p.2 #1 · Using Strobes Outdoors - metering ambient
sherijohnson wrote:
well I was able to negotiate with my model I am VERY happy with the results I am getting with this so far. I appreciate the info shared so far, feel free to give me additional ideas regarding placement of my lights.
I think your exposure on your lovely model is great. It looks like you're getting the results from your meter that you were hoping for.
I agree with Steve that moving the light a little higher might give a more-flattering modeling to the shadows, but it's not bad as is.
One thing to watch for -- and I know from doing it too often myself -- is getting so caught up in the lighting setup and in interacting with your subject that you lose track of the background. Even though it's blurred by the narrow depth of field, the tree "growing out of her head" is a bit of a distraction. Moving either the camera or the subject a bit to either side -- if it was possible at your location -- would have made a good photo even better.
p.2 #2 · Using Strobes Outdoors - metering ambient
In terms of overall exposure in backlight it's pretty much a matter of how strong you want the "hair light" to contrast. Personally I find that when hair lights wind up brighter than the highlights on the front of the face they distract attention up off the face, sooner or later, to go see them. So I like the more muted look in your shot you got by keeping the sunlit hair down below clipping.
As for the background? If you expose highlights below clipping everything darker in tone t will always wind up darker than normal to some degree because the sensor can't handle the contrast range .
A backlight scene is about 10 stops. The sensor can record about 7-8 with detail. The key and fill on the subject fit the subject to that range but the background beyond the flash winds up 2-3 stops darker than normal. Something that you see by eye as middle gray in the background will be reproduced nearly black in the photo.
In the studio you can control the tone of a background by: 1) picking the tone of the background, and 2) putting the subject closer or further away from it and allowing the fall off from the key and fill lights to illuminate it more or less. If you know the sensor can't handle the scene contrast and the background will be reproduced darker in an outdoor shot, factor that into the background you pick starting with one that looks by eye 1-2 stops darker than it will wind up in the photo.
For example a light gray wall in shade, out of the range of the flash, will wind up rendered as dark gray in the photo. If you start with a background darker than middle gray ( i.e., similar to the reflectance value of a gray card) you may wind up with a nearly black one. To get a feel for that cause and effect next time you shoot do some test shots with white, gray and black cloth draped over a light stand near the background.
As for placement of your light? What key light pattern were you trying to create on the face? It looks from the shadow clues on the nose more centered butterfly than 45° from nose "short" lighting as in Sheldon N's shot of his son.
In terms of modeling the 3D shape of a face realistically I find putting the key light 45V°/ 45H° from nose ( short lighting) works better with oblique poses and the centered on nose (butterfly) strategy more effective for full face views.
Note for example there is no shadow on the side of the nose typically seen in an oblique view and the key light is wrapping past the front plane of the face on the right highlighting the side of the head, which makes the face look wider than went the highlight / shadow border is at the edge of the right eye.
In terms of cause and effect for the oblique / short combination what you want to do is first pose the face into the light so the highlight/shadow border defines the eye-chin line on the right side as a compound curve, then move your camera until you define that same line on the far side with the profile of the eye notch > cheek bone ( and curve down under the cheekbone to the chin ). What you get when executed perfectly is the same eye pleasing compound curve from eye-to-chin with the front of the face highlighted symmetrically like a mask. If you blur the shot you should be able to see the "mask" and still recognize it as a face...
The one on the left is oblique/short lighting (key light 45° from nose / 45° higher than eyes) and the one on the right is full-face / butterfly (key light centered on nose / 45° higher than eyes).
With full face / centered key light most of the face is highlighted and fill isn't as critical, in part because the bookend shadows on the sides help frame and slim the face. WIth oblique /45° lighting from the side more of the face is in shadow and positioning the fill so its not shaded anywhere and controlling ratio is more important for conveying mode and environment. Shadow tone is subjective but I find the shadows here a bit dark and somber for a girl her age. The combination of a better placed 45° lighting pattern and more fill in the shadow would be more in context. So would a background that is a few shadows lighter to give it an overall lighter happier little girl vibe.
p.2 #4 · Using Strobes Outdoors - metering ambient
BrianO wrote:
I think your exposure on your lovely model is great. It looks like you're getting the results from your meter that you were hoping for.
I agree with Steve that moving the light a little higher might give a more-flattering modeling to the shadows, but it's not bad as is.
One thing to watch for -- and I know from doing it too often myself -- is getting so caught up in the lighting setup and in interacting with your subject that you lose track of the background. Even though it's blurred by the narrow depth of field, the tree "growing out of her head" is a bit of a distraction. Moving either the camera or the subject a bit to either side -- if it was possible at your location -- would have made a good photo even better....Show more →
thanks for your feedback, I know all too well about distracting backgrounds and this was not done in a location where I had options for perfect backgrounds, so I was focusing solely on the light.
p.2 #6 · Using Strobes Outdoors - metering ambient
Steve Wylie wrote:
So is this the look you were going for? Your flash exposure on her face is fine, and the background is quite dark. If that's what you were hoping for, then you succeeded. If you were looking for more balance, then slowing the shutter speed to let more ambient light in would bring the background up. Remember, aperture affects flash; shutter affects ambient. One good way to test this would be to start with your exposure as you have it in this image, and then successively slow your shutter speed by whatever increment your camera is set at (1/2 or 1/3 stop), and see how the background gets brighter with each adjustment. Don't change aperture, just shutter speed.
As to light placement, this looks pretty close to camera level as noted by the lack of shadow under the nose. I might elevate it a bit and take it just a little wider to the left to create a nice loop shadow under the nose.
Hope this helps.
...Show more →
actually my goal for this test was to darken the background, so yes, that is what I was attempting, in camera it looked even darker. I am definitely going to experiment more with finding the right height and angle on the light, to get enough light on the eyes and get pleasing shadows.
I use the point between the eyes as a reference point for key light position because that's where the nose shadow starts. The nose is like a sundial and like telling the time it's shadow is a "tell tale" for where the key light is relative to the face.
45° to that spot, both above and to the side, winds up modeling most faces ideally with the nose shadow falling down along the base of the nose on the side where it meets the cheek and the shadow from the tip falling over the top the the nostril.
It's a perception thing. The brain seeing half the nose shaded, without the shadow hanging out sideways or down can deduce the actual shape of the nose. I became aware of this back in the 70s when I made maps at National Geographic. One of my jobs was the reproduced the drawing of the mountain relief. The artist would draw only the shadows the mountains would cast at 2PM when the sun hits at a 45° angle. The brain sees the shadow and from it interprets the shape and relative heights of the mountains. In a photo the clues the nose shadow creates are similar.
Tilting the eye line is helps make the pose more dynamic vs. static but you still want the angle of the key light at 45° relative to the eye line (lower arrow). It might be easier to practice start with level eyes.
Without modeling lights if you stand behind the light stand as you move it, using the stand like a front gun sight, and move it around to the side until you see the notch of the eye > on the far side you will place the light perfectly on the face because that's where you want the highlight/shadow border —just at the edge of the eye. Put it there first, look at it, have her move 1/4" one way then the next to compare and pick want models the face in the most flattering way. As she moves in the light watch what is happening with the nose shadow. It will be more flattering if not hanging out and becoming distraction.
Noses come in a lot of different shapes. What key light height affects is where the shadow from the tip of the nose winds up being cast. I like it to fall over the top of the nostril on the shadow side, but not all noses will do that. Like the placement sideways you need to move the face up/down in the light and see by comparison what looks most flattering.
When you see the catchlights at 10 or 2 in the eyes, relative to a level eye line, you'll know the key light is 45° above and 45° to the side of the point between the eyes. Again don't take the 45/45 angle to be a "Thou Must" rule. It's just a starting baseline for evaluation.
If the catchlight is at 9 or 3 the key light is too low and nose shadow will be cast sideways. If at 11 or 1 the nose shadow will hang down on the upper lip (loop lighting). Some find that effective (it was used in a lot of 14th Century paintings) but I find it draws attention to and exaggerates the shape of the nose.
Because skylight comes from overhead eyes will be shaded unless you stand on something 1-3 feet higher than the subject and have them look up into the camera. They look up the camera looks down. The face / camera relationship stays parallel so there's no distortion of the face, just better light in the eyes.
Chin down poses scrunch up and shorten the neck. When the subject looks up the neck is stretched and looks thinner. Then you just raise the camera so it is looking at the raised face from slightly above eye level (to hide nostrils) and you wind up with an overall more flattering look. The neck is more graceful looking but relative to the camera it looks like the chin is tipped down a bit.
This is from a 11 year old tutorial taken with a 2.1MP camera but it shows my fool proof "relaxed guy" pose that uses the same raised camera neck trick. First I have the guy put the shadow side foot on a chair like this...
Then I have him lean forward at the hip and rest his hands over his knees, then raise his chin and look up. I was standing on an identical chair to take the shot below. This wide view was a set-up shot, the actual one was H&S cropped as indicated...
Are you using any fill? The shadows are very dark. Without a second flash as fill they always will be outdoors if you expose the highlights below clipping because sky light fill is about 3 stops darker making the rendering of the shadows darker than seen by eye.
The way I set two light with sun as rim light is:
1) Expose hair below clipping
2) Add fill until I get the shadows on the face the tone that I find age/gender/mood appropriate.
3) Add key until I get the highlights on the face the tone I want.
I'll err on the side of over filling at capture because its easy to burn in the shadows darker. With the key light I err towards under exposure by 1/3 stop at capture. Better to tweek than not have detail.
One of the oldest but most useful adjustment tools in Photoshop is the middle slider in Levels. It allows you to make the midtones lighter without clipping the highlights. Here's your second shot with a middle slider levels correction on the face and background...
How is did it was dupe the file as two layers, moving the middle slider to 1.50 on the top to lighten it. Then with a mask I selectively blended it in to the darker shirt in the original. It took less than a minute. It's still a bit dark for my tastes for a girl her age but I couldn't push it much more because the original is so dark. More fill / adding fill would make it more flattering, at least for me. Here's how I light kids that age in "happy" poses.
For those shots I used butterfly (centered key light / chin level fill). To keep the shadows very light I set key and fill at about the same incident strength, which when overlapped reflects a 1 key + 1 fill : 1 fill = 2:1 ratio.
p.2 #8 · Using Strobes Outdoors - metering ambient
your details about light placement are very helpful Chuck, I was not using any fill for any of these shots, more than anything just playing around with the softbox to get a feel for it by itself and learning how to place it in regard to the subject.
p.2 #9 · Using Strobes Outdoors - metering ambient
sherijohnson wrote:
your details about light placement are very helpful Chuck, I was not using any fill for any of these shots, more than anything just playing around with the softbox to get a feel for it by itself and learning how to place it in regard to the subject.
The shape of human faces and the goals of the shot dictate placement of the key light.
To get it past the brow and into the eyes it needs to be below 45°. Outdoors at mid day the sun is higher than 45° which is why a person looking at the horizon will have shaded eyes, both in sun and shade as in your second shot. That's why outdoors you need to get the person looking upwards to get light in the eyes. What will the angle of face to sun be then? 45°
Ever see a photo and think "Wow what an attractive nose!" in the same way you do for eyes and smile? Me either. That's why I view the nose shadow as a distraction from what is important and triggers the emotional reaction to the expression. When the vertical angle of the key light drops much below 45° the nose shadow gets cast sideways rather than down at a 45° angle which distorts the shape of the nose and distracts from the eyes and mouth.
That's why butterfly pattern where the key light is centered at 45° to eye line, and short pattern where the light is also at 45° vertically and 45° horizontal became conventions. If you learn those two to the point you don't need to think about how to create them and use them as a starting baseline its difficult to go wrong.
When not pressed for time I start with butterfly with some full face views. It's forgiving in the sense the subject can move around without the face winding up turned away from the key light complete as when key light is put to the side.
It's great for kids too young to follow verbal instructions (and 2 yr. olds who understand but refuse to obey) because you can forget about the lighting and concentrate on expression. I'll tell kids to goof off and make faces and show them the playback. That's how I got the shot of the boy pulling up the hat. I didn't tell him to do that, he did it when goofing then later when we got down to more serious posing I set it up with his sister's expression coached.
The problem with key lighting from the side at 45°V/45°H is that it requires very precise placement to model the face ideally. That requires the subject to have the ability to hold the pose to the light, or the patience and reflexes to catch them when they turn into...
Here's an example. The lighting here was stage lighting for the key and accent from the back, I just used fill flash to eliminate the color cast in the stage fill. I found a spot 90° from the key light on the face and just waited for the subject, a preacher, turned obliquely to both the key light at 45° from his nose, and my camera which was 45° from his nose.
This was a near miss... http://super.nova.org/MP/BarryBlack1.jpg
Note how the far side if the face is disappearing? He's turned too far away from the camera. Note how the key light is spilling past the front of the face and lighting up the ear? In an oblique pose lit that way the key light will pass through the < notch on the near side and "spotlight" the ear if you not careful.
Recognizing all those problem I kept shooting (he was moving a lot) until I got his one.... http://super.nova.org/MP/BarryBlack2.jpg
Can you see the differences? He turned his face away from the light more ideally highlighting just the front "mask" of his face, keeping the side of the head and ear in shadow and at the same time showing a fuller more balanced far side of the face.
I do the same thing with flash using speedlights at events. I park the off camera light, go stand at a right angle (90°) it, then wait for the subject's face to turn 45° to the camera. http://super.nova.org/MP/Dual03.jpg
Not rocket science, simple geometry: 45°+45° = 90° = naturally flattering. I simply knew from experience and "connecting the dots" of how camera and angles naturally flatter a face to know where in the room to stand and wait for the "decisive moment"
That did turn out nicely in part because you did as I've been suggesting and matched the angle of your flash illuminating her in the shadows with the angle and clues of the natural lighitng in the background.
Note how the shadow at her feet is nearly the same angle as the shadows on the sunlit stuff in the background? It's by looking at shadow clues like that, and the corresponding highlight modeling the flash creates vs highlights on background objects that the brain decides whether something looks normal (because the lighting patterns blend seamlessly) or fake (because the foreground lit with flash looks different than the background context lighting pattern).
But be aware of that outdoors when you don't blow the highlights in the background of your flash lit foreground shot the camera is not going to reproduce the background "normally" in the sense of how you perceived it by eye because the camera sensor can't handle the contrast and loses the shadow detail.
The same thing happens on the flash lit foreground if you simply move one flash to the side. What it filling the shadows on the girl the flash is not hitting? The same amount of light from the sky in the shadows that made her so dark before the flash was added.
The paradox her is that her lighting angle ratio here winds up matching that of the background, which sends "normal" matching clues, but per how you perceived her by eye (and how I'd like to see her) the shadows are darker and lighting harsher.
The solution? Add just enough supplemental fill with flash from over the camera to lift the shadows on the girl and make her lighting ratio seem "seen by eye" normal vs. the dark heavy look you got here without flash.
I will grant you that shooting outdoors with a rig like this is not as convenient as just having a radio trigger in the hot shoe to trigger an off camera flash.... http://super.nova.org/MP/CGinCO1.jpg
... but it is the best way I've found to add the needed fill from the same natural downward angle skylight comes from in outdoor shots, both single flash with sun directly behind the subject and as fill when off camera flash is used as key light off to the side.
Fill fill controls shadow tone, shadow tone controls the impression the subject's emotions and/or the environment they are in. This shot works quite well as is, but if you also had fill on the camera you could have also tried it with various degrees of supplemental flash fill from a bracket over the camera blending it in seamless with the slightly downward fill angle of natural skylight . In other words do the same with fill as worked very well here with the key light — match the angle of the natural lighting vectors with both flashes. The bracket makes doing that with fill a no-brainer.
How much fill is the "right" amount? That comes down to a judgement call. Here the shadows on the girl look abnormally dark. If you added the same amount of fill that you might use indoors or in a close-up in this wide shot they would wind up look too light and fake because they won't match the darker shadows in the background your camera can't reproduce as you see them by eye.
The lesson to take away there, which you'll grasp if you practice this and compare results, is that the amount of background context you show in a flash lit foreground shot affects how "normal" the foreground ratio looks. Here's a test shot example...
Here's an ambient only "baseline" shot to show what the camera sensor is capable of recording when highlights are kept below clipping: http://super.nova.org/MP/HSS/_MG_5034.jpg
Here I moved in at full power until I saw visual separation in the darker tones on the target (fill for shadow detail) then added my key light at 45° and moved it in at full power until the flash lit white areas were just a shade darker (looking like shaded whites in sunlight by eye). This fit the range of natural skylight + flash fill + flash key light to the sensor range: http://super.nova.org/MP/HSS/_MG_5035.jpg
It winds up looking over flashed to some extent in the foreground because the background lighting clues don't match the foreground. That because the flash is "normalizing" the tonal range in the foreground to match what the brain expects to see (a full range of detail) which the camera sensor can't do in the background.
The solution? You can't change the background lighting beyond the range of your flash but you can crop it out of the shot....
Here's the exact same shot cropped tighter. Now it looks pretty "normal" because your brain isn't seeing the "abnormally" underexposed background for comparison.
Consider for a moment if after you took your daughter's wide shot you moved in close with the camera, with they same lighting for tight H&S shot. Would those dark shadows, which seem in context with the background rendering in the wide shot, still seem normal? No. Absent the context of the background (which you now would have cropped out) the shadows will look too dark, harsh, hard, etc.
When shooting with flash outdoors I'm situationally aware of this perceptual dynamic. It has little to do with f/stops and lighting ratios and everything to do with how the brain looking at the photo will compare the background and flash assisted foreground and either accept the mix as normal, or not.
The lesson to take away here is that the more background you include for context the less fill you need / should add because the goal is to make the overall clues match. But for closer shots where there is less background context you need more fill to match the brain's expectation of what a "nomal" face with a normal lighting ratio looks like, assuming of course you want the subject to look "normal".
There is a way to "split the difference" compositionally and this is a "trick" I use outdoors with flash all the time. Compositionally in a photo if there is a really compelling focal point large in the foreground the brain scanning the photo will largely ignore the background and the fact the lighting clues are not the same because the eye keeps coming back and dwelling on the foreground.. This is an example of what I mean....
When taking that shot I knew my flash (direct flash on a bracket) would fall off across the row of marchers making the faces darker and that the background in backlight below the range of the sensor to record the shadows would be abnormally dark. But I was betting that foreground figure would attract enough attention those technical "defects" would be ignored.
Here's another example. It's just a vacation snap shot but illustrates the idea. The tonal range of the natural lighting was such it was physically impossible to record detail in the falls everywhere. Putting my wife in the foreground who I could expose normally was a "diversionary" tactic to prevent the viewer from noticing that the background isn't ideally exposed.
I had to burn in the over flashed rail in the foreground to make the overall net effect seem more "natural".
Your shot of your daughter has about 50/50 balance in terms of foreground / background interest. If you were to progressively move closer to her and make her occupy a greater % of the photo you'd want to progressively add more fill to make the balance between what the brain of the viewer expects the ratio to be on the face with what the camera is capable of recording in the background. By the time you got close enough to fill the frame with her face you'd find you needed about the same ratio of key:fill as indoors for a normal looking facial shadows and "softer" modeling on it.
The take away here? Fill flash is usually needed outdoors to create more normal balance, but finding the "looks natural" right balance is judgement call you need to make by eye based on how much the viewer will wind up noticing the background. The more the background plays a role in the story of the photo the closer you need them to match perceptually.
How important is the background to the story here. Is it abut her texting at the playground or about her texting and absorbed in her phone. Would cropping tighter alter the focal point of the story line here?
Not really I think, but it will affect perception of the lighting on her face. Above is a crop of your original on the left, a 10 point middle slider Levels correction in the middle to lighten the shadows as fill flash would have, and on the right a 40 point middle slider correction to simulate a slightly over-filled look. What looks more "normal" for the tighter crop without all the background context? Something between the center and right edits above...
So give fill control a try like that. It's the final piece of the lighting equipment / technique puzzle, but one of the most important perceptually in making the flash / natural balance blend in a way that looks normal, which differs in wide and close-up shots.
In situations were you want a "normal" foreground subject and background context to add story detail? Make the foreground subject large enough the under-exposed shadows in the background are noticed. Another trick for that? Shoot against a lighter background where there is no darker than middle gray content. The middle gray stuff will be rendered darker but not loose detail. That's the distracting thing in underexposed photos, not the fact they look darker but that detail you expect to see isn't there.
I am VERY happy with the results I am getting with this so far. I appreciate the info shared so far, feel free to give me additional ideas regarding placement of my lights.