Metering for low key shots

donkeymusic

donkeymusic

Suspended / Banned
Messages
2,524
Name
Carlo
Edit My Images
Yes
Hi,

I have been trying some low key shots tonight, but the subject seems too bright still, i was doing tis by using one light to the left of the subject but wasn't sure what i should be measuring the light at.

Any suggestions would be much appreciated.

Thanks
 
Do you have an example you can post?
It's difficult to answer without seeing the problem, because not everyone uses terms like 'low key' and 'too bright' in the same way
 
Garry,

Its just dawned on me that i had no method of diffusion, i was using the lights that were lighting the backdrop. What would you suggest from your kit to use for lighting a subject in low key?

Thanks
 
Err... don't know. I really need a much better description of what you're trying to achieve, and if possible a sample shot.
 
That's very easy to replicate.

Either a standard reflector (with no diffusion) dead square to the subject and at something like 90 degrees, or a softbox (but not too close) at a bit more than 90 degrees, i.e. a bit further back and pointing slightly forward. This shot had the light slightly higher than dead square, you could try that position and see which you like best.

Other than that, just make sure that the subject is far enough away from the background for no light to reach it, and either keep the subject well away from a reflective surface such as a wall on the dark side, or introduce a flag to darken that side.
 
i just used a standard reflector but was getting much brighter images, not got my camera handy at the moment so can't show you what results i had, will post tomorrow.

Basically i had one reflector to the side of the subject and had this set from when it was lighting the background so was reading f11, thinking about it i should have lowered that to read more like f8, but overall wasn't sure what it should have been set as.

So you wouldn't suggest and diffusion on the reflector then?
 
Well, it depends.
Diffusion would take the edge off of the shot in the sense that it wouldn't show pores/scars etc as sharply. That may be what you want, or it may be the opposite of what you want.

It really has nothing to do with 'brightness' - that's just exposure, and with this kind of shot you'll often find that deliberate under exposure usually gives a better result.
 
Garry Edwards said:
Well, it depends.
Diffusion would take the edge off of the shot in the sense that it wouldn't show pores/scars etc as sharply. That may be what you want, or it may be the opposite of what you want.

It really has nothing to do with 'brightness' - that's just exposure, and with this kind of shot you'll often find that deliberate under exposure usually gives a better result.
Click to expand...

so really, its all down to the photographer as to how it should be lit? allowing for positioning of the flash and the amount of power to create a more creative lighting, with regards to the exposure there is no set standard that should be adhered to.
 
donkeymusic said:
so really, its all down to the photographer as to how it should be lit? allowing for positioning of the flash and the amount of power to create a more creative lighting, with regards to the exposure there is no set standard that should be adhered to.
Click to expand...
Yes, it's subjective
 
sorry to reopen this thread, I was attempting this again in the studio.

I was using a smart flash to the right of the subject and with soft box and turned the power down low and was just turning up a stop each time until i got one that looked similar to the example. I didn't meter anything.

When trying without a soft box the light seem too bright.

The point of these was to get a black and white shot so was working just not sure i was using the best method.

On a different note but slightly similar, i have the following scenario, baby lay on black cloth against black background, i would like to light the baby but to show the black as black, what would be the best method.

I have tried to just the key light on the baby, but this still lets light hit the back drop and show the creases, moving it forward it didn't make much difference, just wondering what you would advise?

Thanks for you assistance
 
Last edited:
Normally with black, the inverse square law helps us, because with the subject some distance away from the background, a lot less light hits the background so it photographs as black - and of course exactly the same thing happens with a white background, but the inverse square law works against us and the background photographs as grey.

Your problem is that the baby is right up against the background so there is minimal fall off. If the light is as close as it can possibly be to the baby it will help, but not much.

The real answer is to use a black velvet (or black flock) background because either of those will absorb nearly all of the light and so photograph as black. Black muslin works reasonably well, black paper is hopeless but even black muslin is nowhere near as good as black velvet.

Paul Rodgers does a black velvet background - I was using one on Tuesday for my lighting demos at the Event Photographer Society show, and it worked brilliantly, even with the model right up against it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top