C&C Needed for Test Shots

[cherylynne1]

So, last time I asked for C&C, it was suggested that I go back to practicing basic lighting techniques. And I have been. But I feel like I've gone as far as I can go without help, so I'm coming back for another critique.

I'm trying to do the four basic portrait lighting styles here. I really struggled with Rembrandt and split, but I'm not sure if it's because of the shape of the doll's face (she doesn't really have a nose ridge) or if I'm just doing something wrong.

Thank you so much!

1.) Loop

2.) Rembrandt

3.) Split

4.) Butterfly

 

[cauzimme]

You got the Rembrant right no worry, it's just that it's hard to judge based on the doll

 

[cherylynne1]

You got the Rembrant right no worry, it's just that it's hard to judge based on the doll

Thank you, cauzimme! That's what I was hoping, but I hate to be the kind of person that always blames the tools. I wanted to push the triangle of light a bit higher to make sure there would be a catchlight, but then any hint of a shadow by the nose disappeared. I think I could do it with a person, though.

 

[Derrel]

I think you did a good job! This is kind of an interesting exercise, working on such a tiny face! Well-done! I downloaded and looked at the full-size images....that dished-out, missing nose bridge looks like it would be a bugger to work with! Your doll's reflective upper chest area is great for showing the placement of the umbrella main light source!

I'd say you got all four lighting types done pretty well on a challenging type of person.

I can see by the shadow on the split lighting that the majority of the main is coming from just a little bit behind her--but she's so smallllllll that the near-camera side of the umbrella is giving some fill light. Pretty sure that on a full-sized human, and you know, one with an actual nose bridge, that this would look more split, more light/dark. (BTW, I think split lighting is just super-overrated, and sooooo 1930-ish....I've always disliked it.) I think you did a good job on this though, given how small the doll head is, and using an umbrella.

Your loop lighting nose shadow is well-placed, the butterfly shadow does not touch the lip, and I can see by the catchlight right below her chin that the light was centered above the nose.

This exercise might be easier for some people to evaluate, or to do, with a light source that's harder, and smaller, and which throws a LOT more crisp shadow, something like a classic 16-inch, deep bowl reflector with a mylar diffuser over the front, something like that which leaves a pretty deep,dark shadow on the loop light and makes the butterfly shadow really dark under the nose, and makes the Rembrandt under-eye triangle really sharp-edged and super-obvious. Working with an umbrella, and on a smaller face with no real bridge of the nose, I think you completed this exercise very well, using a challenging scenario too.

 

[cherylynne1]

I think you did a good job! This is kind of an interesting exercise, working on such a tiny face! Well-done! I downloaded and looked at the full-size images....that dished-out, missing nose bridge looks like it would be a bugger to work with! Your doll's reflective upper chest area is great for showing the placement of the umbrella main light source!

I'd say you got all four lighting types done pretty well on a challenging type of person.

I can see by the shadow on the split lighting that the majority of the main is coming from just a little bit behind her--but she's so smallllllll that the near-camera side of the umbrella is giving some fill light. Pretty sure that on a full-sized human, and you know, one with an actual nose bridge, that this would look more split, more light/dark. (BTW, I think split lighting is just super-overrated, and sooooo 1930-ish....I've always disliked it.) I think you did a good job on this though, given how small the doll head is, and using an umbrella.

Your loop lighting nose shadow is well-placed, the butterfly shadow does not touch the lip, and I can see by the catchlight right below her chin that the light was centered above the nose.

This exercise might be easier for some people to evaluate, or to do, with a light source that's harder, and smaller, and which throws a LOT more crisp shadow, something like a classic 16-inch, deep bowl reflector with a mylar diffuser over the front, something like that which leaves a pretty deep,dark shadow on the loop light and makes the butterfly shadow really dark under the nose, and makes the Rembrandt under-eye triangle really sharp-edged and super-obvious. Working with an umbrella, and on a smaller face with no real bridge of the nose, I think you completed this exercise very well, using a challenging scenario too.

Thank you so much, Derrel! I know you can always be counted on to tell it like it is, so it means a lot to hear a compliment from you. I agree about the split lighting. It's not something I could ever see myself doing in the real world, but I wanted to know that I could. And it was slightly further behind her than I think it should have been, I agree, because when I pulled it forward I'd start getting that Rembrandt triangle again. Even here, you can see the slightest hint of it. The light just escapes over that non-nose. But at least I feel like I understand the light and what it's doing, which is a big step up from where I used to be.

Thank you again!

 

[tirediron]

Skin's way over-worked; she looks like a plastic doll!

 

[Designer]

You got the Rembrant right no worry, it's just that it's hard to judge based on the doll

When I was in architecture school, the instructor had a styrofoam head that we had to draw several times. It is probably inexpensive, if you can find one.

 

[cherylynne1]

You got the Rembrant right no worry, it's just that it's hard to judge based on the doll

When I was in architecture school, the instructor had a styrofoam head that we had to draw several times. It is probably inexpensive, if you can find one.

I'll have to look into that, thank you for the suggestion!