High Key

MissB

I was on flickr the other day searching for inspiration and saw a bunch of photos tagged "high key" so I googled it and this is how I interperted the explainations. Is this even close... is this even a good example.. and is high key one of those over exposed "happy accidents"?? Anyway, thanks for the imput in advance.

Candid Arts

MissB wrote:

I was on flickr the other day searching for inspiration and saw a bunch of photos tagged "high key" so I googled it and this is how I interperted the explainations. Is this even close... is this even a good example.. and is high key one of those over exposed "happy accidents"?? Anyway, thanks for the imput in advance.

I would say this is a pretty good example of high key. Not great, but close. As I understand it, high key is VERY little to no shadows. Not nessecarily over exposed, because a lot of the time you can still see detail, it's just all towards the right side of the histogram. Also, it's most certainly not a "happy accident". There is a rhym and reason to every shot, high key fits certain shots and is done intentionally.

Excellent post though, good job. Keep trying and pushing it. Push it till it goes too far then go back a step.

MissB

Candid Arts wrote:

I would say this is a pretty good example of high key. Not great, but close. As I understand it, high key is VERY little to no shadows. Not nessecarily over exposed, because a lot of the time you can still see detail, it's just all towards the right side of the histogram. Also, it's most certainly not a "happy accident". There is a rhym and reason to every shot, high key fits certain shots and is done intentionally.

Excellent post though, good job. Keep trying and pushing it. Push it till it goes too far then go back a step.

Thank you so much for you feedback!!! I played with this photo too... any better? I feel light certian aspects of the photo shouldn't be washed out too much... like the eyes nostrils and mouth... am I correct by thinking this?

Tim Kamppinen

A lot of people would say that both of these are high key, and others would say that only the second one is. There's lots of definitions that people use, but the one that I tend to agree with is that a high key photo is one in which the darkest tones in the image are the subjects skin tones. This means typically a white background and white or light colored clothing. The point is that the eye of the viewer is immediately drawn to the subject because of the contrast. A low key photo, conversely, would be one where the skin tones are the brightest tones in the image. That means usually a black background and black or dark clothing.

Additionally, low key photos typically have deep shadows and lots of falloff, while high key photos have a more open lighting pattern with a low lighting ratio and no deep shadows.

Of course, the definitions don't matter much. If you like the photo it doesn't really matter if it measures up to some arbitrary classification.

Candid Arts

MissB wrote:

Thank you so much for you feedback!!! I played with this photo too... any better? I feel light certian aspects of the photo shouldn't be washed out too much... like the eyes nostrils and mouth... am I correct by thinking this?

You're welcome. I really like this photo. Great sharpness, color, light. This is a great example of high key. I would say you are correct by thinking this.

Here's an example of one I did (Self Portrait)...



Good work. Keep it up. Your second one is way better than mine...fwiw.

Cygnus Studios

Check this out

MissB

Candid Arts wrote:

You're welcome. I really like this photo. Great sharpness, color, light. This is a great example of high key. I would say you are correct by thinking this.

Here's an example of one I did (Self Portrait)...



Good work. Keep it up. Your second one is way better than mine...fwiw.

awww...thank you for the sweet compliment I feel like the learning jobs never done having sooooo much fun doing it tho. I took a peek at your site... you are a very talented gentleman!!!! I do like this self portrait of you... I can see what you mean by bringing it too far.. .then back a step. Tho..its impressive how much detail still remains. I can't thank you enough for your time and explainations... everyone here seems so generous in that way. I only hope to be able to pay it forward one day.

MissB

Tim Kamppinen wrote:

A lot of people would say that both of these are high key, and others would say that only the second one is. There's lots of definitions that people use, but the one that I tend to agree with is that a high key photo is one in which the darkest tones in the image are the subjects skin tones. This means typically a white background and white or light colored clothing. The point is that the eye of the viewer is immediately drawn to the subject because of the contrast. A low key photo, conversely, would be one where the skin tones are the brightest tones in the image. That means usually a black background and black or dark clothing.

Additionally, low key photos typically have deep shadows and lots of falloff, while high key photos have a more open lighting pattern with a low lighting ratio and no deep shadows.

Of course, the definitions don't matter much. If you like the photo it doesn't really matter if it measures up to some arbitrary classification.

Thank you so much Tim!!!! I think I get it! Its dramatic ends of the color spectrum... ... good way of looking at it

GoofBckt

I did this one of my daughter. How is this? She has very curly hair, so it was hard to get a "smooth" look from this, but . . well, I like it and so does she. lol Thanks for looking. C&C?

MissB wrote:

Thank you so much Tim!!!! I think I get it! Its dramatic ends of the color spectrum... ... good way of looking at it

MissB

im still not sure what the standards are for high key...but I like the way it looks... I guess thats what really matters... if you and your daughter like it. nice work!

lizzard_nyc

MissB wrote:

im still not sure what the standards are for high key...but I like the way it looks... I guess thats what really matters... if you and your daughter like it. nice work!

Hi MissB-You have given me the itch to try out high key. My Oly E620 actually has a setting called "high key" but unfortunately it's not much--
I am going to try it out anyway with the minimal pp available to me.

Love the way they look.

Thanks for starting this great thread.

GoofBckt

I don't think there really are any standards per se, but I think that's the beauty of "Art" whether it's digital or handmade. Thanks, MissB! i appreciate that.

MissB wrote:

im still not sure what the standards are for high key...but I like the way it looks... I guess thats what really matters... if you and your daughter like it. nice work!

MissB

awww...shucks! Cant wait to see what you guys come up with... yay!

GoofBckt

Here's one of my sweet Grandma.

MissB wrote:

awww...shucks! Cant wait to see what you guys come up with... yay!

CSR Studio

I shot this one with a 2:1 lighting ratio. There is a lot of space between her and the background. It hasn't been photoshopped and was shot on film awhile ago. You can also shoot this on digital, I have done some but this was the first one I came across. Is this what you are talking about?

GoofBckt

That's very nice!! I'm sure there are quite a few variations on this "High Key" theme as well. I've seen some in color, some in B&W, etc. Your shot is beautiful. IMHO

CSR Studio wrote:

I shot this one with a 2:1 lighting ratio. There is a lot of space between her and the background. It hasn't been photoshopped and was shot on film awhile ago. You can also shoot this on digital, I have done some but this was the first one I came across. Is this what you are talking about?

MissB

I love all the different variations and examples... I did one yesterday...well not sure if its truly high key... but definatly a higher exposure.. whatya think?

MissB

GoofBckt wrote:

Here's one of my sweet Grandma.

oh my goodness your family is going to love this one for generations to come!

CSR Studio

GoofBckt wrote:

That's very nice!! I'm sure there are quite a few variations on this "High Key" theme as well. I've seen some in color, some in B&W, etc. Your shot is beautiful. IMHO

Thank you!

GoofBckt

Beautiful!

MissB wrote:

I love all the different variations and examples... I did one yesterday...well not sure if its truly high key... but definatly a higher exposure.. whatya think?

eL eSs Vee

Goof, the photo of your grandmother is a beautiful example of high-key.

High-key doesn't have to involve overexposure and washout. In fact, the idea is to go as light as possible while still holding onto detail.
The shadows give us detail, definition and contour. Without shadow, the swan would be invisible and, let's face it, we'd only have light.
And if all we have is light, we might as well photograph nothing but nice, neat, clean sheets of white, unlined paper.



You needn't wash out colors, either, because they are also a part of light and shadow. The main difference is that these shadows happen to have pigment.
As you know, converting Jack's face to black and white would leave nothing but light and shadow in the shape of his round, bulbous head and pointy hat.
Of course, his facial features would be diferent shades of gray. That's the nature of color as shadow.



High-key can also involve the use of darker shadows and colors. An image that is pure black and white can be seen as high-key, but's it's actually high contrast.
If the shadows are black enough, it can also be known as Litho. But we're talking about high-key, here, so although pure black is allowed, it is kept to a minimum.



Although all of these images are high-key, the swan, ironically, is furthest from being pure. Why?
Because out of the three images, it is the darkest overall.

MissB

eL eSs Vee wrote:

Goof, the photo of your grandmother is a beautiful example of high-key.

High-key doesn't have to involve overexposure and washout. In fact, the idea is to go as light as possible while still holding onto detail.
The shadows give us detail, definition and contour. Without shadow, the swan would be invisible and, let's face it, we'd only have light.
And if all we have is light, we might as well photograph nothing but nice, neat, clean sheets of white, unlined paper.



You needn't wash out colors, either, because they are also a part of light and shadow. The main difference is that these shadows happen to have pigment.
As you know, converting Jack's face to black and white would leave nothing but light and shadow in the shape of his round, bulbous head and pointy hat.
Of course, his facial features would be diferent shades of gray. That's the nature of color as shadow.



High-key can also involve the use of darker shadows and colors. An image that is pure black and white can be seen as high-key, but's it's actually high contrast.
If the shadows are black enough, it can also be known as Litho. But we're talking about high-key, here, so although pure black is allowed, it is kept to a minimum.



Although all of these images are high-key, the swan, ironically, is furthest from being pure. Why?
Because out of the three images, it is the darkest overall.

FANTASTIC! thank you for sharing these examples and information!

CSR Studio

Candid Arts wrote:

As I understand it, high key is VERY little to no shadows. Not nessecarily over exposed, because a lot of the time you can still see detail, it's just all towards the right side of the histogram. Also, it's most certainly not a "happy accident". There is a rhym and reason to every shot, high key fits certain shots and is done intentionally.

That is what I have always been taught and how I have always shot high key. With a portrait, most of the time the eyes and hair are the darkest things in the image. Everything else goes to white. Example: the photograph that Candid arts posted. I have never seen high key with a yellowish background. That is just shooting on white.

lizzard_nyc

Ok my attempt at high key.
Or I should say self-portrait/high key, arms straight out method, lol.
Is this close?
I had to get creative with the PP. All I have available to me is basic exposure and then the picnik editing program on smugmug, which thankfully allows me some creativity.

I think some will say that round border should go away, but blv it or not I will lose other effects if I take that border out.

Started with a regular shot, shot under my high key setting in my camera, I used late afternoon natural light plus my ceiling fan light and a standing lamp next to me.

I then kicked up the exposure tons in pp, then backed it down a notch, then went to bw then used a "horton-ish" effect on picnik. lol. Not the usual way probably....

Let me know if I"m close.

GoofBckt

Thank you so much. You made my day.

eL eSs Vee wrote:

Goof, the photo of your grandmother is a beautiful example of high-key.

High-key doesn't have to involve overexposure and washout. In fact, the idea is to go as light as possible while still holding onto detail.
The shadows give us detail, definition and contour. Without shadow, the swan would be invisible and, let's face it, we'd only have light.
And if all we have is light, we might as well photograph nothing but nice, neat, clean sheets of white, unlined paper.



You needn't wash out colors, either, because they are also a part of light and shadow. The main difference is that these shadows happen to have pigment.
As you know, converting Jack's face to black and white would leave nothing but light and shadow in the shape of his round, bulbous head and pointy hat.
Of course, his facial features would be diferent shades of gray. That's the nature of color as shadow.



High-key can also involve the use of darker shadows and colors. An image that is pure black and white can be seen as high-key, but's it's actually high contrast.
If the shadows are black enough, it can also be known as Litho. But we're talking about high-key, here, so although pure black is allowed, it is kept to a minimum.



Although all of these images are high-key, the swan, ironically, is furthest from being pure. Why?
Because out of the three images, it is the darkest overall.

MissB

lizzard_nyc wrote:

Ok my attempt at high key.
Or I should say self-portrait/high key, arms straight out method, lol.
Is this close?
I had to get creative with the PP. All I have available to me is basic exposure and then the picnik editing program on smugmug, which thankfully allows me some creativity.

I think some will say that round border should go away, but blv it or not I will lose other effects if I take that border out.

Started with a regular shot, shot under my high key setting in my camera, I used late afternoon natural light plus my ceiling fan light and a standing lamp next to me.


I then kicked up the exposure tons in pp, then backed it down a notch, then went to bw then used a "horton-ish" effect on picnik. lol. Not the usual way probably....

Let me know if I"m close.

first off you are really pretty fun self portrait! great first attempt definatly. I would really like to see more details in the eyes especially. would you mind throwing the original at me so that i can tinker with it too? speaking of ... i'd love to see some sooc and high key afters in this thread.. that might be fun!

lizzard_nyc

MissB wrote:

first off you are really pretty fun self portrait! great first attempt definatly. I would really like to see more details in the eyes especially. would you mind throwing the original at me so that i can tinker with it too? speaking of ... i'd love to see some sooc and high key afters in this thread.. that might be fun!

Hi MissB,
Thank you for the compliment:) made my morning.

I know you are a wiz on the PP work, I've seen what you've done with quite a few of them.
So yes I'd love to see what can be done with the original and some real High Key work. i wish I could isolate the eyes so they don't fade, the only way to keep it semi bold for me is to go b&w, otherwise it's just all faded looking.

Here is the original you asked for.
Happy processing!

MissB

oh oh fun fun!! thank you!

eL eSs Vee

Here ya go, Liz.



You made a good attempt, but you went all the way to Washoutland City Hall: Most of the detail in your face is missing, which is a bad thing.
Why? Because then everyone who views your image will miss out on the wonderful curve of your smile.
The secret to successful high-key is to go as light as possible without losing detail in your main subject. Pure white isn't always the goal.
On the other hand, a pure white background, although not necessary, can be a good thing and is often associated with high-key.

MissB. The examples I presented are very close to straight-out-of-the-camera. Only the swan was lightened to protect the image.
Had I exposed it normally in-camera, I would have lost a lot of detail in the swan.

lizzard_nyc

eL eSs Vee wrote:

Here ya go, Liz.
You made a good attempt, but you went all the way to Washoutland City Hall:



Hee hee "Washoutland City Hall", I'm a frequent visitor to this part of town , I have a heavy hand for sure.

Thanks for giving me back my nose, and some of my lips.
I'm really enjoying seeing the same photo and how you processed it differently, I hope more people will do that, it certainly is teaching me a few things.

It's definately a different look from the one I did, and I can see where I went off the deep end.

Thanks Lee.

PS: next time I will use a white background, will make things much easier.

MissB

black and white conversion after normal tweaking....



high key version using "soft light" on PSE.

any imput...im trying to interpert the advice for the figurine examples.