Numpty question about fill..

juggler

juggler

Messages
4,907
Name
Simon
Edit My Images
No
We know that a fill light to lift the shadows goes on the camera axis, and is ideally as large as possible, to avoid creating unsightly shadows.

Yet we often use a large white reflector panel to one side of a subject to do a similar job. It generally doesn't do any damage since (a) the light bouncing from it is faint and (b) it is large - but if it's not on axis what should we call it?
 
juggler said:
We know that a fill light to lift the shadows goes on the camera axis, and is ideally as large as possible, to avoid creating unsightly shadows.

Yet we often use a large white reflector panel to one side of a subject to do a similar job. It generally doesn't do any damage since (a) the light bouncing from it is faint and (b) it is large - but if it's not on axis what should we call it?
Click to expand...

A large white reflector panel?

Mike
 
Fill
Appart from physics there are no rules in photography.

Edit
If it's there to open/fill in the shadows it's fill light whereever it's placed though you could call it Luna if you like ;)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
To 'answer' your question - I don't know - but does it matter?
To go back to your definition of fill, what you say is broadly correct but there is another kind of fill too. If, for example the portrait subject is looking to the right and the key light is therefore placed so that s/he is looking at it, and high, then a light on axis to the key light, (and typically lower) is also a fill light.
 
It
soeren said:
Fill
Appart from physics there are no rules in photography.

Edit
If it's there to open/fill in the shadows it's fill light whereever it's placed though you could call it Luna if you like ;)
Click to expand...
it's only a true fill light if it's on axis either to the lens or to the key light.
In any other place it's a second, competing light, I.e. a second sun.
 
Garry Edwards said:
To 'answer' your question - I don't know - but does it matter?
To go back to your definition of fill, what you say is broadly correct but there is another kind of fill too. If, for example the portrait subject is looking to the right and the key light is therefore placed so that s/he is looking at it, and high, then a light on axis to the key light, (and typically lower) is also a fill light.
Click to expand...

It doesn't matter at all - except for when I spout off to others about what I think I know!
 
I always call any lighting which is only used to lift shadows created by primary lighting "fill"... because that's what it is doing...

I also tend to call uncontrolled spill/bounce "ambient" as that's the part of the exposure it contributes to.
 
Last edited:
sk66 said:
I always call any lighting which is only used to lift shadows created by primary lighting "fill"... because that's what it is doing...

I also tend to call uncontrolled spill/bounce "ambient" as that's the part of the exposure it contributes to.
Click to expand...
As long as you don't try to get rid of it by raising your shutterspeed which would normally take care of most ambient light ;)
 
Call it by what ever purpose you are putting it to .. which will usually be as a fill.

Used outside, its placement is often dictated by the position of the sun, the position of the subject, and where it will not obstruct the image.
so putting it on the axis of the camera is usually off limits.

Used in the studio. in a simple set up, it will need to be placed where it can pick up light to redirect towards the subject. This may or may not be ideal, nor on the axis.
There can be more flexibility when you can direct a dedicated light at it. as it becomes much like a large soft box.

However just like a soft box it can be used as a secondary light source for what ever purpose. It can become a hard directional light if covered with crinkled silver foil.

So name it as to its use.

in the old days we often used large spots, heavily dimmed, as fill lights. so the function, rather than what you used, is always a better descriptor.
 
Last edited:
Glad we filled that gap in your knowledge :D

Edit
Hmm looking though "Hollywood Portraits" by Nisperos and Hicks.
Here on axis fill is not that common.

Edit Edit.
Another observation. When it is on axis or almost it's often in a kind of a clampshell beauty light positioning of key and fill.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
soeren said:
Hmm looking though "Hollywood Portraits" by Nisperos and Hicks.
Here on axis fill is not that common.
Click to expand...
I have never thought of fill as being on axis... I honestly don't know where that comes from. For a flat/perpendicular surface fill has to be (nearly) on axis in order to reflect back to the camera, but otherwise it needs to be placed at some angle/position in order to show where you want it.

The way I've always thought of it is; you have the key light which sets the overall tone/mood of the image. You then may have lights that serve a specific limited purpose (rim/spot/etc). And everything else added is just fill regardless of how/where it's added (to offset/counter the other lights).
In more dramatic setups you may not have a key light as such at all, because the overall tone/mood is based on a dark image i.e. hatchet lighting using two rim lights equally along with a little fill. A chiaroscuro type image lit with a single spotlight would be similar... in this case calling the spotlight the key light wouldn't be incorrect, but it wouldn't be more correct than calling it the spotlight either.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top