Broke the rule on broad lighting.
Having fun with the ladies. They were such fun to work with but on 4 of 5 of her I broke my rule on broad lighting. She had such a cute face I think it worked anyhow.
1. [img][/img]
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
1. [img][/img]
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
Charles
www.cameraone.biz
www.cameraone.biz
0
Comments
I'm not too wild about the white balance in the "ring light" shot though. (Nor the ring light, but that's a whole 'nother kerfuffle)
Natural selection is responsible for every living thing that exists.
D3s, D500, D5300, and way more glass than the wife knows about.
Thanks. Agree on the ring light...at times I like it alot and others oh well.
www.cameraone.biz
I also like ringlights almost all the time so no reason for me to question these.
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
Yes, on women with a full face a broad light makes it fuller.
www.cameraone.biz
I thought so, thanks for the reply
Broad , narrow, rembrandt, cross , clamp ..... lighting are just basic principles from which anybody can start building .
This is a nice series with nice lighting .
However I do still consider that 4 & 5 are a frontal light method, so how do you then break the rule of broad lighting ? As it is not applied...
4 was just a set up shot so I wan't worried about that one. The light on 5 was to the left of camera. There is a shadow showing it must be due to feathering the light severely but the light was to left of camera.
www.cameraone.biz
http://www.flickr.com/photos/21695902@N06/
http://500px.com/Shockey
alloutdoor.smugmug.com
http://aoboudoirboise.smugmug.com/