Chiaroscuro lighting examples?

A warning has been given for this post
What an excellent thread, I just have to get shots of my grandchildren using this technique.
 
Last edited:
Nionyn said:
Yeah, easy and fun. Can also be as complicated as you care to make it, of course.

This one's about as obvious and straightforward as it gets, I'd say (chiaro - scuro - chiaro - scuro, from left to right):

Light and Shade(s) by Nionyn_, on Flickr
Click to expand...

Yep, that is what I would call a text book example of what it means

As to the old master use it was to add depth and to direct the viewer

Mike
 
In simple terms it has always meant the use of light and shade.
However that description can be applied to most photographs.
It might be better described as the use of dramatic light and shade.
while colour may be present it is not used to create the effect.
There is not any single lighting effect that must be used. It can be acieved with many different techniques.
As it predates photography, photographic techniques are not the determining factor,
But it is dependant on the use and control of light.
 
mike weeks said:
Yep, that is what I would call a text book example of what it means

As to the old master use it was to add depth and to direct the viewer

Mike
Click to expand...

Mike don't you think that you need to go farer than a process and bring imagination and meaning into an image which may reflect a process ... the meaning can be personal or whatever ....... but it is all about the image at the end of the day

times change

I am not saying this is a good example of C ....... but I can see various meanings and why I took the shot


cc_60.jpg
 
Last edited:
A warning has been given for this post
That won't happen mate, I just asked to get banned from here.

I posted an honest opinion of a pillock and got a warning.

Steve.
 
BillN_33 said:
Mike don't you think that you need to go farer than a process and bring imagination and meaning into an image which may reflect a process ... the meaning can be personal or whatever ....... but it is all about the image at the end of the day
Click to expand...

Like all things this is a technique which when applied well helps an image, but there will always be the art because perfect technique alone will normally never be enough.

Personally I think there are very few that really know what things like real Low key and high key are because they (such terminology) have been stolen by marketing men, but when you see the work by somebody that does understand you will see art.

MIke
 
Steve T said:
That won't happen mate, I just asked to get banned from here.

I posted an honest opinion of a pillock and got a warning.

Steve.
Click to expand...

the main point about a forum like this and a specific thread is to encourage discussion and enhance knowledge for the less aware or experienced ...... it is a learning process for many, (I hope anyway), that's how I treat it - and no topic phases me

don't get uptight you may have just mis understood what has been said
 
mike weeks said:
Like all things this is a technique which when applied well helps an image, but there will always be the art because perfect technique alone will normally never be enough.

Personally I think there are very few that really know what things like real Low key and high key are because they (such terminology) have been stolen by marketing men, but when you see the work by somebody that does understand you will see art.

MIke
Click to expand...

I suppose I am more interested in a message or the message than (photographic) art with such subjects ........... which there is no point in me discussing
 
Last edited:
AshleyC said:
Apologies if you just wanted people
Click to expand...
•
This leaf is spectacular to me! Claire-obscure is a lighting
approach that has been used extensively with "nature morte"
as well as with people or group of.
 
Last edited:
Not sure if this is the right thing/effect you mean. As the fella that showed us how to do this just said it was a famous photographers trademark not sure who though.The aim was to have the subjects lighter side against the darker side of the background and the darker side of the subject against the lighter side of the background. Hope that makes sense. Like I say not sure if this fits the bill. I took this selfie when at home to try and recreate the effect. It was not that easy trying to light the backgound and me at the same time. I used speedlights and a blocker to create the light on the background.

Gaz
lighting_3x2.jpg
 
Garry Edwards said:
This would be helpful too. I would appreciate the option of using it, with your permission. Could you please emaila high res copy to me at support (at) lencarta.com, with either your name or website url, whichever you would like shown?
Click to expand...

No problem Gary - It's a rare selfie taken using just daylight from a velux window on my landing ....I'll dig out the original shot for you.
 
mike weeks said:
In my opinion not, whilst you have light against dark, you do not have dark against light

Mike
Click to expand...

Why do photographers have to reduce things to rules.?
Chiaroscuro is not a rule or defined by a rule. It is purely a lighting effect first used in painting, and can be obtained in many ways with the controlled use of light.
where you have light you will have shade, the picture you commented on has both. However Chiaroscuro rarely concerns itself with partial portraits, though this portrait may well have been part of a scene displaying a greater Chiaroscuro affect.
 
Terrywoodenpic said:
Why do photographers have to reduce things to rules.?
Chiaroscuro is not a rule or defined by a rule. It is purely a lighting effect first used in painting, and can be obtained in many ways with the controlled use of light.
where you have light you will have shade, the picture you commented on has both. However Chiaroscuro rarely concerns itself with partial portraits, though this portrait may well have been part of a scene displaying a greater Chiaroscuro affect.
Click to expand...

But it is not part of a scene as how presented and the question has been what is and what is not
 
mike weeks said:
But it is not part of a scene as how presented and the question has been what is and what is not
Click to expand...

Exactly...
One can be considered little more than a crop of the other. The lighting could remain identical. So how much of an image must be included before a photographer would consider an image to be chiaroscuro. This is not a consideration that an artist would even recognise.
Chiaroscuro is a form of lighting not an arrangement or viewpoint of a subject.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top