How to get No-shadow, No-highlight smooth lighting outdoor

[k.udhay]

Hi,

I was going through this website and I want to reproduce such images with my family:

Family

I noticed few things there:
1. Almost zero shadow at the vicinity of the subject(s)
2. And no (or very less) highlights at their nose tip, forehead, cheeks etc.
3. Most pics. look back lit by sun.

How would the photographer have achieved this combination? What kind of modifiers would you recommend me to get this lighting?

P.s. - Few photographers recommend to have some shadows in the subjects to bring reality. However, I personally like the type of pictures as in the link.

 

[smoke665]

Fill, baby fill!!! Either supplemental light from a strobe or large reflector.

 

[Frank F.]

I would say huge reflectors, quite possibly bright white and a portable strobe with a softbox to add more blue light to the setting sun warm tones

 

[Braineack]

They are shooting into the sun with a good sensor -- there is no supplemental lighting in these.

I've achieved the exact same here and here.

subject in full shade or overcast; exposed for subject. no direct light on them, so no shadows.

 

[k.udhay]

They are shooting into the sun with a good sensor -- there is no supplemental lighting in these.

I've achieved the exact same here and here.

subject in full shade or overcast; exposed for subject. no direct light on them, so no shadows.

Awesome pics. I have few questions, if you don't mind:
1. // into the sun with a good sensor// - Do you mean camera in-built metering sensor? If so, which metering mode do you reckon?
2. Whats the ISO no. you have used? I see no noise in your images - Desperately need some advice on this topic.
3. Even this place seems full of shadow - But still there is one side more lit - Because of water bouncing some light? [DSC_7332]


P.s. - I think the second ink you gave is not working.

 

[Designer]

Hi,

I was going through this website and I want to reproduce such images with my family:

Family

I noticed few things there:
1. Almost zero shadow at the vicinity of the subject(s)
2. And no (or very less) highlights at their nose tip, forehead, cheeks etc.
3. Most pics. look back lit by sun.

How would the photographer have achieved this combination? What kind of modifiers would you recommend me to get this lighting?

P.s. - Few photographers recommend to have some shadows in the subjects to bring reality. However, I personally like the type of pictures as in the link.

1. All the subjects appear to be in the shade or under an overcast sky.
2. All the examples need fill light.
3. Some are, but see #1 & #2.
4. No auxiliary lighting was used, so no modifiers were used either. I would recommend fill flash. Considering the settings shown, a flash is all you would need, no modifier needed, IMO.

Note: Fill flash is not harsh. Use just enough to counteract the shadows. Ideally, you would see some shadows, but they would not be distracting. You will see some shadows in the eye sockets and under noses and chins, but you should still see people's eyes even on a very bright day.

Also; the family groups were framed quite loose, meaning the photographer could crop most of them a bit tighter, to better effect. I don't mean to imply they should be cropped right down to the subject, but a bit tighter would be good.

 

[tecboy]

Shoot early in the morning or late in the evening. The shadows don't get harsh around these times.

 

[k.udhay]

Thank you, Designer and tecboy. I am trying out this with my friends this weekend. Will post the results here.

 

[Derrel]

Hi,

I was going through this website and I want to reproduce such images with my family:

Family

I noticed few things there:
1. Almost zero shadow at the vicinity of the subject(s)
2. And no (or very less) highlights at their nose tip, forehead, cheeks etc.
3. Most pics. look back lit by sun.

How would the photographer have achieved this combination? What kind of modifiers would you recommend me to get this lighting?

P.s. - Few photographers recommend to have some shadows in the subjects to bring reality. However, I personally like the type of pictures as in the link.

The photographer appears to have applied a HUGE amount of software fill-light, and removed all traces of shadowing, through her use of software, to the point that most of her shots look very unnaturally flat and boring. This is a horribe rendering of backlighting. But these days many people would like that light from nowhere, light from everywhere look.

YES, most of these are backlighted, and there's not much sense of any predominant direction of the light. The type of lighting she's using is what many call "open shade"...shade that's found in open areas, and where the sun does not directly strike the people, nor does it model their faces and limbs. This type of lighting occurs in the morning and late afternoons and early evnings, every day. I personally like this type of lighting, but I prefer that there be some shadows allowed to remain, and to have a deeper, crisper D-max on the blacks, using a lot less digital fill lighting.

She's cranked in wayyyyy too much digital fill lighting, in my opinion.

 

[fmw]

Shoot under an overcast sky. The sunlight arriving through overcast is the utlitmate soft box. Simple as that.

 

[k.udhay]

Hi,

I was going through this website and I want to reproduce such images with my family:

Family

I noticed few things there:
1. Almost zero shadow at the vicinity of the subject(s)
2. And no (or very less) highlights at their nose tip, forehead, cheeks etc.
3. Most pics. look back lit by sun.

How would the photographer have achieved this combination? What kind of modifiers would you recommend me to get this lighting?

P.s. - Few photographers recommend to have some shadows in the subjects to bring reality. However, I personally like the type of pictures as in the link.

The photographer appears to have applied a HUGE amount of software fill-light, and removed all traces of shadowing, through her use of software, to the point that most of her shots look very unnaturally flat and boring. This is a horribe rendering of backlighting. But these days many people would like that light from nowhere, light from everywhere look.

YES, most of these are backlighted, and there's not much sense of any predominant direction of the light. The type of lighting she's using is what many call "open shade"...shade that's found in open areas, and where the sun does not directly strike the people, nor does it model their faces and limbs. This type of lighting occurs in the morning and late afternoons and early evnings, every day. I personally like this type of lighting, but I prefer that there be some shadows allowed to remain, and to have a deeper, crisper D-max on the blacks, using a lot less digital fill lighting.

She's cranked in wayyyyy too much digital fill lighting, in my opinion.

Thanks Derrel.

 

[chuasam]

Open Shade or Golden Hour...also I did the same kinda look making use of the smoke from the nearby forest fires.

 

[k.udhay]

I tried an open shade with slight natural backlight and bokeh to get this:
DSC_0565.NEF

Do I always get haze like this - I could get rid of this by moving my black slider in photoshop - However, would like to know if there is a way eliminating this at camera level.

I am happy with the exposure I got in the subject's face. Still, I feel there is something missing. I am desperate to take this to the next level. Hence request your comments pl.

Camera settings for the attached pic.: -
Nikon D3200 (Cropped sensor DSLR)
f/1.8
1/160 second
ISO 200
50 mm prime lens

Edit - Spelling mistake corrected

 

[k.udhay]

Open Shade or Golden Hour...also I did the same kinda look making use of the smoke from the nearby forest fires.

Sounds interesting. Can you give link to your pics. pl.?