Too much spill/wrap around using BG reflector

Cris_L

Cris_L

Take That's Biggest Fan
Suspended / Banned
Messages
1,923
Name
Cris
Edit My Images
Yes
I've got a lencarta set up and as I'm in a very small space use a Bg reflector to blow the BG white. Trouble is even with the BG light set to minimum power (just enough to blow most of it) I'm getting a fair bit of light spilling onto the subjects face on that side.

I don't think its bouncing off the nearest wall because I've tried blocking it (only partly I admit). I've been using a BG stand so the light is fairly low.

Any ideas? putting more space between subject and BG isnt really an option as I'm having to shoot at about 25mm to get half body as it is.

cheers
 
Can you post a wide shot of the set-up if possible?
 
Wrap is a reflection of the background off the subject. Excessive brightness of the background causes lens flare - loss of contrast and outline bleaching.

To reduce wrap, you must reduce the width of the background. Either make it smaller by screening it off, or by moving the subject fowards which makes it relatively smaller, with the same result.

To reduce flare, turn the background lights down, and shield the lens.
 
Last edited:
Cris, having similar issues with my reflector. I too work in very small areas (peoples houses) and having to position the reflector very close to the b/ground. Because I shoot lots of toddlers, I have to have it on the edge and not directly behind. On my last shoot I was finding one side was a bright white and the other side a dull white. As a newbie to this lighting it could be down to technique, but think its also down to the lack of space available.
 
Thats precisely the problem I'm having. Will post up a shot of the set up when I'm able to but its like

*****background*****
reflector************
******************
******************
*****subject******
*****************
*****************
*****************
******camera*****
**********Key light
 
I use a spill kit very close to the BG and bring the subject forward, i dont have loads of room so i played with the settings till i got the power just right not to spill onto subject but enough to blow out the BG
 
Maybe I need to experiment with the angle of the bg reflector more, perhaps I can make the light spread across the bg rather than just bounce off it
 
I have similar problem,

I put it down to the fact im working in a very small space, there is no way of getting around it, just need to play with the angle of the reflector, I've not yet got a full whiteout on my bg without haveing masses of spill onto the subject, I know why because my subject is 2ft or less away from the BG :( i need a tardis studio.
 
kiteninja said:
I have similar problem,

I put it down to the fact im working in a very small space, there is no way of getting around it, just need to play with the angle of the reflector, I've not yet got a full whiteout on my bg without haveing masses of spill onto the subject, I know why because my subject is 2ft or less away from the BG :( i need a tardis studio.
Click to expand...

Haha yes! It's called a Lastolite HiLite background. Seriously, that's what you need to do blown white in a small space. And they work really well.

Getting the fully blown white look is difficult to do well at the best of times. You need width to have a reasonable chance of getting the background evenly lit, and depth to prevent spill and control wrap.

With a HiLite, the lights go inside, and you can put the subject right up against it if you have to. Dr Who uses one all the time :D Here you go http://www.warehouseexpress.com/search/?q=lastolite hilite
 
I agree with HoppyUK, but the closer your subject to the hilite the more wrap you will need to deal with.

I have never met an area where everything is a balance/compromise like photography !
 
Hmm, I might email Garry Edwards see if he has any ideas. I know the BG reflectors are sold as "ideal when space is limited" so there must be a workaround..
 
Cris_L said:
Hmm, I might email Garry Edwards see if he has any ideas. I know the BG reflectors are sold as "ideal when space is limited" so there must be a workaround..
Click to expand...
I decided to post my reply here, as it may help others...

Your problem is wrap, pure and simple.
Wrap is caused by light from a light source reaching the subject where it isn't wanted, and when you overexpose a white background it becomes a light source in its own right.

There are several things you can do to minimise wrap, including not overexposing the background any more than you need to and having plenty of space between subject and background, but the one thing that will really work is to make the background smaller.
Making the background smaller simply involves masking off the part of the background that isn't going to show in the photo, and the jargon term for this is 'flagging'. Use anything that works - sheets of black cardboard, hardboard, plywood, blackwrap - it doesn't matter.

To the person who suggested that the best answer is a Hi-lite, sorry but you're very wrong. The only advantage that the Hi-lite has in this situation is that it's physically smaller than most backgrounds, but if often needs to be flagged off none the less.

As with almost everything else in photography, good equipment helps but the most important factors are care and knowledge - knowing what causes the problem and knowing how to avoid it, and taking a bit of care - and now you know how to avoid the problem:)
 
cheers Garry, so are saying that the light which is wrapping around the subject may actually be what has bounced off the BG, rather than coming directly from the reflector light?

I was wondering if, as my reflector is close to and pointing directly at the BG, that the light was actually being concentrated on a relatively small area and was more likely to bounce back. maybe if I pointed the reflector slightly upwards the light would "spread" over the Bg and be less likely to bounce off?

or is that the most hilarious thing anyone has ever said?
 
Cris_L said:
cheers Garry, so are saying that the light which is wrapping around the subject may actually be what has bounced off the BG, rather than coming directly from the reflector light?

I was wondering if, as my reflector is close to and pointing directly at the BG, that the light was actually being concentrated on a relatively small area and was more likely to bounce back. maybe if I pointed the reflector slightly upwards the light would "spread" over the Bg and be less likely to bounce off?

or is that the most hilarious thing anyone has ever said?
Click to expand...

That makes sense, because the light will be reflected off at an acute angle and, because of the effect of cosine law, far less light will reach the back of your subject BUT there are 2 problems to that...

1. The problem here is wrap, not light bouncing onto the back of the subject
2. The background won't be as evenly lit and will become a bit darker as it becomes higher. That IMO is likely to be an improvement but if you like pure white chavbackgrounds then you'll have to increase the power of the background light, which will create more overexposure at the bottom.
 
I think in my case it is just when people have been too close to b/ground. Will have to experiment more.
 
Garry Edwards said:
I decided to post my reply here, as it may help others...

Your problem is wrap, pure and simple.
Wrap is caused by light from a light source reaching the subject where it isn't wanted, and when you overexpose a white background it becomes a light source in its own right.

There are several things you can do to minimise wrap, including not overexposing the background any more than you need to and having plenty of space between subject and background, but the one thing that will really work is to make the background smaller.
Making the background smaller simply involves masking off the part of the background that isn't going to show in the photo, and the jargon term for this is 'flagging'. Use anything that works - sheets of black cardboard, hardboard, plywood, blackwrap - it doesn't matter.

To the person who suggested that the best answer is a Hi-lite, sorry but you're very wrong. The only advantage that the Hi-lite has in this situation is that it's physically smaller than most backgrounds, but if often needs to be flagged off none the less.

As with almost everything else in photography, good equipment helps but the most important factors are care and knowledge - knowing what causes the problem and knowing how to avoid it, and taking a bit of care - and now you know how to avoid the problem:)
Click to expand...

Garry, I don't think anybody suggested that a HiLite doesn't have to be flagged in the same way as any other white background that is wider than it needs to be, but for anyone working in small area I believe that actually it is the best answer.

The savings in both width and depth are dramatic, and I can detect no difference in practise between the results obtained with a HiLite and a conventional background with conventional lighting (Cosine Law). Unfortunately, they cost £2-300 but that's the only drawback.
 
Chris/Simon - Sorry to bring back an old thread, but how do you guys get on with wrap now?

I seem to be having similar issues, and hoping that i can overcome this with loads of practise :)
 
Y15HAL said:
Chris/Simon - Sorry to bring back an old thread, but how do you guys get on with wrap now?

I seem to be having similar issues, and hoping that i can overcome this with loads of practise :)
Click to expand...

Wrap is simply the reflection of the background on the subject, usually most visible on the cheeks.

The amount of wrap is directly related to the width of the background, relative to the subject. So if the background is huge, you get more wrap, and the closer the subject is positioned to it, it becomes relatively bigger still.

So the answer is to make the background smaller, by masking off or screening any areas you don't need; or by making it relatively smaller, by moving the subject away from it.

Too much exposure on the background also increases the appearance of wrap.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top