How to control light spills (+ new pictures)

Tried yesterday to do some kind of high-key setup: main at ~f11,

fill at ~f8, and a medium softbox lighting the background from above

the subject, at ~f16.

 

The distance between subject and background is around 5 feet (my

room is kind of small)

 

After taking a few shots, I figured out there is some light spill on

the left side of my subject. (first image)

 

In order to identify the suspect, I turned off my main, dialed down

my fill to 1/32nd (kept it on, just because my sync cable was

plugged into it), then shot the second image. The light spill was

still there.

 

I looked around the rom for reflective objects, there is nothing

here. Not sure how can the background light give such kind of

spill...

 

May this be from the walls/ceilings? (the distance to the

surrounding walls is ~ 4ftn and I have 9 ft ceiling).

If so, why do I see it mostly on the left side of my subject? (my

subject, background and background light are centered left/right in

the room)

 

What would be the best way to cut this spill (painting the walls is

not an option, since I'm living in a rental house)

 

And, by the way, besides the light spills, may I have some feedback

for the first shot?<div></div>

Second shot<div></div>

It's not "spill".It's glare. <p>Your background lights are bouncing off the white background, onto the sides of your subject's face and into the lens. <p>Move him further off the background and/or place black flats on either side of him, just <i>barely</i> outside the frame. <p>Also, you've got at least two f-stops too much light overall. Try to get your main back to 5.6 and balance the others to that. This will help to reduce the huge blast of light that's bouncing off everything and compressing your lighting ratio. I doubt there's one stop difference from one side of his face to the other... Too flat for my tastes, which will no doubt prove to be controversial... t

I'm with Tom on this one, though I've seen the word "spill" apply in this situation as well.

 

Insert lesson here about ratios, etc... Timber?

Just wondering. Really a question. But why the softbox on the background, and from above. why not behind the subject pointing directly towards the wall??

 

And isn't the technique for obtaining a white washed background to incident meter the subject, then ajdust the background light until you get a reflective meter reading of 1 1/2 to 2 stops above the incident reading?

 

Just wondering.

'Try to get your main back to 5.6 and balance the others to that. This will help to

reduce the huge blast of light that's bouncing off everything and compressing your

lighting ratio.'

 

The 'hugeness' of the light output isn't relevant here. You'll have exactly the same

problem if you knock all your lights down a couple of stops.

 

What you're seeing is your white background being reflected on the shiny head (and

less shiny cheeks) of your subject.

 

As Tom says, this can be reduced by using flats, but that may be impractical in your

tiny studio. (For a balding subject, as well as side flats, you need an additional flat

above his head).

 

I think your space is too small to do nice, clean, white background work (even

headshots). Given the limitations, I'd recommend bringing down the background

light a stop or two, and cleaning up in Photoshop.

Marc, the boom is above the subject, holding a softbox towards the background.

Regarding the white background, should I get a incident reading at subjects position, or get a reflected reading of the subject?

As for flats, where can I get them? Any recommendations?

Whether you call it flare, glare, bounce or spill, the 'problem' is caused by light bouncing off your background (and pperhaps the ceiling too) and on to your subject.<br>This has nothing to do with lighting rations (and anyway, it could be a mistake to assume that the people on PN who come up with long lectures about such things actually know what they're talking about)and if you don't want to see the effect then you will have to move your subject further from the wall. Full stop.<p>Feedback on the shot? Personally I think that the lighting could have been a tad harsher, but that your lighting 'fault' actually adds to its appeal.<p>BTW - measuring background, if you want the background to be the same colour/shade as it actually is, light it to give the same reading by <i>incident light</i> as your subject, e.g. both f11.<br>If you want the background pure white, and it's a white background, use the same method but over-expose a bit - how much you can safely overexpose will depend on how far your subject is from the background and on the media (type of film or digital).<br>If you want the background pure white, and it's not a white background, use the same method but measure the background by reflected light.

You're getting spill light on your subject because you don't have enough distance between him and the background. You can try placing some large flats, foamcore or other opaque material, to the sides and behind your subject to block some of this light coming from the edges of the background, but the real problem is too little distance from the background. Your room may just be too small for this type of setup.

 

Here's a sample with the subjects being 10 ft. from a background that is 9 ft. wide. The background is lit by 2 medium softboxes, one on each side of the background and shielded from the subject with gobos.

 

When you successfully isolate the lighting on the background from the lighting on the subject, you can be as aggressive as you like when lighting the subject. Notice on this sample how directional the lighting is on the people with clearly defined shadows and highlights, not very flat lighting at all.<div></div>

My ratios comment had more to do with Tom's comment about the lighting being too flat--nothing to do with the spill/glare discussion.

Thanks a lot, folks!

I'll try this again with a shorter lens, placing my subject as far from the background as I can.