Food Photography Lighting

[ben_pettit]

<p>So I'm curious what to do to get quality food (plated and catering [table] setup) photos. I'm on a limited budget and trying to get the best bang for the buck. I need to cash flow everything, if I purchase something I need for it to pay for itself sooner than later.<br>

Different scenarios I'm thinking about:</p>

<ul>

<li>Biggest money: 1 580II from behind (angled) and 1 580II from front. Use reflectors and diff with flashes. </li>

<li>Cheaper Option: 1 580II from front serving as master, 1 430 as a slave from behind.</li>

<li>Shoot with natural light!</li>

<li>Buy two smaller cheap soft boxes off ebay. I've found some 12 x 12 for a little as $100. Use them in conjunction with 1 580II from the front. Soft boxes will be used to back light. </li>

</ul>

<p>I'm new at this and I'll just play dumb and have you experienced ones give me tips.<br>

Any free training out there to become the best food photographer I can be? Love to have your feedback!</p>

[garry edwards]

<p>Food photography is about a lot of things, not least of which is specialists to cook, prepare and style the food.<br>

The photography side is also specialised and requires a very high leve of both lighting knowledge and skill. It takes equipment too, and hotshoe flashes are totally inadequate for the purpose.<br>

In other words, you need high quality studio lighting, the knowledge to use it and a team of specialists to work with.</p>

[ben_pettit]

<p>Ok. I will say this. All the shoots are going to be on location. So I need the flexibility to work (setup to tear down) fast and quick.<br>

The pictures will be used for food menus. We're not talking about poster size here. Think about your local mexican restaurant. What I am saying is, I'm in no way big time!</p>

[JDMvW]

<p>There are books and articles on food photography which can be a very difficult thing to do well. The tricky thing is that real food often doesn't look all that great in a simple straight-on picture. To make it worse, things can "age" rapidly under lights and all. A local Mexican restaurant has pictures of their food on TV and sometimes it honestly and truly looks like something a pet coughed up. Not, I think, what was intended.</p>

<p>A quick Google™ on "food photography" brought up quite a lot of information, starting with what looks like a useful source at (<a href="http://www.foodportfolio.com/blog/#blog">link</a> ). Others will have to address the suitability of your suggested lighting and so on.</p>

<p> </p>

[ben_pettit]

<p>Thanks Garry!<br>

Thanks JDM!</p>

[devon_mccarroll]

<p>Hi Ben,<br>

I took the Food Photography course at <a href="http://www.ppsop.com">www.ppsop.com</a> last spring, and I learned so much! The previous posts are correct--you need to know how to style food (which is often not edible when all of the styling tricks are used to make the photo look good), or have a good chef or stylist to help with that. And although I took my class using only speedlights and umbrellas, it became clear very quickly that I will need good studio lights to do it properly. Some work can be done with natural light, but it's really tricky and doesn't give you much time to work. Also, if you're doing some full table setups, you'll need alot more lighting than your speedlights will give you.<br>

Check out Lou Manna's book, Digital Food Photography. He also has a new one coming out later this month that will show more lighting setups. It is a fun type of photography to learn!<br>

Have fun with it!</p>

[ben_pettit]

<p>Thanks Devon!</p>

[JAPster]

<p>You can use ambient lighting assuming you have the permission of the venue owner. But many venues use subdued lighting to create soft romantic cozy ambience. That means you must have TRIPOD and SELF TIMER delay (2 or 10 seconds) so you can use slower shutter speed and take hands completely off the camera to get sharp image. You may be able to improve on this by moving the 'setup' near a door, window, or under a patio area that is covered. Soft diffused sunlight from a door, window, or patio can give food a nice soft look without strong harsh shadows. Skylights can also give nice diffused sunlight. Look for these type 'openings' to the outside light when you scout out the venue.</p>

[joseph_wisniewski]

<p>I can't even imagine trying "to get quality food ... photos" without light I can visualize. As far as "bang for the buck", for the price of two 580 II speedlights, you can get three (or maybe four, if you buy used) decent monolights. Those will give you a lot more power (so you can drive down to f16 even with soft boxes) and decent modeling lights (150-250W) to see by. I'm partial to Paul Buff "White Lightnings", but his lower cost "Alien Bees" line may be fine for you. (If you get the bees, replace the stock modeling lamp with the halogen capsule lamp he uses for the higher priced "X" line). I had two recent CL deals on the older White Lightning "Ultra" line, $100 for a 600 W-S, $200 each for two 1200 W-S. So yes, if you keep your eyes and ears open, for the price of one new 580 II, you can get three "solid" versatile monolights that will last you decades, and shoot hundreds of thousands of burgers.</p>

<p>Food photography is pretty "light duty", you won't be popping 1000 shots in a session, the way you sometimes do in fashion or corporate event.</p>

<p>Don't know if you'd call it a "starter kit", but here's what I drag along on a "quick" food shoot. Four 600 W-S monolights (seldom use all four, but it gives me a spare, the peace of mind is worth carrying the extra 4 pounds). Six light stands. 2 lightweight booms (to position lights over the food). 2 small (2 foot) soft boxes), 1 large (4 foot) softbox. 2 snoots. 2 sets of barndoors that fit the 7 inch "stock" reflectors that come with the Bees or the White Lightnings. Two pop-up "5 in 1" reflector kits. Two reflector holders (they work with 2 of the light stands) and a small background roll holder. If you go with "off brand" soft boxes, stands, and reflectors (Photoflex, etc) you can get all that surprisingly cheap.</p>

[ben_pettit]

<p>Thanks Alan!<br /> Thanks Joseph!</p>

<p>Keep the comments coming here. I'm not sure that I'll need to drive down to f17, that seems extreme, since I'm using macro lens with low f stops to get the opposite (maybe I'm missing something though) for some depth of field. From what I do understand is small light sources at low angles are key to create texture on the food. Seems like with 6 lights on it I'll just be blowing everything out? Shadows create a dramatic effect on food? Obviously black food is bad! Please correct me though if I'm way out there.<br>

<br /> Also stumbled across these... <a href="http://www.adorama.com/PFLDSK.html?searchinfo=mini%20photoflex%20soft%20box%20kit&item_no=8">ONE</a> , <a href="http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/425220-REG/Impact_DFUMK_Digital_Flash_Umbrella_Mount.html#features">TWO</a><br>

<br /> I'd love to make a speed light setup work. I mean maybe I'm crazy. I guess I'm secretly hoping to work quick enough to hop to another city and schedule more than one shoot in a day! I talked with a Canon rep today who told me to buy a handful of 580's but not sure if I can trust him, he probably just wanted me to buy more of their products! LOL</p>

[ben_pettit]

<p>Ran across this post.<br>

<br /> <a href="http://veganyumyum.com/2008/09/food-photography-for-bloggers/">http://veganyumyum.com/2008/09/food-photography-for-bloggers/</a><br>

<br /> Comments about her technique? She uses natural light only. Her cookbook just came out nationally and I believe she did all the photography herself. My fiancée loves to eat healthy so I might have to scurry to Barnes and Noble and pick up a copy!</p>

[bob_sunley]

<p>The whole idea behind the design and evolution of pro artificial lighting equipment for photographs is to make the lighting look natural. That way you don't have to wait a couple of days(weeks(months in Seattle)) for that nice hazy sunlight you want for a certain shot. </p>

<p>It appears that she does a fair bit of editing to enhance the natural lighting as well. It is much easier to get it right before you press the button than to spend a whole lot of time fixing it after the fact.</p>

<p>A macro lens lets you get close to an object, it does nothing to increase the dof, in fact it does the opposite by getting in closer.</p>

<p>Do you have a copy of the book Light, Science and Magic? If not buy it first</p>

 

[DEGREEFOTO]

<p>I would agree with Bob Sunleys comments above.....get it right up front. It can take a great deal of time to get the lighting right to get that all important...mouth watering effect in the image and the use of all sorts of liquids and gels is at times a essential requirement...not to mention the design of the dish by the chef. Studio lighting units would be (is) my choice in this case...and at times more useful on locations.</p>

<p>Artur</p>

[hjoseph7]

I once attended a Photographers Assistant bootcamp sponsored by APA (Adrvertising Photographers of America). While I was there a Food photographer gave a demonstration on how to take pictures of food. The woman who was giving this demonstration has worked all her life for food photography magazines about 22 years, so I'm pretty sure she knew what she was talking about. The camera she used throughout her career is a 4X5 view camera although she recently purchased a Digital back to fend off the competition.

 

The lighting she used is, you guess it continuous lighting which I think works best with Digital 4X5 view cameras because the the digital back(at least that one did) had to make 3 passes or scans of the sensor. One for Red one Green one for Blue. The view camera also allowed her to use a very, very small DOF and to gain perspective control. The photographer had an assistant prepare the food and the backdrops. Yes the food was cooked right there on the set although some stuff was pre-prepared somewhere else.

 

I was getting a little hungry so I asked the photographer what she was going to do with the food after the shoot. She said Oh no, we can't eat that food it is packed with chemiclas to make it look more robust than it really is. I know you are on a budget, but I think this photographer was using two cool floodlights that had to be rated at 500 Watts or greater. Those lights were really bright, but not very hot like regular floods.

[ben_pettit]

<p>Thanks Bob!<br>

Thanks Artur!<br>

Thanks Harry!</p>

[hal_b]

<p>Whether you use 580EX's or monolights, either way you will need lightstands, light modifiers, and power. You can't ignore the fact that those Canon flashes are $420 APIECE while you can get good monolights for under $200 each including lightstand. The monolight will take the same amount of time to set up, so why cripple yourself with low power battery flashes? While you will be shooting on location, I assume they will have AC power? How can you resist setting yourself up with some quality studio lights and getting a much more versatile solution? It sounds like you need to be money-conscious, and you could save a bundle by spending wisely, and you won't need batteries in the future, either.</p>

[r_smith2]

<p>Here is a link to an online food photography video series from kelbytraining.com. If you watch the videos you can see that he uses rather large soft boxes with monoblock strobes (usually just one) along with just some simple home made white reflector cards. After watching the videos it seems to me there is a lot more to good food photography than just worrying about the lighting.</p>

<p><a href="http://www.kelbytraining.com/instructors/joe-glyda.html">http://www.kelbytraining.com/instructors/joe-glyda.html</a></p>

[ben_pettit]

<p>Thanks Hal!<br /> Thanks Randall!</p>

<p>Great recourse on Kelby Training. I had watched Joe's intro video to that training seminar before. I signed up for the monthly training price, figured I'd watch as much as I could this month for $25!<br>

<br /> I love the idea of putting a hot shoe in this:<br /> http://www.buy.com/retail/product.asp?sku=211419169&listingid=46243509<br>

<br /> Anyone know of a cheaper alternative? $200 seems like a lot of brand name and a little product there.</p>

[tony_clark]

<p>I shoot a lot of food and I find that natural light with modifiers and reflectors work best for me. I started out shooting fashion but after a decade or so, I gravitated to food. I light food much as I did beauty. The only difference is that food does not move, so shutter speed is not an issue.</p>

<p>Harry's comments on the workshop cracked me up. I find that 99% of my subjects are edible and I frown on dishes that are not made from fresh ingredients. Although I have only been shooting food for a few years, I see those artificial dishes as "old school" and cheating to a degree. I try to just light it well and do it in a timely manner. What we have not mentioned is the importance of a talented Food Stylist. The most beautiful lighting will not make average styled food look appetizing.</p>

[devon_mccarroll]

<p>To add to Tony's comments, not all food styling involves "artificial" food, but for some things like ice cream, it can be really necessary. (If you're shooting for an ice cream company, however, you have to use the real product and shoot quickly!). There are many tricks that professional food stylists use in order to make the subject look as attractive as possible.<br>

Alot of food styling tricks involve not fully cooking meat (tends to dry out too quickly), using things like oil to create more shine, using things like dark corn syrup in place of maple syrup for a slower "drip", etc. These are not old school but in fact very heavily used in the commercial food photography industry. That having been said though, like Tony I do enjoy shooting edible food!</p>

[scott_ferris]

<p>I'm with Tony, I have found natural light and reflectors and modifiers to be the most straight forward, a north facing window and reflectors are so so good. The current style is for comparatively large light, over exposure of backgrounds and very focused DOF. The beauty of food photography is you can practice on your own "models" to get your lighting down. This one was done outside under a white canopy, and a 50 f1.4 with a 12mm extension tube. Very basic and easy.</p>

<p>These might help<br>

<a rel="nofollow" href="http://www.101cookbooks.com/archives/001451.html" target="_blank">http://www.101cookbooks.com/archives/001451.html</a><br>

<a rel="nofollow" href="http://www.davidlebovitz.com/archives/2008/04/my_food_photogr.html" target="_blank">http://www.davidlebovitz.com/archives/2008/04/my_food_photogr.html</a></p><div></div>

[r_smith2]

<p>Here's a couple cheaper alternatives to your softbox question. </p>

<p><a href="http://cgi.ebay.com/20-x-20-SOFTBOX-FOR-NIKON-CANON-SPEEDLIGHT-SPEEDLITE_W0QQitemZ360181019806QQcmdZViewItemQQptZLH_DefaultDomain_0?hash=item53dc76349e">http://cgi.ebay.com/20-x-20-SOFTBOX-FOR-NIKON-CANON-SPEEDLIGHT-SPEEDLITE_W0QQitemZ360181019806QQcmdZViewItemQQptZLH_DefaultDomain_0?hash=item53dc76349e</a></p>

<p><a href="http://cgi.ebay.com/Nikon-Canon-Speedlite-Flash-Softbox-Photo-Studio-Lights_W0QQitemZ360196574000QQcmdZViewItemQQptZLH_DefaultDomain_0?hash=item53dd638b30">http://cgi.ebay.com/Nikon-Canon-Speedlite-Flash-Softbox-Photo-Studio-Lights_W0QQitemZ360196574000QQcmdZViewItemQQptZLH_DefaultDomain_0?hash=item53dd638b30</a></p>

 

[joseph_wisniewski]

<blockquote>

<p>The lighting she used is, you guess it continuous lighting which I think works best with Digital 4X5 view cameras because the the digital back(at least that one did) had to make 3 passes or scans of the sensor. One for Red one Green one for Blue.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>You're pretty close. Although the newer 4x5 scan backs only need a single pass, it's a single pass that can be upwards of two minutes, so without rock solid and stable continuous lighting, you're dead. You can't do this with flash.</p>

<p>Even among medium format back users, "multi-shot" backs are quite popular in product and food work, they shift the sensor 1 pixel width left and right, up and down, so a 4 shot image won't have the color moire of a single shot image. This typically requires continuous lighting. There are also 16 shot backs...</p>

[nicolebranan]

<p>Hi Ben,<br>

Have you checked out food photographer Michael Ray's Web site? He does nice work (http://www.foodportfolio.com/frames/welcome_frame.html) and has posted some good tutorials, such as this one: http://www.foodportfolio.com/blog/food_photography/food_photo_process.html.<br>

All the best,<br>

nicole</p>