Help Needed - First Attempts at Product Photography in Studio

Messages
33
Name
Mark
Edit My Images
Yes
Hi there,

Some time ago you all helped me get set up with a studio and I am now up and running.

I have two strobes and two 60cm softboxes and have been getting moderate results with the images I have been taking so far. I would really like to improve the images however as the background still isn't zinging out...

Here is one I took earlier...
IMG_0194.jpg

Can someone give me some advice about how to take a better image/light placement. Sadly my boom arm is terrible and I cannot afford a good one, so I am stuck with the two tripods.

Any help would be much appreciated.

p.s. I am using an ISO of 80, f.8 and 1/125 on a Canon G12...working in quite a confined space in a garage.
 
I think you're approaching that question the wrong way, surely the question should bee how can I make the product zing? not the background.
 
Well I assume you mean how can you make the product stand out from the background as it all appears very flat to me.?
There are all sorts of techniques you can try. The following are all things you could try.
Bring your lights closer to the subject.
Rather than just using softboxes, use a diffuser panel between the softbox and the subject as you can see the reflection of the softboxes in the subject. A large diffuser panel between softbox abd subject will illiminate this.
Or ditch the softbox entirely and just use a diffuser panel.
Ditch the product table or whatever you are using and place the subject on a flat white surface and then have the background further away and have a seperate light for your background, it all looks kind of grey.
Place the product on white perspex and get a nice reflection
Buy a good book like this http://www.amazon.co.uk/Lighting-Pr...459116746&sr=1-1&keywords=product+photography

or this http://www.amazon.co.uk/Masterclass...r1&keywords=product+photography+dennis+savini

I have both and they are both good books

Or finally join this for some great online lessons https://www.photigy.com/

I joined and it is a great help
 
As Hugh said, its the wrong question.

That's not a criticism btw, it's based on your mis-reading of your results.

Firstly, even with that lighting, your subject would pop more on a black background, a cream pot on a White BG is just asking for 'meh' at best.

Then as Steve said the lights themselves are too far away (just to underline this - by miles IMHO), and the light placement is actually designed to create 'flat light'.

I'd start with a light from above, then see what needed adding.
 
Hi,

Thanks for this. Like I said this was my first attempt with studio lights ever so I am expecting a steep learning curve!

I agree about the white background and cream too! I have some grey and some black paper to play with so will get those out later.

I have had another play this morning with light placement etc taking on board some more of what I read on this forum.

Here are the results...no PP other than white balance on LR.
IMG_0314.jpg

I think this is better lit but still a long way from being 'good'.

I will go an get the black paper out...
 
Hmmmmm, I knew lighting would be difficult but not this difficult!

Another attempt - definitely my favorite image so far. Still with the reflections of the softboxes in (I will look into a diffuser screen Steve, thanks).

My biggest problem has been trying to get enough light onto the subject without making too many reflections from the soft box or over exposing it.

IMG_0372.jpg
 
Seriously, do look at one or both of those books. And the Photigy tuition is extremely good though will cost a few quid every month but you can drop in and out of subscription.
They also have a facebook group worth a look at https://www.facebook.com/groups/photigy/ some really good product photographers use these resources, though do be prepared for some serious but constructive critique if you post an image and if you do you will need to post a 'Behind The Scenes' image to go with it to show the setup you used. Which actually wouldn't be a bad idea here.
 
A silk (diffusion screen) is an excellent tool, and is often used in conjuction with a softbox, to effectively make the softbox much bigger, but it can be an awkward tool to use. A 60x60cm softbox is a bit limited for many still life subjects, you really need something bigger - this particular subject is just about OK, but if it was more shiny you'd need a much bigger one. As Steve says, your softbox isn't close enough.

Your biggest single problem is light placement. For this type of shot you NEED a boom arm because the softbox needs to be directly above - there is no alternative.
It also needs to be angled forwards a bit, which it isn't in your shots. This would (with this particular subject) light the top and most of the front elevation but would leave the vertical bit at the top and parts of the handle unlit. A simple reflector would then push enough light back into those areas. The reflector probably needs to be white, or maybe light grey - don't use a silver one for this as it would create unwanted reflections (putting the light where I suggest would avoid those reflections).

You've got 2 flash heads, but that doesn't mean that you need to use both on every shot - this is a single light shot!

For a subject as simple as this, just use a black background and cut it out in PS. That way, you'll be able to choose a suitable background later. More importantly, you can have a white (or any other) background without light from it bouncing around and ruining the shot.

I totally respect the fact that you've posted these shots SOOC - this is what everyone should do, so that we can see the actual shot. But, once you've got a usable shot you will need to adjust luminance and contrast to get the best from the shot, and a bit of usm works wonders too.
Seriously, do look at one or both of those books. And the Photigy tuition is extremely good though will cost a few quid every month but you can drop in and out of subscription.
They also have a facebook group worth a look at https://www.facebook.com/groups/photigy/ some really good product photographers use these resources, though do be prepared for some serious but constructive critique if you post an image and if you do you will need to post a 'Behind The Scenes' image to go with it to show the setup you used. Which actually wouldn't be a bad idea here.
I can't comment on the paid subscription service but I do belong to the FB group and some of the advice there is sound. Some of it though (other FB users) is hopeless, it's just like a forum, with a wide quality mix.

EDIT: I meant to say that bringing the sofbox closer effectively makes it bigger relative to the size of the subject. But, because of the way that the inverse square law works, when it's really close the power of the light will fall off very rapidly as it travels down the subject, resulting in over exposure at the top and/or under exposure at the bottom - and cosine law doesn't help with this either....
So, the best answer (which may be out of budget for you) is to have a much bigger softbox a little further away.
 
Last edited:
Well, you chose a tough subject to start with... essentially a reflective sphere.

A sphere always sees/reflects everything in a 180* radius. The only difference is that a smaller sphere makes the reflections smaller. And there are only a couple of ways to light such a subject where the lights themselves do not show.

One way is essentially "dark field" backlighting. You place the light behind the subject (out of field) at an angle (~45*) so that the light just cuts across the surface... this won't get you much more than edge/rim lighting on an opaque subject like this (watch out for lens flare/bloom).

The other way is to use *very* large modifiers from close. The idea here is to use falloff/gradient so that the light hitting the object/recorded falls off before the edge of the modifier shows. In your case, I would use the 60cm softbox to illuminate a 6-8ft silk (I use cheap plastic shower curtains from the dollar store). This is the only way to provide any primary frontal lighting (catchlights) without the modifier itself showing (fill can be added with a reflector or another light as long as it's kept below the primary).

The last way is to make the entire environment the light source... if you make the room the light source, everything in it will be reflected (to include the camera/tripod). This is where tents and domes come in, but even in the best circumstances the camera lens is usually reflected (at a minimum) unless hidden with negative lighting (in a shadow or dark area behind the camera which is reflected instead).

IMO, your best bet is to use an ambient exposure as the primary, and use you lights for "dark field" rim-lighting just a bit above ambient. This is basically what Gary was describing with the light above and pointed forward (the part he left out was that the light also needs to be behind). Your biggest issue doing this in a small space is going to be preventing the lights from creating bright spots in the room which are then reflected in the vase. Again, working at shorter lighting distances will help as it will require less power and the light will travel less distance (basically).
 
IMO, your best bet is to use an ambient exposure as the primary, and use you lights for "dark field" rim-lighting just a bit above ambient. This is basically what Gary was describing with the light above and pointed forward (the part he left out was that the light also needs to be behind).
Well, in fact I wasn't talking about rim lighting and I didn't forget to mention that the light also needs to be behind.
What I was talking about is a light from above and angled forwards, not a light that is above and behind.
Rim lighting can be a valid method, but isn't the method that I would use for this.
 
I'm not too keen on the black background but do like the second "specimen". I think a jug like this is better against a white background (or light grey) and the second post does show its age very well. I'm guessing now but is this Coalport china?
 
Well, in fact I wasn't talking about rim lighting and I didn't forget to mention that the light also needs to be behind.
What I was talking about is a light from above and angled forwards, not a light that is above and behind.
Rim lighting can be a valid method, but isn't the method that I would use for this.
If it's not behind the line, how do you keep it from showing in the reflection?
 
Last edited:
If it's not behind the line, how do you keep it from showing in the reflection?
It needs to be as large as possible, and with this size of subject and this size of softbox, that means having it very close. There will be some reflection, but the angle of reflection will take care of it.
 
Surely, you answered this yourself, a very large light source ie a softbox at an angle through a scrim to create a gradient, actually one each side and above perhaps with the odd refector where needed?
I stated how I would do it, but that doesn't necessarily mean I know or understand everything that Gary does...

With reflective objects (spheres in particular) it can be easier to think of it as creating "the environment that will be reflected" rather than "lighting the subject" as such.
 
Wasnt disagreeing Steven, I was highlighting that you had said
The other way is to use *very* large modifiers from close. The idea here is to use falloff/gradient so that the light hitting the object/recorded falls off before the edge of the modifier shows. In your case, I would use the 60cm softbox to illuminate a 6-8ft silk (I use cheap plastic shower curtains from the dollar store). This is the only way to provide any primary frontal lighting (catchlights) without the modifier itself showing (fill can be added with a reflector or another light as long as it's kept below the primary).
and I was agreeing with you. :)

Well, as an example, and this was my first ever product shot so plenty of errors and I am not claiming to be any expert, far from it.
But for some mad reason I chose a globe like shiny object, had I know better I would have chosen an easier subject.
Anyway, short of a light tent which I dont like anyway I shot this with one light behind and above and another camera right as BTS shot below

11779793_10206799494853334_6392569674669288882_o.jpg


Then I placed a white card as 'around' as I could on the left and another white card camera right to lighten some shadows.
There is still a little shadow to the front perhaps from the camera but personally it doesnt bother me.
Anyway this is just to illustrate kind of what I meant to the OP about using diffuser panels.
Effectively though the 'globe' tries to reflect the whole world so a light tent would do it but does leave an image a little flat in my short experience of these things.

11050779_10206799569935211_7583612050797084524_n.jpg
[/quote]
 
There is still a little shadow to the front perhaps from the camera but personally it doesnt bother me.
Anyway this is just to illustrate kind of what I meant to the OP about using diffuser panels.
Effectively though the 'globe' tries to reflect the whole world so a light tent would do it but does leave an image a little flat in my short experience of these things.
Definitely don't like tents... not enough control and rather flat as a result.
The "shadow" is the gap between cards/lights... but it hides the camera and it would be hard to do much better with a single image.

And you chose brushed metal which just wants to be ugly when photographed (a bit of that in the base).
 
Last edited:
Definitely don't like tents... not enough control and rather flat as a result.
The "shadow" is the gap between cards/lights... but it hides the camera and it would be hard to do much better with a single image.

And you chose brushed metal which just wants to be ugly when photographed (a bit of that in the base).
Yes indeed, it was not a nice subject :)
 
Steve,
What you set out to do with your doorknob (and did pretty well) was to produce a shadowless photo of a fairly complex and fairly shiny but physically small subject.
What we're trying to do here isn't to eliminate shadows, it's to come up with a simple lighting arrangement that suits a very different type of subject. We're not trying to eliminate shadows (which is easy) - we're trying to make a piece of American pottery look good :)
 
Actually I wonder if this product would be enhanced by making it more in its normal setting. So perhaps on a neutral coloured table cloth say light brown or grey and lit to show the texture so that it is obviously a table cloth and perhaps with a few shadows to make it appear to be window light, with another prop or two of less importance to show it off?
Just a thought.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Back
Top