How to make these kind of food photos?

phinix

phinix

Messages
1,103
Edit My Images
No
I never used studio equipment, so would like to ask - how could I take photos like this one below? (its not mine, found it on some page)
What kind of lights or flashguns should I use and what kind of background? (maybe different color?)

I know that food photographers use different techniques, some stuff to make food look good etc - lets skip that and just focus on lighting and background.


EDIT: please ignore the glass :)
 
Last edited:
If it were me and I am no expert, I would be shooting a fairly shallow depth of field to lose the focus on the glass, and a large / giant softbox as close as possible to get soft lighting,

Again, no expert but you can tell with those soft shadows falling under the buns to the left that there is some form of light softening taking place. Hard to tell in the glass reflection but possible a tall narrow softbox?

The black background is possibly far enough away and of a material type to not have light too visible.

Some lighting expert will be along with the right answer :)
 
glass is only a big problem because it has quite hard reflection of light. Either remove it completely, or better still light it properly with double diffusion. Light is from the right, perhaps a little the back and there is likely some reflector on the left. Nothing too fancy.
 
As this isn't your image, you shouldn't post it. The workaround is to post a link to it instead.

There are different possible approaches, to avoid the almost-inevitable ugly specular reflections on the glass.

We can light the glass as per that tutorial, and comp it in, or if a white background is OK then we can light it with brightfield lighting

Almost as an aside, we don't usually show a single glass, which can indicate an alcohol problem, we usually show 2 glasses, to show companionship, romance or whatever.

I think that this thread belongs in the Lighting Forum, so I'm moving it.
 
Graham W said:
You could do a lot worse than plow through a load of this guy's videos. Not particulally "How To" videos but a great insight.
www.youtube.com

Tin House Studio

Commercial Photography Education, unfounded opinions, entertainment and general good times with Scott Choucino - Commercial Director Photographer Represented by Agent-At-Large
www.youtube.com www.youtube.com
Click to expand...
Scott’s videos are probably a bit too high-end for a beginner. I would rather recommend Joanie Simon’s “The Bite Shot” on Youtube, here.

Regarding the OP’s questions, the background looks like some black cloth (rather untidy, look at the unsightly folds in the foreground...), and the backdrop is either very dark paper or cloth, or artificially darkened in Photoshop. It looks too black to be in-camera, unless they used this new cloth that’s super-black and quite expensive, Musou Kiwami.

Regarding lights, could be one flash to the right and a white reflector to camera left. For small subjects like food, you can probably make do quite nicely with a pair of AD100 Pros from Godox.
 
Blue439 said:
Scott’s videos are probably a bit too high-end for a beginner. I would rather recommend Joanie Simon’s “The Bite Shot” on Youtube, here.

Regarding the OP’s questions, the background looks like some black cloth (rather untidy, look at the unsightly folds in the foreground...), and the backdrop is either very dark paper or cloth, or artificially darkened in Photoshop. It looks too black to be in-camera, unless they used this new cloth that’s super-black and quite expensive, Musou Kiwami.

Regarding lights, could be one flash to the right and a white reflector to camera left. For small subjects like food, you can probably make do quite nicely with a pair of AD100 Pros from Godox.
Click to expand...
Some good points, but let's not overcomplicate things . . .

It's a single large light from the right and a bit behind, almost certainly a large softbox.
There's also a fill light, on-axis with the camera at a very low power setting, which is the right approach, and another to subject left and slightly to the front, although each of these additional lights may be a reflector.

The background is neither here nor there, almost certainly a black fabric one but anything other than vinyl or paper is fine, and of course all backgrounds photograph as black unless light is reflected from them.

As for videos, any video that explains the principles and the physics is worth watching, we should all watch loads of them and take the bits from each that are helpful. Just ignore the ones that are trying to flog gear and the ones that rely on Photoshop too much.
 
Garry Edwards said:
Some good points, but let's not overcomplicate things . . .

It's a single large light from the right and a bit behind, almost certainly a large softbox.
There's also a fill light, on-axis with the camera at a very low power setting, which is the right approach, and another to subject left and slightly to the front, although each of these additional lights may be a reflector.

The background is neither here nor there, almost certainly a black fabric one but anything other than vinyl or paper is fine, and of course all backgrounds photograph as black unless light is reflected from them.

As for videos, any video that explains the principles and the physics is worth watching, we should all watch loads of them and take the bits from each that are helpful. Just ignore the ones that are trying to flog gear and the ones that rely on Photoshop too much.
Click to expand...
Lol! Is overcomplicating what I was doing? :eek:

I rather thought I was simplifying by suggesting a simple white card reflector instead of a fill light at a very low setting... There is really no telling which from that photo. ;)

Regarding videos, I agree with you on the principle. It's just that Scott Choucino is a very high-end commercial photographer with a very "niche" practice and a style that's technically and conceptually leagues above what Liz Putnam does —no offense, there are just different markets for different styles and different budgets. I think someone like Joanie Simon is a much better teacher of food photography for a beginner.
 
The image you linked has a largish soft light back right and something esle to the left, either a fill light or reflector. You could get very similar with a large brolly or softbox and a simple fold up reflector (or anything white) I've taken similar photos with just a window not sun facing and a white shefs coat for reflector.
It's worth noting a LOT of food pics are faked. Burgers stacked are often held from behind to get the higth (why your burger never looks like the picture) Ice cream usually isn't actually ice cream, ice cubes and plastic and frosty glasses are often sprayed, as is some food, indeed some is painted or glossed to make it shine, or get a better colour.
Personally I dont like "cheating" mostly it's because I want to eat the food I photograph after....
 
Blue439 said:
Lol! Is overcomplicating what I was doing? :eek:

I rather thought I was simplifying by suggesting a simple white card reflector instead of a fill light at a very low setting... There is really no telling which from that photo. ;)

Regarding videos, I agree with you on the principle. It's just that Scott Choucino is a very high-end commercial photographer with a very "niche" practice and a style that's technically and conceptually leagues above what Liz Putnam does —no offense, there are just different markets for different styles and different budgets. I think someone like Joanie Simon is a much better teacher of food photography for a beginner.
Click to expand...
Fair point, you're not overcomplicating things, except perhaps for the bit about the background, which doesn't really matter
swanseamale47 said:
The image you linked has a largish soft light back right and something esle to the left, either a fill light or reflector. You could get very similar with a large brolly or softbox and a simple fold up reflector (or anything white) I've taken similar photos with just a window not sun facing and a white shefs coat for reflector.
It's worth noting a LOT of food pics are faked. Burgers stacked are often held from behind to get the higth (why your burger never looks like the picture) Ice cream usually isn't actually ice cream, ice cubes and plastic and frosty glasses are often sprayed, as is some food, indeed some is painted or glossed to make it shine, or get a better colour.
Personally I dont like "cheating" mostly it's because I want to eat the food I photograph after....
Click to expand...
Natural light CAN work but it relies on location, weather and luck, artificial light is a controllable constant.

We don't fake food photos any more, not allowed. The actual, genuine ingredients (but including the oil used in cooking) plus careful light placement, has replaced baby oil for creating gloss, and we can't include anything that isn't present in the bought product, for example if we photography a ready meal chicken curry then we can't add pieces of chicken from another pack - but we can include cotton wool, covered by sauce, to bulk it up a bit - them's the rules:)
 
The best garlic bread I ever had was at a food shoot for a restaurant. What a waste of time. About 2 days after I did the shoot the chef left, then a few months later the place closed down. It seems the "new" chef couldnt cook... :)
Mind the one they had who could cook didn't have a clue. I had to replate all the meals he prepared, what a mess, no presentation , he must have been an army or prison chef, just throw it on the plate any old how.
 
Garry Edwards said:
We don't fake food photos any more, not allowed. The actual, genuine ingredients (but including the oil used in cooking) plus careful light placement, has replaced baby oil for creating gloss, and we can't include anything that isn't present in the bought product, for example if we photography a ready meal chicken curry then we can't add pieces of chicken from another pack - but we can include cotton wool, covered by sauce, to bulk it up a bit - them's the rules:)
Click to expand...
This is quite interesting, I had never heard of that. Can you quote the origin of such regulations? Is it a UK thing? I have never heard of that in continental Europe. Thanks in advance.
 
Blue439 said:
This is quite interesting, I had never heard of that. Can you quote the origin of such regulations? Is it a UK thing? I have never heard of that in continental Europe. Thanks in advance.
Click to expand...
Trading standard may bring criminal prosecutions, but it's really more about complying with the Advertising Standards Authority rules.

Key Rules for Food Photography​

  1. Misleading Advertising (CAP Code Rule 3.1 & 3.3)
    • Food photography must accurately represent the product.
    • Over-enhancement (e.g., using non-edible substitutes like shaving cream for whipped cream) is allowed only if the final product looks the same as advertised.
    • Photos must not exaggerate portion sizes, ingredient quality, or visual appeal beyond what consumers will receive.
As an example of what IS allowed, we can use mashed potato in place of ice cream provided that it looks the same as the ice cream, because ice cream melts and mashed potato doesn't, but we can't fake ingredients that there is no actual need to fake, and we can't mislead potential buyers by exaggeration, enhancement or avoidable substitution.

What an individual photographer may do is one thing, but in reality there's usually at least one assistant, a food stylist and a chef, all doing essential work, plus at least one person from the client, a creative director from the ad agency and at least a couple of odd people from the ad agency wasting time on an awayday, sitting around doing nothing, so it doesn't pay to take risks:)
 
Great discussion here. For that soft, directional look you're seeing in commercial food photography, a large softbox positioned slightly behind and above the subject is indeed the go-to approach. I'd suggest going with a 60x90cm or larger octabox rather than a square softbox — the more even light wrap works well with plates and drinks.

One thing that's made a huge difference in restaurant work is using a black reflector or flag on the opposite side rather than white fill — this gives you more depth and shadow definition, which makes dishes look more three-dimensional and appetising. Natural light plus a single strobe to supplement when needed is also worth experimenting with if you're shooting on location.

For anyone wanting to see how this translates into real commercial results for restaurant clients in the UK, there are some examples and behind-the-scenes notes at [link removed by moderator] might give you a useful style reference.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top