How to lower contrast of my fake north-window lighting? Please help improve my setup!

[mood_lover]

<p>I am trying to recreate the light of a north-facing window (I know itll never be exact but trying my best) by bouncing a strobe off a v-flat and passing that light through a bedsheet. I like the slow falloff but I'm finding that the overall contrast is just too high for me (highlights too hot, shadows too dark). What are some things I can do to lower the contrast in-camera? I have some guesses before my next shoot so if anyone wants to confirm or suggest new ideas that would be great:<br /><br />1. Put a white v-flat on the shadow side just out-of-frame to kick some light back into the shadow side. My issue with this is that I don't want it to look flat, but at the same time I think I need more light bouncing around. Would that lower the overall contrast, since using bounce fill doesn't affect highlights? I need the highlights to be less hot as well.<br />2. Push the background/model away from the bedsheet (like you would when feathering a softbox, or pulling a softbox back) to create less harsh of a falloff.<br />3. Add frontal fill flash, though I can't afford a secondary light right now!<br /><br /><img src="http://i.imgur.com/av24FPf.jpg" alt="" width="1200" height="1011" /></p>

[Lou_Meluso]

<p>You could put a reflector on that lamp head and fire it so only the v-flat gets light. Using a bare bulb means some direct light is also hitting your scrim (bed sheet). That will soften your source by using greater diffusion.</p>

<p>Put more white reflector material in your set. Your idea to add bounce into the shadow side is a good one. As always, it's a matter of degree and placement is critical. If it starts getting too "hazy" looking, try backing off some or use a dimpled silver reflector for fill with a bit more snap. Use a lens hood to minimize lens flare in a set with lot's of light bouncing around.</p>

<p>Moving the subject <strong>closer</strong> to the scrim will make for a softer wrap of light not the other way around. The larger the light source, the softer the contrast. "hotness" is controlled with exposure and the right amount of fill. Proper post processing techniques can also add some contrast control as you have shown. One old technique is to use soft focus lenses or filters to get a softening effect in camera. I think these optical solutions can look better than digital solutions when manipulating contrast.</p>

<p>Yes, a second light used as a fill light works splendidly. It gives you much more control over the fill quality, direction and degree. It also adds shadows if your subject is too close to the background. FIX: move your model away from the background.</p>

 

[howard_m]

<p>I'd say start by moving the model closer and then see about a 2nd v-flat or a bit of fill</p>

[paul_k1664875007]

<p>Actually, if you look at portraits shot with real north window lighting (eg Irving Penn 'Worls in a small room, my favourite, or the portraits of e.g. Julia Margaret Cameron, or Lewis Carol, the writer of 'Alice in Wonderland') you see that the shadows are far deeper and harsher then those in your pictures. So rather the filling in the shadow. upu should be using a light absorbing screen rather then a reflector.<br>

<br />That said, in the picture you show now, the first thing that strikes the eye is that they are overall quite over exposed, with the high lights (see the white top) tending to near burning out (the black skirt even looks brownish rather the black in the part nearest to the lightsource).</p>

<p>So for starters I would put the power of your bounced flash lower, or close down your lens opening. (I see no risk of spill light from your already bounced light into the picture, that IMO is only a very small, and mainly theoretical risk). Yes, you can put your model further away from the lightsource, but the result will basically be the same.</p>

<p>If you adjust your exposure for your highlights, your shadows will automatically/inevitably get deeper, which you say you don't want. I wouldn't go for complicated or expensive (like being an extra flash for frontal flash, which is contrary to the character of north window lighting anyway) solutions though.<br>

Just put a white (for a soft fill) or silver (for harsher fill) reflection screen just outside the frame or the picture at a 45 degree angle opposite of the model. This way the shadow will flow gradually from light to dark which is probably what you're after.</p>

 

[michaelmowery]

<p>You are correct when you say you need a reflector on the shadow side to fill in.</p>

 

[mood_lover]

<p>@Louis Meluso: Well I have the bare bulb pointed towards the v-flat, not upwards. <a href="http://i.ytimg.com/vi/h-umbubgZ-Q/hqdefault.jpg">This is what the AB400 looks bare</a>, the bulb is attached to a back, so could it actually shoot light backwards?! I had it bare since I figured the sides of the "softbox" could get hit and bounce light as well, but a reflector will create more diffusion? And okay, I'll bring the model closer to the scrim, what do you feel about feathering the light though? I was thinking instead of using the hotspot center (though there shouldnt be one with a large bounce like this), to use the back edge of the soft box instead. I do have some diffusion filters I'll try as well, since I'm trying to get as low contrast as I can and boost it later rather than having to reduce it in post.</p>

<p>@Paul K: 'World In a Small Room' was amazing! Yeah I recall seeing some pictures where he used a black card to absorb light on the shadow side. For me, I want shadow detail and less contrast. The shot was definitely overexposed a little, and as you said, if I exposed it for the highlights then the shadows wouldve been completely void of detail. Once again, I guess thats where the fill light comes in. I have a white wall I can push the entire set towards to use as fill, so I'll play with that. Gradual flow from light to dark is exactly what I'm after. Thanks!</p>

<p>@Michael Mowery: fill light has been so difficult for me to grasp, as you already know. Every time I put a reflector on the shadow side my eyes tell me there's no modeling on the face then I always regret not using it after.</p>

[michaelmowery]

<p>You have to move the reflector closer to see more fill results or move it away to see less. You should use a large 4ft x 5ft foam-core or use another V flat. Fill light is not modeling that is only from your main light. If you don't see that then your main light is not in the right place. It is better to place your main light source more in front of your subject than around to much to one side. </p>

[fotografz]

<p>Maybe began by understanding what a North Light Portrait looks like … AND … how to pose for this type of light.</p>

<p>Working from basics,</p>

<p>1) typically, north window light is actually a bit downward directional … while it is all indirect light, it is still most influenced by the sky above. So, I'd try positioning your main bounce light higher than the model and maybe tilt your diffusion scrim in towards the subject a bit.</p>

<p>2) You should have your subject posing like you actually want in the end image (open pose verses closed pose for example) … then study how refinements in the posing affect how the light sculpts the face (like broad verses short).</p>

<p>Yes, a reflector is needed, but beware … this sort of lighting flattened out to much becomes something other than what a north light type portrait typically looks like. All you want is enough to control the ratio and fill to taste.</p>

<p>This guy does a decent job explaining it.<br>

<br>

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UpoT-j_PDTE</p>

<p>Hope this helps.</p>

<p>- Marc</p>

 

[bob_bill]

<p>The painters used north facing windows because they painted for long periods and the light varied less than say a south facing window. I would find an example of the light quality I want and work with softness, contrast controls til I get it. Some of the most beautiful created north light I have ever seen is in Girl With a Pearl Earring by cinematograper Eduardo Serra. He shot continuous lights through 2 layers of diffusion outside the replica of Vermeer's studio windows. The scene that knocks my socks off is when she is holding the open window. warm soft light on the window side, subtle hints of blue in the shadows. The painting is woman with a water pitcher. I think Serra outdid the painting. Gorgeous. Once you understand the qualities you want to alter and understand the controls, like closer the source(that is the reflector or if shot through a scrim, the scrim surface, not the light behind it make the light softer, ie. slower shadow edge transitions. To change contrast ratio, understand the further from the source the light looses intensity(inverse square rule). If you can't get the ratio you want moving away from the source, then fill needs to be added or the power of the main taken down. Experiment. It's called trial and ERROR, not trial and success. Who knows, watch what you get as you make changes and you may find a quality of light you like better than your original goal. Also, like Michael said, learn about creating shadow with another light quality in your control, direction. </p>

[rodeo_joe1]

<p>Actually the bare-bulb head will harden the light in this situation, rather than soften it. Light thrown back toward the subject from the bare head will pass directly through the scrim and by-pass the reflected stage of diffusion. You want all of the light to hit the reflector panel first for maximum diffusion. And if it really is a bedsheet, then that's going to be far too opaque to be an efficient diffuser. You want some nylon scrim or cotton muslin.</p>

<p>Depth of shadows isn't controlled by the softness of the source, but by the subject's surroundings. i.e reflections from, walls, ceiling, BG, etc. plus any deliberate fill light. The <em>hardness</em> of shadows is a separate thing from their <em>depth. </em>Hardness is how well-defined the edge of a shadows is, and depth is the contrast between the deepest part of the shadow and its directly lit surrounding. You can have hard shadows with almost no contrast, or soft shadows that are impenetrably dark. And vice versa of course. Window light tends to be a lot more contrasty than what you've achieved there. But it does depend on the room that the window is in, and how close the subject is to the window. Closer tends to give deeper shadows.</p>

<p>I'd also look at your camera settings. Are you shooting RAW? Or have you simply got too much contrast set in the JPEG picture control? Since you can get close to what you want in LR, you ought to be able to get it straight out of the camera - more-or-less.</p>

<p>I don't think the plain grey background helps the look either, since the skin and clothing tones blend into it.</p>