Photography Light Box Test

[WildBill]

Hey, the pixels are free, so have fun and experiment

I was just telling my boss the other day to shoot plenty of pictures, since he didn't have to worry about the cost of film.

That's a great photograph, but the tomatoes look too good to eat.

[nyj]

I'll offer this from the perspective of a retired professional photographer. One thing to avoid in photography (in most cases) is direct frontal lighting. Lighting should be angled to allow for both highlight and shadow, for without highlight and shadow there is no "dimenison." Keep in mind that you are photographing a 3 dimensional object that will be viewed on paper or screen in 2 dimensions. Therefore, having both highlight and shadow creates the "appearance" of depth and 3rd dimension. If the angled lighting is natural light, great, but in the studio that dimension must be created with a main light and a fill light (or main light and relector), and perhaps a background or "separation" light. The angled main light creates the highlights and the fill light is the overall illumination that also creates detail in the shadow area. The image below, just googled for illustration, shows how highlight and shadow create a 3d appearance, where direct frontal lighting would be 2d and extremely boring and without impact. However, if you are just trying to say in your photograph, "this is my XDs" any lighting will do. When metering main and fill light, a good rule of thumb is 1 1/2stops difference between the main and fill, but experimentation is always fun. Hey, the pixels are free, so have fun and experiment

[ Image ]

That's the best picture of tomatoes I've ever seen.

[RX8er]

Thanks for the feedback everyone and the examples.

I'll offer this from the perspective of a retired professional photographer. One thing to avoid in photography (in most cases) is direct frontal lighting. Lighting should be angled to allow for both highlight and shadow, for without highlight and shadow there is no "dimenison." Keep in mind that you are photographing a 3 dimensional object that will be viewed on paper or screen in 2 dimensions. Therefore, having both highlight and shadow creates the "appearance" of depth and 3rd dimension. If the angled lighting is natural light, great, but in the studio that dimension must be created with a main light and a fill light (or main light and relector), and perhaps a background or "separation" light. The angled main light creates the highlights and the fill light is the overall illumination that also creates detail in the shadow area. The image below, just googled for illustration, shows how highlight and shadow create a 3d appearance, where direct frontal lighting would be 2d and extremely boring and without impact. However, if you are just trying to say in your photograph, "this is my XDs" any lighting will do. When metering main and fill light, a good rule of thumb is 1 1/2stops difference between the main and fill, but experimentation is always fun. Hey, the pixels are free, so have fun and experiment

This is the effect I am after and yes, digital makes it easy to play around. I guess I am going to have to break down and get a couple slave flashes that I can use.

Unless you're determined to make your own, B&H has got a nice little set up for about $50. Two light, studio box*, four back drops.
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/8 ... t_and.html

*Being an old film photographer I think of something else when you say light box.

Unless you're determined to make your own, B&H has got a nice little set up for about $50. Two light, studio box*, four back drops.
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/8 ... t_and.html

*Being an old film photographer I think of something else when you say light box.

I made my own because of the size limitation with many of them including that one. Mine cost about $12 and 30 minutes to put it together.

[G26ster]

Personally, I would stick with your daylight bulbs. Studio type flashes have "modeling lights" that are used to show the photog. the results of the flash. IOW, what you see is what you get. The beauty is also that you can use your screen to see the finished product if you are using bulbs, when if using flash alone, it will be one test shot after another while you adjust your lighting. Yes, pixels are free, but it will reduce your time considerably. Just a suggestion. Also, if you camera can shoot RAW images, the color temperature of the light source is immaterial, as you can adjust the RAW image to replicate any type light source your choose (daylight, incandescent, etc.) and save as a .JPG. Just make sure all lighting used is the same type.

Also make sure, if you do shoot with your bulbs, that you have a steady mount for the camera, and a remote shutter release, as you will shoot at much slower shutter speeds with bulbs, than with flash. Even with flash it's wise to have a remote release. Doesn't take much camera shake to make an outstanding shot mediocre.

I'm not saying avoid flash, I'm just saying bulbs give the photographer the ability to see the (almost) finished photo "before" the shot is taken. It also allows you to spot meter the highlight and shadow areas, to ensure a good ratio, and give the exact exposure "before" the shot. Unless you want to invest in a flash meter, you will spend a lot of time adjusting the power on your strobes before you shoot or after. Just MHO.

[filmtex]

Count me in as a San Antonio photographer. I make my living photographing in (primarily) the Middle East. 6-8,000 stills and 20-40 hours of video during an average year. I too have an XD Sub Compact. I thought the OP's photo was a great start. WIth the helpful comments above he should be on the right track to put out some outstanding shots in the near future. As somebody observed-pixels are free!

[RX8er]

Personally, I would stick with your daylight bulbs. Studio type flashes have "modeling lights" that are used to show the photog. the results of the flash. IOW, what you see is what you get. The beauty is also that you can use your screen to see the finished product if you are using bulbs, when if using flash alone, it will be one test shot after another while you adjust your lighting. Yes, pixels are free, but it will reduce your time considerably. Just a suggestion. Also, if you camera can shoot RAW images, the color temperature of the light source is immaterial, as you can adjust the RAW image to replicate any type light source your choose (daylight, incandescent, etc.) and save as a .JPG. Just make sure all lighting used is the same type.

Also make sure, if you do shoot with your bulbs, that you have a steady mount for the camera, and a remote shutter release, as you will shoot at much slower shutter speeds with bulbs, than with flash. Even with flash it's wise to have a remote release. Doesn't take much camera shake to make an outstanding shot mediocre.

I'm not saying avoid flash, I'm just saying bulbs give the photographer the ability to see the (almost) finished photo "before" the shot is taken. It also allows you to spot meter the highlight and shadow areas, to ensure a good ratio, and give the exact exposure "before" the shot. Unless you want to invest in a flash meter, you will spend a lot of time adjusting the power on your strobes before you shoot or after. Just MHO.

Thank you for the pointers. I plan to play a bit more on Wednesday. One question, does help or hurt to have a darkened room to shoot in? Some of the videos I have seen, they are shooting in the dark.

I have a good tripod and remote shutter that I have played with. The problem is when I slow down shutter, I am over exposing. I just need to play and practice a bit more with the Exposure Triangle. I can shot in RAW but really doesn't do me much good. I lost the older copy of Photoshop CS I had and the license for it so now I am just stuck with a 10 year old copy of Paint Shop Pro.

[G26ster]

Personally, I would stick with your daylight bulbs. Studio type flashes have "modeling lights" that are used to show the photog. the results of the flash. IOW, what you see is what you get. The beauty is also that you can use your screen to see the finished product if you are using bulbs, when if using flash alone, it will be one test shot after another while you adjust your lighting. Yes, pixels are free, but it will reduce your time considerably. Just a suggestion. Also, if you camera can shoot RAW images, the color temperature of the light source is immaterial, as you can adjust the RAW image to replicate any type light source your choose (daylight, incandescent, etc.) and save as a .JPG. Just make sure all lighting used is the same type.

Also make sure, if you do shoot with your bulbs, that you have a steady mount for the camera, and a remote shutter release, as you will shoot at much slower shutter speeds with bulbs, than with flash. Even with flash it's wise to have a remote release. Doesn't take much camera shake to make an outstanding shot mediocre.

I'm not saying avoid flash, I'm just saying bulbs give the photographer the ability to see the (almost) finished photo "before" the shot is taken. It also allows you to spot meter the highlight and shadow areas, to ensure a good ratio, and give the exact exposure "before" the shot. Unless you want to invest in a flash meter, you will spend a lot of time adjusting the power on your strobes before you shoot or after. Just MHO.

Thank you for the pointers. I plan to play a bit more on Wednesday. One question, does help or hurt to have a darkened room to shoot in? Some of the videos I have seen, they are shooting in the dark.

I have a good tripod and remote shutter that I have played with. The problem is when I slow down shutter, I am over exposing. I just need to play and practice a bit more with the Exposure Triangle. I can shot in RAW but really doesn't do me much good. I lost the older copy of Photoshop CS I had and the license for it so now I am just stuck with a 10 year old copy of Paint Shop Pro.

A dark(ened) room is helpful, as the only light you want to use for exposure is the light you placed on the subject. I don't know what mode you are shooting in. I should have been clear that my suggestions for exposure and metering are based on using the manual mode. However, using a Program mode should still give you acceptable results. My life was based on shooting in studio in manual mode with medium and large format cameras.

As for the "exposure triangle," that's just another name for EV (Exposure Value). Don't get wrapped up in that right now, but in the situation you described, if you slow your shutter speed down by 1stop (i.e. 1/60 sec to 1/30 sec) you would need to decrease (close) your aperture (f-stop) (i.e. f8 to f11) to have the same EV as you had before you slowed down your shutter. The EV is the amount of light you want entering the camera to be properly exposed.

Get a book on basic photography if you don't already have one, that covers exposure, depth of field, composition, lighting techniques, etc., and just go slow and enjoy the improvement with each successful shot

Edit to add:

What is your goal with these photos?

[RX8er]

A dark(ened) room is helpful, as the only light you want to use for exposure is the light you placed on the subject. I don't know what mode you are shooting in. I should have been clear that my suggestions for exposure and metering are based on using the manual mode. However, using a Program mode should still give you acceptable results. My life was based on shooting in studio in manual mode with medium and large format cameras.

As for the "exposure triangle," that's just another name for EV (Exposure Value). Don't get wrapped up in that right now, but in the situation you described, if you slow your shutter speed down by 1stop (i.e. 1/60 sec to 1/30 sec) you would need to decrease (close) your aperture (f-stop) (i.e. f8 to f11) to have the same EV as you had before you slowed down your shutter. The EV is the amount of light you want entering the camera to be properly exposed.

Get a book on basic photography if you don't already have one, that covers exposure, depth of field, composition, lighting techniques, etc., and just go slow and enjoy the improvement with each successful shot

Edit to add:

What is your goal with these photos?

Thanks for all the advice and info. I have been playing with Manual and AP modes. AP seems to keep me out of trouble but I "feel" like I am learning more by shooting in manual mode. No real goal other than to take good photographs when I need too. I know that just shooting in Auto will work most of the time but I am never satisfied when I don't understand or think that I can improve.

For example of what started this, I just added an EOtech 553 in the for sale area. I don't sell but a couple times a year, my first time this year, but when I do, good pictures are nice. I also like to take photos of the different critters I have in my salt water reef tanks. I've been eyeing a Canon 50mm f/1.4 lens and will add the digital photography for dummies when I buy. thanks again for all your pointers.