Help me better this lighting...please

[corrim]

I had a great time with these four friends. They wanted something a little

edgy and fun. I tried this pose with a certain lighting in mind..but I dont

think I achieved it. Its been a few weeks so I dont think I can tell you my

exact positioning of the lights.

 

What would you have done differently to get more of an even lighting. I was

TRYING to get light on one side with shadow on the other. It looks a

bit "mismatched" to me.

 

Athough the girls loved it I would like to do better next time. (just for

those who are wondering, AMOR is the initials of each of the girls)

 

Thank you!

 

Corri<div></div>

[corrim]

Here is an example of what I was trying to do. Thank you<div></div>

[josh_ross1]

What lighting do you have and what were you using?

[corrim]

Hi Josh. I have a savage s-100 (100ws 110-120v/60Hz) that I use for main. A delicacy 180 with a softbox at 45 Degrees to my right. I didnt use any reflector for this shot, and obviously my "hair light" was not in use either.

 

Help!

[steve_levine]

That looks like a single light. The shadows in the shot indicate the direction/location of the light itself(high and left of the lens). And the light has a hard shadow edge, so I'd guess there isn't any diffuser being used.

 

Any high powered, off camera flash unit. Should be able to easily duplciate this lighting.

[steve_robb1]

I know you were trying to replicate that particular lighting, but I actually like yours better!

[corrim]

Steve, your my new best friend!

[johnw436]

Hi Corri,

 

I like yours better, too.

 

It would be really interesting to see your shot done with one extra light positioned on the left and aimed between the girl in the black shirt and the background. It would help separate her black shirt from the backdrop and illuminate a little of the negative space between the two girls on the left. (Basically, exactly what you did on the right side, but with less downward angle, maybe placing the light at waist to shoulder level.) I'd dial it down one stop or so from the main light to avoid throwing weird shadows on the two girls on the right.

 

If you try this and discover that it lights the left side of your backdrop too much you can pull the left side backdrop stand farther back from the girls to create more space on the left side. The light would then have less effect on the backdrop and even out as it fades across toward the right side of the frame.

 

As is, yours is really good!

[petemillis]

Corri, I'm with the others - your's looks good and I don't think the other lighting would be very flattering on girly faces. John mentioned using another light to seperate "A's" t-short from the backdrop - but even simpler would have been for "A" to wear a bit of a lighter colour t-shirt. The lighting on her arm, face and shorts is good and this would be lost with an extra light in my opinion.

[corrim]

Thank you everyone. Black shirt black background is never a good combination in my opinion.

 

Thank you for your compliments and suggestions. In the future I will try to seperate background from subject more. That is one thing I definitly need to work on.

[johnw436]

"The lighting on her arm, face and shorts is good and this would be lost with an extra light in my opinion."

 

Excellent point, Pete.

[josh_ross1]

I think you need a hairlight. Maybe try and use just one hard main light coming from high 45 degrees left and then your other light as a backlight/hair light.

[corrim]

In all of your opinion, what is the best technique used for a hairlight? I have a boom , an extra light and a brolly, is this ok, or what works best? Several "extras" laying around, umbrellas (white, black, silver), barn doors. What do you use?

[corrim]

This is posted as an example of when I used a "hair" light. I guess my next question is Am I second guessing myself too much? Am I doing the right things just being too critical? I just see others work here on PN and am simply amazed at quality and clarity. Jealous to say the least!<div></div>

[steve_c9]

The photo of the boys has a single light high left and a light for the background, and you get the same effect on the girl in front, but your second light, from their left, adds a nice hair light on the girl on the far right, but adds fill to the blonde.

 

I think the real difference is that all the guys have their faces in about the same direction - if you had the girl on the left turn a bit more forward it would've helped. Also the guys are spaced out more evenly. But then, yours has the best expressions.

 

The shot just above is very nice, with less contrast on the faces. Keep at it!

[twmeyer]

but their arms look like a line up of bologna :^) <p>Steve C has reverse engineered the punky boys lighting pretty well. There's probably a reflecting surface somewhere to camera right. <p>One basic trick I try to remember is (when using one main light) to put the darkest person closest to the light (or vice versa). You have 2 lights on the white girl in the white T shirt at camera right, and only one on the girl with dark hair and the darkest T shirt. Adding a light on the <i>background</i> behind the darker girl would have finished that shot, nicely balancing with the backlight on the white T-shirt girl. <p>The other thing to note is that the hard light on the punks is consistent with their quasi-tough "attitude", while the soft light on the smiley girls is appropriate for them. Hard light is for edgier looks and punks, soft light is for a more mellow look and friendly girls. <p>If you want "edge"... no smiles and hard light... t

[twmeyer]

oh yeah, the girl on the right is blocking the back light off the girl in front, and no the hairlight is kind of invisible in that last shot. Try setting your main light 180 degrees from the back (or hair) light, and start testing with them both set at the same power. <p>You may need to shield your lens so the backlight doesn't cause flare... t

[corrim]

Tom, Im very disapointed as I was trying to get the "salami" look, but at least I achieved some kind of meat! :0)

 

I too thought, afterward, that moving the girls so the darker shirt was closer to the light, but then again, it would have messed their "name".

 

When you are referring to hard light and soft light ( i know this might be basic stuff ) are you simply referring to the distance the lights are to the subjects. Moving my lights back farther would create the hard light I was trying to achieve?

 

Thanks for all the help and input.

[twmeyer]

That positioning will have the effect you note, but an easier way to achieve it is with the amount and size of a diffusing modifier. The larger the light source (like a softbox/umbrella) the softer the light. The closer the light is to the subject the "softer" it's effect. A soft box close is softer than the same box further away. Or use a smaller softbox, or a bare reflector, or a grid spot, or a silver umbrella (less diffuse) to get "harder" light. <p>The soft/hard quality is best observed in the "transit" area... where shadows change into lit areas. A short transit is seen as a hard edged shadow, where un-diffused light creates a cleanly defined edge with shadow (on the punky boys). <p>A wide transit is where the lit area slowly (gradually) changes into shadow (umbrella/softbox) as in your portrait. <p>You can use fill with either to reduce the overall contrast of the scene. This is how the boys photo has a hard edged transit, but low contrast, while yours has a wider transit (softer light), but higher overall contrast. Fun, huh?.. t