Family Portrait Lighting Feedback Requested

[Bgagnon127]

Hi All,
I setup this portrait sitting for my church directory and I'm pretty happy with the way the photo's came out. One thing that really stands out to me that is disappointing is that the key light doesn't look as soft as I would like and is too concentrated in the middle of the faces/foreheads, then falls off too much to the sides of the face. I was using a 32"x24" softbox and had it positioned 45 degrees off camera left slightly above eye level. Know I understand the closer to subject the light is the softer it will appear, but I had it about 6-8 feet from the subject to create space for people to safely walk through, and I wanted it to have a wide enough spread so that a family of 5 or more would still have even light on them.


Any suggestions on how to soften the light but keep a wide spread for larger family sittings? Should I just add another key light and move them both closer?

 

[Patrice]

I think you hit the nail on the head when you identify your key light as a problem. To have it that far away from the subjects it will have to be a lot bigger for it to stay 'soft'.

If you can't get a bigger light you might try bouncing it off a large white surface such a large piece of foam board or a large white cloth stretched tight over a frame. You'll need more power though.

Specialists in this field should join in shortly.

 

[Bgagnon127]

I think you hit the nail on the head when you identify your key light as a problem. To have it that far away from the subjects it will have to be a lot bigger for it to stay 'soft'.

If you can't get a bigger light you might try bouncing it off a large white surface such a large piece of foam board or a large white cloth stretched tight over a frame. You'll need more power though.

Specialists in this field should join in shortly.

Thanks for the comment Patrice. That helps reassure me that my thinking is in the proper direction.

 

[Derrel]

Your hair lighting is spectacular--just simply lovely!

You sure didn't do the young mother in the above photo any favors by angling her husband's shoulders,and then presenting her square-shouldered to the camera. You visually slimmed him down and made him look more active and dynamic, and made the mother look broad-shouldered and dumpy. You posed the husband well, but the woman poorly; if they would have been posed similarly, you would have made her look slimmer, prettier, and more-feminine. Had you posed her at an angle to the lens, and positioned him broad-shouldered it would have been better. Two easy options: angle the man and the woman's shoulders the SAME direction and have them facing the same way OR have him face one way, her the other way, both with shoulders angled, and then put grandma in the same place, only elevate her head at least another 6 to 8 inches. She's far too low in the frame,and she is "pulling down" the composition, and because of that, you do not have adequate head space at the top of the man and wife; if they wanted an 8x10 of this, the cropping is far too tight.

A 32x24 inch softbox is exceedingly small for a group of five people. Even a 36 x48 inch softbox is too small in a small shooting area. 32x24 is simply far,far too small for a group of people. I would MUCH rather have a 20 to 22 inch parabolic reflector with a wide-beam 65 degree spread, and a mylar diffuser than a tiny softbox like that.

 

[kundalini]

Good points: Everybody is happy. The vertical distance between Mom and Dad is spot on, her eyes are level with his mouth and Grandma's head position "would" be filling the gap were she not so low in the frame.

Take the lighting info from Derrel as you like (and he is right about Mom's pose), but this is what I see as the deficit ....... positioning. With group photos, think about the pyramids and their form. Mom & Dad need to be sitting with the same difference in height ans adjusted per Derrel's suggestion for Mom. Grandma could be seated to the left of Dad's head position and Baby filling in the gap between Mom and Dad, but at a height that her/his eyes are level with Grandmas's mouth. Does that make sense? You're staggering heads on a gentle slope downwards. Eye level with mouth. If Grandma is the matriarch, then perhaps she should be at the top of the pymarid. Regardless, do not have totem poles (stacking heads).

Another thing.... Mom needs to cover her shoulders. Too much skin showing in an unflattering way.

In situations like this, I think flat lighting is okay. After all, the subjects want to see themselves with their family. If you have access to a boom arm, I would try a setup that has the key light on lens axis just out of frame at ~45° angle and a white reflector underneath to reduce the shadows (falloff) from the key light. Whatever you do, try to keep the hairlight as you have. It is nice.

 

[Kerbouchard]

Your hair lighting is spectacular--just simply lovely!

You sure didn't do the young mother in the above photo any favors by angling her husband's shoulders,and then presenting her square-shouldered to the camera. You visually slimmed him down and made him look more active and dynamic, and made the mother look broad-shouldered and dumpy. You posed the husband well, but the woman poorly; if they would have been posed similarly, you would have made her look slimmer, prettier, and more-feminine. Had you posed her at an angle to the lens, and positioned him broad-shouldered it would have been better. Two easy options: angle the man and the woman's shoulders the SAME direction and have them facing the same way OR have him face one way, her the other way, both with shoulders angled, and then put grandma in the same place, only elevate her head at least another 6 to 8 inches. She's far too low in the frame,and she is "pulling down" the composition, and because of that, you do not have adequate head space at the top of the man and wife; if they wanted an 8x10 of this, the cropping is far too tight.

A 32x24 inch softbox is exceedingly small for a group of five people. Even a 36 x48 inch softbox is too small in a small shooting area. 32x24 is simply far,far too small for a group of people. I would MUCH rather have a 20 to 22 inch parabolic reflector with a wide-beam 65 degree spread, and a mylar diffuser than a tiny softbox like that.

Yeah, pretty much what he said, minus the angling the shoulders the same direction. I don't think that would have worked at all. I would have turned the husband a bit more broad to the camera, instructed the wife to place her weight on her back foot, stand at a 45 degree angle, and move a bit to the right. I would have then moved grandma and kid up a bit.

Another thing is the wardrobe. Grandma and Mom would look a lot more flattering wearing longsleave shirts. It is rarely a good idea for a heavier woman or an older woman to wear sleavless or shortsleaves during a photo shoot.

I don't have any problem with your lighting, although I would agree the fill light is a bit hot. Mostly, the problems with this shot are all wardrobe and posing.

 

[Bgagnon127]

Your hair lighting is spectacular--just simply lovely!

You sure didn't do the young mother in the above photo any favors by angling her husband's shoulders,and then presenting her square-shouldered to the camera. You visually slimmed him down and made him look more active and dynamic, and made the mother look broad-shouldered and dumpy. You posed the husband well, but the woman poorly; if they would have been posed similarly, you would have made her look slimmer, prettier, and more-feminine. Had you posed her at an angle to the lens, and positioned him broad-shouldered it would have been better. Two easy options: angle the man and the woman's shoulders the SAME direction and have them facing the same way OR have him face one way, her the other way, both with shoulders angled, and then put grandma in the same place, only elevate her head at least another 6 to 8 inches. She's far too low in the frame,and she is "pulling down" the composition, and because of that, you do not have adequate head space at the top of the man and wife; if they wanted an 8x10 of this, the cropping is far too tight.

A 32x24 inch softbox is exceedingly small for a group of five people. Even a 36 x48 inch softbox is too small in a small shooting area. 32x24 is simply far,far too small for a group of people. I would MUCH rather have a 20 to 22 inch parabolic reflector with a wide-beam 65 degree spread, and a mylar diffuser than a tiny softbox like that.

Good points: Everybody is happy. The vertical distance between Mom and Dad is spot on, her eyes are level with his mouth and Grandma's head position "would" be filling the gap were she not so low in the frame.

Take the lighting info from Derrel as you like (and he is right about Mom's pose), but this is what I see as the deficit ....... positioning. With group photos, think about the pyramids and their form. Mom & Dad need to be sitting with the same difference in height ans adjusted per Derrel's suggestion for Mom. Grandma could be seated to the left of Dad's head position and Baby filling in the gap between Mom and Dad, but at a height that her/his eyes are level with Grandmas's mouth. Does that make sense? You're staggering heads on a gentle slope downwards. Eye level with mouth. If Grandma is the matriarch, then perhaps she should be at the top of the pymarid. Regardless, do not have totem poles (stacking heads).

Another thing.... Mom needs to cover her shoulders. Too much skin showing in an unflattering way.

In situations like this, I think flat lighting is okay. After all, the subjects want to see themselves with their family. If you have access to a boom arm, I would try a setup that has the key light on lens axis just out of frame at ~45° angle and a white reflector underneath to reduce the shadows (falloff) from the key light. Whatever you do, try to keep the hairlight as you have. It is nice.

Your hair lighting is spectacular--just simply lovely!

You sure didn't do the young mother in the above photo any favors by angling her husband's shoulders,and then presenting her square-shouldered to the camera. You visually slimmed him down and made him look more active and dynamic, and made the mother look broad-shouldered and dumpy. You posed the husband well, but the woman poorly; if they would have been posed similarly, you would have made her look slimmer, prettier, and more-feminine. Had you posed her at an angle to the lens, and positioned him broad-shouldered it would have been better. Two easy options: angle the man and the woman's shoulders the SAME direction and have them facing the same way OR have him face one way, her the other way, both with shoulders angled, and then put grandma in the same place, only elevate her head at least another 6 to 8 inches. She's far too low in the frame,and she is "pulling down" the composition, and because of that, you do not have adequate head space at the top of the man and wife; if they wanted an 8x10 of this, the cropping is far too tight.

A 32x24 inch softbox is exceedingly small for a group of five people. Even a 36 x48 inch softbox is too small in a small shooting area. 32x24 is simply far,far too small for a group of people. I would MUCH rather have a 20 to 22 inch parabolic reflector with a wide-beam 65 degree spread, and a mylar diffuser than a tiny softbox like that.

Yeah, pretty much what he said, minus the angling the shoulders the same direction. I don't think that would have worked at all. I would have turned the husband a bit more broad to the camera, instructed the wife to place her weight on her back foot, stand at a 45 degree angle, and move a bit to the right. I would have then moved grandma and kid up a bit.

Another thing is the wardrobe. Grandma and Mom would look a lot more flattering wearing longsleave shirts. It is rarely a good idea for a heavier woman or an older woman to wear sleavless or shortsleaves during a photo shoot.

I don't have any problem with your lighting, although I would agree the fill light is a bit hot. Mostly, the problems with this shot are all wardrobe and posing.

Very good points but actually this was a quick snapshot at the end of the session of me and my family so I wasn't posing us (I might have made some of the posing mistakes 2 months ago but I'm learning to pose myself to understand how to direct people as you have already mentioned . I was looking more for feedback on how to soften that key light but I think I understand, just need a bigger light source. Thanks for the feedback.

 

[kundalini]

I was looking more for feedback on how to soften that key light but I think I understand, just need a bigger light source. Thanks for the feedback.

Well, your biggest issue is the distance from main light to subject. That being said, I witnessed my parents getting their portraits done recently as a sustaining donor for the local EMS services for their church directory. The photographer was using two AB400 ~15' from the subjects bounced thru shoot-through umbrellas and ~30° each side of the camera and ~8' vertical. Camera to subject was ~8'. TBH, this is probably a setup that would work for you. It was rather flat lighting, but not in a bad way. My folks were well lit and looked pretty good.

 

[Bgagnon127]

I was looking more for feedback on how to soften that key light but I think I understand, just need a bigger light source. Thanks for the feedback.

Well, your biggest issue is the distance from main light to subject. That being said, I witnessed my parents getting their portraits done recently as a sustaining donor for the local EMS services for their church directory. The photographer was using two AB400 ~15' from the subjects bounced thru shoot-through umbrellas and ~30° each side of the camera and ~8' vertical. Camera to subject was ~8'. TBH, this is probably a setup that would work for you. It was rather flat lighting, but not in a bad way. My folks were well lit and looked pretty good.

Any idea what size umbrellas? Also I did a search for AB400 and nothing came up, do you have a link?

 

[Destin]

I was looking more for feedback on how to soften that key light but I think I understand, just need a bigger light source. Thanks for the feedback.

Well, your biggest issue is the distance from main light to subject. That being said, I witnessed my parents getting their portraits done recently as a sustaining donor for the local EMS services for their church directory. The photographer was using two AB400 ~15' from the subjects bounced thru shoot-through umbrellas and ~30° each side of the camera and ~8' vertical. Camera to subject was ~8'. TBH, this is probably a setup that would work for you. It was rather flat lighting, but not in a bad way. My folks were well lit and looked pretty good.

Any idea what size umbrellas? Also I did a search for AB400 and nothing came up, do you have a link?

AB= Alien Bees.

That should help. Figured i'd chime in.