Lighting setup

[OGsPhotography]

I like that softdrink clamp trick!

My backdrop stand came with some pvc cut to use for clamping, I dont use that pvc clamp with my seamless it is much too small.

 

[OGsPhotography]

PS. Clamps should be part of your kit, woodworking clamps can be had for 20$ a set, dont buy " photo" clamps lol. Resellers selling those for 5$+ a pop should be shot on sight.

 

[smoke665]

PS. Clamps should be part of your kit, woodworking clamps can be had for 20$ a set, dont buy " photo" clamps lol. Resellers selling those for 5$+ a pop should be shot on sight.

I'm even cheaper than that. I have a large assortment of clamps like these. One hand operation, and if you have a Harbor Freight or other type discount tool place you can pick them up anywhere from $.50 to $3 each. When you're a woodworker you can never have enough clamps.

I also have some of these that are ratcheting.

 

[matrosov]

Thanks a lot guys. Definitely getting there.

 

[OGsPhotography]

That is better!
If you want to remove the shadows just have them stand further from BG.

 

[smoke665]

Yes, much better. One of the problems that all hobbyist photographers run into, is there is never a good space for studio photography. As OG said if you had the space, more distance between the little boy and the background would have helped, but I suspect that was all the space you had behind. Focal length is better (50mm would be better), but you're either going to have to back up, or go for a head and shoulders shot, you need more space above the head. Lighting looks close on height of the softbox, but I'd bring it just a tad closer to the camera. Bring a white reflector in closer on the left and adjust it to bring light to the left side of the face and under the chin.

 

[fmw]

I may be displaying my ignorance of current technology but I wonder if TTL flash mode would have any affect on the slaves. It looks like your connected flash probably cut output as it should but the slaves dumped everything they had blowing out the subject. I use slave flashes every day for tabletop product shots and I have to use manual exposure. I tend to doubt that the TTL control could control a slave but it may be some new feature in flash units. I don't know but it it worth looking into.

 

[Derrel]

Thanks a lot guys. Definitely getting there.

This shot of the boy has good lighting.i actually like the background with the attachment shadow. The shadow adds dimensional clues, makes his actual body show up as being right there, not pasted in.

 

[OGsPhotography]

Attachment shadow! Yes. I'll have to explain that one tk the wife, she HATES shadows I dont know why so its something I worked on killing early on and now am just learnjng to put them back lol.

 

[smoke665]

I'll have to explain that one tk the wife

Good luck with that!!!! When I try to explain ANYTHING photography related to mine she just says "yeah ok, go away".

 

[Derrel]

Attachment shadow! Yes. I'll have to explain that one tk the wife, she HATES shadows I dont know why so its something I worked on killing early on and now am just learnjng to put them back lol.

After the 60's,70's,80's,90's, and 20-Tens all being almost exclusively nothing but clean, neutral, boring, dimension-free backdrops of seamless paper--a funny thing has happened--people are now embracing the attachment shadow! Photographers are now placing subjects right up against walls, backgrounds, etc., and creating a real shadow! Not a faked, Photoshopped drop shadow, but a REAL one!

Attachment shadow.It's a newish thing, a trend in modern, 20-Teens images.It is no longer the 1980'sor 1990's nort even the 20-TENS...we're in the 20-Teens now...

 

[photo1x1.com]

Chiming in pretty late here. Much has been said already.
It depends on what you are really looking for. If you want that clean white background, Derrel describes as 20-TENS , you really need to get further away with your background and make sure the light of your slaves does not spill back to your kids - anything will do from cardboard to light modifiers.
The best thing would be thick styrofoam boards that stand on the floor. I only know the metric dimensions in cm - you can get them very cheap at 100cm x 50cm x 10cm. Put two of them (on top of each other) on either side of the kids.
The foam boards also act as a reflector and bounce light from the background and from your softbox to your subjects.
Place your softbox as close to your kids as possible and don´t worry if it enters your frame - you can easily remove that later (even in lightroom - no need for photoshop. Lightroom even has the advantage that you can copy and paste your settings including the removal of the softbox from one image to another) as long as the background is clean white.
What you need to do is expose for the background first, because you can´t adjust the settings on your slaves. Then you dial in the softbox-light to fit the background.
Here is a draft:

If you don´t want to create a clean white background, you´d rather use a wall instead of background paper,

so you can put your kids right at the wall to get a nicer look and don´t get any wrinkles in the paper.
In regard to distance background - kid - camera. A lot has been said. The bigger the distance, the better it is.

I have shot tons of images on white like the ones below - you can even shoot white clothing on white. I love the clean look of these images. Some think they are boring, but I rather find it interesting to give the focus to the subjects.
I especially love if these images are placed on white background on webpages, etc. It doesn´t look as good on the offwhite background here.

 

[smoke665]

I have shot tons of images on white like the ones below - you can even shoot white clothing on white. I love the clean look of these images. Some think they are boring, but I rather find it interesting to give the focus to the subjects.

Really like these White on White shots. As you say they have a very clean appearance. So help me understand your set up example. First, what is a "better" distance from a white background, assuming you have the room to work with. Second, if I understand your illustration correctly the reflector on the right is also serving as a flag on the softbox?

 

[Designer]

--people are now embracing the attachment shadow!

May I?

As I am naturally skeptical, especially of any "new" development in the art and design world, I am going to go on ahead and guess the reason that we are seeing the attachment shadow.

My guess is that latter day photographers, lacking the knowledge and space in which to eliminate shadows on the backdrop, have inadvertently "created" a new (and widely accepted and copied) phenomenon of actually including a shadow that is not adding much, if anything, to the composition.

Now where did I put my bottle of hemlock?

 

[photo1x1.com]

I have shot tons of images on white like the ones below - you can even shoot white clothing on white. I love the clean look of these images. Some think they are boring, but I rather find it interesting to give the focus to the subjects.

Really like these White on White shots. As you say they have a very clean appearance. So help me understand your set up example. First, what is a "better" distance from a white background, assuming you have the room to work with. Second, if I understand your illustration correctly the reflector on the right is also serving as a flag on the softbox?

Thanks, smoke .

1. That depens a little on what you are shooting. If it is a single person, 1m can be sufficient. If it is something bigger or a group of people, you need around 2m to start with. Most important thing is: your background lights must not hit your subject from the side or back. The further the lights are away from your background, the more even they will light it (due to the inverse square law), and the less you have to overexpose the background to get a clean white from left to right straight out of camera. Depending on your lights, there are other options though. You can even light the paper from the back if the lights are strong enough. Then your subject could even touch the background. But it is a little difficult to evenly light from the back.
2. I didn´t mean to make it look like a flag, sorry. It does block a little bit of light, but the image won´t change much. You could actually rotate the right foam board counterclockwise (when looking from the top) to make the softbox a little softer - if it does block the light, the characteristics will change a little towards a strip light, but not much because of the light from the background reflecting off the foam board. All the foamboard on the right really has to do is block the light from the right slave.

Does that answer your questions, or is it too vague?