If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
On Wed, 23 Feb 2005 12:13:19 -0500, Alan Browne
wrote: You're on track. For what you're suggesting, a harder surface (that loses less light) would be better (akin to what McLeod mentions about a studio he knows). In my "studio" (aka upstairs living room bereft of furniture) I don't have a wall that I can use as a reflector (eg: 1 'wall' is the windows, 1 wall is bookcases, and mirror), so I'd have to put up a backdrop or reflctors. I could set reflector boards (say 4' on a side) either side of me for the fills but that's a lot of my strobe power being used for fill light. Gotta buy more monolights. A fellow near here has an ancient pack/lights for sale, I'll have to take another look at it. Cheers, Alan Again, don't discount using a re3flector as fill, the idea of using a light as fill is "old school". It may free up your other light to use as a hair or background light. I know another guy named J. Micheal McBride who travels and gives portraiture seminars who only shoots with windowlight and a reflector. He does beautiful work. Check out his site. |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
McLeod wrote:
On Wed, 23 Feb 2005 09:18:39 -0500, Alan Browne wrote: It's that last bit that has me curious. If the fill is as close to the lens axis as we can manage, then there is little need for it to be a soft source. That's what I'm getting at... The reason I ask is that I find the placement of my fill light in a softbox to be awkward. To get it over the camera and on to the subject it has to be relatively high and hence away from the lens axis. W/o the softbox I can get it lower and no shaddows appear that way either. Cheers, Alan As close as practical. If you use a small specular source close to the lens-subject axis you have to also keep in mind the physical properties of light-"the angle of incidence=the angle of reflection". The more specular a light source, the more it reflects, and the closer to the lens-subject axis the more likely it is to reflect even on something like skin, in a very unattractive way. Excellent point, and very much undesired effect. You may not even notice unless you are looking for it but the edge of every greasy pore could pick up specular highlights. Test, see what you prefer, a soft light or a smaller light, but be sure to look at the images closely. I usually use a 5 ft umbrella for fill and if my camera and body are slightly blocking the umbrella the only place it's noticeable is in the eye reflection, which I usually retouch anyway. Probably for fill I should get a larger umbrella rather than use the softbox. My umbrellas are 36-42". My head/camera can block the lower part without much effect on the fill... Another way is to buy a boom stand so you can place it anywhere you want. I had a chance to buy a used Manfrotto boom a year or so ago... I passed it up (even used it wasn't cheap at all). Thanks again. Cheers, Alan. -- -- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm -- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm -- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin -- e-meil: there's no such thing as a FreeLunch. |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
Alan Browne wrote: Lisa Horton wrote: Alan Browne wrote: Let's say I have a simple three light portrait setup, fill, key and background. A soft lighting is desired so the key light is in a softbox (or 'brella). Is it neccesary to use a softbox/umbrella for the fill light? (Let's say the fill is at least 1 stop down from the key). I'm assuming that it isn't, as the key will cast the soft shaddows, but I'd like to hear other opinions. Sure, a bare light is fine for fill, as long as you're reflecting it off of a large, or preferably huge, reflector, as McLeod mentioned. Or shooting through a large sheet of translucent material, like ripstop nylon, which actually can be a relatively inexpensive yet very effective way to deal with fill. See my other reply. To set a softbox (or 'brella) as fill, I have to have it high above the camera ... away from the lens axis. This will cast a (very minor) shaddow under chins. I could try putting the fill, in the softbox, below the camera, I suppose. Some time ago (a couple years) I spread a white sheet behind me with two strobes lighting it up and one key light on the camera side. This took a lot of room (and both of my smallish studio strobes). I used a minolta flash as key. It all worked fine (as light) but just took so much room that I couldn't get a good background separation or use my 100mm lens. (Had to use the 28-70 near the long end). Try approaching it this way: for fill, you want a soft and VERY broad light source. The very antithesis of a single light with a reflector. Bed sheets make poor reflectors and poor shoot through material. They are denser and less reflective than desirable, and may not be quite exactly white. OTOH, a large sheet of foamcore is exactly white, a pretty good size for a fill light, and is fairly reflective. Almost too reflective, as it can produce hot spots because of it's reflectivity. This is why I prefer to paint the foamcore with flat white spray paint. Not a lot, just enough to take off most of the gloss. A 1/4x20 wing nut, a couple of wide washers, and a spare tripod make it a complete and adjustable reflector. Also, if you skip the wing nut and do a good smooth job with the white spray paint, this will double as an excellent slide projection screen. Not as bright as glass beaded or lenticular, but sharper and more detailed than either. Or, you could get a sheet of white ripstop nylon and some PVC plumbing parts and make a free standing shoot through that can also be used as a reflector. Your space constraints are nothing more than an impetus to think creatively. You actually want your fill light to be close to the subject, which works in your context. Lisa |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
Alan Browne wrote: Oh, you have no idea of all the things I've tried. This latest question just poked up as I was thinking about my 'current' portrait setup and the high placement of my fill light. In photography, there's pretty much always a way. You just have to find it. Lisa |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
I've had a whole slew of problems trying to control shadows on location
shoots in dark rooms. Most of these have no good surfaces for reflecting light, so I've resorted to multiple wireless flash. However, in your case, it would seem that if you put a reflector below the model, it would fill in the minor shadows created by having the fill light so high. You'd have to experiment to get the right light balance while not having it block the shot, but then that's where all the fun is. |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
On Wed, 23 Feb 2005 13:05:05 -0800, Lisa Horton
wrote: OTOH, a large sheet of foamcore is exactly white, a pretty good size for a fill light, and is fairly reflective. Almost too reflective, as it can produce hot spots because of it's reflectivity. This is why I prefer to paint the foamcore with flat white spray paint. Not a lot, just enough to take off most of the gloss. I've tried wrapping a board with gold mylar in the past, (for outside use at sunset) but it was far too shiny for the effect I wanted and somewhat clumsy to handle. It gave a watery-like 'spotty' reflection, especially if hit with a flash. So just before Christmas I made a gold reflector by spraying a foamcore board matte gold. Note to anyone wanting to lay any significant amount of paint onto a foamcore board: You have to paint *both sides* with a similar quantity of paint otherwise it becomes a concave reflector when the paint dries. Me: I am now a proud owner of a gold concave reflector, some crumpled gold mylar and a pair of gold-tipped sneakers. -- Owamanga! |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
HeHeHeHeHe ... been there ... the surface tension of the paint does that.
Use a gold-tone foil and glue it to the foamcore, works much better. "Owamanga" wrote in message ... On Wed, 23 Feb 2005 13:05:05 -0800, Lisa Horton wrote: OTOH, a large sheet of foamcore is exactly white, a pretty good size for a fill light, and is fairly reflective. Almost too reflective, as it can produce hot spots because of it's reflectivity. This is why I prefer to paint the foamcore with flat white spray paint. Not a lot, just enough to take off most of the gloss. I've tried wrapping a board with gold mylar in the past, (for outside use at sunset) but it was far too shiny for the effect I wanted and somewhat clumsy to handle. It gave a watery-like 'spotty' reflection, especially if hit with a flash. So just before Christmas I made a gold reflector by spraying a foamcore board matte gold. Note to anyone wanting to lay any significant amount of paint onto a foamcore board: You have to paint *both sides* with a similar quantity of paint otherwise it becomes a concave reflector when the paint dries. Me: I am now a proud owner of a gold concave reflector, some crumpled gold mylar and a pair of gold-tipped sneakers. -- Owamanga! |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
SB800 Nikon flash question (with D70) | larrylook | Digital Photography | 8 | January 16th 05 06:28 PM |
Question on Light Meters. | MATT WILLIAMS | Medium Format Photography Equipment | 6 | December 17th 04 01:16 PM |
reflectors vs diffusers which are better for portraits? | David Virgil Hobbs | 35mm Photo Equipment | 45 | December 5th 04 07:06 PM |
Kiev 88 question - Light leaks | Yannis Exidaridis | Medium Format Photography Equipment | 5 | February 9th 04 04:30 PM |
f-stop to light transmission % ratio question | f/256 | In The Darkroom | 1 | January 25th 04 04:07 AM |