Lighting for Fashion Photography

[michelle_bracken]

I just started photography and need some help in finding out what is the best

lighting for fashion photography.

 

What I have:

I bought three tungsten lights a while back- Lilliput Ianiro Max 650W-240v

with bulbs at varying watts (60-100-300). Additionally, I purchased a

lightbox, an umbrella (reversible) and two barn doors. Plus, let me not forget

the famous filter to compensate for the yellowish light that tungtsen emits.

I wanted to start with this equipment, so I could see the results right away-

since the light is always on and also because I figured I would do most of my

photography work outdoors anyways.

 

I have done a few high-key photo shoots, but had a harder time with the low

key shoots. One fashion photographer came by my mini studio at home and

mentioned that those lights were not much good...

 

Moreover, I was really considering it would be nice to have the portable flash

when shooting in low light situations outdoors, wherein the model still needs

to be somewhat lit.

 

I am trying to grasp how artificial lighting works better and would appreciate

any knowledge/input.

 

So I am wondering:

 

- Is flash really the norm for fashion photography?

- What are the benefits of studio flash versus tungsten?

- What types of studio flash are recommended- good quality without breaking

the budget?

- What about flash that can be taken outdoors? Any brands or models

recommended?

 

Thank you so much for your time and knowledge!

 

Michelle<div></div>

[garry edwards]

Michelle,

 

Good example shot!

 

Tungsten lighting isn't really suitable for fashion photography, come to that it's far from ideal for any kind of photography involving people.

 

You'll find plenty of info here on PN about the advantages/disadvantages of various types of lighting equipment, this short article might help too. http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00Futx

 

You may also find some of the Lighting Themes, archived under 'Administration' in this forum helpful.

[trw]

<a href="strobist.blogspot.com">Obligatory strobist link</a>.<br /><br />

Strobist has great info on using older used manual hotshoe flashes for great results on location. <br /><br />

Lots of people swear by "White lightning" and "Alien bees" brand studio strobes.<br /><br />

The two big differences between continuous tungsten and strobes are: Tungsten lights change colour when you change the power, strobes don't, and Strobes put out a lot more light, for a lot shorter time, which means your exposures can go up to your max flash sync speed, your model won't be squinty, her pupils won't be contracted, and you won't have to fight with the ambient light as much, among other things.

[mark_hartman]

I would agree that flash is more of the norm. Certainly everything from tungsteon household bulbs to xmas lights can be used with the right creative mind, but flash is certainly the most practical. If you are also shooting digital, with it's instant feedback, the advantage of seeing where the light falls with continuous lighting becomes even less of an advantage.

 

I like the Alien bees because they are well priced and have a number of modifiers availble, including battery packs to use when electrical outlets are not available. There are plenty of other brands though that work as well or better. I'd suggest getting at least one light and seeing how you like it. Nice picture, by the way.<div></div>

[sing_lo]

Flash is not norm for fashion photography. Believe it or not, many big fashion label editorials are shot with big tungsten or HMI fresnel spots like those made by Arri etc... If you are shooting digital, you don't really need the blue filter, you just set the correct white balance without the loss of light. There is no reason why you can't shoot low key with your lights...barndoors and flags (black cards)can be used to control spill.

[garry edwards]

Sing Lo,<p>

 

Michelle doesn't have <i>"big tungsten or HMI fresnel spots like those made by Arri etc"</i><br>With respect, there is a world of difference beween high end pro HMI or tungsten and what she has available.

[craig_shearman1]

Strobe is certainly more convenient but there's no reason why you can't shoot fashion or anything else with hot lights. Up until strobe became available in the 60s or so, this is how all studio photography was done. But the wattage you describe is no where near adequate -- 60/100/300. With the exception maybe of a tiny hair light around 250 watts, hot lights start at about 500 watts and go up. Around 1000 watts is standard for something like a Lowell TotaLight or DP. Lowell Softlights are 1500 watts. Even the modeling lights on my Novatron strobes are 150 watts and that's barely enough to focus by let alone shoot by. If your unit can take a 650 watt bulb, then use it. You need the brightness to get a decent f-stop and a decent shutter-speed, unlike strobes where the shutter speed is determine by the duration of the flash, typically 1/500 of a second.

[t_nonstick]

"Sing Lo, Michelle doesn't have "big tungsten or HMI fresnel spots like those made by Arri etc"

With respect, there is a world of difference beween high end pro HMI or tungsten and what

she has available."

 

Tungsten encourages a more natural response from models. They tend to 'relax' their pose

after the flash has fired, albeit slightly, but enough to make a difference.

[michelle_bracken]

Thank you for all your responses.

 

@Garry: Why do you think tungsten is not suitable for photographing people? Thanks for the link, I will read it when I have some time.

 

@Trent: could you resend me the link? The only thing I don't like too much about the strobist effect, it seems to give an unnatural look to the skin, maybe a bit too artificial? If I use several is there a way to make the light more even and natural looking? Great idea though for outdoor photography!

 

@Mark: I really like your low key photo! I will look into the alien bees.

 

@Sing Lo and Craig: Are the tungstens you are mentioning very expensive? The only issue is that my studio at home (Paris size apmartment) is miniscule, around 100 sq meters. This is why I got the weaker tungtsens with less wattage. Otherwise I believe there would be far too much light for a small space with all white walls...

 

@Teflon: I agree with you there, I do like a natural response from models, this is very important. I personally don't like pictures taken of me with flash. Maybe the models are used to this more than myself...Any thoughts?

 

To all, as I mentioned my studio is tiny today but I will have to find a way to upgrade my space for shooting (full body). I would like to know what are the reasons why you prefer flash over tungsten or vice versa. How many watts? How many lights? What accesories? Any knowledge of yours is much appreciated.

 

Thanks!

[garry edwards]

Michelle,

 

My reasons for disliking tungsten lighting for people photography are set out in the link I gave you. If you use the search facility here on PN you'll find innumerable posts on the same subject.

 

The professional continuous lighting mentioned to you is incredibly expensive and would also consume far more power than is available in private households - they're used in pro studios.

 

Models are used to working with photographers who use flash. Flash equipment fired through large diffusers is barely noticeable, doesn't cause models to freeze up and is far more comfortable for them than any form of continuous lighting.

 

As forum moderator, I feel that you now have all the info you need to make informed decisions and see no point in any further posts.

[gabriel scindian]

I just bought some hmi's and tungsten frezzys because I am focusing on shooting in a

similar style of the great photogs shooting in europe. I have 650's tungsten and 150w

HMI's which puts out the same type of light as my 650 tungsten just at 150 watts and 56k

compared to 32k. Don't get me wrong, I love flash and use both profoto's and alien bee's

but there is something great about using hmi frezzys and tungsten frezzys on a shoot.

Also you can also do mixed lighting with flash and continuous for cool effects. Get used to

using all types of equipment. Lighting does make a difference. Remember fashion photogs

first used available light, then continuous light, the same type of light they use on movie

sets.

 

Gabriel Scindian

[chris_leong1]

<p>What Gabriel said.<br>

I've had the great fortune to be trained by the best fashion photographers from the 70's onwards, and most of them had every type of light in their arsenal, and used them depending on the assignments they were given and the looks they wanted to achieve. I'm talking about everything from candles inside China balls to HMIs with loads of tungsten, kino flo, and strobes as well.<br>

Mostly the strobes are great for if you need a dependable daylight look. In Europe we were shooting summer fashion (swimwear) in January and so hotlights for those shoots were much appreciated by the models. In California or San Diego, winter catalog shots in the summer probably call for strobes indoors and cooled.<br>

It was mainly about the looks desired (catalog, editorial, advertising, personal work) and the convenience of the lighting system for the models, assistants, and photographers.<br>

Just like there's not a single camera or lens for every shot, there's not a single lighting system either.<br>

Yes, you can get a perfect shot of a model outside a building if you have the time and money to wait for the daylight to be just so, but if you don't have the time and you have to get the shot (which is the main difference between pros and others - they have to deliver the shots on a schedule or to a deadline), then you'll need to use some kind of lighting to get it. You could just shoot it an post process, but that yields a look that might or might not be suitable for the task at hand.<br>

And the way the lighting system sets up also affects the shots acquired, and I'm not just talking about the quaity of the light itself: the same way as a Hasselblad, digital or not, tethered or not, shoots slower than a 35mm camera or a DSLR, but faster than a 4x5, so the lighting systems also take more or less time to set up, recharge/recycle, and have modifiers and properties unique to each system.<br>

So if you're catching one off, ephemeral or unrepeatable moments, then you're going to go at the task with probably a different rig than if you're shooting a model who can repeat an action again and again, or hold a pose, to order. And of course if they complain, too bad. Their job is to let you make them look good, and if they think they can do better than you, then maybe they should be the shooters.<br>

I'm sure that most photogs will agree with this. So the easiest way is probably with a set of strobes.<br>

However, being around as a pro when Irving Penn shot his portable daylight studio portraits of all the various professions, etc., that would be an instance of a pro taking his time, arranging his one lighting system (in this case the portable studio walls, shades, direction) to get the effect required, and then going for it to get a way different look and feel.<br>

If that's the kind of project you need to light for, then test various lighting systems, choose the one you want to go with, and then stick to it until the project is done.<br>

HTH<br>

JM2c, YMMV<br>

Cheers!<br />Chris</p>