Lighting feedback

[Nwcid]

Today I had some free time so I started working on adding a studio to my shop. I mounted a cross bracket that I can raise to the ceiling or lower to the floor to hold/position back drops.

At the moment I purchased a grey $8 Walmart sheet to use as a back drop until I figure what ones(s) I really need. I have been playing with my lighting and the basic 4 colors that came with my AD200's. I do not have a model so I have been using my little Honda pump.

I do have a question that I think I know the answer to, but I would like to ask it open ended to see if I am correct.

I am shooting the D850 and I capture my images in RAW. The first image is what I get when I download load the image. The second image is what I saw on the preview on the camera when I shot the image. Why is there such a difference?

I ask because I thought my lighting was fairly close until I downloaded the images.

 

[ac12]

Get a maniquin if you want to practice for people.
It won't complain about how long you are taking or how many shots you take
The head only, is good for learning how to control lighting on the head/face.
TIP, look for one with a shoulder, so that you can put a shirt/blouse on it, to more closely resemble a H&S shot. To me, the head and shoulder angles are a critical part of posing.

 

[ac12]

I think the rear screen is based off the JPG image, not the RAW image.

 

[Nwcid]

Get a maniquin if you want to practice for people.
It won't complain about how long you are taking or how many shots you take
The head only, is good for learning how to control lighting on the head/face.
TIP, look for one with a shoulder, so that you can put a shirt/blouse on it, to more closely resemble a H&S shot. To me, the head and shoulder angles are a critical part of posing.

Funny you say that, I might have access to a bunch of old CPR dummies that are half body and are no long currently approved for teaching. I might have to give one a try.

 

[Nwcid]

I think the rear screen is based off the JPG image, not the RAW image.

That was my thought, so good to see I am on the right track. The camera did the JPG of what it thinks it should look like, not the image I captured.

So when shooting in RAW how do you know your lighting is doing what you want? Is there a way besides tethering? I have the ability to and I enjoy shooting tethered, but that is not practical for all applications.

 

[ac12]

Get a maniquin if you want to practice for people.
It won't complain about how long you are taking or how many shots you take
The head only, is good for learning how to control lighting on the head/face.
TIP, look for one with a shoulder, so that you can put a shirt/blouse on it, to more closely resemble a H&S shot. To me, the head and shoulder angles are a critical part of posing.

Funny you say that, I might have access to a bunch of old CPR dummies that are half body and are no long currently approved for teaching. I might have to give one a try.

If the eye is open, try this trick.
Color the iris black with a Sharpie, then paint over the eyeball with a CLEAR nail polish.
The clear nail polish makes the eye reflect light similar to a human eye.

 

[ac12]

I think the rear screen is based off the JPG image, not the RAW image.

That was my thought, so good to see I am on the right track. The camera did the JPG of what it thinks it should look like, not the image I captured.

So when shooting in RAW how do you know your lighting is doing what you want? Is there a way besides tethering? I have the ability to and I enjoy shooting tethered, but that is not practical for all applications.

Don't know, never shot tethered.
When I shoot RAW, I presume that what I will get is a step better than what the screen shows me, with the ability to adjust exposure +/- more.

 

[mrca]

If your space can be made pretty dark, a roll of white seamless can be captured all the way from pure white to black if you have the space, ie subject 6-8' minimum from background so you can keep spill of lights off the bg. Or a thunder gray can be lit to give pure white yet easier to make black if some ambient or spill from lights. Couple problems with sheets is wrinkles, and if over a window, light can come threw. Jules, my bust of Julius Caesar has a nose so you can work on positioning your lights to get the basic positioning of butterfly, loop, rembrant and split. When Jules is on a wooden stool he is nearly spot on where most people are when I place the posing stool at it's lowest level. This enables me to set all the lights before subject arrives. Might do some fine tuning but with 5 -7 lights, it saves lots of time over having subject sitting there while you mess around positioning and adjusting power on the lights.

 

[TCampbell]

I don't know about the D850 body specifically ... but most Nikon bodies do not support "exposure simulation" in live-view mode. The one exception I know of is the D810a (and not the D810 "non-A") where they DO support exposure simulation.

I learned this the hard way when a school camera club came out to the observatory hoping to learn how to take images (specifically lunar exposures) through the big telescope. The instructor had a Nikon ... so nearly all students *also* had a Nikon at his recommendation (every astrophotographer I know who uses a DSLR uses a Canon ... so this was the first time we had ever connected a Nikon body to the telescope). What they got was a big white "blob" (that would be the moon) in the middle of a black background. Focusing would change the size of the blob ... but it was always a blob. We couldn't get any contrast on the moon to refine focus (it was really quite a challenge). I did some digging and that's when I learned that while Sony & Canon have the feature ... few Nikon bodies have it.

That means they are automatically brightening or dimming the live-view screen to help you with framing & focus but NOT with exposure. What made this impractical for the moon was that the camera was trying to brighten the display because it saw all the black background sky and assumed that meant it was under-exposed. Use your light-meter or histogram to get a better estimate of exposure.

 

[smoke665]

@Nwcid Even though you're saving as RAW file, the camera creates a JPG preview, that's saved in the sidecar. That JPG is created based on the specific manufacturer's algorithms to create the "ideal" image. Even more strange when you import the RAW file into Lr, the first preview you see in Library is that camera created JPG, however the minute you click on the Develop Pane, it changes to the JPG preview created by Lr. If you pay attention, you can see the shift.

On the K1MII live view is a real PITA in studio. In any of the program modes, the live view screen is bright even in the darkened studio. However in manual mode, the screen is WYSIWG, except when you half push the shutter to focus, then as long as the finger remains on the shutter, the screen will stay bright. Bulb mode is one click the other side of Manual, so I rotate to Bulb, compose (and focus if using manual focus), rotate back to M and shoot. Otherwise I just find it easier to use the viewfinder.

So when shooting in RAW how do you know your lighting is doing what you want? Not sure what you mean by "doing what your want" are you referring to placement or exposure. If it's placement you might be at a disadvantage unless your flash has a modeling light so you can actually see one by one, where your light is pointed. Two ways around that 1) shoot individual shots with each light and adjust or 2) I've seen people rig up small LED pointing lights. As to exposure it's about learning to use and trust your incident meter. I meter individual lights to the setting I want, then do a combined meter reading for exposure. I rarely need to adjust much if any on exposure. A test shot and a peek at the histogram tells me where I'm at. Tethering is nice, but I have two left feet, and constantly moving around. I have this great fear of being on the floor with $$$$ of equipment around me, plus there's that irritating lag time between shots while it transfers. For product or still life's I'll use tethering.

As to background, as MRCA noted Thunder Gray is really hard to beat. It can be anything from white to black to any color in between with the use of gels. If you haven't seen it, check out - Dean Collins Chromzones it can help you regardless of background material. I have an assortment of different materials that I also use, but in addition to the wrinkles mentioned, unless you keep it OOF you'll pick up the weave pattern, and differences in color.

Always interested in DIY projects, post up some pictures of your background rack.

 

[Nwcid]

I don't know about the D850 body specifically ... but most Nikon bodies do not support "exposure simulation" in live-view mode. The one exception I know of is the D810a (and not the D810 "non-A") where they DO support exposure simulation.

I learned this the hard way when a school camera club came out to the observatory hoping to learn how to take images (specifically lunar exposures) through the big telescope. The instructor had a Nikon ... so nearly all students *also* had a Nikon at his recommendation (every astrophotographer I know who uses a DSLR uses a Canon ... so this was the first time we had ever connected a Nikon body to the telescope). What they got was a big white "blob" (that would be the moon) in the middle of a black background. Focusing would change the size of the blob ... but it was always a blob. We couldn't get any contrast on the moon to refine focus (it was really quite a challenge). I did some digging and that's when I learned that while Sony & Canon have the feature ... few Nikon bodies have it.

That means they are automatically brightening or dimming the live-view screen to help you with framing & focus but NOT with exposure. What made this impractical for the moon was that the camera was trying to brighten the display because it saw all the black background sky and assumed that meant it was under-exposed. Use your light-meter or histogram to get a better estimate of exposure.

Thank you. I rarely use live-view, when I do it is in places it is impossible/impractical to use the view finder.

 

[Nwcid]

So when shooting in RAW how do you know your lighting is doing what you want? Not sure what you mean by "doing what your want" are you referring to placement or exposure.

Exposure.

When I shoot tethered, I see the RAW image come up and rarely do I have to/want to change my exposure. When I am shooting untethered, the image on the preview screen appeared to be a correct exposure. When I moved into LR, my RAW images were often at least a full stop under exposed.

Tethering my not stay in my future, but as I practice it makes it very easy to see the outcome quickly.

 

[smoke665]

When I am shooting untethered, the image on the preview screen appeared to be a correct exposure. When I moved into LR, my RAW images were often at least a full stop under

When you say it appeared to be a correct exposure, are you basing that on the histogram, or how the image appears on the screen? Just to be clear you are metering your lights with an incident meter??? The only clue to a good exposure in camera is a look at the histogram. If it's good then so is the exposure.

 

[Nwcid]

When I am shooting untethered, the image on the preview screen appeared to be a correct exposure. When I moved into LR, my RAW images were often at least a full stop under

When you say it appeared to be a correct exposure, are you basing that on the histogram, or how the image appears on the screen? Just to be clear you are metering your lights with an incident meter??? The only clue to a good exposure in camera is a look at the histogram. If it's good then so is the exposure.

Appeared correct based on the displayed image. I am not using a meter. I am starting to learn more about histogram.

I know the camera has to make a jpg to display, it is just frustrating that the image shown can be so far off of the actual RAW file.

 

[smoke665]

When I am shooting untethered, the image on the preview screen appeared to be a correct exposure. When I moved into LR, my RAW images were often at least a full stop under

When you say it appeared to be a correct exposure, are you basing that on the histogram, or how the image appears on the screen? Just to be clear you are metering your lights with an incident meter??? The only clue to a good exposure in camera is a look at the histogram. If it's good then so is the exposure.

Appeared correct based on the displayed image. I am not using a meter. I am starting to learn more about histogram.

I know the camera has to make a jpg to display, it is just frustrating that the image shown can be so far off of the actual RAW file.

Okay now I understand the source of your frustration. Yes the JPEG is the "manufacture's" attempt to fix your exposure whether you like it or not. You're making it double difficult on yourself by not using an incident meter to read the flash, or a histogram to judge the exposure.

Trust me I've been there on guessing at flash settings it isn't easy. The Sekonic L308 is a solid no frills meter that is easy to use and reads both incident and reflective. New they run around $200 SekonicL-308S-U Flashmate Light Meter but they can be found used for eBay for around $75. They are tough, little buggers and seldom wear out.

While there is no good or bad histogram they are a visual representation of the data you've collected in your file, and can tell you what you've clipped. They aren't hard to understand and combined with an incident meter will give you a spot on exposure. https://photographylife.com/understanding-histograms-in-photography