First shots with the 'studio' setup

Good first attempt, but it’s difficult judging lighting without knowing what you were trying to do. I too like the last one.

For my ‘style’, if I was photographing a lady of a similar age, I’d be softening the light source, so if I only had a 60x90 softbox I’d want it to be a bit closer*. Also more fill either from another light or a reflector.

The key fact is that a ‘larger’ light source is softer, but the size is effected by distance, the actual description should be ‘relative size’, the sun is massive, but it’s so far away it can be a point light source.

* I often state that if the softbox isn’t difficult to shoot around, it’s not close enough.
 
I quite like the last three... I think the lighting is best/most flattering in the second image (nose towards the light). The last two are more about her personality coming through, which can be a very hard thing to accomplish. If you were going for the Rembrandt look, then I think you accomplished that in the other three... but single light Rembrandt from dark frame is going to tend to look like a Rembrandt painting (i.e. non-flattering).

When photographing people I would seldom start with such a dark ambient exposure unless I was going for something very dramatic... using a brighter ambient exposure drops your ratio; requires less power and less fill. I would also tend towards a less square pose and short lighting as opposed to side lighting/broad lighting as you mostly have here.

I don't really see any editing to critique really. But I would probably do something more like this with the last image; centered the dominant/prominent eye rather than her head, cropped into crown and a bit tighter overall, a little dodge/burn.

Untitled-1.jpg
 
Phil V said:
Good first attempt, but it’s difficult judging lighting without knowing what you were trying to do. I too like the last one.

For my ‘style’, if I was photographing a lady of a similar age, I’d be softening the light source, so if I only had a 60x90 softbox I’d want it to be a bit closer*. Also more fill either from another light or a reflector.

The key fact is that a ‘larger’ light source is softer, but the size is effected by distance, the actual description should be ‘relative size’, the sun is massive, but it’s so far away it can be a point light source.

* I often state that if the softbox isn’t difficult to shoot around, it’s not close enough.
Click to expand...
Thanks for your comments. I didn’t really have a goal in mind - more experimenting. I have a project in mind photographing older men who have spent their lives outdoors, bringing out the character in their faces, lines-and-all. So I guess I was playing around with less flattering, more dramatic light.

I tried using my speed light as a kicker but didn’t get much luck.
 
sk66 said:
I quite like the last three... I think the lighting is best/most flattering in the second image (nose towards the light). The last two are more about her personality coming through, which can be a very hard thing to accomplish. If you were going for the Rembrandt look, then I think you accomplished that in the other three... but single light Rembrandt from dark frame is going to tend to look like a Rembrandt painting (i.e. non-flattering).

When photographing people I would seldom start with such a dark ambient exposure unless I was going for something very dramatic... using a brighter ambient exposure drops your ratio; requires less power and less fill. I would also tend towards a less square pose and short lighting as opposed to side lighting/broad lighting as you mostly have here.

I don't really see any editing to critique really. But I would probably do something more like this with the last image; centered the dominant/prominent eye rather than her head, cropped into crown and a bit tighter overall, a little dodge/burn.

View attachment 368687
Click to expand...
I had ‘Rembrandt’ and ‘dramatic’ in mind so
I’m glad they came across, even if they were the most appropriate for the subject! Maybe I could have positioned her with a white wall camera-right to provide some fill. I will have a play around with increasing the ambient exposure.

I was having to stop down the aperture to get the right exposure (I was at lowest flash power, and base ISO). How would I achieve a wider aperture in this scenario without the flash blowing out the subject? I feel like it would be useful to be able to reduce the flash power further (As I understand it, SS doesn’t affect the flash exposure)
 
Tom Pinchenzo said:
I had ‘Rembrandt’ and ‘dramatic’ in mind so
I’m glad they came across, even if they were the most appropriate for the subject!
Click to expand...
Job done then!
Tom Pinchenzo said:
How would I achieve a wider aperture in this scenario without the flash blowing out the subject? I feel like it would be useful to be able to reduce the flash power further (As I understand it, SS doesn’t affect the flash exposure)
Click to expand...
ND filters... I generally use a screw on variable ND as it is the most flexible and also useful for video (it just doesn't work as well w/ WA/UWA lenses). Get one big enough to fit your largest lens, and use step down rings to adapt it to the others.

Of course, if you only wanted to drop the flash exposure and not the BG/ambient, you could just add extra layers of diffusion (paper/cloth) over the softbox. Another option you might want to look into is making a simple diffusion screen and using your softbox to illuminate that (double diffusion)... it's a good way of getting a bigger/softer/more even light source.

View: https://youtu.be/XxBLwGXN3oQ
 
Phil V said:
Good first attempt, but it’s difficult judging lighting without knowing what you were trying to do.
Click to expand...
this!!

This set is perfect for demonstrating how a small change of head angle can make a huge difference to the lighting on the face, especially with contrasty setups.

Editing-wise.. the colour one is very magenta, otherwise nothing to report!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top