Soft (C&C)

divamum

Piccies first; details after...

1



2 I include this next one for lighting reasons only (and please feel free to comment, pro and con) - love the catchlights, but despise everything else about it. The angle makes me look much wider than I am, and the REALLY weird thing about it is that I am unrecognisable to myself. To the point that if you were to show it to me without information, I wouldn't know who it was. Weird or what?! (I think that my avatar and #1 above are pretty representative of me in nice-but-casual mode, just a little bit of not-terribly-strong makeup and only enough retouching to get rid of dark circles and obvious flaws, iow fairly natural)




Ok, the deets.

Given that I'm love with reflected light, I have my first ::gulp:: somebody-outside-the-family portrait shoot next week and we haven't seen sunshine in nearly 2 months (at least it seems that way!), I've been trying to figure out my options other than direct lighting. I love my wee softbox and the quality of light it produces when used with my flash, but given that it's small and thus still somewhat directional, I've been trying to figure out my other options. Like creating a larger, softer surface area.

SO.... decided to mess around with the flash coming from BEHIND me on camera right, bounced onto a reflector in front also on camera right. Flare was a problem although in another example of poor-but-inventive I made a barndoor/light blocker by velcroing one of the spare dividers from my camera bag directly onto the flash head a:rofl(I've GOT to get "make do and mend" points if nothing else!). Fill on camera left was diffused daylight leaking through blinds on the window.

Anyway, there we have it. Magic Garage it ain't, but does it work? Do I dare use it on somebody else, and how can I adjust it better (should the brightest point be a little higher on the face, perhaps?)

Ta ever so, you lovely and helpful folks, for any and all comments!

Qarik

Divamum *scratches head* I am just not big fan of the lighting in that 2nd picture except for the eyes. The cheek and parts of nose and neck look blown out which might have been okay if this were higher key shot.

heatherfeather

I love where you are going with #1. Your expression and the lighting is very natural. Reminds me of morning light at the breakfast table. (Silly I know, my imaginings...)

Not a big fan of #2 for similar reasons to Qarik.

divamum

heatherfeather wrote:

I love where you are going with #1. Your expression and the lighting is very natural. Reminds me of morning light at the breakfast table. (Silly I know, my imaginings...)

Not a big fan of #2 for similar reasons to Qarik.

Ooooo.... excellent - you both hate #2 just like I do I can ditch the wretched thing guilt-free now (I was somehow convinced that the pretty catchlight and dcent eyesmeant I was missing something else in it and thus decided to post it even though I loathe it, but you both confirm that it is just not good. Yes!)

And Heather, the "breakfast table light" is kind of what I see in it too, and what i'm trying to create - the illusion of natural light, even though it's 99% strobe-generated. Yippee! It must be working!

Scott_Quier

Google "short lighting" and "broad lighting".

Your first image is short-lit and, because you are not a stick model, is much more flattering to the shape of your face. That's one reason why you (and everyone else) like the first over the second. It's a little bright so you need to either better watch your histogram or dial it back a touch in post.

Your second image is a good example of broad lighting. Broad lighting tends to make the face look wider than it really is - not so flattering for 90% of the population. The second looks a little blown - especially on your left cheek.

As for the gobo - check out black fun foam at your local Michael's or Ben Franklin. An 8.5 x 11 sheet should be just a buck or two. Cut to desired size and, using a rubber band around the head of your flash you'll be in business.

I continue to be hugely impressed by your creativity in the DIY realmbow. You are amazing!! And, you photography don't suck either :lol4 :lol

divamum

Scott_Quier wrote:

Google "short lighting" and "broad lighting".
----
Your first image is short-lit and, because you are not a stick model, is much more flattering to the shape of your face. That's one reason why you (and everyone else) like the first over the second.

::facepalm:: DUH. I knew that rule of thumb ... and it never even occurred to me when I looked at it (or, for that matter, when I switched sides on the light, thus changing it from one to the other and lighting the front side instead of the back. Again I say... )

I continue to be hugely impressed by your creativity in the DIY realmbow. You are amazing!! And, you photography don't suck either :lol4 :lol

Oooo, you southern gentlemen - you're always so darned NICE! Thanks for the props AND continued educating - much appreciated (as always)

Mike J

I think the vote is going to be unanimous - the lighting in #2 just doesn't work.

For #1, I'm impressed with your creative solutions and your experiments.
From your description, it sounds like the flash was bare? Was there any sort of diffuser on the flash to help soften the light? Would shooting the flash through a clear shower curtain help here? Don't know - just thinking out loud.

BTW - You deserve an umbrella for your Valentine's Day treat.

divamum

Mike J wrote:

I think the vote is going to be unanimous - the lighting in #2 just doesn't work.

For #1, I'm impressed with your creative solutions and your experiments.
From your description, it sounds like the flash was bare? Was there any sort of diffuser on the flash to help soften the light? Would shooting the flash through a clear shower curtain help here? Don't know - just thinking out loud.

BTW - You deserve an umbrella for your Valentine's Day treat.

Thanks Mike. As I said, I'm relieved that #2 doesn't work - it confirms my own opinion!

On this occasion the flash was unmodified, but pointed away from subject towards the reflector, the bounce off the reflector thus providing the actual light on the subject (and it's just occurred to me I could have put the whole rigamorole in front of me instead of light aft and reflector fore, in the same way a flash bounces into an umbrella and back onto the subject from the front - must try that this week sometime too and see how it compares.... )

And yeah, I DO want an umbrella, and no doubt at all my other half would happily treat me if we weren't on financial lockdown just now (we're scrambling to plug the gap left when a substiantial contract of mine was cancelled for this spring cuz the company went under :cry ....) It's high on my list as soon as we can loosen up the purse strings again (My list...along with a monitor calibrator .... and a second flash ....and a real lighting stand ..... and a faster long lens .... and setting up the basement with a floor and and and and... does it ever stop???!!!???? )

In the meantime, however, my little softbox and a lot of playin' around will keeep me busy experimenting!

Scott_Quier

divamum wrote:

does it ever stop???!!!????

In a word ... No