Starting with One light

  • Thread starter Deleted member 49549
  • Start date
D

Deleted member 49549

Guest
First of all let me say i know very little about lighting, hence the beginner prefix! Having a very young family, I wish to try some family portraits at home. Looking at the threads here, people in the know have recommend starting with one light and a modifier.

What i have -
  • OMD EM1
  • portrait lenses - 35-100 2.8, 45mm 1.8
  • DI622 Mk2, nikon
  • Nikon SB600
  • Yongnuo 2.4GHz Wireless Remote Control RF-602 for Nikon
  • Tripod and ball head
  • 110cm 5-in-1 Circular Light Reflector Panels - Gold, Silver, Black, White & Translucent Diffuser

Questions
  1. Can I use the flashes and triggers I have, or do I need flashes / triggers designed for micro four thirds? (Will the flashes work manually which is what is recommended for studio the shots?)
  2. I will need a stand for the flash, can I use my tripod with an attachment, or do I need a dedicated stand?
  3. What modifier(s) do you recommend to get initially?
  4. Do i need a backdrop, i will be using my living room, magnolia-ish coloured walls, long and narrow (8x4m) around 2.4m ceiling, but has a largish pendant light that will limit freedom of movement of anything that will need to go high. Due to wall colour I could stick to B+W initially.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Rapscallion said:
First of all let me say i know very little about lighting, hence the beginner prefix! Having a very young family, I wish to try some family portraits at home. Looking at the threads here, people in the know have recommend starting with one light and a modifier.

What i have -
  • OMD EM1
  • portrait lenses - 35-100 2.8, 45mm 1.8
  • DI622 Mk2, nikon
  • Nikon SB600
  • Yongnuo 2.4GHz Wireless Remote Control RF-602 for Nikon
  • Tripod and ball head
  • 110cm 5-in-1 Circular Light Reflector Panels - Gold, Silver, Black, White & Translucent Diffuser

Questions
  1. Can I use the flashes and triggers I have, or do I need flashes / triggers designed for micro four thirds? (Will the flashes work manually which is what is recommended for studio the shots?)
  2. I will need a stand for the flash, can I use my tripod with an attachment, or do I need a dedicated stand?
  3. What modifier(s) do you recommend to get initially?
  4. Do i need a backdrop, i will be using my living room, magnolia-ish coloured walls, long and narrow (8x4m) around 2.4m ceiling, but has a largish pendant light that will limit freedom of movement of anything that will need to go high. Due to wall colour I could stick to B+W initially.
Click to expand...
I'll see if I can help:
1. Yes - if you have a pair of 602's you can use them, but there are better options.
2. Yes, you can use the tripod, but it's not ideal and might not be high enough. Light stands typically start at 2m*, and as you ideally want the light above your subject, they're a no-brainer (* the cheaper lighter ones become frustrating, spend the extra tenner on an air damped stand)
3. I'd recommend this softbox as it comes with a stand attachment that makes things easy.
4. No you don't need a backdrop, IMHO most people think 'studio' is all about backdrops and stands - which sends them off on a tangent, it's about controlling the light and camera position.
 
Regarding the triggers, what are the limitations of the 602's and what would be a better alternative?
 
Rapscallion said:
Regarding the triggers, what are the limitations of the 602's and what would be a better alternative?
Click to expand...
The 602's are dumb triggers, they'll do the job of simply firing the speedlight.

But if you have some money to invest, you might want to buy into the YN622 system so you can control the flashgun either iTTL or Manual from the camera position
 
Ps are the flashes sufficient to get started?
 
Rapscallion said:
Ps are the flashes sufficient to get started?
Click to expand...

You can shoot perfectly good 'studio' stuff with speedlights...

Like all photography though, you have to understand and work with the limitations of your kit.

I can wander into a room and set up a single speedlight in a pop up softbox and get a perfectly good portrait in a few minutes. BUT (this isn't a boast) that's because I know what I'm aiming for and how to get it.

The limitations of speedlights (and the mitigations) are that:

  • They're not as bright as studio flashes (but modern cameras can use high ISO's and portraits don't require a massive DoF)
  • They don't recycle as fast as studio heads (but modern cameras can use high ISO's)
  • There's no modelling bulb (so you need to practice to learn where lights go)
  • They won't fill a massive softbox to do full body shots (either stick to what they will do or bounce off V flats / shoot through huge diffusers to create a larger light)
  • They're not that much cheaper - by the time you've bought a speedlight and mounting bracket - you've spent almost as much as you would on a studio head which is much more suitable*
*studio heads have modelling lights and recycle much faster, and easily take a variety of modifiers.
 
Thanks Phil. I shall take a closer look at those yongnuo triggers - i need to investigate whether they will allow ttl metering for olympus cameras.

but given what you have said, i think i can make a start with what i currently have and the stand / soft box you have linked to.
 
Rapscallion said:
Thanks Phil. I shall take a closer look at those yongnuo triggers - i need to investigate whether they will allow ttl metering for olympus cameras.

but given what you have said, i think i can make a start with what i currently have and the stand / soft box you have linked to.
Click to expand...
They won't do TTL for Oly cameras.
 
More than plenty to get started.

I thoroughly recommend reading light science magic. It'll help you understand more and that's way more valuable than any hear you buy!
 
Just ordered from Amazon (along with some AA rechargeable batteries for the flash). Hope to get a play this weekend and post some results.
 
Had a play this evening. Really needed to shoot where i had some more room and against a plain wall, but will do that next time. here are a couple of the shots (note these are edited 'plain' with no local edits so i can get some tips on lighting). First two 1/60 f4, second 2 1/30 f3.5. All iso 400.

Jn0-dXqwoa-3000x3000.jpeg
aGilr4qll7-3000x3000.jpeg
RBE2MI0aMM-3000x3000.jpeg
fe0rq6QIXF-3000x3000.jpeg
 
Get your ISO down and your SS up so that you know what your light is doing, you're slowing your SS to the point it could degrade IQ and the general exp may be being influenced by the ambient. (Can't tell in B&W)
 
Phil V said:
Get your ISO down and your SS up so that you know what your light is doing, you're slowing your SS to the point it could degrade IQ and the general exp may be being influenced by the ambient. (Can't tell in B&W)
Click to expand...
I agree that the SS is dangerously slow.
But I don't really agree with killing the ambient, that's just going to create higher contrast images. I suppose if you can't see what's going on you can start w/ a dark frame (building up the lighting) to help. And if you are going for more control/advanced lighting using additional fill light(s) it's definitely beneficial. With "one light" scenarios the only thing you can do is manage the ratio, which typically means recording some ambient. FWIW, I wouldn't mind deeper shadows/more contrast, but that's more a personal choice.

I don't see anything particularly "wrong" with the lighting in these images... maybe a bit of exposure control issues, but nothing major. IMO, the first images have the light source both too far away and too close (or nearly so). It is far enough away that the shadows are fairly well defined (hard edged) and speculars are smaller/harder as well. And it is close enough that the changes in distances to the light (forehead/cheek/left arm) are pushing the highlights higher. There's nothing you can really do about this other than set priorities and try to keep things that you want equally exposed at the same distance.
The second two images appear to have the light closer, but it is also contributing much less to the image. The settings all combine to be very precarious for photographing children. IMO, all of the images would benefit from more ambient light so that you could get the SS higher and the ISO lower.
 
Phil V said:
Get your ISO down and your SS up so that you know what your light is doing, you're slowing your SS to the point it could degrade IQ and the general exp may be being influenced by the ambient. (Can't tell in B&W)
Click to expand...

I mostly set my shutter speed to Nikon's base line of 250thsec when using flash, it gives me a margin of error as I have shaky hands.
 
sk66 said:
I agree that the SS is dangerously slow.
But I don't really agree with killing the ambient, that's just going to create higher contrast images. I suppose if you can't see what's going on you can start w/ a dark frame (building up the lighting) to help. And if you are going for more control/advanced lighting using additional fill light(s) it's definitely beneficial. With "one light" scenarios the only thing you can do is manage the ratio, which typically means recording some ambient. FWIW, I wouldn't mind deeper shadows/more contrast, but that's more a personal choice.

I don't see anything particularly "wrong" with the lighting in these images... maybe a bit of exposure control issues, but nothing major. IMO, the first images have the light source both too far away and too close (or nearly so). It is far enough away that the shadows are fairly well defined (hard edged) and speculars are smaller/harder as well. And it is close enough that the changes in distances to the light (forehead/cheek/left arm) are pushing the highlights higher. There's nothing you can really do about this other than set priorities and try to keep things that you want equally exposed at the same distance.
The second two images appear to have the light closer, but it is also contributing much less to the image. The settings all combine to be very precarious for photographing children. IMO, all of the images would benefit from more ambient light so that you could get the SS higher and the ISO lower.
Click to expand...
There's nothing inherently wrong with mixing ambient and flash.

Except when someone is learning to shoot 'studio' type lighting for the first time.

Whilst we can only see these in B&W we have no idea what they actually look like; but a flash lit subject with fluorescent filled shadows is really unattractive, like I said it can make things needlessly complex. When learning to 'light' it's easier to use reflectors or additional lights than the ambient.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top