Lights, Camera, Now What?

[smoke665]

An old dog covering new ground. Finally have a decent place in the garage to use as a studio (when I pull the wife's car out ), so I actually have enough room to setup everything.

I used two lights - Main is a 35" octabox camera right @ just past 4 o'clock slightly above head level, angled down, and secondary light camera left @ 8 o'clock bounced off a white reflective umbrella, at head level. Also on the left behind the secondary light is a large white reflector angled to throw light on the background from the main light. Secondary was metered one stop under the main. Histogram shows a full exposure, and doesn't indicate any blown whites, but in the image there's a couple spots that appear blown.

Overall I'm pretty happy with the image, this is pretty much SOOG, with only minor adjustments but other than the cheesy background, what else do I need to work on??

no-image-available-grid.jpg by William Raber, on Flickr

 

[Derrel]

Adorbs!!!!!!

I do not think anything is blown out in this. If there's a nit, it might be the under-bench shadow/vignette looks a wee bit dark for this overall tone. The white flower in the shadow shows up just a bit too dark, and that under-bench area has a crease on the white flowers and a sort of fish-tail dark patch below whwre her left foot rests on the bench.

OH WAIT--this is a printed-on-vinyl photo backdrop...Okay, the creases make more sense to me now.

Maybe work to get identical catchlights in both eyesm, either two, or one, in each eye.

 

[Ysarex]

Nice job with the lights.

You don't have any clipping in the photo. Histograms indicate a clipped red channel and if you look at why it's primarily the magenta bow. It's a classic digital camera problem. Highly saturated reds and related (magenta) colors are a real struggle to reproduce with appropriate tone and not oversaturate. Camera image processors fall down on this one constantly. It's very minor in this photo and I don't think it detracts any.

Joe

 

[smoke665]

@Derrel Thank you

I do not think anything is blown out in this.
There are some white places in the dress when viewed larger have lost the detail. Maybe borderline??

under-bench shadow/vignette
Yeah in retrospect I was really concerned about the vinyl backdrop being "more" reflective, which is why I tried the reflector to light the background. Surprisingly the vinyl has just enough tooth to the material that it wasn't. Next time I could probably just add a third light to light the background, or go with two reflectors one on each side.

this is a printed-on-vinyl photo backdrop...Okay, the creases make more sense to me now.
I was curious as to how the vinyl backdrops would work. Obviously for shipping they come folded, something I hadn't thought about when ordering. There's not really any satisfactory way to get them out. I let it hang for several days, but they're still there. If I use another one, I'll probably either hang it the sun for a couple days, or use low heat on a heat gun???

work to get identical catchlights in both eyesm
Dang it, dang it, dang it. I knew that going in and I still missed it.

Something you missed that I've already chastised myself on, is the knot on the background right behind her head. I could have moved her either direction, and eliminated that, but I completely overlooked it. The other thing is bottom of her dirty shoes. She wasn't being the most cooperative, but a different bench or pose, would have helped.

 

[smoke665]

Histograms indicate a clipped red channel and if you look at why it's primarily the magenta bow.

Thanks Joe. Yeah I saw that, though it looked like the red channel stopped short of on the histogram. The bow was also very reflective (note lack of detail in highlight). Next to the bow on the dress (chest) I also lost detail in the white.

 

[Derrel]

I saw the knot but didn't think it was worth bringing up as a flaw. I rememebered the vinyl backdrop only after I'd typed out a reply. I thought the creases were from some type of cloning work, but despite the shippinbg creases,you made it work!

 

[smoke665]

@Derrel one of my problems is I get tunnel vision. I get so focused on some things that I overlook little details. Maybe I need to put up a big chalk board on the side with a checklist to remind me LOL

 

[tirediron]

Nicely done. Getting really, really picky (and I mean REALLY) I think the position of the lights could be tweaked just a bit as it seems that the front of her dress is a bit (as in <1/3 stop) brighter than her face and the catchlights aren't matching, but... it's a damn good shot!

 

[smoke665]

Nicely done. Getting really, really picky (and I mean REALLY) I think the position of the lights could be tweaked just a bit as it seems that the front of her dress is a bit (as in <1/3 stop) brighter than her face and the catchlights aren't matching, but... it's a damn good shot!

Wow didn't expect to hear this! Thank you. One thing that hurt is one of the modeling lights wasn't working (bad bulb on a new unit) . On the tweaking could you point me in the right direction - up, down, in, out, left, right? On the catch lights I'm not sure of what to do there. I can correct them post, but is there a way to do it right from the start? I'm really struggling with that.

 

[Ysarex]

Histograms indicate a clipped red channel and if you look at why it's primarily the magenta bow.

Thanks Joe. Yeah I saw that, though it looked like the red channel stopped short of on the histogram. The bow was also very reflective (note lack of detail in highlight). Next to the bow on the dress (chest) I also lost detail in the white.

I don't see any detail loss in the whites. It's a good exposure with very good processing. I don't do too much people/portrait shooting, but when I do and I have a chance to talk to the subjects in advance I always mention clothes. We talk colors and I always tell them: natural fabrics, no synthetic fabrics and bring a change or two just in case.

Joe

 

[smoke665]

I don't see any detail loss in the whites. It's a good exposure with very good processing. I don't do too much people/portrait shooting, but when I do and I have a chance to talk to the subjects in advance I always mention clothes. We talk colors and I always tell them: natural fabrics, no synthetic fabrics and bring a change or two just in case.

My OCD pixel peeping in the original, there's a loss of detail in the fabric, that doesn't show up in the web photos. It could have been just a touch less exposure. A little dodging in the chest area cleared most of it up.

You know the comment on the synthetic fabrics is something I knew, but never thought of when I should have. These are all some of the "little" things that make the difference between a good image and a great image. Hopefully I can commit more to memory so that it becomes second nature to remember.

 

[Designer]

Notice how her head and (right) arm seem darker? The light camera left could be moved around to 9:00, and high enough to become a hair light. This might also get more light on the dark background as well. Or if the fold lines become too pronounced with grazing light, find something else for the backdrop.

I don't know if anybody else has issues with the shoes, but to me they are too prominent in the composition, and showing specular highlights. A model of this age might not be able to sit with her legs to one side, but if you and her mother can get creative, try it. Remove the shoes, give her a sofa cushion to sit on, and while you're at it, exchange the park bench for a sofa. (Or approximate)

 

[smoke665]

Notice how her head and (right) arm seem darker?

That was intentional, see OP. I metered one full stop under on the secondary for a 2:1. I was attempting Loop Lighting, hard to see on this mage, but on her right/under nose there was a small triangle of shadow. The secondary was somewhere close to 8 o'clock, could have been closer to 8:30. Another thing I need to start doing is making a journal of set ups so I can repeat.

The shoes were all her mother sent. In hindsight barefoot would have probably been better. The bench wasn't the best either. I've been searching for a suitable child's chair, but the choices are either $$$$ for what I want or not suitable.

 

[tirediron]

Nicely done. Getting really, really picky (and I mean REALLY) I think the position of the lights could be tweaked just a bit as it seems that the front of her dress is a bit (as in <1/3 stop) brighter than her face and the catchlights aren't matching, but... it's a damn good shot!

Wow didn't expect to hear this! Thank you. One thing that hurt is one of the modeling lights wasn't working (bad bulb on a new unit) . On the tweaking could you point me in the right direction - up, down, in, out, left, right? On the catch lights I'm not sure of what to do there. I can correct them post, but is there a way to do it right from the start? I'm really struggling with that.

Lemme get back to you this evening... Flickr isn't playing nice for me ATM