Apparel Photography

[photo1x1.com]

Very sorry, I still have to disagree. Maybe it has to do with the place I live. The color temperature and the amount of sunlight here varies extremely throughout the years and between days. If the sun is out, the window light is harder in my experience, even when it doesn´t hit the subject.
In regard to "sunlight is free": the OP already has lights (probably energy saving bulbs), and these shouldn´t consume much energy, so it is almost free too.

I totally agree with everything except the lighting:
usually you want reapeatable conditions which you won´t get with natural light.
Flash is definitely by far the best solution, but with continuous lights and a solid tripod or similar you can extend the shutter speed almost infinitely. All you can´t do is photograph motion.

The sun shines daily at the same constant rate and is in a constant location with minor variations on a daily basis. Clouds can diminish the amount of light you get but the color temp is relatively the same. Sunlight is also FREE, to get and FREE to use. It provides what we consider to be the most "Natural" temp of light.

Strobes are convenient when needing to move or adjust them but color temp of flash tubes changes as they age. Color temp also changes with power settings. Monolights tend to have more color shift as the power is lowered than pack lights, but this is not an absolute. This is one of those cases where you get what you pay for.

Natural light is easy and simple to use and if one uses a constant gray card to set white balance adjustments in post are extremely simple and quick.

 

[table1349]

Very sorry, I still have to disagree. Maybe it has to do with the place I live. The color temperature and the amount of sunlight here varies extremely throughout the years and between days. If the sun is out, the window light is harder in my experience, even when it doesn´t hit the subject.
In regard to "sunlight is free": the OP already has lights (probably energy saving bulbs), and these shouldn´t consume much energy, so it is almost free too.

I totally agree with everything except the lighting:
usually you want reapeatable conditions which you won´t get with natural light.
Flash is definitely by far the best solution, but with continuous lights and a solid tripod or similar you can extend the shutter speed almost infinitely. All you can´t do is photograph motion.

The sun shines daily at the same constant rate and is in a constant location with minor variations on a daily basis. Clouds can diminish the amount of light you get but the color temp is relatively the same. Sunlight is also FREE, to get and FREE to use. It provides what we consider to be the most "Natural" temp of light.

Strobes are convenient when needing to move or adjust them but color temp of flash tubes changes as they age. Color temp also changes with power settings. Monolights tend to have more color shift as the power is lowered than pack lights, but this is not an absolute. This is one of those cases where you get what you pay for.

Natural light is easy and simple to use and if one uses a constant gray card to set white balance adjustments in post are extremely simple and quick.

The studio had a giant bank of windows on the North side. The light was more diffused that way. The windows had blackout shades for when we didn't want sunlight.

Plus a simple diffusion scrim in front of the window will soften direct sunlight. It's all about learning light and how to use, modify that light. The one thing you can't easily adjust is not having enough light.

 

[photo1x1.com]

Windows facing north are definitely easier, and if you add diffusion to it, you will end up with pretty similar results from day to day.

Very sorry, I still have to disagree. Maybe it has to do with the place I live. The color temperature and the amount of sunlight here varies extremely throughout the years and between days. If the sun is out, the window light is harder in my experience, even when it doesn´t hit the subject.
In regard to "sunlight is free": the OP already has lights (probably energy saving bulbs), and these shouldn´t consume much energy, so it is almost free too.

I totally agree with everything except the lighting:
usually you want reapeatable conditions which you won´t get with natural light.
Flash is definitely by far the best solution, but with continuous lights and a solid tripod or similar you can extend the shutter speed almost infinitely. All you can´t do is photograph motion.

The sun shines daily at the same constant rate and is in a constant location with minor variations on a daily basis. Clouds can diminish the amount of light you get but the color temp is relatively the same. Sunlight is also FREE, to get and FREE to use. It provides what we consider to be the most "Natural" temp of light.

Strobes are convenient when needing to move or adjust them but color temp of flash tubes changes as they age. Color temp also changes with power settings. Monolights tend to have more color shift as the power is lowered than pack lights, but this is not an absolute. This is one of those cases where you get what you pay for.

Natural light is easy and simple to use and if one uses a constant gray card to set white balance adjustments in post are extremely simple and quick.

The studio had a giant bank of windows on the North side. The light was more diffused that way. The windows had blackout shades for when we didn't want sunlight.

Plus a simple diffusion scrim in front of the window will soften direct sunlight. It's all about learning light and how to use, modify that light. The one thing you can't easily adjust is not having enough light.

 

[Derrel]

Look at the white shirt photo. See the tag, at the top, where it joins the shirt? And at the bottom? See that faint line of blue? That is chromatic aberration, commonly vcalled "color fringing". While it is easily visible on bold, strong edges, like the black-meets-white areas of the tag, it is also present at a much smaller level, across the image, in a lot of almost microscopic edges that we cannot see consciously; this is why a lens with bad CA is a poor imager. The old 18-55 Canon lens I got with my XTi was made in huge numbers...often kitted with various bodies...the Asian market was sold ONLY the better 18-55 IS model, which was optically a better lens. This lens is from the early days of APS-C bodies, but this might be the lens your camera was kitted with. Even today, I STILL SEE old Canon and Nikon lenses, NOS or New Old Stock, being sold with kits! OLD 18-55's, OLD 70-300's, from both Canon and Nikon, decade-old lenses, still being sold by many low-rent internet dealers,etc..

Lightroom can remove or minimize this Chromatic Aberration (also called CA in many articles), this so-called color-fringing effect, and that can improve some pictures.

BEST Canon lens for the money these days is the 50mm f/1.8 STM model...a decent lens! And not too expensive, but you will need to be a ways away to get a T-shirt into the frame on a crop-sensor camera.

 

[pxlsce]

So that CA would be contributing to the lack of quality/sharpness in the image?

I actually have that lens, borrowed from a friend, but as you said, I just can't get far enough away from the shirt to be able to get the whole thing in the frame. Is there anything else I can get that would work from 4-6ft away from the shirt? I was suggested the EF-S 35mm F2.8 Macro lens by someone. Would that work?

Look at the white shirt photo. See the tag, at the top, where it joins the shirt? And at the bottom? See that faint line of blue? That is chromatic aberration, commonly vcalled "color fringing". While it is easily visible on bold, strong edges, like the black-meets-white areas of the tag, it is also present at a much smaller level, across the image, in a lot of almost microscopic edges that we cannot see consciously; this is why a lens with bad CA is a poor imager. The old 18-55 Canon lens I got with my XTi was made in huge numbers...often kitted with various bodies...the Asian market was sold ONLY the better 18-55 IS model, which was optically a better lens. This lens is from the early days of APS-C bodies, but this might be the lens your camera was kitted with. Even today, I STILL SEE old Canon and Nikon lenses, NOS or New Old Stock, being sold with kits! OLD 18-55's, OLD 70-300's, from both Canon and Nikon, decade-old lenses, still being sold by many low-rent internet dealers,etc..

Lightroom can remove or minimize this Chromatic Aberration (also called CA in many articles), this so-called color-fringing effect, and that can improve some pictures.

BEST Canon lens for the money these days is the 50mm f/1.8 STM model...a decent lens! And not too expensive, but you will need to be a ways away to get a T-shirt into the frame on a crop-sensor camera.

 

[photo1x1.com]

You can check whether 35mm would work, by just setting the zoom ring of your 18-55mm at a setting of roughly 35mm.

So that CA would be contributing to the lack of quality/sharpness in the image?

I actually have that lens, borrowed from a friend, but as you said, I just can't get far enough away from the shirt to be able to get the whole thing in the frame. Is there anything else I can get that would work from 4-6ft away from the shirt? I was suggested the EF-S 35mm F2.8 Macro lens by someone. Would that work?

Look at the white shirt photo. See the tag, at the top, where it joins the shirt? And at the bottom? See that faint line of blue? That is chromatic aberration, commonly vcalled "color fringing". While it is easily visible on bold, strong edges, like the black-meets-white areas of the tag, it is also present at a much smaller level, across the image, in a lot of almost microscopic edges that we cannot see consciously; this is why a lens with bad CA is a poor imager. The old 18-55 Canon lens I got with my XTi was made in huge numbers...often kitted with various bodies...the Asian market was sold ONLY the better 18-55 IS model, which was optically a better lens. This lens is from the early days of APS-C bodies, but this might be the lens your camera was kitted with. Even today, I STILL SEE old Canon and Nikon lenses, NOS or New Old Stock, being sold with kits! OLD 18-55's, OLD 70-300's, from both Canon and Nikon, decade-old lenses, still being sold by many low-rent internet dealers,etc..

Lightroom can remove or minimize this Chromatic Aberration (also called CA in many articles), this so-called color-fringing effect, and that can improve some pictures.

BEST Canon lens for the money these days is the 50mm f/1.8 STM model...a decent lens! And not too expensive, but you will need to be a ways away to get a T-shirt into the frame on a crop-sensor camera.