Food Photography, A Different Perspective

Michael Sewell

Michael Sewell

Messages
1,689
Name
Michael A. Sewell
Edit My Images
No
EDIT : This is part of the follow me lighting example thread (Just to make it clear)

View attachment 117338

All my food photography is client driven. Whether that's restaurants, hotels, recipe books or Getty Images, the brief and styling is usually someone else's decision.
upload_2017-1-31_22-39-30-gif.507120


This particular image came about due to a couple of factors. Primarily, I noticed most of my food imagery was quite light and airy. A style my clients rather liked, and a style which particularly suited their websites. Don't get me wrong, I like shooting in any particular style that does the food justice, and best suits the client's needs. That said, I really quite fancied shooting a much darker food scene. A scene that would focus the attention purely on the food, rather than the ambience of the setting which tends to be the better look for a restaurant or hotel.

Oh, and there was a food imagery competition running on the Micro Four Thirds forum.

Anyway, I raided the home fridge and nicked the wedge of Wensleydale Creamery's cheese with cranberries, as you do. (It's actually part of their rather good cheese box). The bottle was liberated from my wife (empty, I might add!). The contents of the glass? Undiluted blackcurrant cordial. The grapes came from a local supermarket on my way into the studio. Knife, board and bowl are from the studio prop cupboard.

My intention was to use a single light source with a large rectangular modifier to light the scene from one side. The reflection of the softbox in anything such as the bottle or glass would take on the appearance of a window. I would need to bring in some light from the other side of the table, but only enough to bring up the shadows and stop the dark edges of the bottle etc. disappearing into the background.

I had a black paper backdrop in place approximately ten feet beyond the back of the table top. The distance would ensure the light source wouldn't illuminate the background. I initially used a honeycomb on the softbox as well, which of course narrows the field of light and reduces light contamination beyond the subject area. However, on close examination of the test image, I found the honeycomb was quite visible in the reflection on the wine glass. So off it came.

The light source is an Elinchrom BRX500Ri frame left, firing through a large softbox (40x53 inches). Output was at 4.0 (Equivalent to 100Ws)
Rather than use another light source to fill frame right, I used a large polystyrene board to bounce the light back towards the subject area.

A very simple one light setup.

Olympus OM-D E-M1 mkII 1/250th sec ISO200 40-150mm f2.8 @f8

A few behind the scene images to better explain the setup. (taken with the original E-M1).

View attachment 117335
View attachment 117336
View attachment 117337

Wensleydale Creamery can be found at www.wensleydale.co.uk
 
Last edited:
I think that works, although the label of the wine would be showing in a product shot, or removed if you wanted a generic wine bottle.
I've always found ribena a brilliant substitute for wine.
 
•


I love the tones and key in there Micheal, delicious! :)
Your layout is brilliant considering the volumes, their
occupied relative positions and the negative space! (y)


Some points in which our approaches differ…
  • though I dig the suggested diagonal composition, I think it is too strongly rein-
    forced by the knife
  • the use of a narrower light source and more specular reflector
  • I only attempt such shoot with a PC lens to avoid the effect on the bottle
  • I love to include crackers and or breads variety and their respective crumbs in
    the scene… so as to suggest a living moment more than a too clean display
  • …we all have our own way :cool:

Nice studio!
 
Last edited:
Not sure I would want to eat that cheese it looks long past its sell by date.... rather than freshly cut.
Looks like a dessert wine but would be nice to see the label.
Port might be more appropriate.
but what is the shot featuring? the wine the cheese or the grapes?
and why no butter bread or biscuits?
for some reason the red grapes look more like cherries.

I would also complain about the cheese board and knife as they look cheap and nasty.
 
Last edited:
I would say that you acheived your aim, Michael, with a darker scene and food-focus. The effect of the image is quite painterly with it's very warm tone and the appearance of the grapes.

Thanks for the pull back shots and description of lighting.
 
Terrywoodenpic said:
Not sure I would want to eat that cheese it looks long past its sell by date.... rather than freshly cut.
Looks like a dessert wine but would be nice to see the label.
Port might be more appropriate.
but what is the shot featuring? the wine the cheese or the grapes?
and why no butter bread or biscuits?
for some reason the red grapes look more like cherries.

I would also complain about the cheese board and knife as they look cheap and nasty.
Click to expand...

Well, it wasn't a client shot, it was an experiment in acheiving a Rembrandt look, as opposed to the usual light an airy food imagery requested by clients.
 
Last edited:
I've dabbled in a little bit of product photography - just simple shots with a white background, an interesting read on how you can achieve different results. I have to say the lighting side of things is very interesting. From your experience do you know roughly what to do, before you do it, or is there a lot of experimentation before you get the desired affect when approaching something like this?
 
Gil Bev said:
I've dabbled in a little bit of product photography - just simple shots with a white background, an interesting read on how you can achieve different results. I have to say the lighting side of things is very interesting. From your experience do you know roughly what to do, before you do it, or is there a lot of experimentation before you get the desired affect when approaching something like this?
Click to expand...

Hi Gil.

I tend to know what I'm going to get from a given head, at a given output, through a given modifier.
Occasionally, I have a subject that does not react to light in the expected manner. A particular paint finish on an Aston Martin mockup springs to mind. It was a metallic finish which seemed to eat light like no tomorrow, and appeared flat. It took three times longr than it should have done to get the to the finished image.
 
It's a whole different skill being able to create light to get a desired effect compared to working with natural light - and just selecting direction to best utilise it. I've a lot to learn!!
 
Gil Bev said:
I've dabbled in a little bit of product photography - just simple shots with a white background, an interesting read on how you can achieve different results. I have to say the lighting side of things is very interesting. From your experience do you know roughly what to do, before you do it, or is there a lot of experimentation before you get the desired affect when approaching something like this?
Click to expand...

I don’t have Mikes vast experience, but IMHO lighting is often over complicated (often by lighting companies who want to pretend their products have magic properties) .

Just remember that all light is just light and that it adheres to actual physical laws. If you really want to study it, I’d recommend the rather boring but worthwhile book ‘Light, science and magic’ .
 
Phil V said:
I don’t have Mikes vast experience, but IMHO lighting is often over complicated (often by lighting companies who want to pretend their products have magic properties) .

Just remember that all light is just light and that it adheres to actual physical laws. If you really want to study it, I’d recommend the rather boring but worthwhile book ‘Light, science and magic’ .
Click to expand...

Couldn't have said it better myself Phil.

Plus, light travels in straight lines, and once you can visualise the path, it's secondary to visualise the amount of light that's likely to be put out by the selected output on the head, and how it's going to impact on the scene.
 
Like it. Love to see BTS.
I'm sure people on here now by now I'm a serial faffer with the camera. Most of my photos are taken using one speedlight with a softbox and a reflector. Mainly as I'm not clever enough for more and as my photos are just for me they tend to look ok most of the time.

Gaz
 
I think that it works very well, not as a food shot but as a still life shot that includes food -in which case, the suggestions made by others, although not rude, are far less relevant.
And I applaud your use of just a single light, and although with studio photography it isn't often possible to end up using just one light, it's almost invariably right to try to do so.
Personally, I think that my approach would have been to produce a low key food product shot instead, and to use backlighting to create the drama, and to avoid the specular reflections of the softbox, but this would have involved more lights, and a different end result.
 
Garry Edwards said:
I think that it works very well, not as a food shot but as a still life shot that includes food -in which case, the suggestions made by others, although not rude, are far less relevant.
And I applaud your use of just a single light, and although with studio photography it isn't often possible to end up using just one light, it's almost invariably right to try to do so.
Personally, I think that my approach would have been to produce a low key food product shot instead, and to use backlighting to create the drama, and to avoid the specular reflections of the softbox, but this would have involved more lights, and a different end result.
Click to expand...

Definitely different.

I wanted a Rembrandt feel to the image, so the "window" reflection in the bottle is quite important.
But who cares anyway. It was a personal project, and so long as the client is happy with the final image, it's all good. And seeing as I'm the client and photographer here, we're both happy.
 
cargo said:
Like it. Love to see BTS.
I'm sure people on here now by now I'm a serial faffer with the camera. Most of my photos are taken using one speedlight with a softbox and a reflector. Mainly as I'm not clever enough for more and as my photos are just for me they tend to look ok most of the time.

Gaz
Click to expand...

We're all faffers to some degree. Some are a little more focused in their faffing than others ;)
 
Michael Sewell said:
Definitely different.

I wanted a Rembrandt feel to the image, so the "window" reflection in the bottle is quite important.
But who cares anyway. It was a personal project, and so long as the client is happy with the final image, it's all good. And seeing as I'm the client and photographer here, we're both happy.
Click to expand...
One thing I've sometimes done when emulating window light is to create glazing bars by sticking gaffer tape to the softbox diffuser - which can of course also be done in PP.
 
Phil V said:
I don’t have Mikes vast experience, but IMHO lighting is often over complicated (often by lighting companies who want to pretend their products have magic properties) .

Just remember that all light is just light and that it adheres to actual physical laws. If you really want to study it, I’d recommend the rather boring but worthwhile book ‘Light, science and magic’ .
Click to expand...

Spot on. Brilliant book and one always on my bookshelf that I dip into often.
 
mike weeks said:
Well done on keeping your cool against uncalled for rudeness Mike
Click to expand...



Was there any sign of rudeness in my post, Mike?
I can be VERY clumsy in English sometimes! :(
 
Thanks for posting this Michael.
I think you have achieved your objective.

My very limited experience with food photography suggests that the dressing/layout of the products is equally as important as lighting, focusing etc.
 
DemiLion said:
Oh the beautiful irony. Looking at the neck label and the bottle shape, that is almost certainly port. If not then it's madeira or marsala, which would fit equally well.
Click to expand...

That is the truth of it we simply are not given the information.
I am far more critical of this shot as from a professional food photographer, than I would be were it by a novice.
It has none of the styling and food Qualities demonstrated on his site.
The saturated colours and deep tones clearly work. But to a large extent the lighting works less well on the glass surfaces and the cheese. which have lost some form and texture. And need extra reflecting surfaces and means to light them.

We are so used to seeing thesee subjects in actual settings, that a blank studio setting loses a lot of the natural ambience. This has to be replaced in some way.
Restaurants and hotels spend a lot of time and energy on establishing the "perfect ambience " through lighting and settings.
Food photography gains a lot from similar treatment.

Many years ago I knew a specialist London food photographer, he did nothing else. He had a full hotel style kitchen and chef . And thought nothing of building
a room set to photograph a single dish.
Though I was working in commercial and industrial photography at the time. Seeing the specialised nature of his work put me off from working in that field.
There was no way that I could compete at that level. To keep such an outfit profitable, you need many high end clients feeding you commissions on a daily basis.
And that require an impeccable reputation.
 
Alas, the pic was not actually created as a food pic, but an experiment in Renaissance lighting/imagery, and not my usual food imagery style for clients.
Arguments over food styling are interesting, but not really pertinent to my goal, and the Copy Me Lighting Tutorials are examples of lighting explained.


Although I do say in the writeup, it was to focus on the food, the emulation of of a Rembrandt image was the goal.

Or something like that
 
Last edited:
Michael Sewell said:
Alas, the pic was not actually created as a food pic, but an experiment in Renaissance lighting/imagery, and not my usual food imagery style for clients.
Arguments over food styling are interesting, but not really pertinent to my goal, and the Copy Me Lighting Tutorials are examples of lighting explained.


Although I do say in the writeup, it was to focus on the food, the emulation of of a Rembrandt image was the goal.

Or something like that
Click to expand...

It would seem that the lighting that rembrant saw and used in his portraits, and still life elements, was the domestic light he found, and was quite normal in his time and place.
Light levels were far lower than to day. Windows were often small and heavily draped. The only artificial illumination was oil , candle and firelight with some help from small mirrors. Which you often see in his paintings.
All of which naturally subscribed to a low key ambiance In the somewhat gloomy generally draped decor. With few reflective surfaces
However such light as there was, was highly directional which provided all the necessary elements of what we call Rembrant lighting.

In my early days our studios were mainly equipped with numerous spots of various sizes, (500w to 3000w) with few large flats and fills and floods as we know today.
Rembrant lighting came naturally, and was used extensively in portraiture and film work. And by extension was used in much of our commercial product photography.
By the 60's large studio constructed movable softlightlights, both overhead and as standing flatsbecame the norm. And Rambrant lighting took a back seat.
At about this time large studio flash was coming in to play and the rest is history.

I suspect the LED lighting will change things again, and continuous lighting will again converge film and studio lighting setups. Making Rembrant lighting with its need for accurate placement and relatively small directional sources once again more easily achievable.
 
Terrywoodenpic said:
It would seem that the lighting that rembrant saw and used in his portraits, and still life elements, was the domestic light he found, and was quite normal in his time and place.
Light levels were far lower than to day. Windows were often small and heavily draped. The only artificial illumination was oil , candle and firelight with some help from small mirrors. Which you often see in his paintings.
All of which naturally subscribed to a low key ambiance In the somewhat gloomy generally draped decor. With few reflective surfaces
However such light as there was, was highly directional which provided all the necessary elements of what we call Rembrant lighting.

In my early days our studios were mainly equipped with numerous spots of various sizes, (500w to 3000w) with few large flats and fills and floods as we know today.
Rembrant lighting came naturally, and was used extensively in portraiture and film work. And by extension was used in much of our commercial product photography.
By the 60's large studio constructed movable softlightlights, both overhead and as standing flatsbecame the norm. And Rambrant lighting took a back seat.
At about this time large studio flash was coming in to play and the rest is history.

I suspect the LED lighting will change things again, and continuous lighting will again converge film and studio lighting setups. Making Rembrant lighting with its need for accurate placement and relatively small directional sources once again more easily achievable.
Click to expand...

Without a doubt, the only certainty within the photographic trade, is change.
 
It does have a Rembrandt esque quality to it but the plastic knife does detract from this aim.

NB if it’s not a plastic knife it still looks like one I’m afraid:)
 
Last edited:
Garry Edwards said:
Why does this matter?
Click to expand...

The problem here is that the term rembrandt lighting is being used interchangeably with low key lighting, not that the props are a poor choice.


However such details do matter in final images, place holders will serve for lighting trials such as this.
But when they are shown in public, they are judged as the best you can come up with, in all respects, so such details tend to be commented on.
 
Last edited:
All,

Forgive me if I've misunderstood (it happens, especially after a few glasses of red) , but Michael's post was a lighting tutorial, not an example of how to shoot an exhibit for Good Food magazine or whatever. As such, being a lighting newbie I've found it extremely helpful and will practise the set up in the next day or so. Does it matter if the knife is plastic or the board cheap-looking? No, not one iota. In fact I will most likely be using a plastic knife and cheap board too. But hopefully I will get what I'm after, which is to learn how to light such a set-up.

Michael, thank you for your time and effort in producing this tutorial. I look forward to reading the next one and learning from that too.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top