Lighting pros, how do we get perfect portrait highlights so when we boost contrast, they still don't overexpose?!

[mood_lover]

<p>Everytime I'm in the studio using a large octabox or softbox, my portraits' highlights on the back of my 5D Mark III looks fine but then on the computer they are too bright. I love boosting contrast to add pop to my photos, but of course, this looks terrible when there's no headroom left for the highlights! I have no idea why my highlights are coming out so hot even before I get to editing. When I boost my contrast in post, I want my highlights to end up far from pure white, and I want my shadows to be deep and dark, but still not pure black.<br /><br />Here's a failed attempt at me trying to do this, but only had one light on the model (with a slight hair light behind) and I think lack of fill light ruined it:</p>

<p><img src="http://i.imgur.com/o7yuKba.jpg" alt="" width="533" height="800" /><br />Question: does lack of fill light (meaning using just 1 key light) create TOO much contrast in-camera, and make the shadows too dark? I find that when I use only one light for portraits, the picture already has the amount of contrast I want in the final edit, so I cant even push it at all. I guess what I'm going for is a low contrast raw picture, so I can grade it and boost contrast to my hearts content.<br /><br />I found images from a great photographer who has the lighting I'm after, and he uses only natural light from windows, I'd love to figure out how he has deep contrast but still such smooth highlight rolloff after editing, and of course I want to do this with no more than 2 lights in a studio:</p>

<p><img src="http://i.imgur.com/YHGdJPV.jpg" alt="" width="1066" height="800" /><br /><br /><img src="http://i.imgur.com/av9l0Hp.jpg" alt="" width="800" height="1078" /><br /><br /><br /> Thank you guys so much for the help and I apologize if I broke any rules, I mean no harm!</p>

[dhbebb]

<p><em>does lack of fill light (meaning using just 1 key light) create TOO much contrast in-camera, and make the shadows too dark?</em><br /> Yes! If you want to work this way and boost contrast in Photoshop, only to find that the contrast is too much, then the only answer to to reduce the lighting contrast (white card or second softbox close to camera position). Don't forget that a close-up key light and no fill means high contrast, using a fill reduces contrast and using a fill AND moving the key light further away reduces contrast even more. However, you may well be boosting contrast simply to get the background to go solid black - if so, don't! Instead increase the distance between the model and the background and/or put up flags (largish pieces of black card) to keep all light off the background.</p>

[mood_lover]

<p>Thank you for the help David, for a while I had a hunch that fill-light (or lack of) is what controls the contrast but never gave it much thought. I want my SOOC photo to be much, much flatter in contrast so I can decide how far to push it later. I really dislike having high contrast right off the bat. When you say "using a fill AND moving the key light further away reduces contrast even more", you are talking about reducing the intensity/power of the keylight right? Sometimes I have the strobe on lowest power level and its still too much, but I want my shadows to be soft so thats why I have it so close to the subject. Not sure how to solve that problem but I thank you for your input!</p>

[Tim_Lookingbill]

<p>Have you tried reducing the contrast on that image in post. I'm assuming you're shooting Raw.</p>

<p>I took your jpeg posted here and cranked the Contrast slider in ACR to -44 and improved the tonal modeling in the highlights of the face considerably and opened up the dark side of the face a bit.</p>

[mood_lover]

<p>Thats a great idea Tim, I can somewhat save the image this way (yes shooting Raw). But moreso my concern is how I can get lower contrast before I even get to the editing stage. I still want some nice modeling on the subjects face, but just very low contrast ratio like the two attached images at the bottom of the original post had. Thanks!</p>

[Tim_Lookingbill]

<p>I'm no expert on lighting but recently I did a similarly lit shot of the one's you're trying to emulate and thought I'ld share. It was the kind of diffused non-directional light I've been looking for but found by accident.</p>

<p>I was using (4) 900 Lumens output LED daylight bulbs bought at Walmart installed above my vanity mirror that were separated and recessed behind a 4 ft wall about 5 feet from my bed. The bounced light just filled half of my bedroom with a dim glow but with enough light to make out plenty of detail. I just loved the look of the light so I took a self portrait by sitting on my bed placing the camera on my dresser drawer to act as a tripod. See below.</p>

<p>I've never used professional lighting equipment but I know how to recognize visually the character of light and how the digital sensor is going to record it but only on continuous light. Flash is a mystery to me. I have to see the light to respond to it. You might attempt to arrange your soft boxes if they're continuous so that you can do the same. And if you're not working with continuous you'll just have to trial and error it using David's advice which is the best you can get.</p>

<p>Basically you have to move the subject farther from directional light and rely on the glow of the diffusion while using a fill light sparingly.</p>

<div></div>

[michaelmowery]

<p>Yes use a fill light number one. Number two if you are going to alway introduce contrast in post then you need to underexpose you highlights a bit so they don't blow out when you increase contrast.</p>

[dhbebb]

<p><em>using a fill AND moving the key light further away reduces contrast even more</em><br /> I mean this literally. If you think about it, let's imagine you have a key light 1 meter away to the left and a fill card 1 meter to the right. This means the key light travels one meter while the fill light travels 1 plus 1 plus 1 meters (3 times as far as the key light) and is also reduced further (let's say by 10% or so) by being reflected off a white card. This mean the fill is RELATIVELY weak (doesn't matter what your flash power setting is). If you move the key light to a distance of let's say 3 meters and leave the fill reflector where it is, the fill light will now travel 3 plus 1 plus 1 meters, total 5 meters, in other words 1.66 times as far as the key light. The first setup thus has a key/fill ratio of just under 3:1, while with the second setup the ratio is just under 1.66 (I'm saying "just under" to allow for the reflection loss off the card). Of course moving the key light further away reduces its INTENSITY, but this doesn't have anything to do with the key/fill ratio!</p>

[jordan2240]

<p>I'm just getting into portraiture using a couple of speedlights and umbrellas, hoping to do some portraits in people's homes once my skills are honed, but it's apparent I must have an awful lot to learn because I see absolutely nothing wrong with the photo you posted. Compared to the ones you post as your goal (and fair warning, be careful about posting other photographers' work even for demo purposes, as photo.net isn't particularly lenient with their rule about that) seem to have completely different light, and don't look any better to me than yours does. In fact, I think the contrast on the Asian model was pushed too far.</p>

<p>One thing I have learned in my experimentation is that you can use about a zillion different light set-ups to get a result you like, and the beauty of using digital is that is allows you to make adjustments as necessary on the fly. The key thing is to know what adjustment to make (ie. move key further away, crank up fill, move fill, etc.). I'm hoping that comes with practice.<br>

I do think you got some great advice above, but also think you might be a little hard on yourself. And if necessary, you can always push your contrast in post to where you want your shadows to be then mask out the highlights that you think went too far.</p>

[rodeo_joe1]

<p>Shoot RAW and learn how to use the "curves" tool - simple!</p>

<p>Edit: The contrast slider in most image editors is far too crude a tool for serious use. Bending the tone curve manually allows you to control highlights, midtone contrast and shadow depth completely separately.</p>

<p>And yes, your original lighting is too contrasty to do what you want. Your "flat" examples use a much more frontal lighting with more fill. Although it's not a fill light so much as increased ambient bounce. To get this effect you need a broader source further from the subject (less falloff) and lots of reflectors around the place.</p>

[DickArnold]

It's simple. A big soft box as close as you can get it and still get the picture at a bit of an angle really

softens facial lighting. I use this with the elderly to fill the shadows and wrinkles. This spreads the

directionality of the light. I also use a fill light further away at one or two stops below the key light to

reduce contrast some on the broad side or short side of the face, whichever you choose. You should

have a flash meter to determine lighting contrast. I have a twenty year old one that still works fine.

Controlling the actual light use is better than trying to do it in LR or PS IMO. But I am old fashioned. I

learned this technique from Monte Zucker. Chimping as you found out is sometimes not too effective.

Edward Izq used short side in the first two pictures and broad side the second two in your posts.

portraits. .

[devon_mccarroll]

I would also consider tethering to a laptop when shooting portraits. You'll get a much better idea of where you need to add or subtract

light, because the LCD isn't a perfect rendering. You can also check your histogram.

[mood_lover]

<p>@Michael Mowery: thanks for the help. Will definitely use a fill light and underexpose the highlights, sounds like a great way to compress the contrast range.<br /> <br /> @David Bebbington: every tutorial I find says that the closer the key light, the softer the shadows and smoother the hotspot will be. Not sure why they give this advice, they always move the softbox in as close as possible. Well I did the results didnt come out so smooth. Also, what if I was using a second strobe rather than a reflector, would I still need to move the key light further away? I assume not since I can directly control the ratio through power settings?<br /> <br /> @Bill Jordan: well there may be nothing "wrong" with the photo but the problem is that it's not what I was after, and thats what's wrong about it. It might appear fine on its own, but it wasnt the desired result.<br /> <br />@Rodeo Joe: When you say "you need a broader source further from the subject (less falloff) and lots of reflectors around the place" - I've always heard that the closer the light, the better and more flattering but I'm not sure that was entirely correct? Is there less falloff because when the light is further the light spreads out and can wrap around the shadows more?<br /> <br /> @Dick Arnold: yeah thats what I always thought too, a big softbox, close to face as possible. But everyone else is saying to reduce the contrast I need to back it off. I am trying to be "old-fashioned" about it as well, I want the lighting to look exactly how I need it to before I get on the computer. Do you have light meter recommendations that arent $300?<br /> <br /> @Devon McCarroll: yes I was tethered and still didn't see what the issue was, major rookie mistake. And the histogram is useful but doesnt actually tell you about contrast does it? I guess it somewhat does, if the graph is spread out too much it usually means high contrast right?<br /> <br /> P.S. unfortunately it seems I cant edit my first post anymore, I'd like to remove the photos since apparently im breaking rules here but cant due to to edit lock? sorry mods, perhaps we can hotlink?<br /> <br /> P.P.S if anyone can tell me what equipment to buy so that I can recreate the exact lighting used in the attached images at the bottom of the first post, in a studio settings, that would be awesome!</p>

<p>Thank you all I deeply appreciate the help.</p>

[michaelmowery]

<p>Light close equals SOFT LIGHT with FAST FALLOFF. Light far equals HARDER LIGHT with SLOW FALLOFF.<br>

You were advised to move back your main light only because you don't have a fill light. The fill light will solve most of your problems and you can keep your main light in nice and close.<br>

Always use a meter and have proper exposure on your highlights. Once you have control over your main and fill you won't have to rely on contrast boost in post. A little boost is ok.</p>

[DickArnold]

Light comes from a point source. If you surround your subject from a broad, close source the light is

softer because the light falls on the subject from all sides. If you move the source back the light

becomes more directional and shadows appear because objects like a nose get lit from a

progressingly smaller source. Prove this to yourself by having someone point a flashlight at you and

back away. You can't argue with physics. Fill light provides a way to control the density of shadows.

Buy a used flash meter at Adorama, KEH, or B&H.

 

I had my own studio and I proved this to myself over and over. Monte Zucker is one of the best

wedding photographers that ever practiced the profession. My flash meter is a cheap Shepherd. I

don't think they even make it anymore. He gave me a simple light set up that I have used for years.

Key light close at an angle. Fill light by and higher than the camera. Vary the fill light ratio by moving

the fill light back and forth.. If the main light reads f5.6 and you want a one stop lighting ratio you

measure f8 from the fill. One stop works ok for a lot of pictures. Get a book. Learn some of this

stuff. You are just practicing trial and error. Proper fill light would have taken care of your subjects black eye.

[dhbebb]

<p><em>every tutorial I find says that the closer the key light, the softer the shadows and smoother the hotspot will be ...</em><br>

<em>You were advised to move back your main light only because you don't have a fill light.</em><br>

I totally agree with this and other postings. High-end pro studios will be equipped with softboxes of enormous size. The tutorial advice is based on the principle that you can get something of the effect of a big softbox by moving a smaller one closer to the subject - when I photograph small objects, I use an 18" reflector with a diffuser, which gives a really soft light over a small area close up. Moving the light closer of course allows you to use a smaller aperture - if you have a low-powered studio strobe, let's say 150 joules, and you put a softbox on it, you'll need to move it close to get a workable shooting aperture. A pro with a 1500 or 2000 joule head won't have this problem, particularly with a softbox 6 feet in diameter.<br>

Short advice - stop all light falling on the background, so that this will come out black, no matter how you light the subject. Then start using a fill (you can do quite a lot with a sheet of white card). If you can persuade friends to model for you while you experiment with lighting, you should soon see what I and others have been talking about.</p>

[Uhooru]

<p>Michael is right, moving light away makes it smaller in relation to the subject and thus more "spot light like" if I can use those terms thus harder and MORE contrast. For the same reason a bright sunny day with no clouds is more contrasty than a day with a cloud cover, in essence the light source is larger in relation to the subject. You might want to practice how to control lighting ratios in the studio. You can use a basket ball:) My basic belief about studio lighting is that you should try to get the look you want from the lighting primarily in-camera and not have to depend on post to "fix it".</p>

[bob_bill]

<p>Question: does lack of fill light (meaning using just 1 key light) create TOO much contrast in-camera, and make the shadows too dark? Only if you power your strobe too high above ambient. I'm with Mike, 2 words, light meter. A carpenter uses a tape measure to work with his unit of measure, the inch, photographers use a light meter to measure in their unit of measure, the stop. I can, but prefer not to pull exposure out of my nether regions or chimping incessantly. An ambient measure tells me what my additive reading must be for a particular contrast ratio. If you have any questions on using a meter this way or want some suggestions on your image since that isn't the subject of this post, feel free to email me direct. Also, your shutter speed controls the ambient, you have room to lower it from 1/250 to lighten shadows. Want to knock down the areas lit by strobe, up your aperture from f/8 to 11 as it primarily controls the strobe. But using a meter will let you repeatably get the ratio you want and perhaps even spare you messing in post. </p>

[michaelmowery]

<p>I would say Yes to that question Bob. Now as far as the ambient light is concerned that would only apply if the OP had knowledge of balancing the two different light sources. It would appear that the shot was taken indoors (studio like setting) so there is no ambient light to use as a fill. I would guess the OP did not even consider that as an option.</p>

[mood_lover]

<p>Thanks all, I have decided to invest in a light meter. I have a question though that I think might stump some of you (hopefully not). What if I wanted to create shallow depth-of-field portraits in a studio WITH strobes (key + fill)? Say I wanted to use f/2.8 and any ISO. Could a light meter help me figure out proper shutter speed (while keeping it under my sync speed of 1/250) and necessary flash power?</p>

<p>I am looking at the Sekonic L-358 and while people say its fantastic, I don't know if its possible to set a wide aperture, a max shutter speed (sync speed) and then use the light meter to figure out the other variables (ISO, key power, fill power).</p>

[michaelmowery]

<p>Yes you can meter for 2.8. Flash exposure is not affected by shutter speed. Shutter speed exposes the available light. Too slow a shutter speed may start to balance out and/or over expose your flash exposure.</p>

[mood_lover]

<p>If shutter speed doesn't affect flash exposure than why would too slow a shutter over-expose it? Sorry im confused by your statement.<br>

<br />Also, what I meant was, how would I tell the light meter than it cant use a faster shutter speed than 1/250th? Im worried because I feel because the aperture is so wide open, it might try to use a speed like 1/500 or something to compensate.</p>

[michaelmowery]

Flash exposure is only read in f-stops on the light meter. If you're flash is set to full power and you take a reading it might

say F 22. When you set your flash to half power the reading will then say F 11. You will set your camera to manual

mode and dial In the readings yourself on the f-stops. The shutter speed will only affect the existing available light that is

in the room or outside. if you're in a dark room then you're not really going to see anything in the background the flash

will expose your subject and the background will be dark. On the other hand if the room is very bright or you're outside you

have to be aware of any light hitting your subject as well because both your ambient light exposure can be the same or

higher than your flash exposure thus overexposing your subject. As a rule you want to be able to control both available

light and flash. You do this by blocking or shading any available light hitting your subject then reintroducing only the flash

to light your subject then with your shutter speed control the background ambient light making it lighter or darker Using

your shutter speed. The best advice I can give you is take a class or read a book in flash photography.

[bob_bill]

<p>A flash pops for a brief duration, say 1/1000 of a sec, changing your sync speed under the max sync speed, yours looks like 1/250, doesn't effect the flashed area as the flash duration is faster than the shutter speed. It still effects the area not flashed giving you separate control of it as well, eg, lightening or darkening the background in studio or outdoors. My current shooting location has a window I haven't blocked so there is some sun light. In some studios, lights are left on and can contribute exposure. Your meter will tell you what that ambient, be it sunlight or artificial is. When metering flash, you set the shutter speed and iso on the meter. The metering then tells you the appropriate aperture. Your shutter speed can be 1/15 of a second to say blur movement behind the subject or lighten the background or 1/250 to darken it to black or near black. The requirement in studio to have maximum accurate control of the bg is to keep light from the flash not hitting it directly or bouncing on to it. Harder in small spaces. You can adjust power/distance of your light til you get the desired aperture. Remember though, any ambient ( any light not supplied by the photographer), sun or artificial adds to exposure where it overlaps the strobed areas. It is one of the reasons I prefer the additive metering method as well as that it can be done outdoors where you can't turn off the sun or indoors when you can't turn off lights. After you take a reading, the beauty of a Sekonic, as you change it's iso setting, it gives you the appropriate reading. Mike, I gathered the same about op perhaps not understanding the principles and since his question was in general I answered it that way not assuming he has blacked out his studio. In my current temporary studio, I have not yet hung a "window treatment" (interior decorator girl friend's term, I thought it was a curtain) over one window and as many home studios I do have a base of ambient floating about during the day. Mood, another feature of the Sekonic is it will give you the percentage of flash to ambient light. Also, the l-358 works great, but I find the reflective metering capability of the next up grade invaluable in studio for dialing in a precise bg brightness or shade of gel. It gives a reflective reading off a surface for a strobed area. Also handy for determining the dynamic range of a scene for hdr. I suggest you search Sekonic's site for instructions. One of the contributors here has a tutorial there as well. But keep in mind, this is just nuts and bolts, it isn't the object of the shot-in most cases. This needs to be automatic so you can concentrate on the goal, achieving your vision. </p>

[ellis_vener_photography]

"Flash exposure is only read in f-stops on the light meter. If you're flash is set to full power and you take a reading it might

say F 22. When you set your flash to half power the reading will then say F 11."

 

Michael this is the and only time I've ever known you to give a wrong answer. If the flash is set to full ower and the meter

reads f/22, and nothing but the flash energy level is changed, the meter should read f/16 not f/11.