Two Catchlights A No-No ???

Bryce WilsonBryce Wilson Registered Users Posts: 1,586 Major grins
edited September 13, 2012 in People
In some instances, when doing portraiture, I find it easier to use a second fill light rather than a reflector to soften shadows. Recently, I was roundly chastised for an image in which two catch lights were visible in the eyes of the subject.

Thought I would throw it up for debate here. Does the small secondary catch light detract from these images?

1
i-Gc5tPPz-L.jpg

2
i-FQL8TRM-L.jpg

Comments

  • novicesnappernovicesnapper Registered Users Posts: 445 Major grins
    edited September 4, 2012
    Wow, really? I guess it was a good thing you didn't use a ring light then. I do like a nice catch light, but it's not a deal breaker. Butttt when I see two humongous softboxes staring at me, with a slit for pupils (cat eyes), that does detract imo. Want to mess with people, put several PP catch lights in lol. headscratch.gif
    http://retroimages.zenfolio.com/
  • reyvee61reyvee61 Registered Users Posts: 1,877 Major grins
    edited September 4, 2012
    Wow, I've never heard such a thing really.
    I don't see anything wrong with these at all
    Yo soy Reynaldo
  • D3SshooterD3Sshooter Registered Users Posts: 1,187 Major grins
    edited September 4, 2012
    I would say 2 is OK, one in each eye . Here I see 3 (2+1) that is less OK for me.
    In certain light modes two will work per eye (clamp). But overall we tend to settle for one in each eye at 10 to 10.
    But at the end its all about taste and can differ from scene to scene. So , as always I would not dear to make a firm statement one or two or more...
    A photographer without a style, is like a pub without beer
  • jpcjpc Registered Users Posts: 840 Major grins
    edited September 4, 2012
    ... Does the small secondary catch light detract from these images?
    IMO, yes, absolutely. I use two soft boxes and clone one set of catch lights out. You're not left with much iris after you cover it with a second catch light.
    http://www.jpcirre.com

    please visit: www.babyelephants.net
  • reyvee61reyvee61 Registered Users Posts: 1,877 Major grins
    edited September 4, 2012
    The other thought is to use a modeling lamp or something so the the pupils dilate so that more of the iris shows.
    Yo soy Reynaldo
  • GothamGotham Registered Users Posts: 187 Major grins
    edited September 4, 2012
    Go look at the cover of any major beauty magazine -- half the shots will have more than one catchlight in each eye. A standard clamshell beauty shot will have one on the top and one on the bottom. It's a matter of taste, but it's certainly not wrong. But as jpc says, you can always clone one out (or both for that matter).
    NY's Top Family Photography Studio | Find Gotham Family Photos
  • IcebearIcebear Registered Users Posts: 4,015 Major grins
    edited September 4, 2012
    So, what do you do when you're shooting in window light, or outside, or in any number of natural settings where the "scene" reflected in the eyes isn't a precise rectangle or perfect circle? Look, if the catchlights are pleasing that's all that counts. To say there's some rule that you can't have two catchlights is just silly. The examples you posted are fine to my eye.
    John :
    Natural selection is responsible for every living thing that exists.
    D3s, D500, D5300, and way more glass than the wife knows about.
  • HackboneHackbone Registered Users Posts: 4,027 Major grins
    edited September 4, 2012
    At times it is impossible to not have two. When I can I will clone out 1 if not I work up the other catchlight to lessen the second. By the way this bothers photographers more than it does clients!!
    Charles
    www.cameraone.biz
  • kdogkdog Administrators Posts: 11,681 moderator
    edited September 4, 2012
    Never delete catchlights. They are necessary so that other photographers can figure out your lighting! rolleyes1.gif
    Moderator of Landscapes forum
    Link to my Smugmug site
  • slpollettslpollett Registered Users Posts: 1,219 Major grins
    edited September 4, 2012
    I think it depends upon the eyes and the catchlights. The ones in your examples do not bother me at all. My favorite images of my daughter have 2 catchlights in each eye. I think it depends upon how big the irises are and how big the catchlights are. Only you (& maybe your client) can decide if it is distracting. I think done correctly, they are fine. :)

    Just my thoughts for what they are worth.

    Sherry
    Visit my galleries at: http://psphotos.smugmug.com/ and/or http://pollettsquaredphotography.smugmug.com
  • zoomerzoomer Registered Users Posts: 3,688 Major grins
    edited September 5, 2012
    2 catchlights, so what.
    If you have catchlights that bug you get rid of them. Shooting outdoor there are catchlights all over the eye.
    http://www.flickr.com/photos/21695902@N06/
    http://500px.com/Shockey
    alloutdoor.smugmug.com
    http://aoboudoirboise.smugmug.com/
  • jpcjpc Registered Users Posts: 840 Major grins
    edited September 5, 2012
    Icebear wrote: »
    So, what do you do when you're shooting in window light, or outside, or in any number of natural settings where the "scene" reflected in the eyes isn't a precise rectangle or perfect circle? Look, if the catchlights are pleasing that's all that counts. To say there's some rule that you can't have two catchlights is just silly. The examples you posted are fine to my eye.

    There's no "rule". Just opinions. I do agree that reflections from natural light are far less of an issue than reflections from soft boxes.
    http://www.jpcirre.com

    please visit: www.babyelephants.net
  • eL eSs VeeeL eSs Vee Registered Users Posts: 1,243 Major grins
    edited September 8, 2012
    When I first started out with photography, back in the early '80s, I'd been told that one catch light was all you needed, because we have only one sun. After all, we don't live on Tatooine. Personally, I don't care how many catch lights there are, as long as they don't distract from the eyes. I've deleted some, leaving only one, because it looked better than two huge catch lights. I've also left three per eye. If I find them distracting, I'll delete the offending ones. Make it your own choice.
    Lee
    __________________

    My SmugMug Gallery
    My Facebook

    "If you've found a magic that does something for you, honey, stick to it. Never change it." - Mae West, to Edith Head.
    "Every guy has to have one weakness - and it might as well be a good one." - Shell Scott: Dance With the Dead by Richard S. Prather
  • ForceGhostForceGhost Registered Users Posts: 81 Big grins
    edited September 8, 2012
    eL eSs Vee wrote: »
    After all, we don't live on Tatooine.

    Speak for yourself! :ivarwings.gif
    Kind Regards,
    Jordon.
    My website
  • D'BuggsD'Buggs Registered Users Posts: 958 Major grins
    edited September 13, 2012
    Catch lights are as much part of a photograph as is the subject. IMO if you start tweaking with them, the overall image becomes compromised.
  • IcebearIcebear Registered Users Posts: 4,015 Major grins
    edited September 13, 2012
    D'Buggs wrote: »
    Catch lights are as much part of a photograph as is the subject. IMO if you start tweaking with them, the overall image becomes compromised.

    I never claimed to be a photojournalist mwink.gif.
    John :
    Natural selection is responsible for every living thing that exists.
    D3s, D500, D5300, and way more glass than the wife knows about.
  • HackboneHackbone Registered Users Posts: 4,027 Major grins
    edited September 13, 2012
    Here is one with two catch lights and not.

    1. Just looking at the eyes which one do you like?

    2. For those purists which one would you like if this was your daughter.

    3. No raggin on me for the hot shoulder. I totally missed catching that and will probably ask her to come in again for that mistake.

    i-v6F3kpb-X2.jpg
    Charles
    www.cameraone.biz
Sign In or Register to comment.