365 Portrait Lighting Project

anonymouscuban

My wife and I are doing a 365 project. I know, so original. :dunno She wants me to take a photo of her everyday for the next year. I agreed but on one condition... I use a different lighting setup for each photo. Now I'm not sure I will be able to figure out 365 unique lighting configurations but I'm going to try to change it up with each shot, even slightly. I don't know if I'll share every single photo since it will be so many but I will share a lot of them. I will post them in this thread instead of creating multiple threads. I think it will be more interesting to see them all together in one place.

As always, critique and dialogue is welcome. Hopefully I will learn a lot during this project and I hope some of you all find it helpful as well. So with all that said, lets get this started.

DAY 1 - Loop Lighting

Objective of Loop lighting is to use the key light to create a nose shadow that follows curve of the cheek opposite to the key light.

3 light setup



Key light - 22" beauty dish set to f/5.6
Fill light - large gridded strip box set to f/2.8
Hair light - 40 degree gridded strobe set to f/2.8
BG Light - none

1/250 @ f/5.6 ISO 100, 200mm focal length



Identical setup as the shot above but I turned off the fill light:

PhilD41

Awesome, I see this soon becoming my favorite thread. Here's wishing you luck in keeping with your project. Thanks again for the lighting diagram. As I have mentioned before, I am just starting with lighting and this will be a wealth of information and knowledge. Who knows, I may even learn a few things by your mistakes... and successes! As for those above, very nice. I kind of like the mood of the second without the fill.

anonymouscuban

DAY 2 - Beauty/Paramount/Butterfly Light

Objective of this light is to create a shadow underneath the nose that resembles the wings of a butterfly. It's used mostly for female portraits.

4 light setup



Key light - 22" beauty dish set to f/5.6
Fill light - large gridded strip box set to f/2.8
Hair light - 40 degree gridded strobe set to f/2.8
BG Light - SB900 set to f/8 or so (red gel in first shot)

1/250 @ f/5.6 ISO 100, 140mm focal length



Same setup as above with the fill light bumped up to f/4 and the gel removed from the BG light:

Hackbone

Nice.

divamum

:lurk

Lightsearcher

Fantastic, very sharp pictures and you are doing a great job using the same background with different lightning set up.

Thank you for sharing.

Marcelo

PhilD41

Day two and I am already amazed. Nice smile in the second one, but I like the lighting in the first one better. Thanks again!

Dooginfif20

The pictures are awesome! Where did you find the colored filters for the SB-900? I need a background light and I already have an Einstein, AB1600, AB800 and the SB-900

Lesley Bray

Thankyou for posting this with the lighting diagram. I am very interested in following this thread - have bookmarked it. Lesley

anonymouscuban

So happy that others are finding this thread useful. I may start adding a pull-back along with the lighting diagram since Chucks stickied thread seems to be hugely liked by folks. I think the combo of the two may help.

We took Day 3 this morning right before heading out. I will post it up later tonight so stay tuned.

Dooginfif20 wrote: »

The pictures are awesome! Where did you find the colored filters for the SB-900? I need a background light and I already have an Einstein, AB1600, AB800 and the SB-900

I actually just used a regular 8x10 gel. I didn't even tape or attach it to the strobe in anyway. Just placed it on top so it draped over it. It stayed put so I left it. You can cut these gels to fit your speedlight and then you gaffers tape to secure in place. Or better yet, you can buy a swatch pack of all the gel colors which are conveniently already the perfect size for a speedlight. I've listed links to both sold on Amazon.

8x10
http://www.amazon.com/Colored-Film-Gels-Colors-sheets/dp/B004A9PMGE/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1358874904&sr=8-1&keywords=light+gel+sheets

swatch pack
http://www.amazon.com/Rosco-Lux-Small-Swatchbook/dp/B0002ER2YG/ref=sr_1_cc_1?s=aps&ie=UTF8&qid=1358875167&sr=1-1-catcorr&keywords=light+gel+swatch

Hackbone

For a general rule on gels get the better ones. You can use the cheap notebook ones you find at WalMart but they will burn quite easy with the modeling light.....been there done that!

Try playing with your bkg light also. It doesn't always have to be directly behind her. You can move it over to the side for a gradient effect.

Another angle to throw at you. Most folks have a closed and open side to their face. It generally is more pleasing to light into the closed portion of the face. Draw a line across the eyes and then draw another thru the lips. Generally the lines on one side of the face or the other will converge toward each other. Your wife is a tough example as her face is unusually symmeterical which is an indication of attractiveness. (is that a word).

If you extend the lines far enough you can see where they converge.

anonymouscuban

Awesome feedback Charles. Hmm... how can you tell if you have cheap vs. quality gels? I bought mine at a local photography shop and they weren't the cheapest dollar wise.

As for convergence, I did studied this concept quite a long time ago for school, but to be honest, I never thought to apply it to photography. This is awesome information though since it does give some basis in deciding how to light someone's face and from which angle to shoot them instead of guessing. Will have to play with it but maybe with someone else since, as you pointed out, my wife's face is pretty symmetrical. Maybe I'll bust out the measuring tape tonight when we get home and take some measurements of her face to figure out which way her face "leans". . Good info though.

Oh and yes, I will try some other angles for the BG light as I change out the BG.

Hackbone

By cheap gels I mean the color plastic folders you see at WalMart. They can work in a pinch but work fast. A good brand of gels is Roscoe.

Dooginfif20

Hackbone wrote: »

For a general rule on gels get the better ones. You can use the cheap notebook ones you find at WalMart but they will burn quite easy with the modeling light.....been there done that!

Try playing with your bkg light also. It doesn't always have to be directly behind her. You can move it over to the side for a gradient effect.

Another angle to throw at you. Most folks have a closed and open side to their face. It generally is more pleasing to light into the closed portion of the face. Draw a line across the eyes and then draw another thru the lips. Generally the lines on one side of the face or the other will converge toward each other. Your wife is a tough example as her face is unusually symmeterical which is an indication of attractiveness. (is that a word).

If you extend the lines far enough you can see where they converge.

Charles how would one know what the closed or open side of the face is? I keep looking at this picture of Alex's wife and I don't see a difference as you already indicated

anonymouscuban

Charles can correct me if I'm wrong but the rule doesn't really work with my wife because her face is pretty symmetrical. What Charles has brought up is the scientific version of someone's "Good Side". Both sides of my wife's face are her good side. . She's lucky. Or I am

In many people, this is not the case. If you draw a line across the top of the eyes and then another across the top or middle of the mouth, the lines will not be exactly perpendicular. They will eventually intersect. The less symmetrical the face, the quicker they will intersect.

The side of the face where the lines will eventually converge is the "closed" side of the face; you want to place it closer to the camera. You do this because of perspective. The further an object moves away from the point of reference, the smaller it gets. Perpendicular lines will eventually intersect as they move further from perspective. If you place the converging/closed side of a person's face on the opposite side of the camera, perspective will further magnify the asymmetric of the face. Place the closed side closer to the camera and perspective will balance it out.

Since my wife's face is relatively symmetrical, it doesn't really matter which side I place closest to the camera or light. I can shoot her with face straight to the camera without issue. However, most people aren't so lucky. Finding the person's closed side and working with it will make for a more flattering portrait. Now I wish I could be a fly on the wall when some of you bust out your rulers and start measuring your next subject's face.

Honestly, I don't think you have to be that anal. I would think a quick study of a person's face, just by looking at it face on, will let you know if they have any significant convergence and thus require close attention to it when posing/lighting but I may wrong.

Does that make sense?

Hackbone

Thanks for explaining it in depth. Everyone has a better side that we need to look for before we begin to photograph the subject. Most just jump in and start shooting without looking for lighting, starting the pose with a good base at the feet even though we're shooting a head shot, facial angles, etc. We would take less shots to get one good one if we just stopped and evaluated first. Digital has given everyone a crutch or license to just shoot away. In the old days we had 10 or 12 shots on a roll to get it right. Wow when we went to 20 or 24 we were in heaven. Look more and click less.

Oh.....by the way.....I wouldn't take measurements of her face.....lol.

anonymouscuban

DAY 3 - More work with Beauty/Paramount/Butterfly Light

Decided to play with this lighting setup a bit more.

4 light setup + reflector



Pull Back (reflector is not pictured but it was sitting on a posing table directly in front of the stool)



Key light - 22" beauty dish set to f/5.6
Fill light - Large round white reflector
Kicker - Two llarge gridded strip box set to f/4
BG Light - SB900 set to f/5.6 at center

1/250 @ f/5.6 ISO 100, 200mm focal length



At first my plan was to set the kicker strip boxes to the same power or maybe a half stop stronger than the key light to add a bit of rim lighting on her hair and some wrap kissing the sides of her cheeks to outline the face but it just didn't work with the way she was dressed as it gave off a bit more edgier feel.

Instead, I used a 2:1 ratio on the kicker:key. I like the way the strip lights filled the sides of her face ever so slightly. I also moved the position of the beauty dish so that the shadow under the nose has less spread than in the Day 2 photo. I think this lighting setup really gives a very soft/feminine look which matched her look today.

BTW, I have to say the light meter is absolutely wonderful. I was able to set everything up and get the lights dialed in in about 5 minutes. Best of all, I did while my wife got dressed. She didn't have to sit there while I fussed with my gear.

Hackbone

Sooooo much nicer with the hair cleaned up. Now raise the front shoulder higher by asking her to cross the front leg over the knee of the back leg and shift her weight to the far cheek of her touchie. This gets rid of the balanced shoulder look and is more feminine. Also spread her arms out slightly to give the body a stronger base. Looking at her put the front hand on her hip and bring the back hand to her knee. Hope that makes sense.

anonymouscuban

Hackbone wrote: »

Sooooo much nicer with the hair cleaned up. Now raise the front shoulder higher by asking her to cross the front leg over the knee of the back leg and shift her weight to the far cheek of her touchie. This gets rid of the balanced shoulder look and is more feminine. Also spread her arms out slightly to give the body a stronger base. Looking at her put the front hand on her hip and bring the back hand to her knee. Hope that makes sense.

Good tip Charles. Haven't paid much attention to the posing to be honest. I will make sure I do with the next shot.

Dooginfif20

is your SB-900 on the floor or attached to the BG stand? I am loving this thread!

anonymouscuban

Dooginfif20 wrote: »

is your SB-900 on the floor or attached to the BG stand? I am loving this thread!

This should answer it:

Dooginfif20

Very nice! Well I just ordered my first Einstein yesterday and I am selling a few other things to make room for a couple strip boxes next. I am so ready for a 3 light setup!

divamum

See, Charles, that is the kind of thing I have been DYING TO LEARN. Where does one learn these portrait rules?!?!?!? I work on my lighting, posing.... but often I'm flying by the seat of my pants and just go by what I think looks good. Even if I ultimately I choose to break some of the rules, I'd love to *learn* them.

I know - give a class! I'd be there in a heartbeat

PhilD41

Looking good. I am also looking forward to seeing how the posing changes / improves with Charles' input. I have learned more already then the last few months combined. :-) Best of luck keeping with it. I check frequently.

Qarik

alex, the eyes look a bit muddy in your shots! clean them up.

Hackbone

Diva, the knowledge is a collage of many different inputs, just as each of you vocal teachers imparts one tip of wisdom during you lessons. The old masters know/knew and taught the rules. Some photographers to look up and there still is some of their teachings on the net for free just google them.
Joe Zeltsman, NJersey .....probably the father of classical portraits.
Al Gilbert Canada.......did environmental and ocf 40 years ago.
Monte Zucker MD......classical port and weddings.
Dean Collins California.....master of light of any type.

Just a few to get you started.

divamum

I still say: CLASS. You need to teach one. For classic portraiture you have so, so, SO much to offer, you live in a really cool place that isn't all that far from DC, B'more, or Virginians willing to head up to the Eastern Shore.....

I've heard of Dean Collins and Monte Zucker, but the others are new to me (I'm embarrassed to say). Will be googling and reading....

John!

Interesting thread


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

anonymouscuban

Qarik wrote: »

alex, the eyes look a bit muddy in your shots! clean them up.

We joke around so much Daniel that I now never know when you're serious. Are you? If so, can you elaborate?

Hackbone wrote: »

Diva, the knowledge is a collage of many different inputs, just as each of you vocal teachers imparts one tip of wisdom during you lessons. The old masters know/knew and taught the rules. Some photographers to look up and there still is some of their teachings on the net for free just google them.
Joe Zeltsman, NJersey .....probably the father of classical portraits.
Al Gilbert Canada.......did environmental and ocf 40 years ago.
Monte Zucker MD......classical port and weddings.
Dean Collins California.....master of light of any type.

Just a few to get you started.

Thanks. Gonna look this fellas up.

OH... and we took today's portrait this morning right before heading out for the day. Went with Rembrandt lighting today. Also used Charles' tip for crossing the leg and butt lean pose. Will share tonight.

Qarik

Dead serious. Your 1st set against grey backdrop is not too bad but all the other shots, whites of her eyes are just kinda dingy grey

anonymouscuban

Thanks Daniel. I'll pay closer attention to that. I don't want her eyes to look over-processed but I guess maybe I went to far in the other direction.