What is this technique called?

[james_willson]

<p>Hi,<br>

Basically, im very new to this, but I heard of a technique whereby you would put the camera on a tripod, in a totally pitch black room, and then set it on a long exposure and wave a desk lamp over the top of the object.</p>

<p>This would give the effect of the object looking like it was in a brightly light room with studio lighting.</p>

<p>What is this technique called, and can anyone point me in the direction of a good tutorial for it.</p>

[asafrye]

<p>Painting by light. (I think.)</p>

[crystal_smith5]

<p>Painting by light is where you can actually "paint with light"....you can wave a lit object and see the path of the light. You can find tutorials for that on youtube. I am not sure what the term is for the technique your looking for.</p>

[james_willson]

<p>Thank you for the reply. To give a better idea, I want the final result ot look like this:</p>

<p><a href="http://allabtcomputer.com/images/motherboard.jpg">http://allabtcomputer.com/images/motherboard.jpg</a></p>

<p>I always thought painting by light was more like this :<br>

http://annoyinglycool.files.wordpress.com/2008/06/2539918181_1af1fb6479.jpg?w=225&h=300</p>

[phule]

<p>James,</p>

<p>I rather doubt the motherboard was shot in a pitch black room and with a desk lamp. Product photography is about consistency and control. It was shot with multiple lights on stands in a very controlled environment. </p>

<p>Do some research on product photography for the tools and techniques needed.</p>

[james_willson]

<p>Hi,,<br>

That picture may not have been, but there was a 5 page artical about it in my computer magazine, but no technique name was mentioned. They showed the output image and it was extremely similar to the image above. I believe they used more than a desklamp, but the techniuqe was the same, keep the exposure on for a while and wave the light over the top to get the impression on rich even lighting</p>

[carbon_dragon]

<p>There was a book of landscape photography (of man made objects like old ruins) which was done by setting up the camera and then running into the frame with a flashlight and lighting up parts of the ruins. I remember the book because the pictures were very interesting and unusual. Can't remember the title though.</p>

[Matt Laur]

<p>I would avoid drawing conclusions about good-looking product photography from reading computer magazines. The manufacturers whose products are shown in those magazines hire professional product studios to show off their wares well.</p>

[hal_b]

<p>James, can you link to the article, or post a picture that actually demonstrates what you are refering to?</p>

<p>It is obvious to most of us that the motherboard photo, like all product photography, is done with multiple flashes or even a lightbox. That's the best way to get consistent results.</p>

[james_willson]

<p>Hi,</p>

<p>Ill scan the article tonight and link you to it, maybe they were exaggerating the results. Is there a way to do it without expensive lightbox's and equipment? I only really have a good camera, I dont have any proper lighting or studio equipment, but I would like to get good results if possible.</p>

[luis_g]

<p> That could easily be done with an inexpensive light tent.</p>

<p> </p>

[hal_b]

<p>The cheapest way still involves at least 1 speedlight capable of bounce-flashing while shoe-mounted. If you bounce the flash off the ceiling, or create a white bounce card above the shooting surface, you can flood the product with light and still use TTL metering to get the exposure right.</p>

<p>To do this without a flash, you can try to set up a pair of hot-lights (hot because they don't turn off) above the object, one to either side. This is very difficult to perform and get even lighting. You would point the right light to the left side of the object, and the left light at the right side of the object.</p>

<p>Or you could make a light-box out of a carboard box and some typing paper, and point a lamp at either side for a DIY light-box.</p>

<p>Or, since you're shooting a still object, you can point all your room-lighting toward the ceiling and create a soft-light ceiling effect. You might have to use a long tripod exposure to compensate for the darkness of the light.</p>

<p>I think the worst of all possible ways is to try to do this while hand-holding a lamp and waving it over an object. That sounds, to me, doomed to failure.</p>

[JDMvW]

<p>This tends to get rediscovered every so often. Here is a pdf of an article in <em>Minicam Photography</em> (the earlier name of <em>Modern Photography</em> ) of May 1941 on "Painting with Light". The file is about 670KB in size.</p>

<p>Although lighting sources have changed, the article does a decent job of explaining what to watch out for and details of execution, with examples.</p>

[Matt Laur]

<p>You can use a roll of white seamless paper, an old shower curtain over the window, and a few dollars worth of white foamcore for reflectors. Daylight is free! Even lighting is about diffusion and reflection. If you have more time than you do money, there's nothing hard about a flat, non-dramatic, evenly lit product shot. Not to mention you can cure a few ills in software after the fact (evening out background tones, etc).</p>

[jim_momary]

<p>Here's a quicky & crappy shot I recently made for posting.<br>

I guess that makes it Qurappy?<br>

No light was painted. As Matt says, some white paper and some light (single flash in this case). Had I done a more quality job, shadows would be nil or I could have erased them in processing.<br>

But, I've done light painting outside with flashes, flashlights, lamps in reflector-type shoplights and road flares. It's a neat diversion. Go at it.<br>

Jim</p><div></div>

[MichaelChang]

<p>Sure, you can paint a mother board with light, why not? It'll give you full control over where shadows appear or none at all. </p>

<p>It's probably the least expensive way to control lighting. The down side is the unpredictable exposure time and getting the color balance right.</p>