Product photography lighting workshop, Sunday 17th August

[Garry Edwards]

None of the shots were difficult, some were a little more complex than others.
Here is the first one I've looked at, it was pretty straightforward in lighting terms.
People were asked to bring along something to photograph, if they could.
And to think about the benefits of the product, because it's always the benefits that need to be sold in the photo.
They arranged the composition themselves, partly as part of the training process and partly because it's the photographers job to light the subject regardless of any difficulty, and there's always a temptation to compose shots in a way that makes the lighting easier.

Anyway, a compact camera plus some lenses
In this first shot, I've simply placed a large softbox overhead, to light the top. The viewfinder on the camera isn't just shiny, it's convex too and this requires as a big a softbox as possible, and only just out of shot, to create diffused specular highlights that we can see through, to see the product beneath. So, it was a 70 x 140cm softbox, just out of shot, and the product was arranged on a still life shooting table

The softbox was tilted forwards so that little if any light reaches the front of the subject, making it possible to light individual parts of the subject individually, if that's what we need to do.
I wanted to show the texture of the fronts, and also highlight the brand name on the lens caps, so I introduced a second light, camera left, for that job.
It's a very fine honeycomb, fitted to a standard reflector, and it just skims across the front, lighting nothing but the fronts and sides of the products. This light was placed quite a long way away, because I didn't want the inverse square law to reduce the light too much as it travelled across the various parts of the subject. In this shot, you can also see the edge of the overhead softbox.

This is creating the definition and highlight that I was looking for, and has added a bit of life to an otherwise dead camera lens, but because of the angle of the camera it's also creating a harsh shadow that isn't helping.
There's always more than one way to skin the proverbial cat, and rather than add another light and flatten that shadow, I decided that adding a reflector would do the job.
The reflector was a piece of A5 paper (OK, A4 paper folded in half) and put just out of shot to camera right.
In this situation, the effectiveness of a reflector depends on a few things, the most important one is the distance relationship between the light source and the reflector and between the reflector and the part of the subject that it's supposed to lighten. In other words, the further the light has to travel before it reaches the reflector, and the less distance it has to travel, the more light is reflected.
Anyway, this is what we ended up with. Cropped, but with no PP work as such. As I explained at the time, in an actual product shot I would comp a graduated specular highlight onto the lens, these things are always added in PP because it's almost impossible to create a good graduated specular highlight of a lens in the same shot as a general product shot.

BTW, if you don't like the semi reflections, either don't shoot on a reflective shooting table, or cut the subject out of the background and produce a different background entirely.

 

[Phil V]

This is great Garry. Are you planning to go through each item?

 

[Garry Edwards]

Yes, as and when I can. The beer one will be fun, there were a LOT of shots of that

 

[Phil V]

And many of them OOF I'd imagine. I need a training course for the weird camera system.

 

[James83]

Excellent write up and will look forward to reliving each one when you get chance to post them.

Stick to the Canon Phil and back button focusing

 

[HoppyUK]

Thanks again Garry, I learnt a load (mostly that I need to buy grids). Again I met some lovely people and Pete too!

Yes, a big take-away point for me too was those grids. Garry was taking real liberties with them, pointing lights towards the camera at angles you wouldn't dare to use normally, even with flags etc (which are a right PITA). And the way he used hard light with them to skim across the surface to show texture. TBH I'm not sure that could have been done without the grids, not without a lot of faffing around for sure. Must get me some

Garry often talks about hard light and can be a bit disparaging about too much soft light - it can be a bit bland I guess. But in practise, most of the sets he used yesterday were pretty soft with big softboxes and strips, but he mixed in some of the harder stuff to add texture/highlights/shadows which was cool

 

[Garry Edwards]

Well, there's nothing hard about hard lighting
Of course, no two shots are ever the same - or should be - but my general approach is to produce low overall contrast and high local contrast, or in other words, an underlying image lit softly but using hard lighting as necessary to create emphasis and to make the shot come alive.

Here's a couple of SOOC shots that show the usefulness of honeycombs, firstly lit with just an overhead softbox, angled forward so that it doesn't affect the front elevation

Then add a honeycombed light, it is in fact a honeycomb fitted to our 40cm beauty dish. I do that quite a lot, because the beauty dish is big enough to light a reasonably large subject with a honeycomb, there are quite a lot of subjects where the honeycomb fitted to a standard reflector just doesn't throw a big enough pool of light, or at least doesn't throw it evenly enough. It's off to camera right and is shining through the lamp base and lighting the front, back, inside top, inside bottom and both elevations of the inside, although of course we can only see the effect on the visible elevations - but as there's nothing else in the shot, nothing else is affected by the 'spare' light.

Because it is skimming at an acute angle, it reveals the texture fairly well, and the stronger the texture, the more dramatic the effect.
I guess I sort of "know" what I can get away with and so don't get it wrong very often but it doesn't matter anyway, because either there is flare on the camera LCD or there isn't .
I also sort of know the level of power that will produce an acceptable result but again, this can easily be arrived at by trial and error - it's all about visual effect and not something that can be metred

 

[Blythman]

Excellent read Garry. And my Pentax Q has never looked so good

 

[Garry Edwards]

Item next, as Samuel Pepys used to say…

This was in fact someone’s lunch, and he wanted to eat it once we’d photographed it, which meant that I couldn’t treat it like a normal food shot – I’ll get back to that later.

Camera height is vitally important. Often, we shoot level to the subject, sometimes we shoot from slightly below it (heroic viewpoint) to make it look more important. On this product, the camera had to be higher, looking down, otherwise most of the food wouldn’t have been very visible.

We started off with just a large overhead softbox, to create the main lighting source and to provide soft overall contrast, meaning that there would be no areas that were in heavy shadow.
We can often struggle to get enough depth of field, especially with small subjects photographed from a short distance. I wanted the bag that the food came in to be quite well back in the set, so that it didn’t dominate the actual food, and shooting at something like f/16 (my normal ‘safe’ aperture on a full frame DSLR wouldn’t hack it, so I decided to get the food sharp and put the bag out of focus. This is actually very effective as long as people can read the logo easily – because it is out of focus people have to (subconsciously) strain to read it, which according to marketing psychologists makes them notice it more. And anyway, the bag was crap, it had a strap that was creased, in a real food shot it would have been a perfect example but putting it out of focus made it look less bad. Normally, I would have just put it further out of focus in PP, but the shots you’re seeing here are SOOC.

It may not be realised by everyone, but serious manufacturers are in fact willing to pay pro photographers to use monorail 5” x 4” cameras, utilising the Scheimflugg principle to shift the plane of sharp focus as required. Richard (HoppyUK) did in fact ask me whether I had ever used tilt/shift lenses instead, the answer is no. I’m sure they’re wonderful as well as being wonderfully expensive, but Sheimflugg relies on swinging the rear standard as well as the front one…

The first shot was at f/5.6, the other shots were at f/4, to achieve this.

In the shot below, I’ve added a honeycomb, fitted to a standard reflector. As you can see from the shadow, it’s off to camera right and is skimming across the food to reveal the texture. You’ll have noticed that the angle of the tomato has been changed to accommodate this and you can see too that we've removed the plastic cup from whatever it is on the far left of the shot. It sort of works, but I don’t want that harsh shadow

So, in the shot below, I’ve mitigated that shadow, i.e. I’ve reduced it but not removed it. I can’t remember how I did that, it might have been a reflector pushing back some of the light from the honeycomb or it may have been an extra light, to camera left.

Of course, as well as that long shadow on the ‘floor’, parts of the horrible beautiful trays had shadow on them too – easily avoidable by repositioning them, but it was really about finding solutions to the challenges I was presented with rather than removing the challenges, and after adding that fill I felt that a degree of shadow actually added to the shot. But on a real shoot, I would have ended up reducing it a bit in PP.

But, what is seriously missing from this shot is psazz – the food just doesn’t look appetizing. And the reason for that is that it’s edible (I suppose)…

In a real world shot of this type, the food stylist would have given me the product to set up on and would then have given me a fresh product to actually photograph, once I was ready for it. And although of course I would never admit to personal experience of this in case the Advertising Standards Authority saw this thread, I’ve heard that some photographers would spray the vegetables with a mix of glycerine and water so that they had tiny droplets on them, and would even coat the meat with baby oil, to give it a nice sheen. And that of course would improve the shot dramatically but make the food unfit to eat. So, we ended up with very little sheen and very little psazz, as you can see in the crop below

I have to be fair to the owner, he did offer me the tart to eat – obviously he didn’t know that a diabetic had to say “No” to that

 

[Diving Pete]

to be fair - he did - but forgot..... & the food was lovely.
Here is a corporate shot of the above -

http://www.standard.co.uk/incoming/article9227323.ece/alternates/w620/33ramsayfood0104a.jpg

 

[photo si]

Cheers for these Garry, it's a good reminder of the HUGE amount of info you divulged on the day!
I look forward to seeing the rest when you have time

 

[Phil V]

to be fair - he did - but forgot..... & the food was lovely.
Here is a corporate shot of the above -

http://www.standard.co.uk/incoming/article9227323.ece/alternates/w620/33ramsayfood0104a.jpg

That's a fairly awful shot! But you can see the food stylists hand at work.

 

[Garry Edwards]

That's a fairly awful shot! But you can see the food stylists hand at work.

Yes, the styling is OK and pretty typical, and sadly the shot is pretty typical too.
Would anyone like to tell me why it is so flat?

 

[James83]

And the bag is still crumpled!

 

[Phil V]

Yes, the styling is OK and pretty typical, and sadly the shot is pretty typical too.
Would anyone like to tell me why it is so flat?

(Prepares to be shot down)
It was only lit by maybe 2 large softboxes - there's definite shadows cast left and right (and the darkest area is where the shadows cross), but there's no sign of the harder light which made your composition pop.
I'd guess the softboxes weren't even fitted with grids

 

[Garry Edwards]

It's simpler than just that Phil...
1. What do I NOT have in my studio?
2. What do we often use instead of an extra light?

 

[Phil V]

It's simpler than just that Phil...
1. What do I NOT have in my studio?
2. What do we often use instead of an extra light?

1. What do I NOT have in my studio? My stock answer would be 'dancing girls' but you sometimes have them Monorail camera?
2. What do we often use instead of an extra light? Reflectors

 

[Garry Edwards]

Is there a smiley for groan?
OK,
1. What do I NOT have in my studio? I do NOT have unwanted reflective surfaces (such as white ceiling, nearby white walls)
2. What do we often use instead of an extra light? Yes, reflectors
And what does that wonderful photo have? It's surrounded by the highly reflective surface of the inside of the bag. Even if the photographer had tried to use any form of creative lighting, it would have been destroyed by the reflective surfaces.

 

[Garry Edwards]

Lighting a Trombone seems, at first glance, to be a bit of a nightmare with all those different shiny bits, but in fact it’s a pretty simple job. I can't remember photographing a trombone before but I've photographed a lot of rifles, and the challenges are very similar.

There are different possible approaches, I went for drama – but if this shot was required, say, for an auction catalogue, I would have gone for a much softer look, with much flatter lighting that wouldn’t leave any faults, dings, scratches etc in shadow. This trombone is far from new and so will have its fair share of cosmetic marks, and it could also have done with a good polish – but there you go, we photograph what we have available to photograph.


The obvious tool of choice here is a pair of strip softboxes. Now, strip softboxes are ideal for this because they aren’t very wide, so don’t spread light where it isn’t wanted, and because they’re long enough to cover the length of the subject. 1 softbox goes each side of the subject, in much the same way as used here, in a very different type of shot.

And I use the same approach too, first I position the first one to give the required effect, and then I add the second one, I don’t start off with two because that would make it difficult to work out which light source is causing any problems that arise.

Here’s my first attempt, which is awful.

I need to position the softbox so that it is square to the subject, creating diffused specular highlights that are as even as possible. Also, the softbox needs to be positioned to put the highlights in the right place – now, photographed against a white background, those highlights mustn’t go up to the very edge of the tubes because if they do, the lit bits will merge into the background. But, photographed against a black background, they MUST go up to the edges, otherwise there would be unlit bits merging into the background.

Here’s the next shot, both softboxes in use and this is really about as good as we’re going to get with this lighting approach, or at least in a few minutes. It wasn’t quite as quick as I’m making it sound, there was a fair bit of fiddling about involved to get the specular reflections exactly where I wanted them to be and to get some interesting light on the bell, which at the same time is showing the engraved maker’s name.

If I’d gone for a softer, less dramatic look then I would have added a 3rd light, as fill, to reduce the contrast and, being a fill light, it would have been on axis with the camera lens.

So, there you go. Here, I’ve done a minimal amount of PP work to remove the support stand, tidy up the background a bit and have also increased saturation just a bit, to show the yellow of the brass better.

 

[=ReBeL=]

Garry do you use SF's for product photography or other Lencarta lights?

 

[Garry Edwards]

Garry do you use SF's for product photography or other Lencarta lights?

Usually, whatever happens to be nearest. On Sunday, we used a mixture of SuperFasts and SmartFlash from memory, with an Atom (literally) thrown inside the helmet for the motorbike helmet shot

 

[Phil V]

We used an atom with a snoot on one shot too.

 

[=ReBeL=]

Thanks Garry and Phil.

Looks like I might be using a combination of Ultrapros and Superfasts soon




If everything goes well.

 

[Garry Edwards]

Thanks Garry and Phil.

Looks like I might be using a combination of Ultrapros and Superfasts soon




If everything goes well.

Pity you didn't order them a few minutes earlier - you would have had them tomorrow
But at least we can now look forward to seeing your fast flash shots, starting Friday


No interest from anyone on the trombone shots then? :banghead:

 

[Phil V]

...No interest from anyone on the trombone shots then? :banghead:

Have we missed a question?

 

[Garry Edwards]

No, there wasn't a question, but I've got used to sarcastic comments, complaints and abuse, which I can cope with.
But I'm not used to being ignored

 

[=ReBeL=]

Pity you didn't order them a few minutes earlier - you would have had them tomorrow
But at least we can now look forward to seeing your fast flash shots, starting Friday


No interest from anyone on the trombone shots then? :banghead:

I wouldn't be able to test them tomorrow anyway so it is not a big problem. I'll do that friday evening. If I get something worth posting, I will

BTW Garry I read and look forward to your posts with photos from the course, even though I don't comment much. Cheers

 

[Phil V]

I wouldn't be able to test them tomorrow anyway so it is not a big problem. I'll do that friday evening. If I get something worth posting, I will

BTW Garry I read and look forward to your posts with photos from the course, even though I don't comment much. Cheers

I think most of the attendees aren't particularly prolific posters.

I'm still trying to work out a shopping list of shiny toys to buy, despite the fact I have no real 'need'

 

[=ReBeL=]

I think most of the attendees aren't particularly prolific posters.

I'm still trying to work out a shopping list of shiny toys to buy, despite the fact I have no real 'need'

The amount of stuff I bought in the past 3 months is unbelievable. Spent way too much already. However I am almost at the end of my shopping spree. Just one more order after this one

But all of that is nothing without proper knowledge and experience, therfore I'm glad there is somebody like Garry here who has both.

 

[Phil V]

The amount of stuff I bought in the past 3 months is unbelievable. Spent way too much already. However I am almost at the end of my shopping spree. Just one more order after this one

But all of that is nothing without proper knowledge and experience, therfore I'm glad there is somebody like Garry here who has both.

I try not to be too nice to Garry on the forum:
A, it might go to his head
B, people would assume my account had been hacked.

Seriously, every time I talk to him I learn something, and that's after too many years 'buggering about with cameras'

 

[Garry Edwards]

Right now, Lencarta emails are down, and I can't upload photos via FTP.
But when things get back to normal I will update this thread with the next subject.

 

[Bassit]

I have started a thread with a few product photography shots i have taken since attending on Sunday, if anyone else wanted to post up any of their attempts in the thread i will happily change the name.

Anyhow if you want to take a look or add to it, the threads here.

 

[=ReBeL=]

After quick test of the SuperFast's yesterday, I think I am sold

The controls and overall build quality of the unit itself is so much better. The stopping power is there as well. I think I'll be selling my remaining Ultrapros and invest in another set of SF later at some point.

 

[Phil V]

After quick test of the SuperFast's yesterday, I think I am sold

The controls and overall build quality of the unit itself is so much better. The stopping power is there as well. I think I'll be selling my remaining Ultrapros and invest in another set of SF later at some point.

I think, should I ever need to equip a studio, I'll start with the SuperFasts, just because it offers something others don't and the premium isn't so great.

 

[=ReBeL=]

I think, should I ever need to equip a studio, I'll start with the SuperFasts, just because it offers something others don't and the premium isn't so great.

I agree. They are a really nice units, even before considering the fact that they are fast. I tested them a bit yesterday (nothing complicated just a bit of splash fun) and it seems to work nicely as well. Flash duration and power recharging makes them a good unit for this type of work. I was able to switch to continous shooting, press the trigger and keep firing... well, that was the theory at least. I was let down by the camera itself, because when shooting raw my 5d mk2 was only able to catch pre splash, one splash shot and one after splash shot. I know I can switch to jpeg to shoot faster but I don't really want to do that.

I was able to shoot at f20 with ISO 200, which is consideringly better than what I was able to get out of my speedlites (obviously), plus I was able to attach big modifiers which is very important to me.

Anyway, unless something major happens, I'll be keeping them

Also, great service from Lencarta as usual. Extremely fast delivery, very good delivery company used, well packaged (BTW the box was so big, that my 3yo son decided that daddy has bought a xmas tree and was disappointed when I opened the box ).

I still would prefer the 600s, but the price was just too much for me. I'll think about it when buying a second set of them, maybe I'll end up with 2 x 300s and 2 x 600s.

 

[=ReBeL=]

I've had a few beers last night, came up with the idea and decided to shoot it

...

 

[Garry Edwards]

Very clever-the physics of short flash duratin combined with light cone string field theory

 

[Phil V]

I've had a few beers last night, came up with the idea and decided to shoot it


Lencarta SF300 by =ReBeL=, on Flickr

I love this^

Very clever-the physics of short flash duratin combined with light cone string field theory

This might as well be Chinese (no preference for Mandarin or any other dialect)
I'm not sure I'll get it even if you try Garry.

 

[Garry Edwards]

Don't worry about it, it's just a bad joke, inspired by the shape of the water element
String theory doesn't have a whole lot to do with the SuperFast...

 

[=ReBeL=]

I didn't get it either Garry

TBH at first I thought it is completely unrelated comment but I'm not sure anymore. Looks like it might be about the photo I posted. Did I make a booboo somwhere?



Thanks Phil