Natural Lighting

[Shoal]

Some people use no flash and natural light only. I use natural light, of course, but also my flash with a bounce card. I don't know what I would do without it. If a person is using natural light only and place the person in the shade and meter off of the face (exposing only for the face) will the eyes still have all the detail?

 

[Rephargotohp]

Placing a person in the shade is the easy way out, It produces very flat light so they don't have to worry about harsh shadows. But they end up with no shadows, which is Kinda borings. It's about finding "The" Light but very few know to even look/

So yes it is better to have flat light than Harsh shadows, but when some one finds the light, is when magic happens.

And you can shoot in shade yet bring light to the subject with a reflector feathered correctly and bring light to the eyes for pop.

Anything is possible, if you know what you are doing

 

[KmH]

And I have seen very few 'natural' light only photographers that know what they are doing.

Most are not informed about photographic ligfhting. The light source, so called 'natural light', strobed, or constant light does not matter when it comes to photographic lighting.

 

[tirediron]

From what I have seen, "natural light" is a term mainly used by those who have either insufficient skill, equipment, or both, to properly execute a photograph using strobed lighting in the belief that it will make them appear to be more of a pure artist: "Oh, I don't use a flash, that's for plebes!"

 

[bazooka]

"Oh, I don't use a flash, I'm too lazy to learn new things!"

There, fixed.

 

[Robin Usagani]

If you place the sun carefully, pick the background carefully, focus carefully, it will turn out good. The background is blown... so what?

 

[tirediron]

"Oh, I don't use a flash, I'm too lazy to learn new things!"

There, fixed.

:er:

 

[willis_927]

If you place the sun carefully, pick the background carefully, focus carefully, it will turn out good. The background is blown... so what?

Don't you love how the snow acts as a huge reflector and provides with some nice fill light.

 

[rexbobcat]

From what I have seen, "natural light" is a term mainly used by those who have either insufficient skill, equipment, or both, to properly execute a photograph using strobed lighting in the belief that it will make them appear to be more of a pure artist: "Oh, I don't use a flash, that's for plebes!"

Not every photo benefits from strobes.

 

[cgipson1]

From what I have seen, "natural light" is a term mainly used by those who have either insufficient skill, equipment, or both, to properly execute a photograph using strobed lighting in the belief that it will make them appear to be more of a pure artist: "Oh, I don't use a flash, that's for plebes!"

Not every photo benefits from strobes.

True... but there are many, many shots that could benefit from strobe. Often, there is not enough light, or the wrong light.. to obtain the photo you (or your client) wants... if you are a "natural light photographer".. you (and your client) are screwed! Agreed?

 

[rexbobcat]

From what I have seen, "natural light" is a term mainly used by those who have either insufficient skill, equipment, or both, to properly execute a photograph using strobed lighting in the belief that it will make them appear to be more of a pure artist: "Oh, I don't use a flash, that's for plebes!"

Not every photo benefits from strobes.

True... but there are many, many shots that could benefit from strobe. Often, there is not enough light, or the wrong light.. to obtain the photo you (or your client) wants... if you are a "natural light photographer".. you (and your client) are screwed! Agreed?

I agree.

I do have to say, though, that I think it also depends a lot of style....

I know several really good photographers (many do senior portraits for high schoolers) who really only use natural light and onboard fill flash, but in the studio they know their way around their lighting setup. I think that saying that someone who prefers natural light is uninformed is a gross generalization.

 

[tirediron]

Not every photo benefits from strobes.

True, but I'm willing to bet that about 90% or more of so-called "natural light" (BTW, could someone please define "synthetic light" and tell me what equipment is needed for creating man-made photons????) portraits would be enhanced by the use of some small amount of strobed light.

 

[tirediron]

Doesn't "onboard fill flash", at least for the purposes of this discussion negate the person being a "natural light" photographer?

 

[KmH]

I know several photographers (many do senior portraits for high schoolers) that only use natural light/onboard fill flash, and think they are really good photographers but are lying to themselves and their clients because they are in reality fauxtographers that have little clue how to effectively use their camera/lens/light, pose, run/manage a business.

I think that saying that someone who prefers natural light is uninformed depends on which person is being referred to.

In a photography business there is little or no time to sit around and wait for natural light to be right. (I'm so sorry! We'll have to reschedule today's photography appointment you made a month ago, because with the weather the way it is, the natural light is just no where close to being right."

It boils down to maximizing contol of the light and enabeling the everyday production of very consistant images.

 

[Robin Usagani]

I got to disagree with you Keith. There is always a way to make natural light looks good especially if there are a lot of buildings or trees AND you are able to direct the subject where they have to be.