Options

Working On Rembrandt Lighting

Bryce WilsonBryce Wilson Registered Users Posts: 1,586 Major grins
edited January 1, 2012 in People
My first foray into trying a Rembrandt lighting style in my allotted space turned into a disaster as I had lens flare in almost all of them.

This time I used a black panel between the rear light and camera and VIOLA, no flare. I still don't think I have the lighting just right, but it is a step in the right direction.

This was done with a 1 x 3 light strip camera left and behind the subject and a medium sized softbox slightly above and a bit to camera right. Not exactly the look I was trying to achieve but certainly a step in the right direction.

Thoughts?

1
<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/60399337@N06/6472986831/&quot; title="Rembrandt Light Portrait by Bryce Wilson, on Flickr"><img src="http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7171/6472986831_d6e827c10c_o.jpg&quot; width="640" height="800" alt="Rembrandt Light Portrait"></a>

2
<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/60399337@N06/6472986717/&quot; title="Rembrandt Light Portrait by Bryce Wilson, on Flickr"><img src="http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7024/6472986717_f324b112d0_o.jpg&quot; width="640" height="800" alt="Rembrandt Light Portrait"></a>

3
<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/60399337@N06/6472986545/&quot; title="Rembrandt Light Portrait by Bryce Wilson, on Flickr"><img src="http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7156/6472986545_127036b499_o.jpg&quot; width="640" height="800" alt="Rembrandt Light Portrait"></a>

And just for grins, one shot with my normal portrait light setup. The Rembrandt lighting certainly gives her a different look.

<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/60399337@N06/6473067893/&quot; title="Portrait Female by Bryce Wilson, on Flickr"><img src="http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7003/6473067893_4c3453507e_o.jpg&quot; width="800" height="640" alt="Portrait Female"></a>

Comments

  • Options
    NikolaiNikolai Registered Users Posts: 19,035 Major grins
    edited December 7, 2011
    I'm really sorry to disappoint you, but a Rembrandt lighting doesn't have a back light. ne_nau.gif
    Yours is a variation of "diagonal", or "cross-fire" lighting, when two light sources are used, one in front of the subject and another behind it.
    Nice portraits, though! thumb.gif
    "May the f/stop be with you!"
  • Options
    Bryce WilsonBryce Wilson Registered Users Posts: 1,586 Major grins
    edited December 7, 2011
    Then pray tell where is the light placed that illuminates the rear side of the face for the Rembrandt look? No wonder I'm not getting the look I want if I'm not setting up right in the first place.
  • Options
    divamumdivamum Registered Users Posts: 9,021 Major grins
    edited December 7, 2011
    If you follow Nik's link there's a diagram there... :)

    Also, for for a true Rembrandt effect I found I needed to keep the light higher than I thought I would. I also found that I needed to move it further to the side than I would have expected; for a dramatic look, it was fine just like that, but I found that for a brighter, more even portrait I needed more than a reflector added just a tickle of fill from the front for a modified Rembrandt effect.

    For most of the stuff I do it isn't really the best lighting choice, but I do like the effect in certain contexts thumb.gif
    facebook | photo site |
  • Options
    NikolaiNikolai Registered Users Posts: 19,035 Major grins
    edited December 7, 2011
    Bryce Wilson wrote: »
    Then pray tell where is the light placed that illuminates the rear side of the face for the Rembrandt look? No wonder I'm not getting the look I want if I'm not setting up right in the first place.

    There is no illumination of the rear side of the face in Rembrandt portraits. Reflector on the opposite side (still in fron of the subject) - yes.

    Historically, this was the time when most commonly used light source was the window light - and typically one window only. Hairlight and back lighting came much, much later.... ne_nau.gif
    "May the f/stop be with you!"
  • Options
    Bryce WilsonBryce Wilson Registered Users Posts: 1,586 Major grins
    edited December 7, 2011
    I'm a bit confused. The link that Nikolai provided shows a lighting diagram very similar to the one I use for normal portraiture, except that I add a hair/backlight light. The Rembrandt effect I was shooting for is where the short side of the face is illuminated much brighter than the other along with getting a highlight on the opposing cheek. The diagram as shown on the linked page wont do that. Am I mistaken in calling that look Rembrandt?

    Maybe I need to move the main light more to the side of the subject to get the look I'm after rather than using the light slightly behind.
  • Options
    NikolaiNikolai Registered Users Posts: 19,035 Major grins
    edited December 7, 2011
    Bryce Wilson wrote: »
    I'm a bit confused. The link that Nikolai provided shows a lighting diagram very similar to the one I use for normal portraiture, except that I add a hair/backlight light. The Rembrandt effect I was shooting for is where the short side of the face is illuminated much brighter than the other along with getting a highlight on the opposing cheek. The diagram as shown on the linked page wont do that. Am I mistaken in calling that look Rembrandt?

    Maybe I need to move the main light more to the side of the subject to get the look I'm after rather than using the light slightly behind.

    You have added hair/back light. At this point, I'm afraid, you have "lost the brandname". ne_nau.gif

    Again, I'm not saying anything about quality. You got yourself good portraits. And I'll be first to support the idea of adding the back/hair light, as it normally makes the image more 3D like (sometimes I shoot portraits with backlights only, but don't tell anybody:-).

    It's just... not a "rembrandt"...
    "May the f/stop be with you!"
  • Options
    HackboneHackbone Registered Users Posts: 4,027 Major grins
    edited December 7, 2011
    Bryce,

    Take an old bicycle helmet and stick and arrow in it about 1:30 ( to get a 45 degree angle). Now also make sure that arrow is on a 45 from camera position to subject. Gotta think two planes. Now this sounds stupid but wear the helmet and as you turn your head left to right and up and down the arrow points to where the main light should be positioned. You will always get a perfect positin of Rembrandt light. Just use a reflector to soften the shadows. Most people put the reflector too far to the side of the subject. It should be out in front of the subject then catching then pushing light back to the subject.
    Charles
    www.cameraone.biz
  • Options
    HackboneHackbone Registered Users Posts: 4,027 Major grins
    edited December 7, 2011
    A quick comment on your posing....they are all posed in a masculine pose, front shoulder should be the high shoulder and head tipped to that shoulder. But if these work for your subject go for it. Good solid lighting.
    Charles
    www.cameraone.biz
  • Options
    anonymouscubananonymouscuban Registered Users, Retired Mod Posts: 4,586 Major grins
    edited December 7, 2011
    Here is a great link that shows portrait lighting setups which includes Rembrandt. Of all the sites I've run across, this one was the most intuitive for me.

    http://www.professionalphotography101.com/portrait_lighting/lighting_names.html
    "I'm not yelling. I'm Cuban. That's how we talk."

    Moderator of the People and Go Figure forums

    My Smug Site
  • Options
    NikolaiNikolai Registered Users Posts: 19,035 Major grins
    edited December 7, 2011
    anonymouscuban wrote: »
    Here is a great link that shows portrait lighting setups which includes Rembrandt. Of all the sites I've run across, this one was the most intuitive for me.

    http://www.professionalphotography101.com/portrait_lighting/lighting_names.html

    A good one, Alex! thumb.gif
    "May the f/stop be with you!"
  • Options
    BilsenBilsen Registered Users Posts: 2,143 Major grins
    edited December 7, 2011
    anonymouscuban wrote: »
    Here is a great link that shows portrait lighting setups which includes Rembrandt. Of all the sites I've run across, this one was the most intuitive for me.

    http://www.professionalphotography101.com/portrait_lighting/lighting_names.html

    Like the article Alex
    Bilsen (the artist formerly known as John Galt NY)
    Canon 600D; Canon 1D Mk2;
    24-105 f4L IS; 70-200 f4L IS; 50mm 1.4; 28-75 f2.8; 55-250 IS; 580EX & (2) 430EX Flash,
    Model Galleries: http://bilsen.zenfolio.com/
    Everything Else: www.pbase.com/bilsen
  • Options
    D3SshooterD3Sshooter Registered Users Posts: 1,187 Major grins
    edited December 8, 2011
    Its a nice set of portraits, but not Rembrandt. I only use lights on the side above the subject pointing down in a 45 degree angle.
    Only one side as the ligt was falling through the window. Reflector panels at the opposite side in a similar position and a reflector panel in the front. That provides in most case and after some trials the triangle effect on the cheekbone.

    Regards D3Sshooter
    A photographer without a style, is like a pub without beer
  • Options
    Bryce WilsonBryce Wilson Registered Users Posts: 1,586 Major grins
    edited December 8, 2011
    Hackbone wrote: »
    Bryce,

    Take an old bicycle helmet and stick and arrow in it about 1:30 ( to get a 45 degree angle). Now also make sure that arrow is on a 45 from camera position to subject. Gotta think two planes. Now this sounds stupid but wear the helmet and as you turn your head left to right and up and down the arrow points to where the main light should be positioned. You will always get a perfect positin of Rembrandt light. Just use a reflector to soften the shadows. Most people put the reflector too far to the side of the subject. It should be out in front of the subject then catching then pushing light back to the subject.

    I may do this, but you can rest assured it will be at a time and place NO ONE will see!rolleyes1.gif
    Hackbone wrote: »
    A quick comment on your posing....they are all posed in a masculine pose, front shoulder should be the high shoulder and head tipped to that shoulder. But if these work for your subject go for it. Good solid lighting.
    This was for her Linkedin photo. With the industry she is in, I felt that masculine posing would suit the purpose best. But, a very good point indeed.
    anonymouscuban wrote: »
    Here is a great link that shows portrait lighting setups which includes Rembrandt. Of all the sites I've run across, this one was the most intuitive for me.

    http://www.professionalphotography101.com/portrait_lighting/lighting_names.html
    Spectacular link! Thanks bunches!!!!!
    D3Sshooter wrote: »
    Its a nice set of portraits, but not Rembrandt. I only use lights on the side above the subject pointing down in a 45 degree angle.
    Only one side as the ligt was falling through the window. Reflector panels at the opposite side in a similar position and a reflector panel in the front. That provides in most case and after some trials the triangle effect on the cheekbone.

    Regards D3Sshooter
    Thanks for the direction. On the front panel you suggest, in addition to the side, should that be placed below the subject pointing upward or directly in the front?
  • Options
    Bryce WilsonBryce Wilson Registered Users Posts: 1,586 Major grins
    edited December 8, 2011
    To take this one step further, would it make sense that in most cases when the subject has an extremely narrow face to use broad side lighting and when the subject has a round, thick or heavy face to use short side lighting to slim it?
  • Options
    anonymouscubananonymouscuban Registered Users, Retired Mod Posts: 4,586 Major grins
    edited December 8, 2011
    Bryce Wilson wrote: »
    To take this one step further, would it make sense that in most cases when the subject has an extremely narrow face to use broad side lighting and when the subject has a round, thick or heavy face to use short side lighting to slim it?

    This is how I've understood the use of broad vs short.
    "I'm not yelling. I'm Cuban. That's how we talk."

    Moderator of the People and Go Figure forums

    My Smug Site
  • Options
    BrettDeutschBrettDeutsch Registered Users Posts: 365 Major grins
    edited December 8, 2011
    I agree that this isn't rembrandt lighting, but I don't see why you can't have a back-light in a rembrandt lighting scheme -- the important part is getting the triangular highlight on the cheek below the eye. If there's an extra light on the hair or creating separation with the background, etc., but it doesn't alter the highlight, it seems that it's still rembrandt to me.
    Deutsch Photography: Actor & Executive Headshot Photographer | NY Wedding, Mitzvah and Corporate Event Photographer | Family & Child Portrait Studio
  • Options
    Bryce WilsonBryce Wilson Registered Users Posts: 1,586 Major grins
    edited December 15, 2011
    By Jove, I think I may have got it!
  • Options
    anonymouscubananonymouscuban Registered Users, Retired Mod Posts: 4,586 Major grins
    edited December 15, 2011
    B E A Utiful.

    That's it. You got it man. Very nice.
    "I'm not yelling. I'm Cuban. That's how we talk."

    Moderator of the People and Go Figure forums

    My Smug Site
  • Options
    novicesnappernovicesnapper Registered Users Posts: 445 Major grins
    edited December 15, 2011
    Oh wow quite a stunner!!! Nice beyond words.
    http://retroimages.zenfolio.com/
  • Options
    HackboneHackbone Registered Users Posts: 4,027 Major grins
    edited December 15, 2011
    Totally awesome.....big time congrats!!!!!
    Charles
    www.cameraone.biz
  • Options
    IcebearIcebear Registered Users Posts: 4,015 Major grins
    edited December 16, 2011
    Ohhh, yeaahhh.
    John :
    Natural selection is responsible for every living thing that exists.
    D3s, D500, D5300, and way more glass than the wife knows about.
  • Options
    Bryce WilsonBryce Wilson Registered Users Posts: 1,586 Major grins
    edited December 16, 2011
    Thank-you very much peoples. I was pretty excited when I saw this one.
  • Options
    NikolaiNikolai Registered Users Posts: 19,035 Major grins
    edited December 16, 2011
    Bryce Wilson wrote: »
    By Jove, I think I may have got it!
    deal.gifthumbclap.gif
    "May the f/stop be with you!"
  • Options
    kdogkdog Administrators Posts: 11,681 moderator
    edited December 16, 2011
    That last one is gorgeous. nod.gifclap.gif
    Moderator of Landscapes forum
    Link to my Smugmug site
  • Options
    rpcrowerpcrowe Registered Users Posts: 733 Major grins
    edited December 19, 2011
    They are all nice but, the last one is really great!
  • Options
    divamumdivamum Registered Users Posts: 9,021 Major grins
    edited December 19, 2011
    Great job, Bryce!! You nailed it. The last one is indeed beautiful (it might have slightly too much tilt for my personal taste, but that is serious, SERIOUSLY nit-y!!). Beautiful. And those curls!!!!
    facebook | photo site |
  • Options
    Mike JMike J Registered Users Posts: 1,029 Major grins
    edited December 19, 2011
    The last one is gorgeous! Great job.
    Mike J

    Comments and constructive criticism always welcome.
    www.mikejulianaphotography.com
    Facebook
  • Options
    CookieSCookieS Registered Users Posts: 854 Major grins
    edited December 30, 2011
    Really Beautiful, and lots of rembrandt lighting have the triangle on the face if memory serves me correctly. there was a long thread of "show off your "rembrandt lighting" on the strobist flickR group. All the portraits were nice. but that last one was stunning.
  • Options
    New Hope StudiosNew Hope Studios Registered Users Posts: 39 Big grins
    edited January 1, 2012
    Bryce Wilson wrote: »
    By Jove, I think I may have got it!

    Oh Bryce! This is gorgeous! I literally almost gasped at how stunning this is (no sarcasm, I swear!). The beautiful curls and her hat give this shot an even more classic feel. You should be very proud of this shot. It's beautiful!

    Who's the little girl? Just curious.
Sign In or Register to comment.