Jump to content

b_christopher

Members
  • Posts

    312
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by b_christopher

  1. <p>Studio lighting technique is important; lighting ratios, the classic portrait lighting patterns, knowledge of light modifiers, inverse square law, etc.. <br>

    Posing techniques play a huge part in the studio; the ability to guide a subject to project the message you are trying to capture is an art in itself, I think. You may wish to research and study contrapossto in fine-art, which will define pleasing posture of the human form.<br>

    Most of all, people skills and the ability to communicate with your subjects will help greatly in making successful portraits. <br>

    All of these things are, of course, complex topics and you will not find any shortage of books, online resources, forum discussions, etc. on these matters. </p>

  2. <blockquote>

    <p>top two are probably using a huge up-close modifier, how do they lift the shadow side so much without a fill strobe?</p>

    </blockquote>

    <p>The top left image is most likely made with a large key source and may or may not have a small amount of fill. Same with the top right image, but there is a kicker in use.</p>

    <blockquote>

    <p>1. Does the key being a few feet forward from the fill have any affect as opposed to say, the key and fill nearly touching and acting as one big window?</p>

    </blockquote>

    <p>Yes. Certainly, lights positioned differently will produce different lighting patterns, will it not? Light source size, intensity, and distance in relation to subject will change too.</p>

    <blockquote>

    <p>2. Is it generally better to feather the light so it falls in front of the face, behind the face (onto the background) or make the hotspot hit the face directly?</p>

    </blockquote>

    <p>Feathering the key will produce a more soft light and less of a hot spot. It appears that the key was feathered in your example images - except the bottom left image, which shows a hotspot on the forehead. Whether it is better to feather or not, and which direction to feather, is a personal choice.</p>

    <blockquote>

    <p>The modifier I understand, it has to be huge (id say like 7 feet or similar, right out of frame), but its the positioning and feathering thats throwing me off.</p>

    </blockquote>

    <p>Softness of light is dependent on<em> size</em> and <em>distance</em> of light source in relation to the subject. The bigger and closer to subject equals more soft light. A soft portrait light can be achieved with a 7 foot modifier, or 4 foot modifier, or a 2 foot modifier, or any other size pretty much. Position of key light and amount of fill will determine the lighting pattern. Feathering to the front will certainly help fill in the shadows.</p>

    <blockquote>

    <p>Definitely think his mouth could've used some fill but I was right between the fill and that area, maybe that's why it got so dark?!</p>

    </blockquote>

    <p>The fill light directly behind the camera(and photographer) does get blocked quite a bit. I like to use a large light source, say 5' octobox for fill placed directly behind me and camera. If I use a smaller size of light source, say a 3' umbrella, I will move it slightly out from directly behind me and the camera<br>

    <br />Your example shows a high key light position, almost no fill light from behind camera, and either some reflected spill light or kicker fill from right of frame. For this model, I would've moved the key light a little lower and closer to subject.</p>

  3. <blockquote>

    <p>This is a 1:1 power ratio, which is a 2:1 lighting/contrast ratio, and thus f/2.0 + f/2.0 = f/2.8 - is my understanding correct here?</p>

    </blockquote>

    <p>Yes.<br>

    For a 3:1 lighting ratio, you'd need to meter 2 units of key and 1 unit of fill. So, a final exposure setting of f/2.8 as in your example, you'd need to meter f/2 for the key and f/1.4 for fill. </p>

  4. <blockquote>

    <p>B Christopher, I feel that I need a second soft box of some kind to go along with the one I have. The Gary Fong isn't cutting it like I thought it would.</p>

    </blockquote>

    <p>Some light modifiers for portraiture which you can add - large 5ft. or 7ft. parabolic reflectors/softboxes, beauty dishes, strip softboxes, honeycomb grids, cinefoil, black flags, and gels. I almost always use some/all of these things in portrait setups. Anyone can throw a whole lot of light on his subjects, but as Rodeo Joe points out, controlling the light is the real art and talent. If you're not familiar already, do look up "classic portrait lighting patterns" and "the six qualities of light." Knowing why you need a certain modifier will help prevent similar experiences you had with the Gary Fong. </p>

  5. <p>I've always tried to let "need" determine equipment purchases. If you ask yourself how the current equipment limits your ability to create images to the extent of your creative vision, you may realize what processes you will need to add or change and/or pieces of equipment you will need to fulfill that vision. There are photographers who create beautiful images using dozens of strobes with all kinds of modifiers and others who use a single bare-bulb flash to make one picture. One wise man once said "Supplemental lighting in photography is all about problem solving." So, what is the problem you're trying to solve?</p>
  6. <p>Oops! I've done it again. Spoke without factual knowledge of subject at hand, that is. I've used Profoto systems and Sekonics with PocketWizard technology for many years now and assumed that PocketWizard and Air systems were compatible, too. I've checked the Profoto Air technical incormation, and found no mention of PW compatibility, unfortunately. Brian, I apologize for the misinformation - I hope I haven't caused you any inconvenience. Colin, thanks for the clarification.</p>
  7. <p>Do you mean hard(or soft) cover coffee table style books? Most professional print houses will do that. Many of them use web-based layout design software, and others provide you with design software. My primary print house is <a href="http://www.hhcolorlab.com/">H&H Color Lab</a> - I've been happy with their service for 6+ years. Of course, there are many others, which you won't have trouble finding with a simple search.</p>
  8. <p>I have a tough time trying to relate the above black band issue with a shutter fault, but find Mitch's repair experience with a similar problem interesting. Shubhankar, please post an update with your findings regarding this issue.</p>
  9. <p>You can change the brightness of the background by using the inverse square law, as others mentioned. Depending on space limitations, available modifier choices, required lighting effects, etc., you can move the background farther from the subject, or move the lights closer to the subject; the inverse square law still applies. A simple explanation and technique, <a href="http://photofocus.com/2009/06/04/understanding-light-falloff-the-inverse-square-law/">here</a>.</p>
  10. <p>It sounds like the white balance setting is on Auto? Try setting the white balance to tungsten. You should get more accurate colors. You should set a custom white balance to achieve the most accurate color - I don't own the G12, but the manual should explain the how-to's.</p>
  11. <p>I still use a <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Cabin-CL-5000L-Light-Panel-11x14/dp/B00015HRXM">Cabin Light Panel</a> which I got from <a href="http://www.macgroupus.com/">MAC Groups</a>, many years ago. It seems they've stopped carrying the brand. Maybe you can find some on the used market. I like its compactness, and the light is even and bright. Also, I made a 20X30 light table using wood, white plexiglass, and a couple of daylight balanced fluorescent tubes. Easy enough if you have a couple of tools.</p>
×
×
  • Create New...