The Natural Light Thread

cjnicolai

cjnicolai

Messages
702
Edit My Images
Yes
There's no light more beautiful in photography than natural light. It's actually very simple to master, but for a lot of photogs it can be a bit confusing or intimidating.

I'm a natural light shooter (primarily "people" shots) and I'd be happy to answer any questions you might have about using/metering/seeing/controlling natural light. I'm sure there are lots of other natural light shooters on this board, too, who could pitch in as well. Hopefully we can make this thread a valuable resource.

- CJ

www.cheryljacobsportraits.com
 
Great idea. I'm also a big fan of natural light over flash. The wedding I was at the other day I shot mostly natural light. I think shooting B&W allows you to bend a few rules too. If you shoot colour a blown out sky is obvious. If you shoot B&W it seems to work.
 
Add me to the list as well, natural light for 99% of my stuff as for me the light is what it's all about.
 
CJ - why do you think I want to be on that workshop of yours..!
I'll try to post a picture of 2 over the next few days, when I am home (if we can get online) to show the sort of stuff I want to do more of - kids (mine this time), available light..
Controling light seems to be the biggie for me - I need more idea how to do it !
 
Cool, then. Let's do it!

Anyone with a question to ask, feel free to throw it out there. You can ask how to achieve a certain look, how to deal with a specific lighting scenario, post an image for help, whatever you need related to natural light.
 
Raymond Lin said:
i have one, at a wedding, what is your fav lens? specially indoors. thanks
Click to expand...


Raymond, when shooting indoors, a fast lens is key. It's great to have a f/1.2 or f/1.8 to enable you to shoot in low light. (Remember that if you must shot at f/1.2, you can gain significantly more depth of field by simply backing further away from your subject. I've done many indoor family shoots at f/2.8!) Keep in mind, too, that just as important is the focal length. You can successfully handhold a 50mm lens at significantly slower speeds that an 80mm or 100mm. If you don't already know it, the general rule of thumb is that you can typically expect to get sharp images handheld at speeds of at least the reciprocal of your lens length; so if you're shooting with a 50mm lens, the reciprocal is 1/50, which rounds to approximately a 1/60th shutter speed. You may find yourself falling to either side of that, but it's a good guideline.

When I'm shooting the bride as she's getting ready (and my normal portrait sessions) I prefer to shoot medium format, which means the fastest lens available is f/2.8. The means I have to be careful about bracing myself well to handhold successfully at slower shutter speeds. I've done it enough that I've learned to successfully handhold at a 1/4th shutter speed.

However, during a ceremony, I need to be able to zoom to get shots I couldn't otherwise get. I trust my Canon 28 - 135mm for my 35mm camera. Although it is only a f/3.5, the image stabilizer on it allows me to shoot at 1/30th and 1/15th handheld when my subjects aren't moving around too much. There are faster zooms, to be sure, but this lens is incredibly affordable and is good for the job.

Does that answer your question?

- CJ
 
cjnicolai said:
Raymond, when shooting indoors, a fast lens is key. It's great to have a f/1.2 or f/1.8 to enable you to shoot in low light. (Remember that if you must shot at f/1.2, you can gain significantly more depth of field by simply backing further away from your subject. I've done many indoor family shoots at f/2.8!) Keep in mind, too, that just as important is the focal length. You can successfully handhold a 50mm lens at significantly slower speeds that an 80mm or 100mm. If you don't already know it, the general rule of thumb is that you can typically expect to get sharp images handheld at speeds of at least the reciprocal of your lens length; so if you're shooting with a 50mm lens, the reciprocal is 1/50, which rounds to approximately a 1/60th shutter speed. You may find yourself falling to either side of that, but it's a good guideline.

When I'm shooting the bride as she's getting ready (and my normal portrait sessions) I prefer to shoot medium format, which means the fastest lens available is f/2.8. The means I have to be careful about bracing myself well to handhold successfully at slower shutter speeds. I've done it enough that I've learned to successfully handhold at a 1/4th shutter speed.

However, during a ceremony, I need to be able to zoom to get shots I couldn't otherwise get. I trust my Canon 28 - 135mm for my 35mm camera. Although it is only a f/3.5, the image stabilizer on it allows me to shoot at 1/30th and 1/15th handheld when my subjects aren't moving around too much. There are faster zooms, to be sure, but this lens is incredibly affordable and is good for the job.

Does that answer your question?

- CJ
Click to expand...

That is very useful thanks :)

The reason I am asking is because a friend of mine asked me to photograph his, a kinda photojournalism style. He already have someone else coming in for the formal group shots (I am glad actually I don't feel comfortable doing those).

I understand the general rule of thumb relative to the focal length to shutter speed (1/focal length). It will mean I am going to be restricted to using my 50mm 1/8 most of the time, I don't have the money to get a 17-40mm at the moment and a friend who has some L-Glass has just moved away so can't borrow one. I'll be stuck with the 50mm, 28-105 and the kit lens...:eek:

Another question, when in doors, how do to meter for the subject ? Do you put the camera in M, F/2.8 and 1/60 (for example) and then adjust the ISO so you get the right exposure with a couple of test shots ? Or shoot in Tv, 1/Focal length and let the camera pick the Aperture ?
 
Ewan said:
I use natural light practically all the time. Hardly ever see a need for flash.
Click to expand...

How do you work with shadowy eyes in certain light conditions without blowing out the background?
 
I work almost entirely with natural light, both because I don't own a decent flashgun, and because I prefer natural light and the challenege it brings. However, I do have a question; Are there any tricks, tips or secrets for manipulating natural light when its very flat and boring? Say I found a great location, for example a building and this is my only opportunity to shoot it, but the light is grey, flat and boring. How would you go about making best use of the light available, either on location or during post processing?:)
 
Messiah, can you please clarify whether you're photographing the building itself, or using it as a location for a shoot? The answer will be very different depending on which you mean.

CJ
 
petemc said:
How do you work with shadowy eyes in certain light conditions without blowing out the background?
Click to expand...

Pete, shadowy eyes come from light coming from the wrong direction. For example, shooting a portrait at high noon, with the light coming from directly overhead. If you shoot from a slightlu higher angle, the subject will look up at you and the shadows will greatly decrease. Alternately, you can use a large reflector to fill the shadows, which is far softer and more flattering than flash.

CJ
 
cjnicolai said:
Pete, shadowy eyes come from light coming from the wrong direction. For example, shooting a portrait at high noon, with the light coming from directly overhead. If you shoot from a slightlu higher angle, the subject will look up at you and the shadows will greatly decrease. Alternately, you can use a large reflector to fill the shadows, which is far softer and more flattering than flash.

CJ
Click to expand...

I think the problem with a reflector, from what i've seen as I've never used one, is that you need a random joe to hold it.

Ewan said:
TBH I never take pictures of people, so tis not a problem :)
Click to expand...

I kinda got that impression a few minutes later :) I figured since cjnicolai started this thread and shoots people mostly that this was a thread for taking fantastic people shots without the reliance on a flash :)
 
Raymond Lin said:
Another question, when in doors, how do to meter for the subject ? Do you put the camera in M, F/2.8 and 1/60 (for example) and then adjust the ISO so you get the right exposure with a couple of test shots ? Or shoot in Tv, 1/Focal length and let the camera pick the Aperture ?
Click to expand...

As a film shooter, I don't have that option. ;) I have to shoot with total confidence that I've metered correctly, as there's no double checking a screen or histogram to be sure.

First things first: you NEVER want the camera to determine your aperture. You need to be the one to decide which aperture you use, because it has a huge impact on the look of the image. Always pick the aperture you want for the look you're after, and then decide (with the help of a meter) which shutter speed you'll need to use, adjusting the ISO if necessary.

I am not at all an equipment junkie, but I HIGHLY recommend buying a simple handheld meter. The digital folks I teach are always surprised by that. Really, though, it is such a simple way to work. Very few people TRULY understand their in-camera meter and how to use it absolutely correctly in every situation. The result is that you have little control over your exposure.

The camera can ONLY tell you how to make what it's metering 18% grey. It doesn't have any idea what you want the image to look like. How do you know whether the camera is metering for the shadows on your subject's face, or the highlights on your subject's hair? What if you want to expose for silhouette? Or compensate for backlight?

Camera meters are pretty good these days, but they can ONLY be as good as the user's understanding of it. For that reason, I find that the vast majority of photogs gain tremendous control and understanding of exposure when they switch to a handheld meter.

Now, if you're shooting digital, you probably already know that you have more latitude in underexposure than you do in overexposure; film is directly opposite. So, if I'm shooting digital and I want to correctly expose a face in window light, I will place my handheld meter on the bright side of her face pointing toward the light source and take the reading. That will render the bright part of her face approximately 18% grey. I set my camera in manual mode to the readings on the meter, and I'm good to go. There's no need to remeter unless I change locations, or the light changes.

Make sense?

- CJ
 
Pete, reflectors really aren't all that difficult to manage. Frankly, quite often I will put the subject's parent/spouse/sibling to the task of reflector-holding because it makes them feel useful without allowing them to interfere. ;) You can also use a reflector stand if you like.

Consider, too, that lots of other things reflect besides reflectors. Light-colored buildings, sidewalks, sand, snow, tablecloths, light walls -- they can all be useful reflectors if you keep your eyes open.

This one was shot using a concrete wall as a reflector.

girlbx2.jpg


- CJ
 
cjnicolai said:
Messiah, can you please clarify whether you're photographing the building itself, or using it as a location for a shoot? The answer will be very different depending on which you mean.

CJ
Click to expand...

Building itself. Or any other relatively large inanimate object. Thanks.

Edit; Slightly off topic, but CJ, you wouldn't happen to have had an article about youself in 'Black & White Photography Magazine'? I think something has just clicked as to who you are.

Edit Edit; And after a bit more reseach, I can answer that myself. You are indeed the very same CJ. Wow, didn't realise we had a celebrity amongst us. (y) I have to say, that picture of the girl sitting on the logpile really is hauntingly good. Fantastic work.:)
 
cjnicolai said:
This one was shot using a concrete wall as a reflector.

- CJ
Click to expand...

Damn! Nothing else? The detail in her eyes is brilliant. Its like you used a studio. I'm very tempted to run out and buy a light meter and things because you really are selling them to me :)
 
cjnicolai said:
Now, if you're shooting digital, you probably already know that you have more latitude in underexposure than you do in overexposure; film is directly opposite. So, if I'm shooting digital and I want to correctly expose a face in window light, I will place my handheld meter on the bright side of her face pointing toward the light source and take the reading. That will render the bright part of her face approximately 18% grey. I set my camera in manual mode to the readings on the meter, and I'm good to go. There's no need to remeter unless I change locations, or the light changes.

Make sense?

- CJ
Click to expand...

Yup :) and thanks again, guess i'll get a light meter then, used one in the past belong to someone else but because i've always had E-TTL I never truly needed one.

cjnicolai said:
This one was shot using a concrete wall as a reflector.

girlbx2.jpg


- CJ
Click to expand...

How did you make her "glow" like that ? Was it a post processing technique ?
 
Thanks, guys! Messiah, yup, correct about Black & White mag; I had a great six-page feature in the Dec. 2004 issues and another little one in February of this year. Great mag! The image of the girl on the logs was shot while demonstrating at a workshop in DC. What you can't see is fifteen students standing behind me. LOL.

Pete, yes, just the wall as a reflector. It's natural light, coming from behind her at left and right, hitting the wall, and bouncing back onto her face. Notice how she appears to have two catchlights in her eyes? That's because I'm standing between her and the wall, of course. ;) I metered the shot for her face, and let the background fall dark.

I really, really highly advise owning and using a light meter. There's no better tool for learning your lighting and nailing it the first time. You don't need to buy the fanciest meter, either. I spend about $200 US for my little polaris meter. It handles both ambient light and flash, and both spot and incident modes. Please do not convince yourself that a $600 meter is the only way to go. ;)

Messiah, in terms of shooting a building or other large object that can't be moved, patience is a virtue. Just as landscape shooters can't move the landscape into better light, you'll have to wait for great light if you want great light. ;) That said, one overwhelming weakness that I see these days in photography is extremely weak midtones. Remember that it's not the highlights or the shadows that give an image its glow; it's the midtones. So even in bright, less-than-ideal light, darkening the midtones slightly (particularly in B&W) can make a world of difference. Resist the urge to increase the contrast, as that actually DECREASES the midtones. Rather, go into levels or curves in photoshop (or the equivalent) and adjust the midtones only, and watch the effect on your shot.

- CJ
 
Raymond, even with E-TTL, you still need a light meter. Unless you're just planning to use fill flash on every shot. ;) Using a handheld meter means you have to consciously decide what you want to expose for, and set your camera accordingly. There's no chance of the meter being fooled by bright backgrounds and the like.

As far as post-processing on that shot, there's really very little. Again, keep in mind that I'm a film shooter, so digital effects are out for me. For this image, I burned down the background slightly (to make an already-dark background a little darker, as there's a concrete seam in the wall behind her.) In the darkroom, I diffused the image slightly to make it just a little surreal. It's 99% lighting.

- CJ
 
CJ - I have just posted a couple of pictures in my gallery - if you have time and the inclination, could you please have a little look and offer any suggestions..
Not sure if this should be here or in a different place, but you opinions count..!
Cheers
Steve
 
Jhob asked a question in another thread that is fairly well related to this one. So, I'm posting my reply in this thread as well.

The question was what to do with a family session in terms of posing and getting them to relax.

*********************

OK, let's start with positioning the family. (Obviously, first you'll have chosen the place and the light you'll be using.)

There are two "rules" that I give the families I'm photographing. The first one is: everyone has to get close together. I mean very close together. That will prompt the family to sit or stand reasonably close, but not nearly close enough for me. LOL. I want their faces touching. I at least want them to try. Getting them that close together accomplishes several things.

- It eliminates dead space between family members, implying a close relationship

- It improves their body language; you can't get all those faces close together without the subjects turning their shoulders (preventing them from squaring up to the camera)

- It makes them giggle! It feels silly to be that close to each other, and more times than not, someone will tickle someone else, whatever.

- It helps them to relax, having the other family members to lean on, literally and figuratively.

- If you don't have a lot of light, getting your subjects' faces together is very helpful as it will get them closer to the same plane; the result is that you can get away with a wider aperture if needed.

Once you've got them close together, take a look at the composition they've created, and simply tweak out anything that doesn't work. If you can hardly see Mom because she's gotten squished behind Dad, adjust it. Be sure to look at the shape the faces are making. Generally you're looking for triangles (as opposed to rows and rectangles.) So, rather than YOU having to come up with a specific pose, you're letting them do the work, and you're just moving around what doesn't work for you.

The second rule for families is that everyone has to touch someone else. Don't tell them HOW to do it. Let them come up with it on their own. It may result in Dad grabbing everyone up in a bear hug. The kid sitting on Mom's lap may reach up and do the "reverse hug." Whatever. If anyone doesn't voluntarily touch someone else, often I'll grab the "dead limb" and with a wink and a smile, shake it until it loosens up, and drop it around someone, which always elicits a chuckle. Again, tweak anything that doesn't work for you.

Having them all touch each other accomplishes the following:

- It enhances the appearance of a close relationship even further.

- It eliminates the compositional problem of having limp, hanging arms, and gives them something to do with their hands.

- It keeps everyone in place! That's really important when working with families with young children.

By now, you should have a very good starting point for your family. They should be nicely positioned, fairly loosened up, and they'll have a clear idea of what sort of images you're looking for. It's a great time to turn your back on them and let them chat amongst themselves for a few minutes. I call it "marinating." ;) It gives them a chance to relax into the position and make it their own.

Once you're ready to start, always keep in mind the goal. You probably don't want them wholly focused on the fact that they're being photographed. You probably don't want them staring at you. I would rather get them focused on each other. You can ask them questions about each other. Ask about their favorite vacation together. Whatever.

I could go on for days about working with families, but really, the majority of it is wrapped up in those two "rules."

Relax! You'll do great.

- CJ
 
steveinspain said:
CJ - I have just posted a couple of pictures in my gallery - if you have time and the inclination, could you please have a little look and offer any suggestions..
Not sure if this should be here or in a different place, but you opinions count..!
Cheers
Steve
Click to expand...

Steve, absolutely. Would you mind choosing maybe two of them and posting them here? That way, everyone can benefit from it. Thanks!

- CJ
 
CJ - Having written my message, I have since learned how to post in thread, so have posted them in another place, but at the risk of being boring, will do so again here..

IMG_4371_edit_edited-1_Medium_blurred_2_Medium_.jpg


IMG_4356_edit_Medium_.jpg


I am new to so much here, especially editing, and you get such wonderful 'glow' to your pictures - I want to know how to make mine look more like yours..! (OK, I need to take better pictures as well, but I need to start someplace !!)
It is much appreciated that you are offering to help so many of us out, as you clearly have a lot of skill and feeling.
Thanks !
Steve
 
Really like that second one Steve. for some reson I think it looks like a shot out of an old film or something. You could do with adjusting the levels a bit though as the blacks look very gray and washed out in my opinion.
 
MK - OK, thanks for that - I have a very old monitor, and have just bought, but not tried a Huey monitor calibration thingie - on my screen, the blacks look pretty black, so thats my excuse......
Will give it a whirl though !

Not really relevant, but Jessie is only 3 - she seems to look a lot older in this shot..
 
How right you are, without light there would be dark. And the world would be void and without light. And then there would be no me, it's a saga now DAVE.
 
cjnicolai said:
First things first: you NEVER want the camera to determine your aperture. You need to be the one to decide which aperture you use, because it has a huge impact on the look of the image. Always pick the aperture you want for the look you're after, and then decide (with the help of a meter) which shutter speed you'll need to use, adjusting the ISO if necessary.
Click to expand...

Must agree 100%.In my view unless I'm shooting motorsport where shutter speed is my first thought but for the rest of my work aperture is KING.Aperture is where creativity is born.
I'm a hugh fan of Bryan F. Peterson and to quote his examples of "three types of aperture"."Singular Theme Apertures (f2.8 , f4, f5.6), Who Cares (f8, f11, f13) and Storytelling (f22 , f29 , f32.)"
 
I'll add my vote to aperture control as well. I think DoF is just as important in composition as the rule of thirds, etc.
 
Steve, sorry to be so long in replying. I've had an exceptionally busy last few days!

The light looks pretty good in both the shots you posted. The direction of the light is very nice, lighting the mask of the face and creating nice catchlights. Do keep in mind that the closer your subjects are to the light source, the softer the light will be. Particularly in the second shot, look at the shadow by her nose and the catchlights in her eyes: do you see how you could outline them with a pencil? It's an indicator of light being a bit on the hard side. The softer/larger the light source, the less sharply defined the shadows and catchlights will be. Remember, too, that a large light source is only a large light source if the subject is close to it. ;)

One suggestion compositionally. See how your subjects' eyes are dead center in both images? It's generally more efffective to place the eyes in the upper third of the image. In the first image, that also would have allowed you to eliminate a bit of extra background, and keep the hands in the frame. That would've made a huge difference.

The tones are just a bit on the weak side, as was previously mentioned. The glow you mentioned in my shots is equal parts careful lighting and a full range of tones. Darken up the shadows and play with your midtones until you start to see that same glow. It's there, really. ;)

- CJ



steveinspain said:
CJ - Having written my message, I have since learned how to post in thread, so have posted them in another place, but at the risk of being boring, will do so again here..

IMG_4371_edit_edited-1_Medium_blurred_2_Medium_.jpg


IMG_4356_edit_Medium_.jpg


I am new to so much here, especially editing, and you get such wonderful 'glow' to your pictures - I want to know how to make mine look more like yours..! (OK, I need to take better pictures as well, but I need to start someplace !!)
It is much appreciated that you are offering to help so many of us out, as you clearly have a lot of skill and feeling.
Thanks !
Steve
Click to expand...
 
CJ - Get your butt over here in Spring - I need to spend sopme time with you to focus my mind more..
Thanks for your comments - I need some time to go over them when I am not mentally full of work stuff (I am a builder..) but I hear what you are saying - I just need to work out how to do it...! (especially the bit about being close to the light source makes the light softer - coming from a basic knowledge of flash, it was always the closer to the flash, the harsher the light..)
As for the eyes being in the centre - that is just me and my poor techinque - focus on the eyes and then forget to move the camera........
I am very grateful for your input, along with all the others who have taken time to respond,
Many thanks,
Steve
 
No problem!

(And I'm working on the spring thing -- still need to find an affordable or free venue, and that ain't easy from across the ocean!)

- CJ
 
CJ - If I can help, then let me know - not that I am too much closer than you much of the time, but let me know what sort of place/size etc, and I can ask...
 
Kicking this thread back into play. Anyone else have a natural light question or anything else related to portraiture?

- CJ

(Steve, I'll drop you a line in a bit.)
 
Hey, CJ, me again..
Ok, well if no other questions are coming, how about a few pointers about using a light meter - you say it a good thing to use - I don't have one, so what sort of thing is good enough to start with, and how do use it..?
(I did have use of one 30 odd years ago, with a borrowed Nikon which had no meter, but never really worked out how it worked to the best..)
Also, portraiture - most of your pictures (that I have seen, ie in your gallery) are of kids/young people. How do you go about taking them - do you set up a place, then try to get them to feel happy in it, and with you, or do you let them choose, or what ? I seem to take a fair few of my kids and a few of other peoples kids - getting them to relax and not pose in any way is pretty hard for me, and normally they have the best expressions at times when they are in the worst place for light. As you use film, I guess you don't shoot hundreds of pictures in a session, so you must have developed some 'technique', or is it that you are just a really lovely person that has the knack - if so, I hate you.
Seems like you need to make a video of a shoot - I'm sure a lot of folks here might be interested in buying a copy..!
 
Cheryl, their is something deeply beautiful about your photography. Film stands out so much in this digital age, it is very refreshing to see film shots, and inspiring.
I love natural light, a little fill flash for the eyes, sometimes a lightbox to put light in the eyes, but by far and away natural light is best.
Really impressive, lovely work. :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top