generally flat lighting with additional focussed shadow till the end

Started 3 months ago | Questions
elliotn Senior Member • Posts: 2,009
Re: generally flat lighting with additional focussed shadow till the end
2

jlafferty wrote:

If you've got more examples, and especially examples with the model's face, that could be helpful.

Lots of examples here (scroll down to 'Look Book'):

https://www.1101.com/store/cacuma/2019ss/

elliotn Senior Member • Posts: 2,009
Re: generally flat lighting with additional focussed shadow till the end
4

Sailor Blue wrote:

Frankly I don't think the lighting is very good.

For fashion you want light that shows off the fashion. This means hard or semi-hard side lighting that throws shadows that highlight the drape and folds of the fashion and show the weave of the fabric. You then add a soft fill light to control the darkness of the shadows.

Well, that's exactly what this photographer has done. What's the problem?

Sailor Blue
Sailor Blue Forum Pro • Posts: 14,686
Re: generally flat lighting with additional focussed shadow till the end
1

elliotn wrote:

Sailor Blue wrote:

Frankly I don't think the lighting is very good.

For fashion you want light that shows off the fashion. This means hard or semi-hard side lighting that throws shadows that highlight the drape and folds of the fashion and show the weave of the fabric. You then add a soft fill light to control the darkness of the shadows.

Well, that's exactly what this photographer has done. What's the problem?

Read what I said more carefully.

The lighting shown is aimed directly at the front of the subject so it is flat lighting on the subject.  This flat lighting hides the drape and folds of the fashion and the weave of the fabric.

To get shadows to show the drape, fold, and weave you need light from the side of the subject, not flat on to the subject.

Typical is with the subject facing the camera and the light located perhaps 45° to the side and up 30°-45° to emulate sunlight.

-- hide signature --

Living and loving it in Pattaya, Thailand. Canon 5DS R & 7D - See the gear list for the rest.

 Sailor Blue's gear list:Sailor Blue's gear list
Fujifilm FinePix Real 3D W3 Canon EOS 7D Canon EOS 5DS R Tamron SP AF 90mm F/2.8 Di Macro Tokina AT-X 16-28mm f/2.8 Pro FX +9 more
elliotn Senior Member • Posts: 2,009
Re: generally flat lighting with additional focussed shadow till the end
3

Sailor Blue wrote:

elliotn wrote:

Sailor Blue wrote:

Frankly I don't think the lighting is very good.

For fashion you want light that shows off the fashion. This means hard or semi-hard side lighting that throws shadows that highlight the drape and folds of the fashion and show the weave of the fabric. You then add a soft fill light to control the darkness of the shadows.

Well, that's exactly what this photographer has done. What's the problem?

Read what I said more carefully.

The lighting shown is aimed directly at the front of the subject so it is flat lighting on the subject. This flat lighting hides the drape and folds of the fashion and the weave of the fabric.

To get shadows to show the drape, fold, and weave you need light from the side of the subject, not flat on to the subject.

Typical is with the subject facing the camera and the light located perhaps 45° to the side and up 30°-45° to emulate sunlight.

The key light in this picture is coming from way off camera right. It is anything but a frontal light.

The fill light is frontal. It is very soft and is coming from above and behind the camera position. It is about one stop below the key light.

This is exactly the lighting structure that you are prescribing.

However, I assume that you feel the fill has been dialled in too high, and that there is not enough depth to the shadows.

For the purposes of this shoot — a look book — I think the photographer has got the lighting ratio just right.

Sailor Blue
Sailor Blue Forum Pro • Posts: 14,686
Re: generally flat lighting with additional focussed shadow till the end
1

elliotn wrote:

Sailor Blue wrote:

elliotn wrote:

Sailor Blue wrote:

Frankly I don't think the lighting is very good.

For fashion you want light that shows off the fashion. This means hard or semi-hard side lighting that throws shadows that highlight the drape and folds of the fashion and show the weave of the fabric. You then add a soft fill light to control the darkness of the shadows.

Well, that's exactly what this photographer has done. What's the problem?

Read what I said more carefully.

The lighting shown is aimed directly at the front of the subject so it is flat lighting on the subject. This flat lighting hides the drape and folds of the fashion and the weave of the fabric.

To get shadows to show the drape, fold, and weave you need light from the side of the subject, not flat on to the subject.

Typical is with the subject facing the camera and the light located perhaps 45° to the side and up 30°-45° to emulate sunlight.

The key light in this picture is coming from way off camera right. It is anything but a frontal light.

The fill light is frontal. It is very soft and is coming from above and behind the camera position. It is about one stop below the key light.

This is exactly the lighting structure that you are prescribing.

However, I assume that you feel the fill has been dialled in too high, and that there is not enough depth to the shadows.

For the purposes of this shoot — a look book — I think the photographer has got the lighting ratio just right.

The camera position has absolutely nothing to do with the positions of the lighting.

The main light is directly in front of the subject so it is flat frontal lighting that destroys shadows from the drape and folds of the garment and the weave of the fabric.

The fill light is side lighting the subject, keeping the shadows on the legs and floor from going pure black.

Please feel free to keep feeling as you do but please stop trying to confuse others with your lack of understanding of the English language and lighting.

-- hide signature --

Living and loving it in Pattaya, Thailand. Canon 5DS R & 7D - See the gear list for the rest.

 Sailor Blue's gear list:Sailor Blue's gear list
Fujifilm FinePix Real 3D W3 Canon EOS 7D Canon EOS 5DS R Tamron SP AF 90mm F/2.8 Di Macro Tokina AT-X 16-28mm f/2.8 Pro FX +9 more
elliotn Senior Member • Posts: 2,009
Re: generally flat lighting with additional focussed shadow till the end
1

Sailor Blue wrote:

The main light is directly in front of the subject so it is flat frontal lighting that destroys shadows from the drape and folds of the garment and the weave of the fabric.

The fill light is side lighting the subject, keeping the shadows on the legs and floor from going pure black.

Huh?

The key light (or 'main' light) in this set of pictures is the hard light coming from  the right of set. This is the light that is creating the shadows. The fill light is the soft frontal light that is filling these shadows.

elliotn Senior Member • Posts: 2,009
Re: generally flat lighting with additional focussed shadow till the end
1

Sailor Blue wrote:

The camera position has absolutely nothing to do with the positions of the lighting.

The conventional way to describe lighting placement is from the point of view of the camera. E.g. a rim light will become a front light, if you shoot from behind the model.

The main light is directly in front of the subject so it is flat frontal lighting that destroys shadows from the drape and folds of the garment and the weave of the fabric.

The subject here - an A-line skirt - is a three dimensional object. A cone, if you will. A cone does not have a front and back. If, as we agree, the main light is far to the right of camera, it makes no sense to describe this light as 'flat frontal lighting' just because the model has turned to face the light. It is still a side light, from the point of view of the camera (and the clothing) and it is modelling the skirt in just the fashion you prescribe (revealing the drape/folds etc).

The fill light is side lighting the subject, keeping the shadows on the legs and floor from going pure black.

Please feel free to keep feeling as you do but please stop trying to confuse others with your lack of understanding of the English language and lighting.

I think you're the one who is being confusing. Look at the set of pictures - from frame to frame the model turns to her left, to her right, and then faces the camera (as you would expect in a fashion shoot). In my way of describing things, the key light remains a side light, and the fill light remains a front light, regardless of the position of the model. In your way of describing things, a static lighting set-up has to be re-described every time the model moves. That is confusing.

jlafferty Contributing Member • Posts: 731
Re: generally flat lighting with additional focussed shadow till the end
1

Thank you. I think someone else called it earlier - looks like daylight with strobe fill. Shadows and background pretty overtly retouched. I should say much of this looks like natural light but some of it could be tungsten hotlight too - my bet is that they had to contend with fading daylight or multi day shoots and mixed their methods a bit as a result.

elliotn wrote:

jlafferty wrote:

If you've got more examples, and especially examples with the model's face, that could be helpful.

Lots of examples here (scroll down to 'Look Book'):

https://www.1101.com/store/cacuma/2019ss/

-- hide signature --

http://jimlafferty.com
General scoundrel. Evocative beats academic.

jlafferty Contributing Member • Posts: 731
Re: generally flat lighting with additional focussed shadow till the end

Elliot is absolutely right. Everything is written as relative to camera position or axis of camera to subject. This is all side-lit with on axis fill.

elliotn wrote:

Sailor Blue wrote:

The camera position has absolutely nothing to do with the positions of the lighting.

The conventional way to describe lighting placement is from the point of view of the camera. E.g. a rim light will become a front light, if you shoot from behind the model.

-- hide signature --

http://jimlafferty.com
General scoundrel. Evocative beats academic.

jlafferty Contributing Member • Posts: 731
Re: generally flat lighting with additional focussed shadow till the end
3

Your post often and provide a great service/resource for many here who benefit by the info you share. However this post of yours is dripping with misinformed condescension. “Congrats, you just played yourself” is the appropriate meme here. Please stop bringing this kind of bitterness into an otherwise productive conversation.

Sailor Blue wrote:

The camera position has absolutely nothing to do with the positions of the lighting... please stop trying to confuse others with your lack of understanding of the English language and lighting.

-- hide signature --

http://jimlafferty.com
General scoundrel. Evocative beats academic.

Sailor Blue
Sailor Blue Forum Pro • Posts: 14,686
Re: generally flat lighting with additional focussed shadow till the end
1

elliotn wrote:

Sailor Blue wrote:

The camera position has absolutely nothing to do with the positions of the lighting.

The conventional way to describe lighting placement is from the point of view of the camera. E.g. a rim light will become a front light, if you shoot from behind the model.

The main light is directly in front of the subject so it is flat frontal lighting that destroys shadows from the drape and folds of the garment and the weave of the fabric.

The subject here - an A-line skirt - is a three dimensional object. A cone, if you will. A cone does not have a front and back. If, as we agree, the main light is far to the right of camera, it makes no sense to describe this light as 'flat frontal lighting' just because the model has turned to face the light. It is still a side light, from the point of view of the camera (and the clothing) and it is modelling the skirt in just the fashion you prescribe (revealing the drape/folds etc).

The fill light is side lighting the subject, keeping the shadows on the legs and floor from going pure black.

Please feel free to keep feeling as you do but please stop trying to confuse others with your lack of understanding of the English language and lighting.

I think you're the one who is being confusing. Look at the set of pictures - from frame to frame the model turns to her left, to her right, and then faces the camera (as you would expect in a fashion shoot). In my way of describing things, the key light remains a side light, and the fill light remains a front light, regardless of the position of the model. In your way of describing things, a static lighting set-up has to be re-described every time the model moves. That is confusing.

As I said before, the position of the light has nothing to do with the type of lighting.

We describe the position of the light as though the subject was in the center of a clock face and the camera at 6. If you move the camera around the subject then you change the position of the light with respect to the camera.

We describe the type of lighting based only on how the subject is lit. Changing the subject's pose doesn't change the position of the light but it will change the type of subject lighting.

We can say a light coming from 3 o'clock is coming from the side but that doesn't make it side lighting because the type of lighting depends only on how the subject is lit. We can say the light is at the 12 o'clock position but that doesn't make it back lighting because the type of lighting depends only on how the subject is lit.

Without ever changing the positions of the camera or light I can change the subject's pose to change the type of subject lighting from flat front lighting to butterfly lighting to split lighting to back lighting to short loop lighting to broad loop lighting to Rembrandt lighting.

In the example posted the light is to the side of the camera, no argument there, yet the type of lighting on the garment is, as I have repeatedly said, flat front lighting.

If you go to the link the OP gave and click on the posted example image you can see the original and other images in that series. Compare the results of the flat frontal lighting on the garment for the example image (the first image of the series) with the second image (see below) or the third image. Notice how much better you can see the drape and folds of the garment.

By the way, the model has her head turned away from the light and toward the camera in the first image so the lighting on the face isn't flat lighting. The face is turned part way toward the camera and the lighting on the face is close to short loop lighting - tipping the head slightly to the model's right shoulder would have made it short loop lighting. In the third image the face it turned a bit past the camera and it is broad loop lighting.

Portrait Lighting - Project 3 - Portrait Lighting Set-Ups

-- hide signature --

Living and loving it in Pattaya, Thailand. Canon 5DS R & 7D - See the gear list for the rest.

 Sailor Blue's gear list:Sailor Blue's gear list
Fujifilm FinePix Real 3D W3 Canon EOS 7D Canon EOS 5DS R Tamron SP AF 90mm F/2.8 Di Macro Tokina AT-X 16-28mm f/2.8 Pro FX +9 more
Clyde Thomas Senior Member • Posts: 1,404
Re: generally flat lighting with additional focussed shadow till the end
2

icoh wrote:

...a question about the studio lighting for portrait and products.

...sharp unnatural shadow

Does anybody have a suggestion about lighting for this???

I've been shooting studio models for forty years. I honestly think this is one bare bulb strobe set at the appropriate angle in a very high white paint ceiling studio. The bare bulb is providing the sharp shadow (obviously), but it is also bouncing off the ceiling, probably set right against the ceiling 15-25 feet high. The bounce from a distance in large white ceiling studio will provide that elegant falloff.

Ambient light nowhere near able to compete with the very powerful strobe of probably 2000ws or more. This seems to be shot in a very high end studio with deep cyclorama wall (not paper). The clue to the single light high ceiling is the very subtle shadow tone in the curve of the cyc wall (where it is furthest away from the light). But the back wall and front floor are probably equal distance from the light.

That's where I'd start if I wanted that look. Keep it stupid simple.

http://photoclydethomas.com/

-- hide signature --

Here to help. Here to learn.

elliotn Senior Member • Posts: 2,009
Re: generally flat lighting with additional focussed shadow till the end
2

Clyde Thomas wrote:

I've been shooting studio models for forty years. I honestly think this is one bare bulb strobe set at the appropriate angle in a very high white paint ceiling studio. The bare bulb is providing the sharp shadow (obviously), but it is also bouncing off the ceiling, probably set right against the ceiling 15-25 feet high. The bounce from a distance in large white ceiling studio will provide that elegant falloff.

I think you're right — one bare-bulb flash in a large white studio.

Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads