the AV has been a bit hit and miss. I've posted the question and has two surprises in a row. The first time all was set with a panel seated below the screen at rehearsal. By the time they are on stage speaking something has moved meaning they are all being blinded by the projector light which cutting across half their faces. By the time the problem is obvious the organizer does not want to interrupt to correct. Roll on to the next one and test the light levels with AV and get levels that are not too bad. Again by the time they are speaking something has changed and it's a lot darker. So having an OCF option or bracketing will be great. Thanks again.
 
Projector light across faces. Oh yes, what a lot of photoshop time that creates :LOL:
 
I appreciate its difficult, but maybe you need to assert more with the organisers - make it plain that if you have done official lighting tests and then some person (unaware or deliberately sabotaging things) comes along and moves stuff after, it is to the detriment of the final product.

You really need to find out who is moving stuff at the last minute and why and then get the people running the event to either put a stop to it or arrange for this person to move stuff prior to your lighting tests.

It might be worth sitting there after your tests and watching to see what is going on so you can catch someone, better time spent there than in post processing.
 
I appreciate its difficult, but maybe you need to assert more with the organisers - make it plain that if you have done official lighting tests and then some person (unaware or deliberately sabotaging things) comes along and moves stuff after, it is to the detriment of the final product.

You really need to find out who is moving stuff at the last minute and why and then get the people running the event to either put a stop to it or arrange for this person to move stuff prior to your lighting tests.

It might be worth sitting there after your tests and watching to see what is going on so you can catch someone, better time spent there than in post processing.

Very good point. Each time I’d moved away to get the shots of people arriving. Something else I could do is have a clear agreement with organizers what to do in case of a problem in future. At the end of day if the photos are crap it’s down to me.
 
Very good point. Each time I’d moved away to get the shots of people arriving. Something else I could do is have a clear agreement with organizers what to do in case of a problem in future. At the end of day if the photos are crap it’s down to me.

Well actually I disagree its all down to you. Many wedding photographers for example have clauses in their contracts that basically say they will do the best they can, but cannot be held responsible if other people intentionally take actions that hinder producing good images. I imagine lots of other photographers have similar clauses.

If you have done your final official lighting test and people at your venue are aware of that, it becomes a deliberate hindrance to the quality of the photos if they then change the scenario, especially if they have not appraised you of such change. So I would get something like that put in your contract to cover yourself if stuff like this happens again.

I would also make it part of the deal that you have a Official Final Lighting Test and this is acknowledged and understood by the whole event team.

I mean this in the most sympathetic and kind way, but the weakness here is you not laying down and communicating a firm line and that IS what you are responsible for. You are letting yourself be undermined and then taking the blame for it yourself!

Be clear to them, state clearly, that the quality of the images is also in their court, not just yours. Remember they are damaging your reputation, if they undermine your image taking by changing the set up at the last minute. They may also end up telling other people your images are poor (however hard you have tried to correct the lighting/projector issues) and they might employ someone else next time, if you keep accepting all of the blame for this problem shoot.

You need to up your communication and the event organisers need to improve their own communication with the venue and their staff. Unless you stand your ground politely but firmly, they are not going to bother sorting this out, but will whine about the results when it is too late.
 
Last edited:
Well actually I disagree its all down to you. Many wedding photographers for example have clauses in their contracts that basically say they will do the best they can, but cannot be held responsible if other people intentionally take actions that hinder producing good images. I imagine lots of other photographers have similar clauses.

If you have done your final official lighting test and people at your venue are aware of that, it becomes a deliberate hindrance to the quality of the photos if they then change the scenario, especially if they have not appraised you of such change. So I would get something like that put in your contract to cover yourself if stuff like this happens again.

I would also make it part of the deal that you have a Official Final Lighting Test and this is acknowledged and understood by the whole event team.

I mean this in the most sympathetic and kind way, but the weakness here is you not laying down and communicating a firm line and that IS what you are responsible for. You are letting yourself be undermined and then taking the blame for it yourself!

Be clear to them, state clearly, that the quality of the images is also in their court, not just yours. Remember they are damaging your reputation, if they undermine your image taking by changing the set up at the last minute. They may also end up telling other people your images are poor (however hard you have tried to correct the lighting/projector issues) and they might employ someone else next time, if you keep accepting all of the blame for this problem shoot.

You need to up your communication and the event organisers need to improve their own communication with the venue and their staff. Unless you stand your ground politely but firmly, they are not going to bother sorting this out, but will whine about the results when it is too late.

Thank you again - very good advice.
 
Well actually I disagree its all down to you. Many wedding photographers for example have clauses in their contracts that basically say they will do the best they can, but cannot be held responsible if other people intentionally take actions that hinder producing good images. I imagine lots of other photographers have similar clauses.

If you have done your final official lighting test and people at your venue are aware of that, it becomes a deliberate hindrance to the quality of the photos if they then change the scenario, especially if they have not appraised you of such change. So I would get something like that put in your contract to cover yourself if stuff like this happens again.

I would also make it part of the deal that you have a Official Final Lighting Test and this is acknowledged and understood by the whole event team.

I mean this in the most sympathetic and kind way, but the weakness here is you not laying down and communicating a firm line and that IS what you are responsible for. You are letting yourself be undermined and then taking the blame for it yourself!

Be clear to them, state clearly, that the quality of the images is also in their court, not just yours. Remember they are damaging your reputation, if they undermine your image taking by changing the set up at the last minute. They may also end up telling other people your images are poor (however hard you have tried to correct the lighting/projector issues) and they might employ someone else next time, if you keep accepting all of the blame for this problem shoot.

You need to up your communication and the event organisers need to improve their own communication with the venue and their staff. Unless you stand your ground politely but firmly, they are not going to bother sorting this out, but will whine about the results when it is too late.
I agree with this, generally at least - but
The simple fact of the matter is that things will and do go wrong.
This can be down to the organisers messing up, or to a speaker looking in the wrong direction, or to equipment failure or just pure bad luck.

The organisers do have some responsibility, and generally they will try to be reasonable, but as photographers we need to accept that the event isn't about the photography and so our needs are pretty well down the list of priorities, therefore they will sometimes mess it up due to lack of attention, poor internal briefing, lack of understanding or whatever.

Therefore, although you will not be totally responsible for the quality of the finished result, part of it is your responsibility, and because of this you need to have strategies in place for when things go wrong. This can be as simple as bracking exposures, making use of shadows/highlights in PS, and being competent with the use of flash. Personally, I would place my reliance on flash. I don't accept that it's overly distracting, simply because the flash will be fired at a very low power level, at which the flash durations are incredibly short, so almost invisible..
 
Hope its obvious, but I was referring to them making physical changes to the setup after the lighting tests and not letting you know.

Anyway, good luck with it. :)
 
Hope its obvious, but I was referring to them making physical changes to the setup after the lighting tests and not letting you know.

Anyway, good luck with it. :)
Yes, I did see that. and I agree with you. My point though is that a pro photographer will have a strategy in place for when things go wrong, for whatever reason, to ensure that the results are still OK
 
Despite the hiccups everyone has been happy with the results...it’s mainly me, I know they could be better and thanks I now have a some better contingency plans for the next one.
 
Sneak your own ND filter over the projector lens. :naughty:

Seriously, I agree with MidnightUK. I'd talk nicely but firmly with organisers about the importance of coordinating and maintaining conditions. Surely they want to convey professionalism, which includes images documenting these events.

The main angle I'd explore, already mentioned, is discussing options for increased lighting on the speaker. I've found lighting staff tremendously helpful and flexible, at least on the scale I've encountered, where a single person is managing lighting. If flash is really the only solution then maybe the shots could be arranged for one end or the other of the presentation? I'd be surprised if the existing lighting couldn't just be evened up though.

Finally, the 5DMk4 is a superb camera, with high ISO / low light performance to match or beat most models from any manufacturer. From the sound of it, an extra stop of DR isn't going to rescue this situation.
 
Last edited:
Yes, that's about it.
The flash must be (well) away from the camera and aimed at the speaker. The angle must be such that the speaker is lit, but any light that also hits the screen will bounce off at an angle that doesn't reflect back to the camera, because the angle of reflectance is always the same as the angle of incidence.
All that you then need to do is to balance the power of the flash and the shutter speed so that both the speaker and the subject are correctly exposed.

I use both methods during most events - mostly on-camera flash bounced off the ceiling if it's suitable. If the venue allows, and I know where they'll be standing most of the time: a couple of speed-lights on sticks bounced off the ceiling near those positions, or with small soft-boxes aimed directly at them. In these examples, the first image is a 32 bit raw made from 2 bracketed exposures 3 stops apart and mixed in Lightroom. I only use this method for the more posed shots like this, and the third example shows the same technique but with just one exposure. Blending the data from 2 raw files gives enormous range for adjusting the shadows and highlights. However - just having enormous dynamic image won't do anything for the *quality* of the light - only the quantity (ie the balance between screen and light on subject). Here it was pretty good, with 6 Fresnel focused warm LED spots aimed at the group from ceiling mounted light rails at the ends of the auditorium. Even so, their faces look a bit flat.

The second image is taken with the on camera flash, bounced up into the ceiling (so the light source - ie where the subject sees the light coming from, is away from the camera).. I keep a BFT* on the flash to stop any light from travelling directly forwards. Now I have a large soft light source directly over head and in front of them - and not only is there now more light on them, but the direction and shadow quality has changed too. It's also a cooler temp, but in this case I didn't bother correcting that as the flash lit the visible environment as well. And the key bit that Garry mentioned: those screens are near perfect mirrors, and the ceiling is not visible as a reflection in them, so I knew my ball of light would not show up in the screens. I would have maybe liked to shoot from a lower position, but then the ceiling *would* start to show up, reflected in the screens. The flash has reduced the contrast a bit on the screens, as it bounces about the scene - and therefore hits the screens at various angles, but it's still clear. Projector screens are more of a matt affair designed to bounce the light off in many directions, so you will probably get a larger reduction in contrast, however I don't think I would change my approach, although if they were in front of a projected image, the image would also be all over them, so that isn't a scenario that happens tbh - I would expect the presenters to be off to the side of projected image where you have the option of adding a controlled light. You can control it by increasing the ratio of distance between light-->subject and light--background (just as you would in the studio to make the background darker), and flagging it off unwanted areas.

_OHL6191-Edit-Website.jpg

_OHL6186-Edit-Website.jpg

_OHL6280-Website.jpg

*BFT - Black Foamie Thing https://neilvn.com/tangents/about/black-foamie-thing/
 
Last edited:
I use both methods during most events - mostly on-camera flash bounced off the ceiling if it's suitable. If the venue allows, and I know where they'll be standing most of the time: a couple of speed-lights on sticks bounced off the ceiling near those positions, or with small soft-boxes aimed directly at them. In these examples, the first image is a 32 bit raw made from 2 bracketed exposures 3 stops apart and mixed in Lightroom. I only use this method for the more posed shots like this, and the third example shows the same technique but with just one exposure. Blending the data from 2 raw files gives enormous range for adjusting the shadows and highlights. However - just having enormous dynamic image won't do anything for the *quality* of the light - only the quantity (ie the balance between screen and light on subject). Here it was pretty good, with 6 Fresnel focused warm LED spots aimed at the group from ceiling mounted light rails at the ends of the auditorium. Even so, their faces look a bit flat.

The second image is taken with the on camera flash, bounced up into the ceiling (so the light source - ie where the subject sees the light coming from, is away from the camera).. I keep a BFT* on the flash to stop any light from travelling directly forwards. Now I have a large soft light source directly over head and in front of them - and not only is there now more light on them, but the direction and shadow quality has changed too. It's also a cooler temp, but in this case I didn't bother correcting that as the flash lit the visible environment as well. And the key bit that Garry mentioned: those screens are near perfect mirrors, and the ceiling is not visible as a reflection in them, so I knew my ball of light would not show up in the screens. I would have maybe liked to shoot from a lower position, but then the ceiling *would* start to show up, reflected in the screens. The flash has reduced the contrast a bit on the screens, as it bounces about the scene - and therefore hits the screens at various angles, but it's still clear. Projector screens are more of a matt affair designed to bounce the light off in many directions, so you will probably get a larger reduction in contrast, however I don't think I would change my approach, although if they were in front of a projected image, the image would also be all over them, so that isn't a scenario that happens tbh - I would expect the presenters to be off to the side of projected image where you have the option of adding a controlled light. You can control it by increasing the ratio of distance between light-->subject and light--background (just as you would in the studio to make the background darker), and flagging it off unwanted areas.

View attachment 118675

View attachment 118674

View attachment 118676

*BFT - Black Foamie Thing https://neilvn.com/tangents/about/black-foamie-thing/

Thank you, very helpful
 
Back
Top