Lighting for newborn photography

<p>With photographing such young ones, I'm nervous about using full studiop lighting.<br>

Does anyone have any experience or tips about newborn photography?<br>

Thanks</p>

<p>Not a very complicated answer. Use available light or bounce your flash off ceiling.</p>

<p>Same lighting you'd use with kids or adults. Seriously, there's no medical evidence that flash damages newborns' eyes. I've done lots of photos of newborns, including in hospital intensive care settings. I normally use bounce flash because it looks better, but occasionally the bounce flash might affect another nearby infant patient. So I'd just use a makeshift diffuser and dial the flash output way down, and crank up the ISO to compensate.</p>

<p>You can tell easily if an infant is irritated by flash - they won't hesitate to frown or cry. If that happens, dial the flash way back, use a diffuser or bounce, or use continuous lighting. Try a good quality video type LED panel. It's not the "brightness" that makes some babies squint and frown, but the sudden flash. They usually cope with continuous lighting well.</p>

<p>My wife is a board certified pediatrician and she had no problem with me photographing our own children as infants with either studio strobes or on-camera flash. We have friends who are eye doctors and I've asked the question and they have no problems with it either. Just shot newborn portraits for another doctor (anesthesiologist) a month or so ago and she had no problems with it.<br /><br />When photographing babies I'm looking for soft light, so I typically use an umbrella or soft box. But I do the same with adults so really no difference.<br /><br />If in doubt, do whatever the mother is comfortable with.</p>

<p>In my experience, small children tend to be irritated by the flash more than adults. Newborns are sleeping most of the time however the flash may wake them up and cause them to open their eyes which may or may not fit the artistic intent. When I've used studio flash on children (not newborns, but 1-4 year olds) sometimes it works ok but at other times they start to squint their eyes in anticipation of the biting feeling from the flash, totally ruining the image (similar to people looking into the sun on a bright day). I think dialing down the flash energy to a level which is as small as possible while still achieving the desired quality of lighting is a good general plan, if you decide to use flash. This may mean increasing ISO and opening up the aperture. If you're shooting in a studio and have modeling lights that constitute the ambient lighting, then it may be enough to habituate the eyes to light but I'd still use flash at a smaller energy setting than with adults.</p>

<p>If you need to kill existing fluorescent light (which is the most common indoor light source in Europe now, due to the compact fluorescents having replaced tungsten bulbs except special applications) to get good colour while working on location then the flash energy that is required may be irritating - even with adults. One approach there is to filter the flash for fluorescent and use mixed lighting (with the flash mostly as fill). I tend to prefer black and white images when I can't avoid the fluorescent light being registered. Black and white is not so bad for newborns, it can look very beautiful. If you're going for B&W, using the continuous modeling lights of your studio lights as the light source(s) may work and yet give you control over the quality and softness of the light, though I guess the ISO will have to be quite high (1600?).</p>

<p>If you have access to a studio with windows on both sides of a corner of the building, you can get quite beautiful results using just the window light, again taking advantage of the ISO dial in the camera and possibly, in the case of a sleeping baby, tripod (which would let you go back to base ISO). By adjusting curtains and position of the baby you can have some control over lighting.</p>

<p>Incidentally, when I mentioned babies squinting or frowning from flash, I meant immediately after the flash. It shouldn't show in the photo. If you're consistently getting squinting or frowning in your photos as a direct result of the flash, it's the preflash.</p>

<p>If the camera has a slow lag between the preflash and main flash, many animals and some people will react. Ditto those gimmicky anti-redeye preflashes.</p>

<p>When I see any signs of flash-related squinting in my photos, I immediate disable the TTL and any type of preflash, and switch to manual flash or in some cases old fashioned auto flash. Old tech non-TTL auto flash (auto thyristor, in old school parlance) often works very well, and since there's no preflash it may help avoid blinkies and squinting while retaining the convenience of auto flash. But if there's no change in distance between the camera and subject, manual flash works well enough.</p>

<p><em>If you're consistently getting squinting or frowning in your photos as a direct result of the flash, it's the preflash.</em></p>

<p>Preflashes can cause eyelids to close with some cameras if TTL flash is used, but in this case I was using battery powered studio flash which doesn't use preflashes. The child was anticipating the flashes and trying to protect her eyes by closing the eyelids into a slit after I had photographed the family for some minutes. I used about 200Ws with a large softbox (150cm, indirect with two diffusers) from a distance of about 3 m (ISO 100, f/8). On my next shoot with children I reduced the flash energy to 132Ws with the same setup (now it was about ISO 200, f/6.3 in a different space) and it seemed to go down better with children, at least I didn't get them to squint. I think it's still creating a bit of a problem, just not as pronounced as before. It depends on whether the subjects are looking at each other and focused on what they're doing or if they're looking towards the light (which was behind me and a bit above). If the children are playing together then it seems to work well, but if I want the subject to have eye contact with the camera then I think I need to move from having the softbox behind and above me (I wanted to have symmetrical lighting in the left-right direction to avoid the movement of the subject from changing the lighting too much) into having a key light and fill setup so that when the subject is looking towards the camera, they aren't looking directly into the light but that there is some space in the middle which is not a part of the light source. However this will then create a bit of an issue with lighting changing more depending on the subject's position. I'll play around with the configuration a bit to see if I can avoid the issue, but I think the easiest way is to turn down the flash energy and open up my aperture and maybe go to ISO 400. f/5.6 and ISO 400 may be a good compromise although that can mean there will be some available light that will register in the images.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>"The child was anticipating the flashes and trying to protect her eyes by closing the eyelids into a slit after I had photographed the family for some minutes."</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Okay, I see what you mean. That sounds more like flash fatigue. In that case either a shorter session or, as you suggested, softer light, window or available light might be better.</p>

<p>I've occasionally experienced that with newborns. Usually it's an indication I should stop using flash for awhile. I have some cute photos of various newborns in my family holding a hand over their eyes after too many flash photos. Looks like they're facepalming in exasperation. The photos are pretty amusing, but, yeah, that's a sign the babies need a break from the flash photos.</p>

<p>One of the kidlets whom I've photographed extensively since his first day on Earth is my cousin's son Stewart, who was born with a serious heart defect in 2006. I spent a lot of time with them at the hospital, particularly during his first month when he had his first open heart surgery, so that I could document his life and family as much as possible. At the time I mostly used a Nikon D2H dSLR and SB-800 flash, usually bounced off the ceiling. And I turned the flash way down and cranked up the ISO to minimize the flash, because there were other babies and their families nearby in the pediatric CCU. But all the other families were frequently photographing their little ones too - I suppose we all had in the backs of our minds that this might be our only opportunity, although we were also hopeful and optimistic. (I don't have any of those photos on my laptop at the moment.)</p>

<p>By 2012 I'd mostly switched to compact cameras and built in flash or available light. When I photographed Stewart after his most recent open heart surgery in the fall of 2012 I just used a Ricoh GRD4 and its excellent pop-up flash, which rivals anything I could do with direct flash using my Nikon dSLR and SB-800.</p>

<p>Stewart has always been an incredibly patient little fellow, with big eyes that never seem to shy from the camera, even at one week old while he was recovering from his first open heart surgery. But my favorite recent photo of him is this one, looking rather less than pleased about being asked to display his "zipper" once again - that's what he calls his chest incision area, because it's been open and closed so many times. This time, when I saw that look on his face, I asked him if he was sure it was okay to take a photo - he's old enough now to decide. He said it was fine. But he doesn't like to dwell on it. He's amazingly well adjusted. His family treats him like a normal kid, not like an egg that might break. He never talks about it unless asked, and if you didn't know his history you'd never know anything was different.</p>

<p><img src="http://d6d2h4gfvy8t8.cloudfront.net/17612574-lg.jpg" alt="1-R0017782.JPG" width="525" height="700" border="0" /><br>

<em>Stewart at Cook Children's Hospital, autumn 2012. Love that wry expression.<br />Ricoh GRD4 with pop-up fill flash.<br />The little Ricoh has a very short preflash and blinkies are rare, other than with some pets.</em><br>

*</p>

<p>Here's another, a few months later at a local public park. The open shade was great so no flash needed - open shade on a bright day makes the eyes pop without needing fill flash. And the surroundings can provide reflected light so you don't even need a reflector in some situations. The Fort Worth Water Garden has plenty of light concrete and a combination of exposure to open sky and open shade from trees - perfect setting for families and kids in natural light. And fun public places like this are often better for photographing kids - gets them in the mood better than a studio setting. <a href="/photodb/user?user_id=448226">Ian Taylor</a> is a master at this sort of thing. I try to emulate his style but I don't really have knack.</p>

<p><a href="/photo/17636242&size=lg"><img src="http://d6d2h4gfvy8t8.cloudfront.net/17636242-md.jpg" alt="LR4-from-V1-NEF-2925-2" width="680" height="680" border="0" /></a><br>

<em>Nikon V1 and 10-30VR, no flash.</em><br>

The V1 is terrific for candid snaps of active kidlets. Ultra-quick AF and shutter response. The one-inch CX sensor offers a slight advantage in DOF over APS sensors, making minor focus errors irrelevant at f/4-f/5.6. The Nikon 1 System or Sony RX100 would be excellent choices for this type of family photography.</p>

<p>Use continuous light and a good FF camera with good ISO.</p>

<p>I really appreciate all this good advice, but as with all advice there's still room for individuality it seems and there's no clear-cut answer to the question.<br>

I've taken the liberty of putting a number of these pieces of advice together under 'pros' and 'cons' so that others can consider the options.<br>

If I have quoted any of the contributors to this forum anywhere and you do NOT want this yto be included (even though I haven't put any attributions) please let me know and I will remove it immediately.<br>

<a href="http://newbornphotographytips.net/flash-in-newborn-photography-yes-or-no/">Newborn Photography Tips/flash-in-newborn-photography-yes-or-no/</a></p>

<p>If I'm understanding this correctly, you're publishing a blog with advice for photographing babies, but you have little or no actual experience photographing babies? And you're using questions and answers on this forum, and from other forums or websites, as the basis for giving advice about the subject on your blog? And you're attributing some of the comments and quotes to medical doctors? Did you notify those doctors that their comments may be cited as authoritative references on your blog/website?</p>

<p>If you're doing research for your own blog or website, you should first notify forum members of your intentions in advance.</p>

<p>And if you're going to use verbatim quotes that are attributed to others, you should follow standard practices for journalism: Use quotes appropriately and accurately; cite the sources, including URLs linking to those sources if the information is publicly accessible; ask for permission to quote those sources *before* you cite them.</p>

<p>Also, it appears that your blog/website is using photos from Flickr rather than your own photos to illustrate your articles. If you have no photos of your own to illustrate the advice you are giving, then you should familiarize yourself with the Creative Commons licensing agreements for the photos taken by other photographers. For example, I see at least three photos sourced from Flickr, two of which are U.S. Army photos, all of which carry the Creative Commons Attribution 2.0 license, yet none of your articles carry the attribution required by that license agreement.</p>

<p>You'll find that advice articles will be considered more credible when written by photographers who actually have experience with the subjects they're writing about, and have their own photographs to illustrate their advice.</p>

<p>The most common mistake i seen in a newborn photography is the lighting. Just think about the most natural sources of lighting we have like sun and sky. The second important think is to have your baby angled such that the light flows on the top of the baby's head.</p>

<p>Photographing newborns is one of the best moment for the parents. Take baby outside into nature you can get some amazingly beautiful and unique newborn photos also Some of the sweetest and amazing photos you can take of your new baby will be the ones you get with older siblings.</p>