Options
Portrait studio lights help
<style>@font-face { font-family: "ＭＳ 明朝"; }@font-face { font-family: "Cambria Math"; }@font-face { font-family: "Cambria"; }p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal { margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 12pt; font-family: Cambria; }.MsoChpDefault { font-family: Cambria; }div.WordSection1 { page: WordSection1; }</style> A couple of weeks ago I got an AlienBee 1600 light for studio work. I also have a speedlite 580EXII to go along with my 5D2.
Well today was the fist time I got to test things, learn them and get familiar with how to setting them up.
I setup the AB1600 at about 30 -40deg. from the subject and a speedlite 580EXII on a boom as a hairlight. I tried using a reflextor on the opposite side but since I didn't have a person holding it it was a challenge to say the least.
Overall I was not too happy with the results. I felt that the subjects face on the side without the main light still had too much shadows.
So what I’m thinking of doing is using the speedlite for the hair light as a second light to help reduce the shadows on the face and bypass the hair light. How does that solution sound to you guys.??
Is it better to have 2 lights to the front of the subject (at45 deg) as opposed to 1main light (at 30 deg) to the fornt and a hair light.
Thanks
R.
Well today was the fist time I got to test things, learn them and get familiar with how to setting them up.
I setup the AB1600 at about 30 -40deg. from the subject and a speedlite 580EXII on a boom as a hairlight. I tried using a reflextor on the opposite side but since I didn't have a person holding it it was a challenge to say the least.
Overall I was not too happy with the results. I felt that the subjects face on the side without the main light still had too much shadows.
So what I’m thinking of doing is using the speedlite for the hair light as a second light to help reduce the shadows on the face and bypass the hair light. How does that solution sound to you guys.??
Is it better to have 2 lights to the front of the subject (at45 deg) as opposed to 1main light (at 30 deg) to the fornt and a hair light.
Thanks
R.
Canon 5DMk II | 70-200mm f2.8 IS USM | 24-105mm f4.0 IS USM | 85mm f1.8 prime.
0
Comments
Sam
I had the camera setup to 1/200 f11 ISO 200
At this point all I was trying to do was get familiar with the gear being that I'm new to this. As you can see the image sucks to say the least, and this is one of the better ones. I was really frustrated with the whole thing and it was by a miracle that everything didn't end up at the bottom of the pool.
Don't let this get you down. It's not as bad as you think.
When I copied your image and opened it up in PS the color shifted dramatically. There was way less saturation.
The light looks like it's a bit harsh. Try moving it back, and for portraits you could also try a wider aperture. As for shadows, you could try moving the light to say about 45 degrees, and or bounce some fill flash.
I hope you don't mind but here is what I was able to get from your shot.
Sam
thanks for reviewing it and helping out.
I tried a smaller aperture and the image was WAY too bright, even with the power all the way down, hence the f11. Still trying to figure that one out.
Also, when I moved the light further to the outside (meaning greater angle to the subject) the shadows on the opposite side of the face were REALLY bad. In these images the light is almost infront of the subject.
I agree I need some fill for that side of the face, no doubt. Since it's just me and I only have a speedlite in addition to the AB I though I would use it for fill instead of a hair light. I think that would solve my issues for the moment. The hair light helps a bit with the shadows but still not good enough IMO. What do you think about that?
Let me ask you, should the main light be looking down on the subject. I tried to get the butterfly shadow just under the nose but was unsuccessful.
HEre is another image. this one had the light at about 45 deg.
Yesterday was the first day I got to mess with the lights. I'll have round 2 with them during this week or weekend. I ordered a boom arm for the speedlite. This will give me a boom for the reflector that I have and a boom for the speedlite.
I'm also going to hunt down a mannaquin head so I don't have to put my fiancee through the hassle of her sitting there while I get my head out of my a** with this.
R.
From looking at the light reflection in the subjects eyes and shadows on the face, I personally would be tempted to raise the light a foot or so higher than you have it so it would be aiming down at the subject a bit and then use the reflector on the opposite side a bit below the subject and angled up.
Just some thoughts.
I was able to do a couple of shots shooting the camera with the timer and me holding the reflector and that's how i held it. IMO it was a big difference with the shadows
The strobe has a AB beauty dish with the white sock on it. It was about 3 feet from the subject and at about 1/16 power.
I need to test it with an umbrella (both types) to see the difference too.
At this point I'm still on the fence about hot to use the speedlite, meaning hair light or fill light.
R.
http://blog.timkphotography.com
thanks for the feedback, really!
All good points. It's not that I'm trying to get rid of all the shadows, they just seemed a bit excessive to me, but to be honest I have zero experience with this type of photography and setup. This is my very first go at portrait photog. and using this type of lighting. My gauge for what's acceptable is what I've seen on the internet and others work. I guess it's somewhat subjective too, it depends on what one is trying to achieve.
I have a couple of umbrellas that I can setup on the AB1600. I need to educate myself with the different results I can get with different setups.
I just want to make sure my results aren't WAYYYY off as of right now. From the comments you guys are giving me it sounds as though they are somewhat acceptable or at least I'm on the right track considering.
Let me ask you, if you had to choose hair light or fill light, which would you setup with your second light?
Is a hair light more of a luxury/artistic look, as opposed to a fill light, which will ensure the image is properly taken/exposed? You know what I mean??
R.
Thanks for the corrections!!!!
Disclaimer: I did mean to say larger aperture.
While I was thinking the AB1600 was too powerful at the 3' distance but moving it back with more diffusion would help.
Your post and explanation was much better!
Sam
Can you shoot a pic of the set up ypou ahve been using please...it might help get answers ....
If I was working with your setup I would use the speedlight as a hair light they way you did in these shots, or as a rim light depending on the setup (just lower and more from the side rather than from overhead). That's because I can use reflectors to easily lighten the shadows... using a reflector as a hair light would be a lot harder (probably have to be a mirror too to get enough light back on the hair). You just need something to hold the reflector. I have a round one with a loop on the edge. I usually just hang that from the top of a lightstand and then clamp the bottom to the stand so it stays in place. Very simple.
Of course, you could ditch the reflector and the hairlight if you wanted. There's no rules... when you have a light background or light hair, you don't always need a hairlight for separation. Mix it up and see what you prefer.
You could, of course, use the speedlight for fill if you want... you could even use the AB for fill. Put an umbrella on it and place it behind the camera so it's giving flat light to the scene, and adjust it by itself. This lets you set the level of the darkest shadows (your shot should still be underexposed). Then you could add a bare speedlight with a snoot as a main light. That would give you hard, dramatic lighting but you can control the level of the shadows so the contrast isn't too extreme and the overall result isn't as harsh. Just another look that you could try.
You could also use the AB for main and the speedlight to put a tight "spotlight" effect on the background (which BTW, is very distracting in these shots... I know you're just testing lighting, but figured I'd mention it anyway). Possibilities are endless!
http://blog.timkphotography.com
Yeah I can get you an image of the setup. Give me a couple of days and I'll post it.
The 22" AB beauty dish and white sock (i got the silver beauty dish) I was using also has a direct light blocker. This I did not use during the shoot. I wanted to try the BD without it initially. Do you think that will make a big difference in diffusing the light even more?
I would have never thought it was TOO powerful, and I was worried about not getting enough juice when I did my research on a strobe light.
R.
So the hair light should be more on the side? I tried to put it almost on top like you mentioned.
I have the arm and reflector needed to do the job. What i don't have (will be here Friday) is the boom for the speedlite so I used the relfector boom for that. Hence loosing the ability to hold the reflector. But I know what you mean.
Like I said, I need to try a few different things and see how things turn out.
You lost me with the spotlight comment at the end though. You're saying my shots have that and it's distracting? If so, can you elaborate, because I don't see where that is. Unless you mean on the hair itself.
R.
The hair light is fine where you have it, I was just describing more of a "rim light" which is another option. It's also called a "kicker"... just a light to give more defnition and separation, coming from behind, usually to the side of the subject opposite the main light (but not always). It usually hits the hair on that side too, but it's main purpose isn't to light the hair. Just a different thing to try.
I meant that the background you have is distracting, with the big black square and the tile. If you pulled her out away from the background and shot with a wider aperture (by reducing the light from the AB in one of the ways mentioned) it would be much more pleasing.
The spotlight thing was just something you could try as far as lighting the background. Basically zoom your flash as much as it will go and aim it at the wall behind the subject, to give a bright spot behind her head and a gradual falloff to black. To do this she has to be far enough away so that the main light isn't hitting the wall in the background.
http://blog.timkphotography.com
Are you using the silver or the white? Also are you going with the larger 86" unit for a larger softer light?
Can you tell me what the difference would be between a soft box and the 86" parabolic umbrella?
Sam
Ok I get what you're saying now.
YEah I agree about the square thing on the wall. We shot this in the house so that wall is in the family room and it's part of the fire place. But you're right during a real shoot I would never use that spot just because of that.
I'm thinking of picking up a mobile background system , they'r not too expensive.
Check out the Botero #23, they're pretty nice for anything from headshots to 3/4 length. About $60 at B&H and they come with a white cloth backdrop as an extra. The #23 is gray so you can put a gel on your background light and make it any color you want. It also has a subtle pattern to it that looks good without being distracting. Here's a shot with it where I used a blue gel (unretouched btw, so ignore the flyaway hairs... although this does illustrate why it's often better to use a soft lightsource for your hair light... it greatly minimizes the flyaways and makes for a lot less work in post):
http://blog.timkphotography.com
Hard light is fine, and a beauty dish is relatively hard light already. But even something like a gridded reflector can be awesome and dramatic. You just need to get the shadows to fall in a pleasing manner. The bad part is that if the person has less than perfect skin, the hard light is going to show every wrinkle, pore, and imperfection and you might be spending a lot of time in post retouching it to make it look flattering. Soft light takes care of that for you.
http://blog.timkphotography.com
So the beauty dish with the sock I'm using would be considered hard light?
My fiancee complained about the points you mentioned. she said she looks bad in the images, that it showed the flaws. (roll eyes)!!!! women!!!!!!
So how can I turn this light into soft light and make it more flattering, an umbrella? I thought beauty dishes where preferred for portraits like these.
Anyways, thats just me and my 3c. I'm not a pro so feel safe to ignore what i say
Start slow and figure out what does what, as it were. One light, with a modifier, reflector on the other side. See what happens if you move it closer or further away. The reflector will likely be just out of shot to fill the shadows the way you want. ETA: if you search back a few months, you'll see that Anonymouscuban did this kind of an experiment and posted his results and thoughts - very englightening!
Then, put the light behind and above camera, and use the reflector in front/under your subject (clamshell setup) - see how that works for you as a setup (one of my personal favorites - not necessarily the most "outside the box" lighting, but very flattering, easy to control, and consistent - there's a reason it's used so much!)
THEN when you've kind of decided what you like/want to do with those, try using the speedlight as a hairlight and figure out where you like it. I know that I struggle with hairlights because my space is supersmall and even using multiple diffusers I can't get them turned down low enough to create the kind of "non-light" light I want. I finally found a solution I like, in that I bounced the speedlight at lowest power into the vestibule to the side (side/rear) of the subject, essentially creating a giant softbox, but because it was bounced and superdiffused, it didn't overwpower the way it did when it was pointed at the subject - it acted as hair and gentle fill. Key light is just visible to camera left.
Gave this:
ETA: Hard light, eg bare flash, can be AWESOME when used creatively and for a specific dramatic effect. But, in general, soft lighting sources are more consistently flattering, and also have a greater "margin of error" as far as placement to give good results.
Dude, read your signature!
I agree about diffusing the beauty dish... you loose the directionality and control that it gives you. However, that only matters if you are looking for that type of light. If what you really want is the same effect as a small softbox, and you already own a beauty dish, well, you might as well just use the diffusion sock and save yourself the money and time of changing modifiers. In this case I think he was mainly using it to eat some light so he didn't have to shoot at f/1000.
http://blog.timkphotography.com
This brings up a question that I don't know. Tim, you mentioned not using a beauty dish for a pimple covered teenager, why not? Is the light to hard?
What modifier is preferred for that? I'm not familiar with different modifiers for different subjects.
R.
The softer the light source, the less it's going to highlight the wrinkles, texture, and imperfections on a person's face. So if I had a subject with bad skin I would go for a large light source, because larger light sources (relative to the subject) are softer. Of course, the sun is the largest light source around, but it's 93 million miles away so it appears to be very small, and thus is a hard source. So distance from the subject matters as well (which is why it has to be larger "relative to the subject" rather than in absolute terms).
But again, there's no one "right way" to do it. I've used hard light on people with less than flawless skin, knowing that I would have to do a lot of retouching, but choosing to do it that way regardless because it was the best method to get the result I wanted (a dramatic photo with deep, hard shadows).
http://blog.timkphotography.com
Also curious as I can't find any specs on the Botero #23...what size does it collapse to?
I agree 100 percent on your comment regarding the people that we work with...most don't come with MUAs and stylists so we have to do what we can to minimize post processing.