Weekly Assignment #105: Single Light Potraits

Nikolai

The idea for this assignment came from the current discussion in People's forum (Studio Virgin:-). during the course of discussion DaveV provided an excellent link to one-light portrait standard techniques. And I thought to myself: this is an excellent way to actually learn single light portraiture.
So, for this class you have to submit all three classic portraits (Rembrandt, butterfly, side), all taken under the same conditions and off the same subject.
For the extra credit add another three with reflectors.

To make your life a little bit easier:-), you can use a mannequin, or a wig holder, or a statue, or anything resembling human face. With such a steady subject it should be possible to use a common portable light source (e.g. desk lamp). Just remember to use higher ISO, longer shutter speed and a sturdy tripod.

As a reflector you can use (depending on a scale): piece of paper, kitchen foil, poster board, foam board, windshield cover, etc. Of course, the real thing from B&H would do fine, too!

Let's make some classic art!

JustPlainMe

I am complete newbie, but I am really interested in practicing this technique so I can decide if I want to invest money in studio lighting for my home.

Please, please forgive this question, but does single-light mean (in particular) one light source only (no ambient light at all) or one added light source, in a room with whatever ambient light is available? I am going to try both, but I want to follow the rules!

These assignments are very challenging and helpful. I have learned an unbelievable amount in just a week.

Thank you very much for your time!

Sarah

Nikolai

JustPlainMe wrote:

I am complete newbie, but I am really interested in practicing this technique so I can decide if I want to invest money in studio lighting for my home.

Please, please forgive this question, but does single-light mean (in particular) one light source only (no ambient light at all) or one added light source, in a room with whatever ambient light is available? I am going to try both, but I want to follow the rules!

These assignments are very challenging and helpful. I have learned an unbelievable amount in just a week.

Thank you very much for your time!

Sarah

Sarah,
it means "one light source, possibly with a reflector". :-)
Should you choose to use a strobe - use a strobe and avoid/dim the ambient (4-5 stops difference makes any ambient invisible from the camera standpoint). Should you choose and conventional light (desk lamp, worklight, candle, etc.) - well, that pretty much means "all other lights in the room are off and shutters are sealed".

angevin1

Okay Nik! Great idea and a bit far from my norm, but I'll give it a try.

First Face Forward trying to get a butterfly on a pug nose and then with refelctor:


Now Side light without, then with reflector:


Now Rembrandt Without and again, with reflector:


Well, Not really tried any of these before with only one light. I typically use flash off cam and not active A/C lighting, but...it was very interesting. Thank you for looking, critiquing and having these fun technical challenges~~

thanks in advance, tom

Nikolai

angevin1 wrote:

Okay Nik! Great idea and a bit far from my norm, but I'll give it a try.

First Face Forward trying to get a butterfly on a pug nose and then with refelctor:

Now Side light without, then with reflector:

Now Rembrandt Without and again, with reflector:

Well, Not really tried any of these before with only one light. I typically use flash off cam and not active A/C lighting, but...it was very interesting. Thank you for looking, critiquing and having these fun technical challenges~~

thanks in advance, tom

Great stuff, Tom! Thank you very much!
Question: did you use AC light or flash? I mean, the requirement was singularity, not the origin.
Also - I do think that the same portrait would be MUCH cooler artistically if the bg was not lit at all (hint: gobos are not sources, and hence are allowed :-)

angevin1

Nikolai wrote:

Great stuff, Tom! Thank you very much!
Question: did you use AC light or flash? I mean, the requirement was singularity, not the origin.
Also - I do think that the same portrait would be MUCH cooler artistically if the bg was not lit at all (hint: gobos are not sources, and hence are allowed :-)

I used a/c lighting, of which I have some but haven't used in quite some time. I don't do much in house shooting. SO when I went to do the assignment I figured it'd be easier to see the shadow with constant lights since I also do not own any strobes with Modeling lamps.

Agreed, couldda used a more artistic approach...and I think that could come with time if I was to present in the challenges more. Problem is, when I think assignment, I also think instead of create~

Thanks once again for the assignments and your time~

tom

jbakerphoto

Well I got an umbrella about a month ago and I have hardly used it. I figured this was the perfect chance to try to get to know it a little. I was using a sunpack 383 set at 1/2 power into a 45 inch umbrealla. I triggered it with a optical slave triggered by a 580ex at 1/128.....I used a foam core board as a reflector..Lights turned out..Straight out of camera....

1.) butterfly


2.) butterfly with reflector....



3.) side



4.) side with reflector



5.) Rembrant



6.) Rembrant with reflector

Nikolai

unclejon wrote:

Well I got an umbrella about a month ago and I have hardly used it. I figured this was the perfect chance to try to get to know it a little. I was using a sunpack 383 set at 1/2 power into a 45 inch umbrealla. I triggered it with a optical slave triggered by a 580ex at 1/128.....I used a foam core board as a reflector..Lights turned out..Straight out of camera....

Thank you!
Wasn't so hard, was it?

Those portrait would have a much greater artistic merit if you

1) watched the background (pieces of furniture realy don't belong here)

2) raised your camera's relative position - headshots are rarely done from beneath the subject

3) as an extra artistic touch I'd use a gobo (flag, whatever) to make a darker background. Currently it's lit with the same flash. Blocking the part of light that goes to bg would create a better isolation.

HTH

jbakerphoto

Nikolai wrote:

Thank you!
Wasn't so hard, was it?

Those portrait would have a much greater artistic merit if you

1) watched the background (pieces of furniture realy don't belong here)

2) raised your camera's relative position - headshots are rarely done from beneath the subject

3) as an extra artistic touch I'd use a gobo (flag, whatever) to make a darker background. Currently it's lit with the same flash. Blocking the part of light that goes to bg would create a better isolation.

HTH

Thanks for the feedback Nick!! This is a great subject! I understand 1 and 2. I figured I would be doing it again so thought I would just figure out the lighting/technique and crop if need be later...

Now #3 is the one that I was oblivious too.....really...I understand what a Gobo is but I do not understand how you use it with a umbrella?

I guess in this senerio I would get a piece black foam core and one of those can stands and position it at the back of the umbrella at the rim. correct??? guess I need to go buy a piece of black foam core...better way???

Nikolai

unclejon wrote:

Thanks for the feedback Nick!! This is a great subject! I understand 1 and 2. I figured I would be doing it again so thought I would just figure out the lighting/technique and crop if need be later...

Now #3 is the one that I was oblivious too.....really...I understand what a Gobo is but I do not understand how you use it with a umbrella?

I guess in this senerio I would get a piece black foam core and one of those can stands and position it at the back of the umbrella at the rim. correct??? guess I need to go buy a piece of black foam core...better way???

You're welcome!
As far as the gobo goes:-)
Yes, umbrellas and brollyboxes (shoot-through umbrellas, aka "poor man's softboxes") are omnidirectional and as such tend to "spill" a lot of light everywhere. What you can do, though, is to use a blanket or two (or whatever other opaque and preferably light absorbing material you happen to have in your household, including those black foamboards you've mentioned) in a way that they prevent at least some of the spillage. I understand that you may be short on lightstands, C-stands and other studio gear, but here's when you get creative and use something else - doors, screens, PVC pipe frames, ceiling mounts... Whatever you can find.

NateW

OK, I'm behind a bit on my assignments (I was never a very good student...), but given the feedback that's been given so far, maybe I can catch up on two themes at once (104 & 105) and maybe even get into 106 while I'm at it. Here's to a new day! (in 24 minutes)

NateW

Here we go:
W/o reflector & with for each:


Butterfly (though I'm not seeing the butterfly: what'm I doing wrong?!?)
And no, she wasn't too pleased to be doing this for some of them. Arms are behind her on the ground for the first shot here, and it shows.


Edge: (I wished I'd shot these using the light on the other side as I think it's a better side for her, but by the end of all this, she was completely done, so we cut it out. At least she got to stand for this last bit!)


Other things learned on this shoot:
1) New backdrops need time to lose the wrinkles
2) My f1.8 50mm Nikkor really wishes it had more anti-reflective coatings. Or at least, I do. When I was blowing out the backdrop with a speed light remote triggered + gobo, I was getting the telltale (at least for this lens, for me) green haze on the opposite side of the image from the bright stuff. When I cut the brightness of the flash enough to cut back on the haze, it wasn't blown out anymore. Shoulda tried one of the other lenses! (but would have lost the short DoF.)
3) My wife wasn't thrilled with being the model. We'll have to do this often enough that it becomes normal, right? That way she'll like it more? (hah.)
4) WB should have been reset when switching from shoot-through to reflected umbrella. Hmm. Same umbrella. No extra colors (in the reflector etc.) and I wouldn't have thought I needed to... Maybe the back wall or something? (but that's a gray) Have to think about that some.
5) Even when they're tired, adults are _way_ easier to get to do what you want them to than 4 and 6 year olds. OK, this was a new thing to learn, but it was a good reminder.

This was fun, even if it didn't turn out quite as awesome as it would with _lots_ more practice.

Nikolai

NateW wrote:

Here we go:
W/o reflector & with for each:

Butterfly (though I'm not seeing the butterfly: what'm I doing wrong?!?)
And no, she wasn't too pleased to be doing this for some of them. Arms are behind her on the ground for the first shot here, and it shows.


Edge: (I wished I'd shot these using the light on the other side as I think it's a better side for her, but by the end of all this, she was completely done, so we cut it out. At least she got to stand for this last bit!)

Other things learned on this shoot:
1) New backdrops need time to lose the wrinkles
2) My f1.8 50mm Nikkor really wishes it had more anti-reflective coatings. Or at least, I do. When I was blowing out the backdrop with a speed light remote triggered + gobo, I was getting the telltale (at least for this lens, for me) green haze on the opposite side of the image from the bright stuff. When I cut the brightness of the flash enough to cut back on the haze, it wasn't blown out anymore. Shoulda tried one of the other lenses! (but would have lost the short DoF.)
3) My wife wasn't thrilled with being the model. We'll have to do this often enough that it becomes normal, right? That way she'll like it more? (hah.)
4) WB should have been reset when switching from shoot-through to reflected umbrella. Hmm. Same umbrella. No extra colors (in the reflector etc.) and I wouldn't have thought I needed to... Maybe the back wall or something? (but that's a gray) Have to think about that some.
5) Even when they're tired, adults are _way_ easier to get to do what you want them to than 4 and 6 year olds. OK, this was a new thing to learn, but it was a good reminder.

This was fun, even if it didn't turn out quite as awesome as it would with _lots_ more practice.

Nate, thank you!

Soo, she was "done" after *six* frames? Tell her my models have to put up with me for six *hours* and six *hundred* frames:-), it will surely make her feel she's got off easy with you :-)

Butterfly - you got it. Look for the shape of the shadow under her nose in your first Butterfly frame.

I mentioned that earlier: umbrealls are very hard to control. A lot of light spill. Hence the light pollution in your lens (and on the bg, for than matter). Sometimes it's good (e.g. for the HK), but more often than not you want a more precise control on what is going where (hence softboxes and grids).

jbakerphoto

Take 2
Ok so my 2nd attempt ended up slightly better. SORTA. I couldnt figure out how to gobo the umbrella so I just took off the umbrella and shot with bare flash with a black foamy as a gobo.

The Good first.....

1.) Butterfly with reflector --- Probaly best out of the bunch


2.) butterfly with out reflector...



3.) rembrant - Guess I lost control of the background here...


4.)rembrant with reflector ----I think....


5.)side --- probaly too dark


6.)side with reflector

jbakerphoto

bump

Nikolai

unclejon wrote:

bump

sorry, got a bit too much on my plate lately :-)

I like the clarity of these shots better. Separation FG/BG has been much improved. However, the lack of a larger diffuser (umbrella) also made the light much sharper. It's not necessarily a bad thing, but you certainly must be aware of the effect.

And yes, the reason why I don't use umbrellas and brollyboxes much anymore is that they spill the light all over the place. Yes, softboxes (esp. with grids) are not cheap, but afterall you spend the money to get a better light...

jbakerphoto

Nikolai wrote:

sorry, got a bit too much on my plate lately :-)

I like the clarity of these shots better. Separation FG/BG has been much improved. However, the lack of a larger diffuser (umbrella) also made the light much sharper. It's not necessarily a bad thing, but you certainly must be aware of the effect.

And yes, the reason why I don't use umbrellas and brollyboxes much anymore is that they spill the light all over the place. Yes, softboxes (esp. with grids) are not cheap, but afterall you spend the money to get a better light...

Understand about everything on your plate. I just got worried because I kept on moveing down the list. Thanks for the critique. I dont forsee my self getting any softboxes anytime soon. My wife and son stay home so things are tight. Maybe eventually

eL eSs Vee

Butteryfly lighting.

I forgot where the reflector belonged and placed it to her side rather than in front.

Paramount lighting.


Edge (side) lighting.



Thank you.

Nikolai

eL eSs Vee wrote:

Butteryfly lighting.
I forgot where the reflector belonged and placed it to her side rather than in front.
Paramount lighting.
Edge (side) lighting.
Thank you.

Thank you Lee, nice entries!
However I honestly think the white wall to the camera right did some reflection on her own. Single light portraits with good spill control usually look a bit more dramatic...

eL eSs Vee

Nikolai wrote:

Thank you Lee, nice entries!
However I honestly think the white wall to the camera right did some reflection on her own. Single light portraits with good spill control usually look a bit more dramatic...

Thank you!

I hear you on that, Nikolai. You're right about the whits(ish) wall to camera right (not to mention the low ceiling above) in her tiny apartment washing light back onto her. I did, though, manage to have her more than eight feet in front of the back wall, and just like my photo for the silhouette assignment (shot on the same day), I'd run out of suitably sized pieces of black flannel to hang on either side of her.

On a related note: After my tax refund comes in (yes, I'm getting money back! YAYHH!! ) I'll be getting a couple of 9'X15' muslin backdrops and support stands, plus more black flannel to be used on either side. Paper will soon follow.

Nikolai

eL eSs Vee wrote:

Thank you!

I hear you on that, Nikolai. You're right about the whits(ish) wall to camera right (not to mention the low ceiling above) in her tiny apartment washing light back onto her. I did, though, manage to have her more than eight feet in front of the back wall, and just like my photo for the silhouette assignment (shot on the same day), I'd run out of suitably sized pieces of black flannel to hang on either side of her.

On a related note: After my tax refund comes in (yes, I'm getting money back! YAYHH!! ) I'll be getting a couple of 9'X15' muslin backdrops and support stands, plus more black flannel to be used on either side. Paper will soon follow.

Before laying out all the tax refund money on the muslins, stop by the LA fabric district on a weekday and simply take a walk first. If you never been there it may take you 2-3 hours, but you do need to get an idea what's where. Create a short shooping list and head out to find the best price. Be prepare to haggle, but don't buy at the first place. Remember: volume and cash makes for huge discounts.

Also, keep in mind that PVC pipe make a great inexpensive replacements for Various stands and racks. You can either buy them in pewter gray or get a can of an acrylic paint abd make them nice photographic black. And for the rest of the support go to www.amvona,com.

eL eSs Vee

Nikolai wrote:

Before laying out all the tax refund money on the muslins, stop by the LA fabric district on a weekday and simply take a walk first. If you never been there it may take you 2-3 hours, but you do need to get an idea what's where. Create a short shooping list and head out to find the best price. Be prepare to haggle, but don't buy at the first place. Remember: volume and cash makes for huge discounts.

Also, keep in mind that PVC pipe make a great inexpensive replacements for Various stands and racks. You can either buy them in pewter gray or get a can of an acrylic paint abd make them nice photographic black. And for the rest of the support go to www.amvona,com.

Thank you for the heads-up. At this time, I'm considering this set-up.

Nikolai

eL eSs Vee wrote:

Thank you for the heads-up. At this time, I'm considering this set-up.

I'd say it's a bit low for what I do, but if you're limited by the ceiling - then it looks like a good price. Of course, I don't know the quality of fabric or rack, so can't comment on those. I know I selected my fabric very carefully. And my rack is 12' or 13' high (not that I use it at home)

eL eSs Vee

Nikolai wrote:

I'd say it's a bit low for what I do, but if you're limited by the ceiling - then it looks like a good price. Of course, I don't know the quality of fabric or rack, so can't comment on those. I know I selected my fabric very carefully. And my rack is 12' or 13' high (not that I use it at home)

It's low for what I want to do, but I am rather limited by said ceilings: Mine are eight feet, and so are those of most of my friends. But, since I won't be shooting in the homes of my high-celinged friends every time the shutter bug gets hungry, I'll be happy with a (relatively) low background. . . . For now!

Nikolai

eL eSs Vee wrote:

It's low for what I want to do, but I am rather limited by said ceilings: Mine are eight feet, and so are those of most of my friends. But, since I won't be shooting in the homes of my high-celinged friends every time the shutter bug gets hungry, I'll be happy with a (relatively) low background. . . . For now!

Can you get those BGs only and get a rack from amvona? Or go to fabric district and get the really nice materail for $25 top (or cheaper). With the amvona rack being ~$60 and fabrics being no more that $25/ea you'll get $25 savings over the kit and a garanteed quality...

baldmountain

I've been remiss in getting assignments done. Or any photography for that matter. I took these hand holding a 40watt Ott desk lamp and the camera. (Sorry for the soft focus.) I think a lot of what makes a single light portrait work is how you deal with backgrounds along with the lighting. I also think that people get too caught up in fancy lighting systems when a lamp from Lowe's or even a candle will do.

Side light



Front light



Rembrandt light

Nikolai

baldmountain wrote:

I've been remiss in getting assignments done. Or any photography for that matter. I took these hand holding a 40watt Ott desk lamp and the camera. (Sorry for the soft focus.) I think a lot of what makes a single light portrait work is how you deal with backgrounds along with the lighting. I also think that people get too caught up in fancy lighting systems when a lamp from Lowe's or even a candle will do.

Thank you Geoff!
I agree, you don't have to have $8,000 camera, $4,000 lens, $25,000 worth of lights and $100,000/yr studio space to take a nice portrait (albeit, they can help, too:-)
Apart from being soft I think your WB is a bit off (fairly typical color cast for Otts)...

baldmountain

Nikolai wrote:

Apart from being soft I think your WB is a bit off (fairly typical color cast for Otts)...

Yeah, I actually changed it a lot to get it here. I think there are two colors of light coming from the Ott. One that has a yellow cast and another green. Makes it very difficult to get a proper white balance. Like taking pictures in a gym that has both Mercury lights sand lots of sunlight.

Nikolai

baldmountain wrote:

Yeah, I actually changed it a lot to get it here. I think there are two colors of light coming from the Ott. One that has a yellow cast and another green. Makes it very difficult to get a proper white balance. Like taking pictures in a gym that has both Mercury lights sand lots of sunlight.

I understand the gym analogy, but this is single light scenario by the very nature of it, hence there is no mix. Custom WB or a gray card would do the trick in one hit...

baldmountain

Nikolai wrote:

I understand the gym analogy, but this is single light scenario by the very nature of it, hence there is no mix. Custom WB or a gray card would do the trick in one hit...

Sorry, I wasn't clear. I only used one light. It is just that the spectrum of light coming from the lamp I used has 2 peaks. This makes it hard to get a good white balance since if you correct for one peak the other causes a cast to the image. The answer is to NOT use this kind of lamp as a light source. A plain incandescent light would be better. Or convert to black and white...

Nikolai

baldmountain wrote:

Sorry, I wasn't clear. I only used one light. It is just that the spectrum of light coming from the lamp I used has 2 peaks. This makes it hard to get a good white balance since if you correct for one peak the other causes a cast to the image. The answer is to NOT use this kind of lamp as a light source. A plain incandescent light would be better. Or convert to black and white...

I see. Yeah, that might be the problem...