is demonstrating studio lighting a must have skill?

[danzel_c]

<p>dave s., cool pic! and thanks for the link.</p>

[pete_s.]

<p>I think it's a must have skill if you want to be well rounded and able to shot for any kind of client in any kind of place. But if you specialize in just one form of photography, for instance documentary available light weddings, you can do without it.</p>

<p>Easy way to ease into it is to shoot some off camera flash. Just get a cheap umbrella and a small stand with an umbrella adapter. If you shoot Nikon you can trigger off camera flash without any additional items using CLS. For other brands you may need to add something to get it to work. Radio triggers are best either way.</p>

<p>Monolights and bigger stuff works exactly like the smaller stuff. It's just more light and usually more options of shaping it.</p>

[picturesque]

<p>Sorry this is late, but as I said above, and as several people have said as well--studying studio lighting, and in particular, studio lighting for people photography, can benefit you even if you don't use studio lights at a wedding.</p>

<p>In the left image, below, there are two things I did that I knew from studying studio lighting, that helped make this image. The first thing was to tell the girls where to stand, and the second thing was to tell the bride to turn toward the window at the right time. Now, it wasn't totally undirected, but after I told them where to stand, I did not interfere, save for telling the bride to turn her face at the right time. When you study lighting for people (normally as part of studio lighting) you know that you light the 'mask' of the face.</p>

<p>The second image on the right is an example of knowing where to bounce one's flash to bring out the texture of the frosting on the sides of the cake--again, something you learn when you study studio lighting.</p><div></div>

[david_prouty]

<p>The real "name of the game " here is "seeing the light"!</p>

<p>Whether you use ambient or flash/strobe is irrelevant. Direction of light and quality of light is the skill most desired in a photographer's arsenal of talent. A two dimensional image that has three dimensional qualities through lighting is a talent that is most desirable in a photographer.<br>

Any skill that improves your knowledge of "lighting" is beneficial.</p>

<p>In the long run, direction of light, and the quality of that light, whether hard or soft, and the purpose for that light, is the goal to achieve, rather than what kind of light is better than the other for the purpose intended.</p>

<p>Learn how to see the light , then choose the type of lighting to achieve the end result. Or, how to achieve the end result with the lighting available.</p>

<p>The true pro will make due with what is at hand. BUT, direction and quality of light is paramount in obtaining the image that is envisioned.</p>

<p>Dismissing education in any form of lighting is foolhardy. Claiming any one type of lighting as sufficient is naive and lacks vision. Learn as much as you can about all types of lighting to be the best photographer you can be.</p>

[joel_stowe]

<p>One of the things that I had a photographer tell me was to look at photo's that had been published in a magazine and look at how it had been lit, and then figure out how it had been done. This helped me quite abit in learning how to invision how someone else had taken this wonderful photograph. I would then try and copy the lighting technique and make it my own.<br>

Joel</p>

[fotografz]

<p>Nice photos Nadine!</p>

[shawn_mertz]

<p>Light is the most important thing in photography. Far more than camera, or any attachment.<br>

Good light is good light it doesn't matter how you get it. Knowledge of using one light, the sun is useful in a studio, and knowing studio light is useful standing in the middle of a field using nothing but maybe a reflector or on camera flash. Learn everything you can about lighting. It is the biggest difference between a pro and a hobbyist with a great camera.</p>

[danzel_c]

<p>thanks for the additional responses! and i agree, nice shots nadine!</p>

[bob_bill]

<p>Nadine, wonderful images. Lets see, brides body turned away from the light and face back to it revealing texture of gown and feminine shape for bride. Face lit with loop lighting to give flattering shape to face from the direction of the light. Camera positon from short side. Good lighting ratio achieved from distance from window and specular highlights eliminated. High contrast of face with rest of image to pull eye there. (Maybe helped with some dodge/burn?) I wonder if someone who didnt understand the concepts would have pulled it all together. Not consistently anyway. If you dont study lighting, you wont know what you dont know. David is right, seeing the light is critical and making it in studio will help recognizing it on location and maximize your use of it whether you elect to pull your the big guns or just use speedlights or a reflector or straight window light. I believe the early painting masters started their training making the paint. They started with an understanding of the medium in which they worked. We work in light. </p>

[picturesque]

<p>Thanks everyone. The image of the bride is actually one of those 'serendipity on purpose' shots. The image is very close to SOTC. I didn't even touch the white balance, so no dodging or burning--that is why there is a bit too much magenta in the image.</p>

[andresa]

<p>Good photographers see light where it falls and can use it always. Where I studied photography no one was allowed to learn studio lighting until they had first mastered natural light. Too many people think the studio part is more important than the light part. They are usually easy to find because they spend all there time thinking about equipment so there pictures are empty and say nothing. Unfortunately many people also stay in the old days working in their old ways, and sometimes make no interesting pictures at all. Learning is always important but more so is the source of teacher. I guess there are not many wedding couples who care how anyone makes a picture as long as it is good. The result is the thing to care for.</p>

[picturesque]

<p>Andres, I think the "saying something" is separate from "seeing light", although they are related in photography, of course. There are always going to be photographers who 'say something' extremely well and photographers who don't. Studio training, IMHO, is not the <em>reason</em> for either.</p>

[fotografz]

<p>I think it is interesting to read so many different thoughts on the subject of lighting.</p>

<p>In some ways, some of it feels daunting and even intimidating. The need to learn this and study that with an undercurrent of formalized academia. Heck, I admit it, I don't know some of the terms bandied about. This isn't to say that the basic physics of light can be ignored ... after all we do have to get it into the camera in enough quantity to make a picture happen.</p>

<p>Yet, if you look at it from the inside out .... with a focus on the subject ... be it a simple ball, a car, a face or a Bride doing a waltz ... and reverse engineer your purpose, then light is much easier to understand no matter what the source. Much of that understanding is intuitive and even obvious. You most likely already have the insights but haven't drawn on that insight enough. </p>

<p>Light is how we celebrate the subject ... the roundness of the ball, the styling of the car, the features of a face, or the shimmering movement of a waltz.</p>

<p>The notion isn't just seeing the light, <em>it is seeing the subject in the light</em>. The subject, or better put <em>"our vision of the subject,"</em> dictates what we want the to light to do.</p>

<p>With this in mind we can make a flat representation of a ball look round, we can reveal facial features or hide them, we can make the same person look evil or angelic.</p>

<p>Start there and it will fall into place with a little patience and practice. It's not really all that hard ... light is all around us ... watch how it defines things, reveals things, or how the lack of it obscures things. But most of all, look at the "things."</p>

<p>The most fundamental difference between natural light and studio light is that with the former the light is fixed and the subject must move into it or be placed in it, where the latter allows you to move the light around the subject at will. </p>

<p> </p>