Working On Rembrandt Lighting
Bryce Wilson
Registered Users Posts: 1,586 Major grins
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/" title="Rembrandt Light Portrait by Bryce Wilson, on Flickr"><img src="http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7171/6472986831_d6e827c10c_o.jpg" width="640" height="800" alt="Rembrandt Light Portrait"></a>
2
<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/60399337@N06/6472986717/" title="Rembrandt Light Portrait by Bryce Wilson, on Flickr"><img src="http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7024/6472986717_f324b112d0_o.jpg" width="640" height="800" alt="Rembrandt Light Portrait"></a>
3
<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/60399337@N06/6472986545/" title="Rembrandt Light Portrait by Bryce Wilson, on Flickr"><img src="http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7156/6472986545_127036b499_o.jpg" 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/" title="Portrait Female by Bryce Wilson, on Flickr"><img src="http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7003/6473067893_4c3453507e_o.jpg" width="800" height="640" alt="Portrait Female"></a>
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/" title="Rembrandt Light Portrait by Bryce Wilson, on Flickr"><img src="http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7171/6472986831_d6e827c10c_o.jpg" width="640" height="800" alt="Rembrandt Light Portrait"></a>
2
<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/60399337@N06/6472986717/" title="Rembrandt Light Portrait by Bryce Wilson, on Flickr"><img src="http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7024/6472986717_f324b112d0_o.jpg" width="640" height="800" alt="Rembrandt Light Portrait"></a>
3
<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/60399337@N06/6472986545/" title="Rembrandt Light Portrait by Bryce Wilson, on Flickr"><img src="http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7156/6472986545_127036b499_o.jpg" 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/" title="Portrait Female by Bryce Wilson, on Flickr"><img src="http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7003/6473067893_4c3453507e_o.jpg" width="800" height="640" alt="Portrait Female"></a>
0
Comments
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!
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
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....
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".
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"...
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.
www.cameraone.biz
www.cameraone.biz
http://www.professionalphotography101.com/portrait_lighting/lighting_names.html
Moderator of the People and Go Figure forums
My Smug Site
A good one, Alex!
Like the article Alex
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
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
I may do this, but you can rest assured it will be at a time and place NO ONE will see!
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.
Spectacular link! Thanks bunches!!!!!
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?
This is how I've understood the use of broad vs short.
Moderator of the People and Go Figure forums
My Smug Site
That's it. You got it man. Very nice.
Moderator of the People and Go Figure forums
My Smug Site
www.cameraone.biz
Natural selection is responsible for every living thing that exists.
D3s, D500, D5300, and way more glass than the wife knows about.
Link to my Smugmug site
Comments and constructive criticism always welcome.
www.mikejulianaphotography.com
Facebook
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.