Bodyscape lighting technique

TangoJuliet

Later next month I'm going to have the opportunity to try my hand at some bodyscapes (I've never shot any nudes before). I've got a couple 1000W hot lights and one 500W, I also have a 430EX Flash and lightstand bracket with gels. Where should I start with my lighting?

angevin1

TangoJuliet wrote:

Later next month I'm going to have the opportunity to try my hand at some bodyscapes (I've never shot any nudes before). I've got a couple 1000W hot lights and one 500W, I also have a 430EX Flash and lightstand bracket with gels. Where should I start with my lighting?

Considering your locale, why not start with some natural light, adding reflectors and lighting as desired. Natural light is the easiest to begin with IMO~

cheers,

angevin1

Nikolai wrote:

Looking fwd as well. This gal has nice look to her...just pleasing without adding undue 'attitude'...pleasing~ love those chains too...is that BLING?

TangoJuliet

angevin1 wrote:

Considering your locale, why not start with some natural light, adding reflectors and lighting as desired. Natural light is the easiest to begin with IMO~

cheers,

I'm not sure how easy/difficult that will be. I live in an apartment, and the dining area is also my studio area. The only natural light coming in would be to my back from the balcony which faces East and into a wooded area.

Nikolai

angevin1 wrote:

Considering your locale, why not start with some natural light, adding reflectors and lighting as desired. Natural light is the easiest to begin with IMO~

cheers,

I'm not sure I agree with this statement. Natural light is volatile and unpredictable. Besides, indoors it is pretty much non-existent.
Strobes (even the cheapest/weakest ones) immediately put you back into control.
Considering how few of us mastered purely/true natural light portraits (privet, Yuri!) , I'd say NL is the hardest of all....

Nikolai

angevin1 wrote:

Looking fwd as well. This gal has nice look to her...just pleasing without adding undue 'attitude'...pleasing~ love those chains too...is that BLING?

Thanks!
The chain - it's just an accessory I own. You can see it in quite a few frames of mine, it's very versatile and matches my style:-)

angevin1

Nikolai wrote:

I'm not sure I agree with this statement. Natural light is volatile and unpredictable. Besides, indoors it is pretty much non-existent.
Strobes (even the cheapest/weakest ones) immediately put you back into control.
Considering how few of us mastered purely/true natural light portraits (privet, Yuri!) , I'd say NL is the hardest of all....

Hey I'm not sure I agree with that statement either...but Natural light is ubiquitous, Free, and can be easily modified and reflected on the cheap...besides we have 150 years of photographer/artists doing just that.

As far as the Mastery component.. ya got me. I might get a masterful shot every now and then, but I wager it'll take me about 6 or 7 more years before I feel like I dwell in Mastery-land.

Cheers,

ivar

Since these posts are not related to the original post, I've decided to give them their own thread. The title may make it easier for others to find this as well.

angevin1

ivar wrote:

Since these posts are not related to the original post, I've decided to give them their own thread. The title may make it easier for others to find this as well.

Good Idea, thanks!

Nikolai

Anyway, back to the OP question...

From what I saw and how I personally understand the theme, a "bodyscape" is a "landscape" "made out" of a human body. Typical framing includes only a part of the body, thus leaving the rest to the imagination.
To make the things more difficult, this kind of landscape is often barren, leaving you with pretty much nothing but a general shape, a possible microtexture (skin) and sometimes some microrelief (e.g. nipples). In addition to all this, you have only one color - which is why bodyscapes are often converted to BW or processed with some other duotone technique.

Shooting such kind of a landscape (barren, no details, monochrome) IRL would most likely produce rather uninteresting results if shot under diffused (clouds) and/or highly positioned light source (sun/moon). The only weapon you'd have to relveal the texture and microrelief details are the shadows. Harsh shadows, to be specific. High contrast harsh shadows, to be even more specific.
So, IOW, you'd shoot at very early sunrize or very late sunset, preferably without the clouds/fog/haze.

Such is an aproach I personally take when I shoot bodyscapes.

• One bare light - no diffusion - to make my shadows as harsh as possible;
• positioned as far from the model as I can afford - for the same reason: the further the light source is, the harsher the shadows are;
• positioned as "low" as I can get it to make the shadows longer while still illuminating the part(s) I want visible.

I also typically put a 10..20 degree grid on the light, simply to avoid light pollution, since I want a truly single light source on my 'scape.

HTH

TangoJuliet

Thanks Nikolai, that's the kind of input I like. I don't own any grids for my lights, so I guess I'll try to flag as much as possible using black poster/foam board. IMO, the "Bobyscapes" are like you said and it's the light and shadow play of the curves that give it life and dimension.

I think she'd like to do some more "playful" shots as well. I just hope I can produce something to be proud of for both her and I. I'm approaching this as professionally as possible, but I've never shot anything of this nature before.

RacinRandy

Nikolai wrote: »

Anyway, back to the OP question...

From what I saw and how I personally understand the theme, a "bodyscape" is a "landscape" "made out" of a human body. Typical framing includes only a part of the body, thus leaving the rest to the imagination.
To make the things more difficult, this kind of landscape is often barren, leaving you with pretty much nothing but a general shape, a possible microtexture (skin) and sometimes some microrelief (e.g. nipples). In addition to all this, you have only one color - which is why bodyscapes are often converted to BW or processed with some other duotone technique.

Shooting such kind of a landscape (barren, no details, monochrome) IRL would most likely produce rather uninteresting results if shot under diffused (clouds) and/or highly positioned light source (sun/moon). The only weapon you'd have to relveal the texture and microrelief details are the shadows. Harsh shadows, to be specific. High contrast harsh shadows, to be even more specific.
So, IOW, you'd shoot at very early sunrize or very late sunset, preferably without the clouds/fog/haze.

Such is an aproach I personally take when I shoot bodyscapes.

• One bare light - no diffusion - to make my shadows as harsh as possible;
• positioned as far from the model as I can afford - for the same reason: the further the light source is, the harsher the shadows are;
• positioned as "low" as I can get it to make the shadows longer while still illuminating the part(s) I want visible.

I also typically put a 10..20 degree grid on the light, simply to avoid light pollution, since I want a truly single light source on my 'scape.

HTH

Are you using the grids on an un-diffused softbox or gridding the reflector on the Bee?

Nikolai

RacinRandy wrote: »

Are you using the grids on an un-diffused softbox or gridding the reflector on the Bee?

When I shoot bodyscapes - no diffusers, obviously (we need a *harsh* light). Grids - yes, typically about 20 (or even 10 if I can get light far away enough) - simply to minimize the light pollution and stray reflections... Grid do not affect the quality of light in the target area, but the stray light without them may.
HTH

anonymouscuban

Nik is the master. Listen to what he says. It really helps if you imagine his voice as Darth Vader's.

I took Nik's advice and shot some exactly as he says... AB400 with simple 7" reflector, no modifier and a 10 degree grid. I still didn't get it right because I was a complete noob when I tried. I've been meaning to give it another go.