Well, it seems aside from Barbara (my loyal plastic mannequin head), having our kids pose for dad without bribing them is like pulling teeth. So how can dad practice his lighting, and newly acquired sync cables? Rely on Milo, our min-pin chijuajua mix who swears he's a pit-bull.
I've been reduced to, "Stay Milo, NO Milo, Here Milo, Want a Scooby Snack Milo?" resulting in rather un-interesting dull/flat images, but at least I found out a "stereo" 3.5mm cord from Radio Shack will work just as well as the standard mono cords to trigger the lights. I purchased two (2) of them (they come in different colors), 1ft long for under 4 bucks.
That being said ... without further delay, Milo. Using two AB-800 with honeycomb grids attached.
The shots turned out well. Direct collimated sources are a good choice for pets. It is the specular highlights on hairs and shadows between them that create the illusion of 3D in fur. By comparison when a SB is used the highlights are more muted and the shadows less distinct with will give hair/fur/features more matted appearance.
Key light placement on humans is dictated largely by the need to get light past the brow and nose into both eyes and controlling the shape of the nose shadow and where it falls. Dogs don't have recessed eyes with a sundial nose between and definition of the overall shape is important. So instead of placing both lights in front use one behind as rim lighting and the other in front centered (so there are no unfilled sideways shadows and above putting the catchlight in about the same place. Foil covered reflectors to the side can be added to nuance the modeling.
If you have any silver umbrellas try them and compare results. If you don't have a silver umbrella you and DIY a white one with foil to create a larger specular source. The lighting on the fur will be similar but you'll get bigger catchlights in the eyes and the wet shiny nose.
I use Photoflex Q39 Mutidome SB which have inter-changable liners. Removing the diffusion panels and using the shiny silver liners creates large controllable source which creates specular highlights. Something I mention for anyone who shoots pets and is shopping for modifiers.
michael kilner wrote:
nice,how did you avoid "blue eye"
Thanks Michael -- I guess the modeling lights caused the dogs pupils to contract and this weren't wide open when the flash went off (my guess). Also, the light source (2 ABs) were 1. at 45 Key, and 2. Camera location for Fill. Or ... it may have something to do with the honeycomb grids I used on both lights?
@ cgardner - I'll need to give this a try. However, next time, can you simplify your response? I'm somewhat lost with some of your verbiage as you obviously know your stuff and I'm just learning this segment of photography.
@ joezasada - Thanks Joe. He could very well be an alien because he looks like a mixture between a rain-deer and rodent. :-)
dortizphoto wrote:
@ cgardner - I'll need to give this a try. However, next time, can you simplify your response? I'm somewhat lost with some of your verbiage as you obviously know your stuff and I'm just learning this segment of photography.
Sorry. Collimated means parallel rays, what happens to the light when a grid is used.
Here's an example of specular reflections on a human face...
The shot of the boy was taken with much smaller modifiers on the lights, but he washed his face a and it had a matte finish so there aren't any specular (mirror-like) hot spots. For the girl I had switch to my bigger studio lights and modifiers, but wearing make-up she hadn't washed her face and it was shiny creating "hot" spots on the face. Specular hot spots aren't desirable on humans, which is why big soft boxes are better. But as this illustrates if the skin is shiny it will cause hot spots even with bigger sources.
But for hairy critters the hot spots on the top of the hairs is a good think because that's what creates the illusion of 3D in the 2D photo. But selecting a diffuse source like a big SB or a parallel ray / collimated one like the grid you can control how the coat of the dog appears in the photo; dull and matted with diffuse light, or sparkling and healthy with collimated light.
The digital capture process with the RGB array and filters over the sensor tends dulls the sparkle seen by eye. So to make the photo look more natural you need to either exaggerate the contrast in the lighting, sharpen in PP, or do some of both to make the photo image look more like the dog seen in person. The edit below is a bit exaggerated for effect, but it illustrates what I'm describing. On the left I applied unsharp masking (USM), on the right is the photo you posted...
The USM does in Photoshop what a specular producing source does — add more sparkle and texture to the fur.
It's counter-intuitive but revealing the soft texture of fur in a photo requires "hard" (parallel/collimated) light. Your choice of the grids was a good one. A bigger silver umbrella will give you the same sparkle but with bigger more aesthetically pleasing "soulful" catchlights.
Wow!!! CGardner, that's what I call a solid and good clarification. You know, I sorta like the boy's image as it seems to pop more with the darker background and non shiney/hot spot on the face. Nicely done. I see what you mean about scrappy's image - the sharpening does tend to make him pop more, though I wouldn't sharpen as much.
Your skill set is far too advanced for me my friend. You obviously have an in depth understanding of how light works, and in photography that's a God send because light is everything as you very well know. Hate to sound like a simpleton, but I suppose that's what I am. This is great stuff, but I need to start slow, with a good solid and simple understanding that I can build upon.
Hope this doesn't stop your posts because I really appreciate the time and illustrations you provide. However, know that on a 1-10 scale, if your skill set is 10, mine is a 3.
