portrait help

[Skyeg]

im a student doing cast portriats for a low budget school production. they want a white background and im just wondering what is usualy done to eliminte a shadow from the white background? right now i have a Nikon N80, coolpix 5700 and an SB-80 DX what kind of lights should i use for portraits on a budget? thanks for any advice you can give me

 

[abonecronedone]

The typical tip is overexposing the background to get a pure white.

 

[Skyeg]

would that get rid of shadows?

 

[ksmattfish]

Hide a light on the floor behind your subject, or use an overhead spot. It illuminates the the back drop. As said above, lighting should be arranged so that in comparison to proper exposure of your subject, the back ground should be overexposed.

 

[Big Mike]

Have the light source above the subject and don't put him/her too close to the back ground. If you can see the shadow, try telling the subject to step away from the background so that the shadow is lower and out of the frame.

 

[PortraitMan]

Forgive me if this answer is way too simple for you, it's just that I'm thinking if these are head shots the problem is really easy. Considering the flash you have is only one on camera source, can you use a sync cord so that you can hold your flash directly above your camera about 18"? You see, that throws the light down in a flattering modeling on your subject while also casting the shadow directly behind and below your subject where you'll never see it. This assumes it's a relative close-up on your subject and that there's a white or light colored wall behind them. The idea with overexposing your background isn't bad, this just may be simpler to calculate as getting too bright of a background will haze your portrait.

 

[Josh]

What PortraitMan is discribing is called butterfly (or galmor) lighting and would be the cheepest (and most failproof) way for you to go. If you want to have a true white background you need to over expose it by one stop (two if it is a reflective meater). This will not beed into the image unless you overexpose more than that.

You could mount your flash with a light stand (they make adapters for this but packing tape works in a pinch) or use a strobe-o-frame. If you place a reflecor on a posing table in front of them you can fill in some of the shadow under the chin.

Have fun

 

[Skyeg]

what kind of meter is in a Nikon N80? is it the reflective type or incident?

 

[photoman]

Its defenetly reflective because it is reading the light bouncing off the subject.

An incondesent light meter reads the light that if falling onto a subject (put it where the subject is and point it twards the camera)

You will probably want a gray card for the camera because everything it sees it wants to make grey so if you point it at a white background and dont overexpose the image then your background will be grey instead of white.

 

[PortraitMan]

In most cases you're right, Photoman. However, if these are close-ups where the subject fills the majority of the frame, (not wearing white like a bride of course), then the in-camera meter on most cameras will register that beautiful 18 percent grey which will be a good reading for most skin tones. No matter what, the white background will not be truly white looking unless it receives one stop more light than the subject, but in most cases it will appear by contrast to the subject as white enough to be acceptable.

-Tom.

 

[Skyeg]

thanks everyone, you have all been very helpful

 

[ksmattfish]

Light skinned folks are zone 6 (1 stop over middle gray), and most dark skinned folks are zone 5 (middle gray). Very, very dark (I mean living right on the equator dark) skinned folks approach zone 4 (one stop under middle gray). If you are metering off a black guy's face, use the recommended reading; if you are metering off a white guy's face overexpose one stop.

Compare your background reading to middle gray. Pure white is 4 or 5 stops brighter than middle gray.

At least that's how it should work. Now I'm going to talk about something the camera industry doesn't want you to know. Many in-camera meters don't measure middle gray, they measure zone 6 (one stop brighter than middle gray) I've heard this called the "K factor". I don't know why it's called that. It occurs more often in entry level SLRs and point-n-shoots than fancier, pro-model cams.

The reason is that the industry demographics indicate that most cameras are used to shoot face/head portraits of people the camera owner knows, and whites and light skinned asians buy more cameras. So they set the meter to measure one stop over middle gray, because if you meter off a white guy's face for middle grey, you'll be underexposing one stop.

The only way to know for sure if your camera is set this way, because your camera manufacturer sure isn't going to admit this, is to compare your in-camera readings to the reading made by a hand held meter.

This is the kind of thing you got to hope has been done away with, but it wouldn't surprise me if it's still going on. I use so many different cameras that I went to a hand held meter many years ago, and don't pay much attention to in-camera meters. So I don't know what's up these days. When I compare most of my 60s, 70s, and 80s in-camera meters to my hand held model, they all overexpose by about a stop.

Now I suppose I should make the disclaimer that I'm a cynic when it comes to the way folks treat each other. Some people might explain this whole thing as the camera manufacturers just wanting to make sure you get details in your shadows, but I've heard this from three completely different sources, and none of them were internet. I believe it, but like I said, I'm a cynic.

 

[Skyeg]

wow...that kinda freaked me out. if someone (me!) doesnt have a handeld meter is there another way they could tell? do you think older cameras would be like that? or would they more likly meter middle grey?

 

[Josh]

Don't let it scare you too much. Negative film is very forgiving; if you are worried about it, and don't have a handheld meter, then just over expose a bit. It is allways good to air on the side of over than under. Under exposure will screw you up, over you may not even notice =)

If you are realy worried, try film with higher exposure lattetude. Lets see, for theater B&W is the comon. For the most lattetude with B&W try Ilford XP-2; it is a c-41 prosses, lower contrast (good for portraits), higher lattetude (about 2 stops over or under) film. It will also give you less grain than other 400 asa films. Just make sure that you don't print it with a color prossesor. Take it to a lab that does B&W, it needs to be printed on B&W paper. And make sure that they don't divelop the film with B&W cemistry, it needs a c-41 prosses for best results. Most labs will tell you "oh ya this stuff looks grait printed on a color prossesor." Don't beleve them, there lying, cuz they don't have a B&W printer =)

Cheers
Josh

 

[ksmattfish]

Well, after some internet research on the K-factor, I think I'm ready to admit that my story about racism in the camera industry is probably just a bizarre conspiracy theory that I bought into (like I said, I'm a cynic, and sometimes a sucker).

The K-factor is how far off of middle gray (18% gray) that a meter actually measures. We are all taught that our meters measure middle gray, but apparently this isn't often the case. Most meters measure 10% to 12% gray, and this should be listed in the small print of your camera or meter manual. Apparently measuring for 18% gray is great for graphics work, but most photographic scenes average out to a reflectance of 9% to 12% gray, and if you actually expose for 18% gray then you'll underexpose the shadows.

I worked in a lab/camera store for 3.5 years, and after dealing with the crappy customer/dealer service of Kodak, Canon, and Nikon I was ready to believe the worst.