daniel_seo2

<p>Thank you. I will try this.</p>

<p>Thank you for all the help. I appreciate it. I need more studying and practicing before I can shoot seriously.</p>

<p>Can you guys tell me what I'm thinking right now is right? I think I've got it figured out.</p> <p>When you light a subject from a certain angle, the subject creates a family of angles for direct reflections. The position of the light source at that moment could be inside or outside of that family of angles. As you move the light source, the family of angles changes, and the light source could happen to sit inside or outside that changing family of angles.</p>

<p>Ok..it's not too hard to make myself think that the family of angles changes relative to the position of the light source. It does seem to make sense. But the book focuses on "whether to <strong>position</strong> a light source <strong>in</strong> a family of angles or not" It is this part that made me think that "an object at a certain position has its family of angles for direct reflections" When the author says whether to put a light <strong>in</strong> the family of angles or not, does he mean the family of angles created by the ambient light that was already there before the main light we are trying to position? </p>

<p>Hi, I was reading Light Science & Magic, and had a question about family of angles. From what I understood, an object at a certain position HAS its own family of angles for direct reflections, so in order to avoid direct reflections you should not put a light source inside that family of angles. But I've come across a sentence that does not make sense to me: </p> <p>"Moving the lights closer to the camera axis, for example, means moving the camera farther away from the subject(and using a corresposdingly longer lens to get a similar image size.) This<strong> creates a smaller family of angles</strong> that causes direct reflections and allows more freedom in choosing the angle to light the subject."</p> <p>From these sentences, it sounds like you can create a family of angles by moving the light source. Two things don't quite come together: 1. You can decide to or not to place a light source inside a family of angles. 2. You can create a family of angles by moving a light source. </p> <p>Can you explain what I am not getting here? Thank you in advance. :)</p> <p> </p>

<p>I see. Thank you for the help. :) </p>

<p>Hi, I am a beginner at photography, and I've left some threads here before asking for help. I've gone to the top of my apartment building to shoot my gemstones under sunlight. I shot these with myself facing the sun (that is, backlight), because if I have the sun at my back, shadows of me and camera are cast on the photos. What I think the problems with these photos are<br /> 1. Cannot see the facets of the stones clearly<br /> 2. The stones are not shiny enough? <br /> 3. Bright shiny areas on some of the stones are on the bottom of them, making them look not good</p> <p>I shot these as practice and I am planning to shoot seriously after studying more about shooting under sunlight. I am planning to bring a table, reflection plates, diffusion box, a lamp that works on batteries, and some fancy background materials (these are shot on a white piece of paper), and a gray card (One thing I still don't understand is when to use it. Do I need a gray card when shooting AWB? If I shoot RAW, does custom WB matter?). Any comments for improvement will be helpful. Thank you. I appreciate all the help.</p> <p><img src="http://cafeptthumb3.phinf.naver.net/20150910_207/dannymudd_1441867659108hMJj4_JPEG/%BF%C1%BB%F33.jpg?type=w740" alt="" width="740" height="493" /><br> <img src="http://cafeptthumb4.phinf.naver.net/20150910_245/dannymudd_1441867659206XJIH0_JPEG/%BF%C1%BB%F325.jpg?type=w740" alt="" width="740" height="493" /><br> http://cafeptthumb3.phinf.naver.net/20150910_67/dannymudd_1441867659304VwfPS_JPEG/%BF%C1%BB%F327_fixed.jpg?type=w740<br> <img src="http://cafeptthumb4.phinf.naver.net/20150910_143/dannymudd_1441867659452C229D_JPEG/%BF%C1%BB%F328.jpg?type=w740" alt="" width="740" height="493" /></p>

<p>This was very helpful. Thank you so much for taking your time to answer. :)</p>

<p>I have some more questions regarding how to use the modeling light (Sorry, I really should have learned these before I'd bought it). First, I cannot figure out how to match the model light and the flash light. The model light knob has a minimum end and a maximum end, and the flash light knob goes around 360 degrees endlessly. The flash has values of 4.0, 4.1, 4.2 ........ 9.8, 9.9, 10. I just cannot figure out which point of the model light knob matches each of the flash light values. </p> <p>And I have one more question. If I shoot the photos with both the ambient room light and the modeling light off (ambient light off to get a better picture and modeling light off to save the bulb), how do you meter the flash that will come out only after the shutter button has been pushed? I tried this and couldn't get either exposure or the focusing. I've tried manual focusing, but could not see anything on the viewfinder because it was too dark. </p>

<p>It says 400W/s maximum. I just found out that these lamps are not continuous. Like you said, the halogen lamps were not continuous light. They are modeling light. These are flash lights. I should have paid more attention to the sales person in the lighting shop. The brand name is FOMEX. It's a South Korean product. Does modeling light have much effect on the product? </p>

<p>Thank you for the advice. Lighting really does seem to be the most important thing and the hardest. I have two continuous halogen lamps which have flash functions as well and have quite a bit of power intensity. Is this enough? I am actually thinking about getting another light as a pointing light, but I am not going to if this is something that can be achieved depending on how I get the right combination of light intensity, position and camera parameters. I've attatched a picture of one of my stones that I took today. Both of them are edited in Adobe Camera Raw. Any comments will be helpful. Thank you guys. <br> <img src="http://cafeptthumb1.phinf.naver.net/20150909_98/dannymudd_144172830055094qE5_JPEG/CRW_0003_%BC%F6%C1%A4%C8%C4.jpg?type=w740" alt="" width="740" height="493" /><img src="http://cafeptthumb4.phinf.naver.net/20150909_224/dannymudd_144172830068834vJl_JPEG/crw0003%BC%F6%C1%A4%C8%C42.jpg?type=w740" alt="" width="740" height="495" /></p>

<p>Hello guys, I am just learning how to use Adobe Camera Raw to edit my jewelry pictures. Can you give me some useful tips on how to make the pictures as natural as possible? I am trying to whiten the background(shot on a white acrylic board), not affecting the naturalness of the stones. I've mostly been using the adjustment brush, graduated filter, and the radial gradient, to apply an increased exposure only to the background and not to the stones. But no matter how small I make my brush to be, it's impossible to make the edge of the stone look natural. Auto mask does not help. Thanks. </p> <p>Daniel </p>

<p>Thank you both. Will try focus stacking. :)</p>

<p>Thank you for all your info and suggestions. I have a few questions after reading your comments. The point source light: does it mean a hard light(without diffuser. lamp shining straight to the subject)? And by shinyness I meant surface shinyness but depth of field I also have to achieve. If you are lighting the subject from underneath like you suggested, should I do it right from the bottom or maybe at a 45 degree angle? And what does stacking mean? And lastly, is it okay to use a LED light along with the two halogen lamps I have now? I am thinking of getting a LED lamp (a desk lamp because it's cheap). I'll read that book. Thank you all. </p>

<p>Hi, I am a beginner at photography. I started learning to take photos with a DSLR after I decided to take photos of my jewelry products that will go online for selling. I am starting with jewelry stones before wearable jewelry products(rings, etc). I have a lighting set composed of two halogen lamps(continuous) that has a flash function as well. (about 700 USD) And I have two cameras: Canon D60 with a 100mm macro lens and a 50mm normal lens, and a Sigma SD14 with a 18~50mm macro lens. And an old lighting tent that has gone a little yellowish. My one main problem is: that all of my pictures seem to lose most of their shinyness. I use auto white balancing since I am shooting everything RAW. My two lighting lamps are pretty powerful: if I turn them up about 2/3 of the full light power, I can set<img src="http://cafeptthumb4.phinf.naver.net/20150907_20/dannymudd_1441558032132HibYg_JPEG/SDIM046602.jpg?type=w740" alt="" width="740" height="493" /></p> <p>the exposure at 1/160, f32, and get an OK picture. How can I bring out that shinyness of my stones? I've included a picture that I think is the best one I took so far. Thank you. </p>