I got hold of the second edition in school, and thought it great. Saw the 3rd edition at the book store and bought it for the new content and to support the cause . . . but the new content is so very basic, and not up to the standards of the rest of the book. There's nothing wrong with the 3rd edition, but it's not a worthwhile upgrade for those who have taken to heart the earlier versions of it.

I really liked this book,especially the glass photography part.
Good stuff!

I have tons of books on photography; this one is among those three titles that really stick

Any recommendations on whether this is a book that would translate well to a kindle format or one that needs a physical copy to be affective? (ie: grayscale pics only, some changes in format)

Strecker, could you elaborate? I think the color version accomplishes a lot with the images it uses, and the information it has, but I have no second edition to compare to

I will say that, if the third edition is lacking in info, I can only imagine the second edition must be some compendium of knowledge.

excellent book

PShizzy wrote: ...I will say that, if the third edition is lacking in info, I can only imagine the second edition must be some compendium of knowledge.

It's not that the 3rd edition is lacking info, it's that the additional info it has over the second edition probably isn't enough to warrant owners of the 2nd edition buying it...unless their older editons are so dog eared and time worn that they need to be upgraded anyway.

BrianO wrote:
PShizzy wrote: ...I will say that, if the third edition is lacking in info, I can only imagine the second edition must be some compendium of knowledge.

It's not that the 3rd edition is lacking info, it's that the additional info it has over the second edition probably isn't enough to warrant owners of the 2nd edition buying it...unless their older editons are so dog eared and time worn that they need to be upgraded anyway.

+1

If you don't have either, get the 3rd. Not that you will get tons more information, but at least a little and the color pages help to visualize things better.....and I only make this statement because we see in color.....

.......now that I think about it things related to photography are often better learned in black and white so one can concentrate on the light alone. hmmmmmmmmm

Thanks for clearing that up guys, I totally misread that. I'm VERY glad I have the third edition. I consider it a must have book and am glad to have read through it a few times over. I actually find it fascinating.

Max

Just got my copy today.

Excellent stuff...

Max

"What does he say about continuous lighting? Yea or nay?"

the type of lighting source is irrelevant to the book's content.

I'd also like to suggest to the OP "Matters of Light and Depth" by Academy Award winning cinematographer and lighting instrument designer Ross Lowell.

Bought the book last year and love it. Would recommend it to anyone really interested in light as it relates to photographing objects.

This book is a joke. A friend bought it for me for xmas. I read a few random sections here and there, flipped through the rest, and saw nothing of value. This is more of a textbook for high school kids than anything else, or if you need to learn basic and old studio techniques.

stickonatree wrote:
This book is a joke. A friend bought it for me for xmas. I read a few random sections here and there, flipped through the rest, and saw nothing of value. This is more of a textbook for high school kids than anything else, or if you need to learn basic and old studio techniques.

I just ordered it. Hopefully it really isn't at a "high school" level. I'd hate for the info to go over my head.

I just wanted to bring back this thread I started, as I have now been referring to this text book (Third Edition) for lighting glass. If your interested in my specific project, you will find my questions here:

http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/803097

Anyway...

I have a specific question, as it relates to the information provided in this book. "Bright" and "Dark" field lighting setups for lighting glass. They both worked very well for me, and the devil was in the details such as keeping the background the same size as my viewfinder, and moving the subject slightly back and forth to manipulate edge definition, etc.

My question is... that I now want to use this new knowledge of lighting, to create a specific shot for my portfolio... Here is the example of what I want to create: http://www.flickr.com/photos/kylemay/2041260277/

Question is this.. I will create a "Bright Field" setup using one light as I have done for just the glass itself.. now I want to illuminate the "contents" of the glass (liquid & olive in this case) without any distractions, and without ruining my light setup for the glass.

Do I simply add say a 580II directly overhead at a low power say... 1/64 with a snoot? I am wondering what others have done to accomplish this type of result!

Thanks

Travis Harris wrote: ...Question is this.. I will create a "Bright Field" setup using one light as I have done for just the glass itself.. now I want to illuminate the "contents" of the glass (liquid & olive in this case) without any distractions, and without ruining my light setup for the glass.

"Liquids in Glass" -- pages 172 - 176 in your book.

Short answer: for the classic "beer mug" shot, I have used the old trick of cutting out a mug-shaped piece of white carboard and standing it up behind the mug. Then, because the liquid acts as a lens, magnifying the image of the card to a different degree than the mug alone, moving the card back and forth and trimming it as needed to get the correct image.

For clear liquids, like water or a gin & vermouth mixture, you may not need any change in setup. At most you may want a light or reflector to illuminate objects in the liquid -- like the olives in your example -- and the basic lessons on lighting objects to reveal their shape and texture apply. But set up the scene for the glass lighting first, then decide if supplemental lighting is needed. A reflector may provide all the additional light you need.

Interesting... but, what about a martini glass? Will a cutout still be an appropriate option? I do remember reading about the beer glass.. I will take another look tonight, and maybe shoot a test for fun...

Travis Harris wrote: Interesting... but, what about a martini glass? Will a cutout still be an appropriate option?

Oops. I was adding more info to my post while you were reading and responding.

No, you shouldn't need a cutout for a martini glass, due to size and shape of glass, and amount and color of the contents.

HA

I am a bit eager!!

Okay, I will try to play with this over the next few nights, and I will post some results. I will try both a reflector for fill and a low power snooted 580 for some fill...

nycfirefighter wrote:
I must be an abject idiot but I have this book and it is way too complicated for me. I understand what is trying to be accomplished -- explanation of how light behaves in lighting products -- but I cannot grasp the concepts and explanations. Maybe someone can recommend another book I can look at (being written for a 4 year old and in crayon is ok).

Thanks for the help.

Light Science and Magic is a great book but it approaches lighting in what a would call a very clinical and abstract way, with a few very controlled examples to illustrate specific concepts. You are left to your own to apply the concepts more generally. I can see how this presentation would be difficult for some people to grasp.

Creative Lighting Techniques for Studio Photographers (I think that's the right one) in my opinion covers essentially the same concepts but from a more practical standpoint. I think these two books compliment each other nicely and might help people who are struggling with LSM.

Thanks for that info too.. The more I read the better!

Don't miss Neil van Niekerk's new book. It's easy to understand and really informative: http://www.planetneil.com/tangents/2009/08/18/the-book-2/

Velu01 wrote:
... " family of angles" ... one of those interesting and useful topics !
Rgds
Velu
+1 - I found myself looking at shiny stuff for a month and thinking in terms of family of angles. Damned good book. I wish I knew if the 3rd ed is better enough to replace my 1st ed.