cgardner
Offline
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: Off
|
 p.2 #10 · Humor: homemade on-camera softbox | |
Brian:
I said "creates the impression...." not defines the terms. Since you are so hung up on syntax you should recognize there is a difference... I'm describing a cause and effect process not trying to define the terms, simply saying there are two ways the >>>impression <<< or if you prefer >>>> the illusion <<<< light is soft can be created in a photograph.
Honestly I don't know if photons are hard or soft, but last time I checked they still traveled in straight vectors from source to object. Its the vectors of the light, relative to source and object, which is the variable underlying the cause and effect of how source size and distance affect shadow characteristics: the relative amounts of umbra / penumbra.
I did however err semantically in not qualifying "not how fuzzy...." I should have said, "not JUST how fuzzy..."
My starting baseline is human perception of the what lighting produces. On the most basic perceptual level photography is magic trick which fools the eye of the viewer into thinking patterns of contrast represent 3D shape. In person we can perceive the shape of objects in any light because the tracking of the eyes and shifting of focus provide clues to the shape independent of the lighting. In a photo the clues about shape come from the contrast created by the tone and color of the objects in the scene.
Put a white ball on a white background in flat light in a photo and perceptually it will disappear. By that I mean the brain of the viewer will have no clues which "create and impression of shape". If we do nothing with the lighting but simply make the background darker and we begin to perceive its overall shape because it contrasts with the background but it will still look like a flat disk. We could also define the basic outline of the ball by keeping the background white and making the ball darker. Which strategy is best will depend on whether the goal is to reproduce the ball or background as white.
Change the direction of the lighting on the ball and and a contrast gradient will be created on the ball which will give the brain of the viewer clues about its shape. Those clues come from memory of seeing 3D objects in various angles of light while handling them. Connecting the patterns of contrast with the shape of objects is an acquired sub-conscious skill which starts at birth. Infants can't recognize shapes or faces in photos because they haven't formed the associations yet. Creating those linkages is the reason behind the basic shapes and colors of infant toys. Kids parked in front of TVs will also learn to make associations between the flat 2D images on the screen of Big Bird and Elmo and the stuffed toy they are hugging.
But we all eventually grow into adults who sometimes can't find our car keys when they are right under our noses because they have fallen at an odd angle. Our eyes see them, but our brains don't perceive them as keys because the pattern of contrast they create doesn't match the stored memory of what keys look light.
Read that again because it reveals one of the most important things about perception as it relates to lighting and what we are discussing here. Human perception is driven by expectation of what our memories tell us an object should look like. The white ball will aways be a white ball, but whether or not our brain perceives it as being 3D in the photo relies on our brain's ability to associate contrast pattern with its shape. Some patterns of contrast create the illusion of shape better than others.
In person we sense shape and space subconsciously but to do it in a photo we must consciously learn how to do it with the clues provided with contrast: tone, color, relative size of recognizable things in the photo, etc. Learning how to define shape with contrast is the essence of learning lighting. Learning to lead the viewer around the photo with contrasting tone, color, sharpness and space is the essence of learning composition and effective delivery of the message of the photo.
Contrast patterns consist of highlights and shadows. Which are more important to the perceptual process? To get a clue to the answer find a sheet of paper and a pencil and without drawing an outline create a 3D likeness of a white ball. Drawing the shadows a directional light source will create will define the shape on part of the ball which is shaded but there will be nothing to define the shape on the highlight side. If you look at just the shadows you have drawn your brain will tell you its a grey banana. Now take your masterpiece, tape it to the wall and take a few steps back and admire it. More than likely what will happen it that your brain, seeing the crescent shape from a wider context will tell you is a representation of a white ball on a white background.
The same perceptual dynamic occurs with the definition of shape in photos with lighting. In the end it comes down to tricking the brain of the viewer into thinking a pattern of contrast created with the lighting is something three-dimensional and real. Having used direct light sources for 30+ years before ever using diffused sources other than the soft light of a north window I learned how to create the perceptual illusion of softness and flattering lighting on faces with direct sources. Its actually quite simple:
1) Start with flat light. White ball on white background for example, illuminated with a light source above the lens.
2) Add a second light with a different vector. The angle of the second light creates the illusion of shape.
3) Modulate the tone of the shadows with the light on the camera to change the PERCEPTION of the shape of the ball in the photo.
4) Manipulate the perception of the shape and brightness of the ball by changing the background tone, either with the naturally occurring fall off of the light or by changing the background.
I'm not trying to re-define what "Soft" and "Hard" mean, only open people's brains to the fact there is more than one way to achieve that perceptual illusion in a photograph with lighting due to the way the brain interprets basic shapes from contrast patterns.
The only way to see how direct light can work is to try it, but many self-taught photographer thinking direct light or any light near the camera is somehow "bad" or "old-fashioned" never try it. The knee-jerk reaction is "I want to move my flash off camera - is a 7' octobox big enough?" and they remain ignorant of how to control contrast and the IMPRESSION of softness with small sources such as speedlights.
Chuck
|
j/k (I was going to say what a chittie idea, but don't want to break the joking nature 
)