How To Light A Clock

[cargo]

Yes it does say "Clock"


Anyhow jesting apart. I have this clock, the better half never really liked it, she don't really like old stuff :-( We had a new fireplace fitted and this timepiece is now banned from mantle so I said I would sell it, if poss. Then the good lady changed her mind when our Daughter chirped up that she liked it and why would you want rid of it

By then I had been mulling it over in my mind on how I would photograph the item. So I spent some time this afternoon trying. The photos here are the best I could do. They were taken in raw and have had no exsposure changes made in post. Hopefully this way some of you kind people can tell me where I have gone wrong.
I did attend Garry's "free" still life afternoon late last year and did try to remember some tips.
Lighting wise I am never sure on the starting point as to where the main light should be coming from ? In this case I placed a 60cmx60cm soft box above close as poss so as not to reflect back into the lens. I then wanted to bounce some light into the dial but no matter how many pieces of card I used most times I kept getting a reflection of the card in the glass. Eventualy I decided to use a speedlight with homemade grid from as far back as I had room for,from camera left then I placed a bounce card on right hand side. This gave the best results but the dial needed more light really as there is more detail in there or does it look ok ?
Nearly forgot, the top silver rim of the glass which was nearest the softbox had a massive glare on it which was a real pain to sort, that is until I remembered Garry showing us a neat trick, can't recall what he used but I used a strip of card and masking taped it to the softbox above the rim worked like magic no highlight

Anyway I am sorry for the long thread but thought it wise to let you all know what I had done so you could give better help. That is if anyone reads along

Gaz

ps: lighting wise I have 3 speedlights (2 used here) and 3 small softboxes plus a reflector.

1

2

3

 

[Garry Edwards]

What do you mean "I did attend Garry's "free" still life afternoon" ? From memory it was free, and unless you were very late it was a full day...

I think you've done pretty well with this. It seriously lacks drama, because the lighting is too soft, but the very serious downside of using hard lighting is that it shows up every tiny fault, so works best with new items in perfect condition.

That 'neat trick' was probably Cinefoil, but black card works too.

If I was lighting this, I think I would have started off with a very large softbox overhead and tilted forward a bit, and then a fill from very near the lens - but that would have needed a large softbox, a studio flash and a boom arm, none of which you have.

 

[=ReBeL=]

Well,it depends what you want to achieve really. If it is just for fun, then I must say I quite like the effect you have there already. It is a bit underexposed, but that can be easily corrected in PP.

The way you have you lighting set up now, reveals the wood texture nicely. There are some conflicting shadows but they are not too distracting (except the one under the clock in the middle picture).

You can light a subject like that in many different ways and get different looks, all depends on personal taste and the effect you want to get.

 

[cargo]

What do you mean "I did attend Garry's "free" still life afternoon" ? From memory it was free, and unless you were very late it was a full day...

I think you've done pretty well with this. It seriously lacks drama, because the lighting is too soft, but the very serious downside of using hard lighting is that it shows up every tiny fault, so works best with new items in perfect condition.

That 'neat trick' was probably Cinefoil, but black card works too.

If I was lighting this, I think I would have started off with a very large softbox overhead and tilted forward a bit, and then a fill from very near the lens - but that would have needed a large softbox, a studio flash and a boom arm, none of which you have.

Hi Garry. Sorry about the above free comment, it reads wrong looking at it now and yes it was a full day too my mistake apoloigies.
Thanks good to know I seem to have done an ok job and was not to far off the mark. I thought the little speedlight from the side would add some sharpness along with filling in the face. I could fill the face with a bounce from the front under the lens but you could see the card reflected. I had the idea of using a larger piece of card with hole cut out for the lens which would have covered the whole clock face I would be assuming this would not show as a reflection but I never tried so I don't know if that would have worked.I do have a boom for the softbox and maybe I could have held another but I only have small boxes. I will upload my set up photo forgot this morning.
Many thanks for replying.
Gaz

Well,it depends what you want to achieve really. If it is just for fun, then I must say I quite like the effect you have there already. It is a bit underexposed, but that can be easily corrected in PP.

The way you have you lighting set up now, reveals the wood texture nicely. There are some conflicting shadows but they are not too distracting (except the one under the clock in the middle picture).

You can light a subject like that in many different ways and get different looks, all depends on personal taste and the effect you want to get.

Thanks Adrian.
Seems I did ok and yes I can sort the exsposure out in post. So I am pleased about that. I had not thought of conflicting shadows but had noticed that ugly one on the centre image.How would I have removed that when shooting ? Flagging somehow ?

ps: Like you say this is for fun I am not a photographer so don't take photos for anyone else. It's just very interesting & frustrating too

Gaz

Upped the exsposure on the face and a touch over all.

 

[Diving Pete]

my only 'real' issue is that by shooting it straight on you have lost all depth & the image looks flat.

 

[=ReBeL=]

Hi Gary,

you could reduce the dark shadow by modifying the positioning of the light. You could also try flagging it. Also instead of shining it directly on the clock itself, you could point it at a white sheet / card and position it so it lights the clock. This would soften up all the shadows created by this light, however it will also make the light softer, which in turn will not reveal the texture so nicely.

Similar to what Garry suggested, I would probably start with the softbox above moved back behind the subject a bit and tilt it forward toward the camera (just watch out for a flare) and then use two white sheets of paper (or foam card) left and right to bounce some light back to the front of the clock.

In the edit you have done the exposure is much better, but it looks a bit too flat now for my liking. I like shadows and would not remove them completely from the clock, because it looks a bit two-dimentional now. I would up the contrast a bit. If it was me doing the PP, I'd probably also darken the clocks base a bit, because now it is one of the brightest things in the photo and stands out a bit too much.

Having said all of that I think you've done a nice job and I like the effect

 

[Garry Edwards]

If you remember, from that lighting day, with that type of shot I used a very large softbox immediately over the subject and pointing forwards a bit so that it didn't light the front, leaving the ability to light the front separately.

Your softbox is small (forced on you by only having a speedlight, which can't light a large softbox evenly, it isn't close enough and it's tilting back, lighting the front, not forwards lighting everything except the front...
Small points, but important ones.

I'm not going to be at work for the next week and will be very busy, so may not be able to answer any queries for a while.

 

[cargo]

my only 'real' issue is that by shooting it straight on you have lost all depth & the image looks flat.

Thanks Pete. Good point.

Hi Gary,

you could reduce the dark shadow by modifying the positioning of the light. You could also try flagging it. Also instead of shining it directly on the clock itself, you could point it at a white sheet / card and position it so it lights the clock. This would soften up all the shadows created by this light, however it will also make the light softer, which in turn will not reveal the texture so nicely.

Similar to what Garry suggested, I would probably start with the softbox above moved back behind the subject a bit and tilt it forward toward the camera (just watch out for a flare) and then use two white sheets of paper (or foam card) left and right to bounce some light back to the front of the clock.

In the edit you have done the exposure is much better, but it looks a bit too flat now for my liking. I like shadows and would not remove them completely from the clock, because it looks a bit two-dimentional now. I would up the contrast a bit. If it was me doing the PP, I'd probably also darken the clocks base a bit, because now it is one of the brightest things in the photo and stands out a bit too much.

Having said all of that I think you've done a nice job and I like the effect

Thanks Adrian.I get what you are saying re post work it was a very quick edit just to make sure I could brighten the face up and make the image work but good points to watch out for regarding the contrast.
When moving the softbox back and tilting do you mean tilt the edge nearest the camera up the opposite to what I have done in the image above. When I used the card as you suggest I had to have them real close which then showed up in the glass.Maybe that would be diferent with the box placed as you describe.
Thanks for the positive feedback.
Gaz

If you remember, from that lighting day, with that type of shot I used a very large softbox immediately over the subject and pointing forwards a bit so that it didn't light the front, leaving the ability to light the front separately.

Your softbox is small (forced on you by only having a speedlight, which can't light a large softbox evenly, it isn't close enough and it's tilting back, lighting the front, not forwards lighting everything except the front...
Small points, but important ones.

I'm not going to be at work for the next week and will be very busy, so may not be able to answer any queries for a while.

Thanks Garry.
Yes I did remember and the first frames were taken that way but I veared off piste thinking I was on the wrong track as most of the clock was very unlite with a very strong/blown highlight on the top chrome rim.
I maybe had it to far back and not strong enough ?

Many thanks for coming back.

Gaz

 

[=ReBeL=]

Yes, pretty much. Position your softbox above and a little behind your subject and then take the near-camera edge and move it up a bit. However, this works best with a large softbox which gives much more wrap-around light and it is also much easier to bounce the light back into your subject.

I'm not sure how will this work with a speedlite and 60x60 softbox though, but I guess it is worth a try.

 

[Garry Edwards]

Thanks Garry.
Yes I did remember and the first frames were taken that way but I veared off piste thinking I was on the wrong track as most of the clock was very unlite with a very strong/blown highlight on the top chrome rim.
I maybe had it to far back and not strong enough ?

Many thanks for coming back.

Gaz

It's the opposite really - the idea is that the front of the clock should be unlit, so that it can be lit separately to the top.
And the power level should be low, not high - just enough to create a subtle highlight on the rim, and to light the top

 

[cargo]

Yes, pretty much. Position your softbox above and a little behind your subject and then take the near-camera edge and move it up a bit. However, this works best with a large softbox which gives much more wrap-around light and it is also much easier to bounce the light back into your subject.

I'm not sure how will this work with a speedlite and 60x60 softbox though, but I guess it is worth a try.

Many thanks. Yes worth a try for sure.

It's the opposite really - the idea is that the front of the clock should be unlit, so that it can be lit separately to the top.
And the power level should be low, not high - just enough to create a subtle highlight on the rim, and to light the top

Ok Garry maybe I was on the right path apart from the bright rim of which I hadnt worked how to fix by then.

Thanks

Gaz

1st frame looked terrible :-( So moved and tilted box as set up above.

 

[=ReBeL=]

It should be behind the subject tilted towards the camera. In this photo the softbox is clearly above the clock.

Remember that the objective isn't to get rid of all shadows and drown the subject in light. Shadows are as important as highlights and help create the 3D illusion on a 2D medium.

 

[cargo]

Thank you I see that now. I will have a play with that softbox and angle to see the differance. As you can tell I still get confused with the light.

Gaz