Continuous light beginner

[jcdeboever]

I got my set up today and of course, two bulbs were broken. What a PITA it is to assemble the Impact Octabox. I like it but don't care for the assembly. Anyway.... Setup OCtabox 9 (7 on), Fujifilm XPro2, 60mm macro. 1/85s @ f/5.6, ISO 600.

My goal tonight is the position of the light as it's refected on the subject, NOT FOCUS, COMP, ETC. Not that I don't need help in these areas, I prefer to focus in brackets for learning. Please don't tell me the obvious mistakes outside of lighting, it only confuses me. I am only focused the applied light of the subject, thank you for your patience.

My secondary goal is to see if my chosen position sculpted her lower jaw and offered a reasonable artistic exposure for a beginner with continuous light. Probably project suggestions so I can assimilate.

My ultimate goal is to learn ways of manipulating the light to achieve artistic renders. Probably project suggestions so I can assimilate.

I have been reading up on this in Hedgcoe books, video's and the helpful diagrams from @Braineack , @DanOstergren, @Derrel. Verbal direction from @Gary A, progressive advance work @smoke665 ,@ronlane, and @JonA_CT . I think my vertical position of light may be off. I know other things can be wrong as well, so please advise.

1. The catch lights are lost a little in location of the eye?

2. If you notice an advance feature of the subject, tips to dial that in... I did notice the wonderful structure in the shadows of my granddaughters left side of her mouth, i had to move the light a few times..... not easy with a six year old, let me tell you.

3. Please advise in general of ways to improve the photo, approach, etc. I am open to software but be specific if you feel it's important, I use open source software and may have to google your advise as it relates to GIMP, and I will post a result. It is important to me as I try to get right in camera.

Thank you in advance, y'all are always so helpful. I will also post an artistic shot later that may offer greater opportunity for my improvement.

 

[Rick50]

Just my opinion JC but I think the light is slightly too far back (of her). The shadow below the nose looks like it's extended all the way down the chin. I think it's actually the shadow off the mouth.
The face and nose shadows seems a tad hard but this may be what you want.
Softer shadows are created by a larger light.
This looks like a single light source which is why the hair on her left side blends into the sofa with no separation. This may also be what you prefer. Adding a reflector or second hair light would provide separation.
But for the most part I like the light on her as well as the pose. The background is another story but I know thats for later.

 

[tirediron]

Good points from Rick; I would suggest lowering the light a bit and moving it a little closer to lens axis.

 

[Derrel]

The height of the main light looks good; any higher, and the catchlights would be lost on the eyeballs. The nose shadow is going downward, a little bit, which is generally good. I LIKE that I can see definition in the eyeballs themselves, that they are not just inky-black orbs. I think you might have too much light hitting the chair behind her, and the lower left corner where her hands are has slid to a gray-ish, under-lighted tonal value that is not particularly flattering.

I dunno...I LIKE this type of higher-ratio lighting on Black & White renditions of people. My gut feeling is that the light itself is just a little bit too close to her for the optimal light; I can see the inverse square law at work here...the highlights on camera left are very,very bright, while a few inches away, the light falls off to much darker values. The right hand side is inky black. Which adds drama, right?

I think this is a good facial character study, in that it literally shows her, and the shape of her face,nose,eye sockets,lips,etc. I think the lighting is basically workable. Had the setting been less-busy, like in front of a plain backdrop, or a lower chair without back, it'd really have a lot of three-dimensional impact.

I dunno...this is a perfectly fine way to light a person. I can't offer up too much analysis that isn't just basic comments like, to maybe move the light father away; or perhaps comment to say maybe think about reflector fill light, but both those comments would change the picture, change the lighting. This "is what it is"...it's a specific look, one that's been around for a long, long time. These days many people are afraid of using this type of lighting setup, but I think it's perfectly usable, especially for Black & White portraits. I've lighted this way before...I kind of like the spartan quality it gives.

 

[ronlane]

Rick, John and Derrel have given you a lot of suggestions to work on, they do it to me as well. They all make valid points of things to try and decide what you like best.

Do you have the light pointed straight at her? Try feathering it in front of her and you will get a little bit more wrap around the face and her left shoulder, giving some more separation. And it may bring down the brightness of the hands and jeans just a little. By doing this, it will make the face more of a focal point. (You could also burn these areas just a little in post)

 

[jcdeboever]

Just my opinion JC but I think the light is slightly too far back (of her). The shadow below the nose looks like it's extended all the way down the chin. I think it's actually the shadow off the mouth.
The face and nose shadows seems a tad hard but this may be what you want.
Softer shadows are created by a larger light.
This looks like a single light source which is why the hair on her left side blends into the sofa with no separation. This may also be what you prefer. Adding a reflector or second hair light would provide separation.
But for the most part I like the light on her as well as the pose. The background is another story but I know thats for later.

Thanks Rick. This is what I'm looking for to work on moving forward. I did think about a reflector so I will more than likely use one next time. I could add an internal diffuser to this light, it also shipped with one broken bulb. It was kind of a spur of the moment thing but the 6 year old was busy being a 6 year old so I did have ample time to think, visualize, move, etc.

Good points from Rick; I would suggest lowering the light a bit and moving it a little closer to lens axis.

Thanks John, I need to study that more when during the shoot, move things around more. Probably be way easier with an adult, she was being a 6 year old good ball.

The height of the main light looks good; any higher, and the catchlights would be lost on the eyeballs. The nose shadow is going downward, a little bit, which is generally good. I LIKE that I can see definition in the eyeballs themselves, that they are not just inky-black orbs. I think you might have too much light hitting the chair behind her, and the lower left corner where her hands are has slid to a gray-ish, under-lighted tonal value that is not particularly flattering.

I dunno...I LIKE this type of higher-ratio lighting on Black & White renditions of people. My gut feeling is that the light itself is just a little bit too close to her for the optimal light; I can see the inverse square law at work here...the highlights on camera left are very,very bright, while a few inches away, the light falls off to much darker values. The right hand side is inky black. Which adds drama, right?

I think this is a good facial character study, in that it literally shows her, and the shape of her face,nose,eye sockets,lips,etc. I think the lighting is basically workable. Had the setting been less-busy, like in front of a plain backdrop, or a lower chair without back, it'd really have a lot of three-dimensional impact.

I dunno...this is a perfectly fine way to light a person. I can't offer up too much analysis that isn't just basic comments like, to maybe move the light father away; or perhaps comment to say maybe think about reflector fill light, but both those comments would change the picture, change the lighting. This "is what it is"...it's a specific look, one that's been around for a long, long time. These days many people are afraid of using this type of lighting setup, but I think it's perfectly usable, especially for Black & White portraits. I've lighted this way before...I kind of like the spartan quality it gives.

Thanks Derrel. I see what you mean. That's exactly what I am after. Kids are hard to practice on. Try and get the wife to work with me on some of the points. I am gonna try a little further back and lower. For a 9 bulb unit (8 in it, one broke in shipping), I was rather surprised that it doesn't throw off as much light. But I do like the softness potential.

Rick, John and Derrel have given you a lot of suggestions to work on, they do it to me as well. They all make valid points of things to try and decide what you like best.

Do you have the light pointed straight at her? Try feathering it in front of her and you will get a little bit more wrap around the face and her left shoulder, giving some more separation. And it may bring down the brightness of the hands and jeans just a little. By doing this, it will make the face more of a focal point. (You could also burn these areas just a little in post)

Thanks Ron. I have it about 3 feet away, above her, to her right, 45° angle down at her. Kind of like I do with an umbrella but closer. It is definitely more controllable than an umbrella. It's almost like I could have just lowered it a little. I couldn't really go back any more. Wasn't an ideal spot. This is good direction for further progress.

 

[Derrel]

I looked up the unit I think you bought, this one https://www.amazon.com/Impact-Octacool-9-Fluorescent-Light-Octabox/dp/B005GMVHWM

And have a few observations that I think could help in your practice with it. First off, this metal "bowl" the lights are in looks similar to a 50-degree to 65-degree parabolic reflector, like Speedotron's 11.5-inch model for the last 50 years, a unit I'm very familiar with. If that metal bowl encloses the bulbs, and is placed inside the softbox itself, at close ranges, the edges of the sofbox beam _might_ have more light fall-off than if say, the bulbs were bare (bare meaning reflector-less) and inside the softbox. This is just a guess, not a claim...it's tricky to evaluate a light unit over the internet. But...anyway...

Second observation. I used to work at a studio where we used studio flash heads fitted with 20-inch,metal parabolic reflectors that had a frosted mylar front diffuser panel on the main and fill lights. Since the lights were small, the shadows were rather distinct, since the light sources were small in relation to a single person or to a group of three to ten people. So, setting the _exact,right,precise_ height and placement for the main light was critical. The easiest way was the way we did it: we had roller-base light stands, with easy height adjustment. You are,I think, possibly working with a somewhat similar light unit, with somewhat similar shadow pattern and degree of softness. So I think this suggestion would be the best one I could offer you: rig up a castor-based light stand, one that can easily roll across the floor.

First step is to roughly set the height of the main light, looking for 1) catchlights in the eyes and 2)at what direction and at what angle the nose shadow falls and 3)evaluating the clock position of the main light in relation to the face and pose. Set the height of the main light first, at an approximate angle. Then, literally roll the light in an arc, so that you get the exact type of "reveal" of the face that you want. With a smaller light source, the clock position of the light makes a huge impact on where the shadows fall, and how the nose is revealed, how much of the face falls off into shadows, etc..

Once you get pretty much the rough idea of how high the main needs to be, and at what clock placement in relation to the sitter, then you can "waggle" the light unit on a loose head clamp setting, and refine the angle and the sweep of the light...maybe feather it forward of the face, maybe feather it back toward the wall, whatever...the idea is to "refine and perfect" the placement of the main light's beam.

I'm going to explain this carefully for emphasis: a roller-based light stand that adjusts height FAST and easily, with one, or two big, easy-to-operate clamps or knobs, is the basis for this system of working. A roller-base light stand makes it easy,fast,and workable. You need to be able to literally roll the light through an actual _arc of movement_ on the floor, and actually _watch and see_ the light's effects. This step is the one step that people can not do without a roller-based light stand.

You wanted suggestions to improve your lighting effects with this type of studio light. I just gave you a huge insider tip on how best to light faces with this type of light source. A huge percentage of the success of using a smallish, 16- to 40-inch light is in positioning it "just so", in the _exact_ place where the desired lighting effect is most obvious. The roller-base light stand is the key. Moving the light through a height range, and then an arc, is the secret. The easily height-adjustable, roller- based light stand for the main light is really what this method is based upon.

 

[smoke665]

Thanks Ron. I have it about 3 feet away, above her, to her right, 45° angle down at her. Kind of like I do with an umbrella but closer. It is definitely more controllable than an umbrella

I tried continuous lighting at first and even in close I just couldn't get it to work for me. Maybe you'll gave better success.

As to position, I'm pretty sure you have a head model so pull it out set it on a table in a dark room, light it and start studying the shadows as you change the light around. Don't even need a camera. I spent an evening on my deck with with my AB's set to modeling light, and a couple of foam core reflectors. Once I had a setup "I" liked it was fairly easy to switch to a live model.

For kids I like to position my Octabox center line at just above the forehead, then angle down and at the 7 o'clock-7:30 position. Usually about 4 ft gives me better working room. I n my case I'll adjust the light setting (with your continuous set up you're limited to moving in or out, or changing your f/stop) to give me f/8.0 on the cheek, then use the foam core on the right side to fill in the shadows. I like to stay in the ratio of 2:1 to 3:1, any higher and the shadows seem to dark to me, unless my intent is a Low Key image.

 

[jcdeboever]

@Rick50 , @Derrel , @tirediron , @ronlane

Here is the setup I journaled. These were quick notes

I looked up the unit I think you bought, this one https://www.amazon.com/Impact-Octacool-9-Fluorescent-Light-Octabox/dp/B005GMVHWM

And have a few observations that I think could help in your practice with it. First off, this metal "bowl" the lights are in looks similar to a 50-degree to 65-degree parabolic reflector, like Speedotron's 11.5-inch model for the last 50 years, a unit I'm very familiar with. If that metal bowl encloses the bulbs, and is placed inside the softbox itself, at close ranges, the edges of the sofbox beam _might_ have more light fall-off than if say, the bulbs were bare (bare meaning reflector-less) and inside the softbox. This is just a guess, not a claim...it's tricky to evaluate a light unit over the internet. But...anyway...

Second observation. I used to work at a studio where we used studio flash heads fitted with 20-inch,metal parabolic reflectors that had a frosted mylar front diffuser panel on the main and fill lights. Since the lights were small, the shadows were rather distinct, since the light sources were small in relation to a single person or to a group of three to ten people. So, setting the _exact,right,precise_ height and placement for the main light was critical. The easiest way was the way we did it: we had roller-base light stands, with easy height adjustment. You are,I think, possibly working with a somewhat similar light unit, with somewhat similar shadow pattern and degree of softness. So I think this suggestion would be the best one I could offer you: rig up a castor-based light stand, one that can easily roll across the floor.

First step is to roughly set the height of the main light, looking for 1) catchlights in the eyes and 2)at what direction and at what angle the nose shadow falls and 3)evaluating the clock position of the main light in relation to the face and pose. Set the height of the main light first, at an approximate angle. Then, literally roll the light in an arc, so that you get the exact type of "reveal" of the face that you want. With a smaller light source, the clock position of the light makes a huge impact on where the shadows fall, and how the nose is revealed, how much of the face falls off into shadows, etc..

Once you get pretty much the rough idea of how high the main needs to be, and at what clock placement in relation to the sitter, then you can "waggle" the light unit on a loose head clamp setting, and refine the angle and the sweep of the light...maybe feather it forward of the face, maybe feather it back toward the wall, whatever...the idea is to "refine and perfect" the placement of the main light's beam.

I'm going to explain this carefully for emphasis: a roller-based light stand that adjusts height FAST and easily, with one, or two big, easy-to-operate clamps or knobs, is the basis for this system of working. A roller-base light stand makes it easy,fast,and workable. You need to be able to literally roll the light through an actual _arc of movement_ on the floor, and actually _watch and see_ the light's effects. This step is the one step that people can not do without a roller-based light stand.

You wanted suggestions to improve your lighting effects with this type of studio light. I just gave you a huge insider tip on how best to light faces with this type of light source. A huge percentage of the success of using a smallish, 16- to 40-inch light is in positioning it "just so", in the _exact_ place where the desired lighting effect is most obvious. The roller-base light stand is the key. Moving the light through a height range, and then an arc, is the secret. The easily height-adjustable, roller- based light stand for the main light is really what this method is based upon.

That is the model, I just bought one. Wasn't sure what that metal bowl was, nothing in the instructions on it so I didn't put it on. They do a a interior diffusor you can install over the lights inside but if cuts the light down, so I left it out on first run and made good notes. I will still have to shoot at higher ISO to obtain the shutter speed I need unless I use a faster prime. I shot these at f/5.6, 800 ISO @150s using the 60mm macro. I will look into the roller stands, this sounds ideal and I can probably even make them as I have a ton of scrap to work with and I am proficient at welding. This thing doesn't break down or assemble fast at all, the only negative I see.

The artistic render is what I love about this setup. So I am still not sure what the metal bowl's purpose is, I may have missed your point on it, I apologize, I'm not the sharpest knife in the drawer even if I have tested an above average IQ. I really need to find a patient model, the wife is not even close to that, not to dog her, she just is not wired that way. Kids are kids so not a great choice there. I have a near by friend that is perfect for this but my wife is not fond of him because he always smells like weed, he does but I understand why. He has MS and has a RX for it so I'm not sure what the problem is other than her thinking I'm going to nebulize with him... I may use him for this, he loves to hang out but my house is not setup well for him, we manage when he hangs. I tell the the wife james is coming over and she buys cheetos, that's all the guy eats. Sorry for the ramble...

My question is, are you talking the light with no bowl or diffuser for the roaming action of illumination composition?

define sweep of light for me

 

[jcdeboever]

 

[Rick50]

Love that 2nd shot. One of the things about kids and younger adults is their smooth skin which allows all sorts of hard or soft light. Makes this a lot of fun, heck I'm enjoying it. Keep it up!

 

[Derrel]

The bowl likely sends a good portion of the light forward, and might give a little bit more exposure over say, a 50- to 65-degree area. Without the bowl, it's likely that there's some sideways light that's not directed forward. The bowl's interior finish might also tend to make the light a little bit more specular than without the bowl. The differences might be subtle, and hard to notice at first. I don't know for sure, just basing this on other lights I've used that have the option of being shot with or without a reflector.

The bowl is the "reflector"...it forms the light beam and crates the beam spread, the angle of beam...this is almost always expressed in degrees. 50-degree, 65-degree, and 110-degree beam spread reflectors are the ones I'm most used to using.

The "sweep of the light" is my term for the way the beam spreads across the room. Is it a narrow-beam that hits only a small segment of the person, like a 10-degree honeycomb grid fitted to a 50-degree metal reflector? That modifier combination creates one type of sweep of the light. Is it a 24 x 24 inch softbox? That creates its own type of sweep of the light.

Using a caster base is one way to get to a roller-base light stand. There are casters that are designed to just screw on to the feet of regular light stands.

 

[Derrel]

B&H Photo has an entire web page dedicated to casters that can be quickly fitted to regular 25mm diameter lightstand feet. An Impact brand set is $32.50, or less than the cost of a nice lunch for two at most restaurants.

Impact Casters for Light Stands with 25mm Tubular Leg Ends 1025B

Under the heading of Light Stand Casters and Wheel Sets, B&H has 44 entries: Light Stand Casters & Wheel Sets | B&H Photo Video