Could do wi you in my cuboard in shed lol your a star thank you for all your help
) please Garry this flash kit will it require much post processing ? im not very good with potoshop etc so I try my best to get what i want str out of camera if possible i realise the that it depends on how good i get it right in camera but i was just wondering if id have to change backgrounds due to flash sorry if its a stupid question etc cheers once again
The flash gear won't have a bearing. Just as your camera and lens don't.one last thing ( honest
cheers phil my skills using pp is zero thats why i try to get it right in camera but im a trier
PP is an essential skill, and you'll just have to learn.
The continuous lighting kit is fine, but for your purpose the SmartFlash kit is way better.
Yes, white on white is always a challenge for all of us, but it's easy enough to get that "Almost spacey/faded" look but with the detail that's missing here..
Your problem is made a bit more difficult by the limitations of your lighting, but it's still do-able.
I would paint the ceiling black (temporarily, to find out whether I'm right or not, you could put a bit of black cloth ['or Blackwrap/Cinefoil] up there)
Then, fit a softbox to one of your lights. Unfortunately, one of the 'qualities) of the Portaflash is that they don't have an accessory mount but there are some so-called universal mount softboxes available, not perfect but perfectly usable. You will need to measure the front of your flash, but I think this one will fit http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/50x70cm-S...984645?hash=item2a36617b45:g:rQ8AAOSwKIpWAW~s and is about the right size for this subject.
Mount it above and behind your subject, so that it lights the background, the top and part of the front. This will leave a gentle shadow at the front, similar to the one that you already have. The position is shown and explained in this article https://www.lencarta.com/studio-lighting-blog/controlling-specular-reflections/#.VjzW6ysl-hE but in that article, the softbox is placed so close to the subject that it's almost touching, in order to get the diffused specular highlights needed for that particular subject.
In your case, it would need to be quite a bit higher, I can't tell you how much, but start at say 3' and experiment from there. Also, experiment with the angle. Getting it a good distance away will produce a harder light, which is less boring, and it will also reduce the amount of light. Another of the problems that you have with your lights is the lack of power adjustment, so moving it further away will help with this too. If it's still too bright, get a neutral density gel, say 0.3 (1 stop) and put it in front of the light to halve the power http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/0-3-ND-NE...137619?hash=item256c434413:g:Tn8AAOxycD9TVYcI
In my far from humble view, the single biggest problem is the totally flat lighting and the lack of definition in the shoes, I can see that they're made of wool but the flat lighting has destroyed that look, and you need to introduce a second light, from an acute angle, that will skim across the surface.
With more professional lights, I would fit a standard reflector to the flash, and fit a 10 degree honeycomb to it, but as far as I know there isn't anything available for the Portaflash.
I may be wrong, but I don't think that this flashgun snoot with honeycomb will fit your flash, but at least it will show you what's needed https://www.lencarta.com/flashgun-snoot-with-honeycomb-grid and you should be able to make something similar out of a piece of blackwrap/Cinefoil or even black paper.
The acute angle will be from one side or the other, not from the top, and will need to be positioned with care, but it will work wonders! I don't like to give specific advice when I haven't got the subject in front of me, but logic says that this snooted light should come from both the right and the left of the subject, because one light can't do the job on both ends, which means that you need to fit a snoot to two lights - but have a go with one, which will show you whether I'm right or not. Get these lights as far away as space allows, this makes the light harder, creates harder shadows (and therefore greater definition) but with your lights you may not have enough power to place them as far away as you might wish - and it's this extra power, needed for the snooted light, which made me suggest getting a neutral density gel for the softbox light.
At this point, I would say "job done" but it's possible that you might want to add another light as fill, at very low power, but it's equally possible that this extra light would go some way towards destroying the improvements.
Just try it, and please post your results
Plenty of people are using that kit in small spaces.
You're just not getting what I'm trying to say, this is probably my fault for not explaining things properly.
That's generally very smart IMO... to a certain (large) extent light is light.
There are plenty of good sources of information...
...and this was the result
Stop trying to blow the background, that's very easily done and in fact my cat could do it, and I haven't even got a cat
but it's causing problems, not curing them. If those snooted lights aren't powerful enough then follow my advice and put an added layer of neutral density filter over the softbox light.
People who know me will tell you that I'm rude and curmudgeonly, and I'm sure they're right, so I won't try to change, just to make you feel better
1. You may have the softbox as high as the room allows, but you have NOT placed it behind the subject and angled it forwards as I told you, it's pointing almost straight down, which is putting light on the front of the shoes, which I told you it must not do.
2. I also told you that the snooted light(s) are the ones that have to do the work of skimming across the surface of the shoes, to define their texture and create definition, and they're not doing that to any meaningful extent. I also told you that you need two of those snooted lights, that statement was correct for your original layout, but you've now changed that and, for the current arrangement, you only need one.
3. I told you that the softbox light is overexposed, and that the snooted light(s) is/are underexposed, and this is still the case - reduce the brightness of the overhead softbox, and increase the brightness of the snooted light(s) The overhead softbox is (should be) nothing more than a fill, the snooted light(s) are the ones that reveal that the shoes are made of wool, not of some fluffy non-woven fabric.
If I had a raw image in a decent size, there is a lot that I could do with it so demonstrate what you need to achieve, but even with a small jpeg and about 30 seconds of adjustment, I've come up with something.
Now, it has many faults.
1. The colour is way off, this is easily put right so don't worry about it
2. The shadow would be a problem if left as it is, but that is very easily cured, either by correct lighting or in Photoshop, so don't worry about that either
3. The background isn't white, but again that is very easily cured, either by correct lighting or in Photoshop, so don't worry about that either
At least, we now have some definition,
Stop trying to blow the background, that's very easily done and in fact my cat could do it, and I haven't even got a cat
View attachment 112014
Sorry, but the softbox is nowhere near where it should be - like all studio photographers, I only need a quick glance at a photo to see exactly what type of lighting was used and exactly where it was placed, both the highlights and the shadows tell a full and complete story. I fully accept that you think that it was was angled forwards correctly but it wasn't, and this in itself is making a massive difference.
This is closer to what I would be going for, but your lighting ratios are still backwards. And you've created a double shadow, probably due to trying to blow the BG.
Numbers would theoretically help, but at best would be vague.
Yes, that's exactly what he needs to do, which is why I (and others) have suggested it.
Your approach is theoretically right, but at an angle of something like 60 degrees serious lens flare would be an issue - avoidable in a pro studio with a bellows lens hood or, even better, a bloody great black-both-sides-flag between the camera and the subject, with the shape of the sensor cut out.
I would say "could be an issue"... never know for sure until you try
.
