Grey backdrop light setup HELP!!

D

danielc

Suspended / Banned
Messages
16
Edit My Images
No
Hi all,

I am new to this site and new to photography.

Sorry if this has been asked before, I did look through the site but did not really find the answer to my questions.

I have got a Nikon D100 with a 18-55mm lens, ive purchased 2 stellarX 600w flash lights with softboxes, light metre and a medium grey backdrop non reflective 8ft by 20ft.

All the photographs I will be taking are going to be in limited space, around 8ft by 10ft, height not being a problem. What I would like to know is:

Should I only be using one light or two?

How far away do the lights need to be from the subject and at what angle?

Should the lights be above the subject or at head height?

How far should a subject be away from the backdrop?

What is a good ISO, Aperture and shutter speed setting?

How do I stop the shadows on the backdrop?

I have tried to find out the information online myself but all I can find is aot of white backdrop setups, 3 light setups, umbrella setups and so on.

So any help digrams or information would be great and if there is anyone with photos of a 2 light setup with a grey backdrop I would love to see them so I know what the end result should be.

Thanks

Dan
 
Also work through the tutorials at www.strobist.com - they're mostly based on speedlights but the principles are the same.

It does sound like you might be best mastering the camera first, then add a flash and see what the effect is, then add the second... your questions suggest that you're looking for a 'standard lighting setup' but it all depends what you want to achieve!
 
Thanks for the replies. I have been looking on youtube but most seem to be about white backdrops with different lighting setups. Is it all relative?

I know I'm trying to run before I can walk but I have started a new business canvas printing and would like to add portraits onto the back of it, hense the rush to learn this as I'm setting up this sunday. I have been practising but just don't know if I'm getting the right result.
 
incapete said:
Also work through the tutorials at www.strobist.com - they're mostly based on speedlights but the principles are the same.

It does sound like you might be best mastering the camera first, then add a flash and see what the effect is, then add the second... your questions suggest that you're looking for a 'standard lighting setup' but it all depends what you want to achieve!
Click to expand...



I am still mastering the camera but am getting there with that, and you are right I am looking for a standard lighting setup. I'm not looking for magazine images just images that people would look at and think "I'm happy with that".

Once I have reached that then I would like to progress from there, but for now I just need to know what I need to know to get me started.
 
danielc said:
I know I'm trying to run before I can walk but I have started a new business canvas printing and would like to add portraits onto the back of it, hense the rush to learn this as I'm setting up this sunday. I have been practising but just don't know if I'm getting the right result.
Click to expand...

You intend to offer photographic portraits as a business service? ! :eek:
Sounds like a ridiculous idea to me with the level of photo knowledge you appear to have!
Let's have a look at some of your pics.
 
Should I only be using one light or two?
Click to expand...
For natural results, use the same number of lights indoors as you find outdoors.
Use extra lighting (or a reflector) only if you need to mitigate the light in some way, e.g. to reduce shadows
How far away do the lights need to be from the subject and at what angle?

Should the lights be above the subject or at head height?
Click to expand...
Wherever they produce the effect you're looking for. There are no rules, but it's worth bearing in mind that the light outdoors is always from above, to some extent at least
How far should a subject be away from the backdrop?
Click to expand...
As far as possible, the subject and the background are in fact 2 separate backgrounds and need to be lit separately, so the more distance the better within reason
What is a good ISO, Aperture and shutter speed setting?
Click to expand...
Lowest possible ISO (to maintain image qualtiy) aperture to suit depth of field required, shutter speed is almost irrelevant, as the only function of the shutter is to be open when the flash fires. 1 1/125th is usually fine.
How do I stop the shadows on the backdrop?
Click to expand...
By having enough distance between subject and background, by lighting the background and/or by hiding the shadow of the subject behind the subject

Yes, there are a lot of tutorials and videos out there, and lots of books on portrait lighting. Most of them are rubbish. Learn for yourself, by experimenting, and develop your own style.
 
Ok then, let's have a look at your questions...

One flash or two?
Depends what you want to achieve. You can get some good shots with just one but you'd probably want to use a reflector with it to open up the shadow side of your subject, with two flashes you can choose the direction and intensity of both your lights.
Alternatively, use one flash and reflector with the second flash behind your subject as a rim-light to produce a backlit effect. Or behind the subject and pointing at the backdrop to 'blow out' a white backdrop.

How far away and what angle?
Distance from subject will affect how hard the light appears, the softboxes will soften it to start with and then you'll find the further away you put them the softer the light is. Obviously you'll have to weigh this up with space available and what power you've got the flashes set to.
As for the angle, try one at about 45degrees to the subject/your camera to start with then play with it since this affects where the shadows fall on your subject.

Height
Generally you'd put them above head height but again, depending on what you're doing with shadows etc you might want something lower. If you use one behind your subject then this is likely to be lower down and hidden by their body.

Distance from backdrop
Depends how bright you want it! The reason a lot of people use a white background is that you can vary the appearance of it between bright white, through grey and right up to black - all by varying how it's lit and how far away it is from your subject.

ISO, aperture etc
Don't take this the wrong way but this is impossible to recommend online. This is the very core of your photography and is entirely dependant on the setup.
Start with an ISO of 100 since this gives the lowest noise - you're using flash so light isn't going to be a problem.
If you're just using flashes the exposure time can be anything over the sync-speed really, the flash with freeze the image at the point they go off - if you've got ambient light then the shutter speed is the bit that controls how bright this is in your image. Quick shutter speed = low ambient light, longer exposure = more background light.
Aperture directly controls how much of the flash light enters the camera so it's this, along with the flash power, that you want to play with. You'll also want to take Depth of Field into account; a wide aperture to get shallow DoF will possibly mean you want to drop your flash power to avoid over-exposure (and vice versa if you need a larger DoF)

Shadows
To avoid shadows on the backdrop you need to make sure that the flashes and camera are positioned to that the shadows are out of sight - high flashes will cast a shadow down on the the ground so a headshot wouldn't capture them. Another option is to aim a flash at the backdrop itself which works well on a white drop.


Phew! A long post!
Check out some of the sites that have been recommended and be careful you're not being too ambitious - good luck with the canvas business though!
 
Thanks for that detailed post Incapete great help and all the other replies, this is just the info I need.

Off to Practice.
 
Ok this is what I got...





Let me know what you think and what could be changed.

Thanks for all your help you have put my way folks.:)
 
can you post these at 800px wide please.
 
I know one of them is 800 wide but the other one is not because of the aspect ratio. Not unless I'm getting it wrong. Regarding the images if anyone could give me any pointers on what could be changed to improve them that would be great.
 
The image size is small. lets see if this is better?

DSC_0155.jpg


DSC_01531.jpg
 
Any comments from some professional eyes would be great. How do I stop the white clothes on my baby boy looking so white but still keep the same overall light?
 
Garry Edwards is your man for this but I would say it is slightly over exposed. Try upping the aperture or lowering the power on your lights slightly to keep the detail on the white clothes
 
danielc said:
Any comments from some professional eyes would be great. How do I stop the white clothes on my baby boy looking so white but still keep the same overall light?
Click to expand...

It's difficult to know where to start with these shots. There's nothing actually wrong with them, just quite a lot that needs to be better...

As for losing detail in the whites, there's an old saying that you should expose for the highlights, which means that the exposure should be correct for the white areas, and correctly exposed highlights means a degree of underexposure in the darker areas. The reason for this is that although you can adjust the exposure of the darker areas you can't put back detail that has been lost in the highlight areas.

Another think to consider is the jpeg settings on your camera. Depending on make, it should be set NOT to produce high contrast. As a general rule, it's a very good idea to shoot in raw format, which will allow you to maintain the highest possible detail, but to practice using jpeg, which is far less forgiving.

The lighting is also a bit on the harsh side for some tastes. Personally I'm very much in favour of really harsh lighting, but only for the right subject. Softer lighting would help to preserve highlight details, both on the babygrow and on her face.

Also, if the light had been central and above instead of off to the side, the shadows on her face would have been more pleasing, the eyes would have looked larger and there would have been less light on the babygrow. This comment applies to these particular photos, where she is looking towards the camera. If you had shot her looking at her baby then the lighting you used would have worked much better.

Also, the pose isn't too flattering. A less square on approach would have narrowed her shoulders.

Just a few random thoughts...
 
Thanks for that Garry, a lot of that has made sense to me now.

Would you always use a tripod when taking photos or free hand?

Also I have my camera set on fine at the moment, I understand that raw is a much better format but my camera (Nikon d100) can only take 3 or 5 photos in raw then it seems to take about 30 secs to 1 minute to process them. Is jpeg a better format to use rather than fine?


Thanks for your advice.
 
Tripod? That's just a question of style. One of the very best fashion/portrait photographers I know, Marc Gouguenheim, always uses a tripod for portraits. Many people, including me, hardly ever do. The reasons for using a tripod are to make life easier from the compositional viewpoint and to be able to interact better with the model. You don't need a tripod to avoid camera shake, given that flash duration is short enough to take care of that problem For commercial and still life shots I always use a tripod or a studio stand.

It must be at least 8 years since I used a Nikon D100 so I'm not sure, but I believe that 'Fine' IS a jpeg. To expand on what I said earlier, all of my own shots are taken in raw because raw gives me more flexibiltiy - but it also hides poor technique, so I use jpeg when i'm training myself, or training other people to get exposure and colour balance right. But the question of raw -v- jpeg is one of those arguments that can never really be resolved, it's a case of each to his/her own
 
The various quality settings available are all presets for jpeg resolution so 'fine' should be your highest resolution in that format.
 
incapete said:
The various quality settings available are all presets for jpeg resolution so 'fine' should be your highest resolution in that format.
Click to expand...
Agreed - but the point I was trying to make is that the camera may also have presets for the jpeg settings, e.g. auto sharpening, colour saturation and contrast - and if it's set to high contrast then this tends to destroy highlight detail.

No different really to the machine-processing of film, where processors would increase the temperature and add salt to 'improve' contrast, because most people like their photos to have more 'punch'. I can't remember whether the D100 offers those choices.

The issues are really about lighting, but if the contrast settings have been set to 'hard' then it doesn't help.
 
Garry Edwards said:
Agreed - but the point I was trying to make is that the camera may also have presets for the jpeg settings, e.g. auto sharpening, colour saturation and contrast - and if it's set to high contrast then this tends to destroy highlight detail.
Click to expand...

Totally agree - the OP asked if he should use 'fine' or 'jpeg' so I was just trying to point out that they've the same thing, sorry for the confusion.



danielc said:
my camera (Nikon d100) can only take 3 or 5 photos in raw then it seems to take about 30 secs to 1 minute to process them
Click to expand...

Are you talking about holding the shutter down and taking rapid-fire shots? If so the camera will save these to a buffer which then gets processed to the memory card.
You shouldn't need to take lots of photos mega-quick with portraits, if nothing else you're flash might not be able to keep up!
 
Ok it's finally coming together now thanks to all your help people. It's not 100% by no means, but I'm happy with the results and I think jo public would be for what they will be paying.

If any professionals could cast their eyes again at the images that would be great. I know the poses are not the best but I have been trying to get the lighting right first.

I’m still trying to work out how to stop the white bean bag looking to over exposed, I tried turning the flash down and lighting the backdrop on its own but know joy, and also changing the aperture.







 
I don't think these are good enough to charge for.
 
* Lighting
* Composition
* Cropping/Framing
* Posing
* Exposure
 
Could you explain a bit more as to how I can improve on them points, I felt they are better than the last ones I posted so any information would help. I no practice makes perfect but if I no what to look for I can work to that.

Has anyone got a photo on a grey backdrop to show me what it should look like.

Thaks Dan
 
Ok, so with some help and practice this is what I have come up with over the last week.

Any advice comments would be great.

Also I have bought a nikon D300





 
I'd watch the exposure.. you've blown out some of the highlights in the last shot so unless you're going for that really high-key look like the first one then maybe think about dialing down the flash a bit.
Also, have a think about the reflections in the subject's eyes - I'm guessing you've got a big square softbox pointed right at them since they've all got square reflections in their eyes.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top