Hi all.
I am back again. Hope everyone is well and refreshed for the New Year ahead !
After the help last year when taking the bicycle photos I thought I would post here again. Everyone is so generous with there time and knowledge.
I won this old camera in a raffle at our camera club just before Christmas. Well, won is a stretch it was second to last thing to go !
Loved the look of it and thought I must try and photograph it.
So I have. It took me two attempts to get an image I am happy with.
The first nights attempt was OK as I did get an image. At the time I didn't know why but the photo just didn't feel right.
The night after I tried again and I am much happier.
In the first image I set my strip box over the top as I did with the bicycle images and reflected light back from the front. The box is way bigger than the camera. So I assumed this was my problem the light may have been to soft/large.
Photo number 2
I swapped the stripbox for a 16inch square gridded softbox. Also reflected light from below. The image looked better to me on the lcd so I got a bit clever "I thought" and added a speedlight with a cinefoil ( a tip from here, previous postings) snoot to the rear pointing at the side. I was chuffed to see that it did actually light the side.
I took an image with the view finder down so as not to get a white circle in the glass then pasted this in after.
I am posting here to get confirmation as to my way of thinking. Am I right to think that the harder light source as made the difference. I am now aware that there is no one size fits all for the lighting. For example because the bike lighting worked well enough doesn't mean to say the same light would work here?
Also I noticed the light from the stripbox seem to be have a different colour cast to it than that from the softbox. Used the same wb and same ad200. Is that normal ?
Sorry for the long waffle.
All comments are welcomed.
Gaz
1
2
I am back again. Hope everyone is well and refreshed for the New Year ahead !
After the help last year when taking the bicycle photos I thought I would post here again. Everyone is so generous with there time and knowledge.
I won this old camera in a raffle at our camera club just before Christmas. Well, won is a stretch it was second to last thing to go !
Loved the look of it and thought I must try and photograph it.
So I have. It took me two attempts to get an image I am happy with.
The first nights attempt was OK as I did get an image. At the time I didn't know why but the photo just didn't feel right.
The night after I tried again and I am much happier.
In the first image I set my strip box over the top as I did with the bicycle images and reflected light back from the front. The box is way bigger than the camera. So I assumed this was my problem the light may have been to soft/large.
Photo number 2
I swapped the stripbox for a 16inch square gridded softbox. Also reflected light from below. The image looked better to me on the lcd so I got a bit clever "I thought" and added a speedlight with a cinefoil ( a tip from here, previous postings) snoot to the rear pointing at the side. I was chuffed to see that it did actually light the side.
I took an image with the view finder down so as not to get a white circle in the glass then pasted this in after.
I am posting here to get confirmation as to my way of thinking. Am I right to think that the harder light source as made the difference. I am now aware that there is no one size fits all for the lighting. For example because the bike lighting worked well enough doesn't mean to say the same light would work here?
Also I noticed the light from the stripbox seem to be have a different colour cast to it than that from the softbox. Used the same wb and same ad200. Is that normal ?
Sorry for the long waffle.
All comments are welcomed.
Gaz
1
2