Tutorials

Tip: Softbox or shoot-through umbrella = ringlight

I think we can all agree that there are more than enough self-portraits of me on this here Interweb thing. But here's another one!

This time it's to demonstrate how you can use a softbox or shoot-through umbrella to get roughly the same effect as an expensive ringlight. The stressed-out pose with my hand up was done to illustrate how soft the shadows are. Notice that my wrist is right in front of my eye but my eye is still well lit.

portraitwithumbrellaringlight.jpg

Click through to the lighting diagram for a summary of how to set everything up.

This technique is still used by even the most high-end magazine photographers. Look for the tell-tale catchlights in the subject's eyes which will appear as circles or squares with a line going from the middle downwards.

umbrellaringlightcatchlight.jpg
ps: This portrait appears on the front page of Strobist today. Eek! There's nothing like waking up on a Sunday afternoon and seeing your own ugly mug staring back at you from your favourite web site…

Black background and silhouette lighting tutorials

I've posted a couple of new illustrated lighting tutorials over on Flickr explaining the two basic techniques used for yesterday's photos of a violinist.

blackbackgroundandsilhouette.jpg

  • How to use any wall as a black background
    Get to grips with this technique and you'll have a good foundation for many other styles of lighting, especially ones involving ratios.
  • Silhouette lighting
    This one isn't as important as you'll only ever use this technique for creating silhouettes but if you need to do it then this is how.

Step-by-step guide to cross-lighting

Apparently this photo was in the Press & Journal last week although I never saw it myself. But I do know that it was used over on Strobist today as an example of cross-lighting which is a huge compliment.

48be9898-420.jpg

I've been meaning to do a write-up about the procedure behind cross-lighting, so for the benefit of people clicking through from Strobist I'll do that now.

Ambient exposure:

The first thing to keep in mind is that you're exposing your ambient for the sky. Forget about the ground. When you try this for the first time and you chimp the test shots on your camera you'll probably be worried that the finished photo is going to look awful. But it won't. This is the correct way to do it.

So with your camera in manual mode and metering for the whole frame, point it at the sky in the direction that you'll be taking the photo. Choose your shooting direction based on the position of the sun, which should ideally be at 45 degrees behind the subject. For this shot the sun was behind the subjects to frame right.

Set your ISO to its lowest setting and your shutter speed to the fastest speed that your camera can flash-sync at, probably 1/250s. This allows you to tame the ambient while still giving your flash a fighting chance of matching sunlight. Then adjust the aperture to correctly expose the sky.

Now when you take a test shot you'll find that the sky looks a little darker than it usually does in photos, and the ground looks under-exposed. Perfect! This is what you want. This is the beginning of that natural-but-surreal look that is so evident in cross-lit photos.

48be9850-420.jpg

Flash exposure: 

Now it's time to set-up your flash, which should be directly across from the sun on the opposite side of the subject.

You'll probably need to use bare flash because you need a lot of power and diffusers eat too much. If you're shooting on an overcast day, or when the conditions just aren't very bright, you might be able to set your flash to 1/4 or 1/2 power.

But it was ridiculously bright sunlight for this photo so with my shutter speed at 1/500s and the sky metered at f/8 the flash was set to full power straight away, and I wasn't sure even that would be enough.

Time for a test shot to check the flash exposure so I held my hand over the middle of the boat, where the subjects would be standing:

48be9856-420.jpg
I wanted to use a rear light to enhance the effect of the sun so I positioned that on the other side of the boat. This was at half power because it was a lot closer to where the subjects would be standing. Here's the customary hand shot to check its effect:

48be9859-420.jpg

I'll admit that I don't know what effect, if any, this flash had in the final photo. During the 23 shots that I did of the musicians I can be sure that there will have been times when it hadn't recycled fast enough and so didn't fire, but I can't tell which shots it fired for and which it didn't. So in conclusion I would say that you probably don't need a trim light for cross-lit shots.

With the ambient exposure set and the flashes set it was now just a matter of waiting for the musicians. Once they arrived I explained what I was trying to do and roughly how I wanted them to position themselves in the boat. Then I let them get on with it while I grabbed some more test shots, firstly checking that the ambient exposure hadn't changed significantly:

48be9861-420.jpg

By this point of setting up a cross-lit shot you might be better relying on your histogram rather than the preview image. You'll have a lot of dark tones in the image with some spiking in the highlights for the brighter areas of sky. This is the histogram for that test shot:

48be9861-histogram.jpg

Make sure it all works: 

Time now for a final check of your flash exposure, and the easiest way to do this is to just walk into the frame and take close-ups so you can see people's faces more clearly on your preview image. If their faces are too dark or too bright then change the power of your flash or move it closer or further away. What you DON'T want to see when you're already at full power is that your flash isn't providing enough light, and that's exactly what happened on this occasion:

48be9863-420.jpg

That looked about one stop under-exposed to me, so my only option was to open my aperture from f/8 to f/5.6. That was going to make the ambient brighter than I wanted it to be but there are times when you have to choose between doing the shot less-than-perfectly or not doing it at all, and the clock was ticking. So I opened up to f/5.6 and did some more test shots to make sure the flash exposure on people's faces was correct, which it was:

blasboatfacetests.jpg

Make sure you do test shots that cover the full width and height of the area that you need the flash to light. For example it would be no good doing a test shot of someone in the middle of this set-up and then finding that the people on the edges weren't properly lit.

Next a quick dash around to behind them to check what the combination of sunlight and rear flash was doing. Looked okay, a couple of stops over-exposed which is what you want, no time to change it anyway:

48be9873-420.jpg
Doing the shot: 

With the settings locked I made a few adjustments to how the group was set-up, went to where I'd be taking the shot from, and asked them all to make sure they could clearly see the main flash without anyone else's head blocking their view. That's one way to check (approximately) that you won't get anyone's face in shadow: If they can see the flash then the flash can see them.

(I did actually know that we were okay for this shot because I'd checked already, but I might start using this method in future so this was an experiment to find out if people will understand what I'm asking them to do.)

We then did 23 shots in about two minutes, with the 22nd frame being the best of the bunch, despite the flaw of the guy standing at the back, third from the left, having his face slightly obscured by the guy sitting in front of him. Kind of ruins the shot for me but there you go. My fault, not theirs.
48be9898-420.jpg

It's always a good idea to grab some extra shots if you've got time, so I quickly took some from low down and some from high up, holding the camera above my head and getting the girl in the middle of the group to tell me if it needed to be raised or lowered to point straight at her. For these shots I just told everyone to make themselves the most dominant person in the frame. Didn't get anything particularly good but it's worth trying.
blasboatextrashots.jpg

Here's an outtake from the overhead shots that shows where the rear flash was positioned in relation to the group:

48be9908-420.jpg

And that's how you cross-light a shot using one flash and the sun. You can pretty much disregard the rear flash as its effect was negligible at best and the shot would have worked just as well without it.

Tip: Scouting a location

One of the best things you can do to make a location shoot go smoothly is to go and shoot it in advance without the subjects there.

It's perfectly natural to have preconceptions of how the finished shot will look, and few things will send a shoot to hell faster than the realisation that it isn't going according to plan and you can't quickly figure out a back-up shot.

Shoot the location on your own time and you'll get a clearer idea of what will or won't work, and how the location can be adapted if things change at the last minute, such as needing to fit more or fewer people into the shot, having subjects with a great variety of heights, someone in a wheelchair, etc.

Tomorrow I'll be doing a photograph of a group of musicians who will be performing a concert in the village hall. I originally thought of doing the photo on some large rocks near the hall but it's tricky to get a nice background at that location, so I then thought of doing it on the beach with the mermaid in the background. That opened up a world of hurt as I'd need to light the mermaid as well so I decided to use another of our local sculptures, a group of three 10-foot salmon.

I've never even taken a snapshot of the salmon before so I headed over there tonight to work out what angles work and how to light the salmon in such a way that I can set-up the lights tomorrow ready for five or six people to walk into frame, position themselves roughly where I want them, and click. I also wanted to see if it would be possible to light them using a shoot-through umbrella at ISO 100 so I'd be able to use my 1Ds which can be too grainy at higher ISO settings.

The shot I have in mind is fairly standard: Moody sky with flash-lit subjects. So the first thing to do is meter the sky. You can do this easily by putting your camera in evaluative mode (or whatever mode on your camera meters the whole frame) and then filling the frame with sky. If you're taking part in the Strobist twilight challenge then you'll be using this technique, and here's a rough guide to how the sky should look. Note that it isn't particularly dark. You don't want it to be.

341x9028-420.jpg

Using that same exposure setting, here's a shot that shows the sky and ground. It's okay that the ground is almost black, we won't be seeing much of it in our final image. As a bonus this means that you don't have to worry too much about background objects. There are a couple of benches in this scene but in silhouette they practically disappear.

341x9030-420.jpg

This next shot had the flash at full power through the shoot-through umbrella. Clearly not enough light so that was the umbrella straight back in the bag!

341x9033-420.jpg

And here we have a bare flash at full power. Plenty light! Don't worry about the horrible flash look, we're going to deal with that in a moment.

341x9034-420.jpg

Okay so why does that shot look so amateurish?

Two reasons:

  • In the time it's taken to put the umbrella away the sky has darkened considerably and I haven't adjusted the shutter speed to lift it again.
  • Because the flash was aimed directly at the salmon (albeit on a light stand to frame left) there's a lot of light spill on the foreground, which is typical of amateur flash-lit photos.

The first problem is a no-brainer: Drop the shutter speed. Re-meter the sky if necessary. To fix the second problem you could angle the flash upwards to feather the light at the bottom of the frame, and that's a great solution, probably the one you'll use most often. But I thought it might be a good idea to take this shot from a low angle so I lay on the floor and pointed the camera upwards. Now it doesn't matter if the flash spills on the foreground because it isn't in the frame anymore.

(Remember that the flash is in a fixed position on a light stand so I can point the camera wherever I want and the lighting won't change. That's one huge advantage of using off-camera lighting.) 

Compare this shot and the previous one. The only thing that has changed is the ambient exposure (to brighten the sky) and the composition to lose the foreground. The flash didn't change at all. But look how much more 'lit' this one appears, whereas the previous one just looked like someone popped a flash.

Update: Oops, looking at the two photos again, I think I must have changed the angle of the flash a little as some of the shadows are different.
341x9043-420.jpg
You'll have noticed that the salmon are a very dark colour so it's difficult to judge the lighting from the camera's preview screen or histogram. To make sure your flash exposure really is spot-on you can just walk into the scene and take some photos of your hand. Take a few shots at various positions, ideally where you expect people's faces to be, to make sure the light coverage is even.

341x9046-side_by_side.jpg

By this point I'd pretty much decided that I was going to abandon this as a location for tomorrow's picture. Too many variables, too awkward a composition, and if the sky is overcast then the shot will be a dud.

But while you're there it can't hurt to try a different composition. Sometimes the best angle doesn't occur to you until you actually see it on the camera screen. So I re-set the light around at the side of the salmon, re-metered the sky, and the result was a boring side-on view but with potential for using the salmon as a background rather than an element in the picture.

341x9053-420.jpg

Again, check your flash coverage to make sure it's even:

341x9055-side_by_side.jpg

And it's not a bad idea to go and stand in the scene for some test shots, just to get a feel for what effect the composition will have on the subjects. (Yes, more dorky pictures of myself on the web. Good job I'm not vain, eh?)

341x9060-side_by_side.jpg

Conclusion? No, there are better locations. But tonight wasn't a waste of time. I'd prefer to decide against this location tonight rather than tomorrow when the subjects are wondering why the bozo with the camera is starting to panic.

Tip: How to perfectly focus a self-portrait

Please excuse the poor quality model in this photograph but this is a tip about self-portraits so it's all I've got to work with.

a6cd9886-420.jpg
It's a fact of life for photographers that we sometimes have to take pictures of ourselves. Often it's just for practice when we're learning a new lighting technique so it doesn't have to be a good photo, but secretly I think we all hope it will be, so we want it to be correctly focused. If all the planets fall into line and you somehow get that one photo of yourself looking like Tom Cruise then you want it to be sharp in the right places, and that means getting your eyes in focus.

If you use standard auto-focus then chances are the camera will focus on the end of your nose, more than a centimetre forward from your eyes. Sometimes it will focus on the bridge of your nose but that's still about half a centimetre forward from your eyes. It could possibly focus on your mouth but that's almost certainly going to be further forward or back than your eyes, depending on the angle of your head. What you can be sure the camera will not focus on is your eyes.

So how do you solve this problem?

There are two well-known but shoddy techniques that you can try:

  • Use a small aperture for a large depth of field so your whole face will be in focus. But depth of field is an artistic choice so if you want a shallow DOF then you should use a shallow DOF. Using a deep DOF solves one problem by creating another. Bad idea.
  • Trial and error. Auto-focus the camera then take a few photos, move forward a little and take some more, more forward again and take some more, maybe move back a bit and take some more, etc. But you know from doing portrait sessions with other people that you might take 100 frames to get the one you want, so what if your one good frame of yourself is one of the 90% that aren't properly focussed? Bad idea.

The solution is incredibly simple. It occurred to me when I was doing a self-portrait a couple of days ago for the latest Strobist lighting challenge. Before you scroll down, please take a moment to see if you can figure it out, otherwise you'll kick yourself when I tell you!

Here's a clue: Show the camera what you want it to focus on.

Before I tell you the secret, I'll prove that it works. Here's a close-up from the photo at the top of this post. It was taken at 70mm with the aperture set to f/3.5 so the usable depth of field was only a few millimetres. As you can see, though, my eye is perfectly sharp and my eyelashes are perfectly sharp, but my eyebrow and the bridge of my nose are out of focus. Perfect.

a6cd9886-eye-420.jpg

Okay so here's how you do it…

Although the portrait is brightly lit, the room was totally dark. The photo was lit by flash but the camera needed to focus in ambient light, which was non-existent — it could have hunted for focus all day and it would never have found it.

So I held a small torch next to my eye and then used a cable release to auto-focus the camera. The only thing visible in the room was the bulb of the torch and the part of my eye that it was illuminating, so that was what the camera focussed on. Then I moved the torch away and took the photo. Result!

a6cd9847-420.jpg

The white background… uh, wait for it… that was a piece of foam board leaning on my back with one corner stuck down the back of my trousers to hold it up! How's that for an improvised background?!

Beauty lighting with one flash

This image is the result of an experiment that I think worked quite well.

For months I've been promising / threatening Joyce that I'd do a 'proper' portrait of her, but circumstances have conspired against us. Today I only had my 1Ds and a single flash with me, a terrible combination for doing a portrait, but I decided to give it a go and see what I could produce. Always up for a challenge!

We did some shots using dramatic lighting with lots of shadows, not at all flattering, especially for a woman, so I decided to try a variant of beauty lighting. When I say "variant" I mean that I made it up on the spot and it isn't traditional beauty lighting in any sense of the word, but it worked so I'll call it whatever I want! :-)

341x8613-420.jpg
We did the shot in the café at the village hall where Joyce works. The background is the blackboard that they write the day's specials on. The single flash was positioned behind Joyce and it served two purposes: To light up the back of her hair and hands, and to bounce some light back onto the blackboard.
The main light was just ambient, which meant I had to use ISO 400 (not desirable on a 1Ds due to shadow noise) and a stupidly low 1/13s shutter speed. (Normally for a quick location shot like this I'd be working with two flashes and a 1D at 1/500s.) Out of 37 photos there were maybe half a dozen that weren't ruined by motion blur, but they were still quite blurry. By pure fluke, this was the best frame and it was the sharpest of the lot.

The 'pose' with the glasses was just an idea to solve a problem: Joyce loves to pose and she's good at it, but she always puts her head down which exaggerates her nose. When I told her not to pose she looked uncomfortable. So I gave her something to do with her glasses and the result looks fairly natural.

This is how the shot was set-up. Click to see it with notes:

341x8615-420.jpg

Tip: Lens cap = incident meter

Cameras base their auto-exposure on reflective metering, which is unreliable. Light meters are much more reliable as they use incident metering. Here's a quick-n-easy way to use your camera as a makeshift incident meter.

First of all you will need to know how to use your camera's manual mode, and how to select different metering modes. Flick the camera into manual and select whatever aperture you want to use. Now find something black such as your wallet, an item of clothing or your camera's lens cap.

If you've got a spot meter on your camera then this next step is easy. Simply switch to spot metering, hold your black object in front of whatever you want to photograph, and set your shutter speed to under-expose by 2 stops. Get rid of the black object and take your picture.

lenscapspotmetering.jpg

If your camera doesn't have spot metering then it might have partial metering which is effectively a less precise spot meter. Use that, just make sure your black object covers at least the middle 10% of the frame. Then it's the same procedure: Under-expose by 2 stops and take your picture.

lenscapcentremetering.jpg

If you only have full-frame metering then you'll need to make sure you use a black object large enough to cover the whole frame, but keep it far enough away from the camera that you won't cast a shadow on to it.

When you use this technique you're actually using the zone system, and you're showing your camera what zone 3 should look like. Zone 3 is defined as being where dark objects with texture belong. When you spot meter your black object, your camera has no idea if it's black, white or grey, so by default it goes in to zone 5. When you under-expose by 2 stops you place it in zone 3. Then when you take your picture you'll have a correct exposure. If the blacks are in the right zone then everything else must be too.

This technique has much the same strengths and weaknesses as an incident light meter. It won't be fooled by the brightness (or darkness) of the object you want to photograph. But it doesn't work very well for large scenes such as landscapes.

For example, in these two pictures, the lighting across the whole scene is consistent so the overall exposure appears correct:

lenscapmeteringflowers.jpg

But in this scene, although the rocks in the foreground are correctly exposed, the metering hasn't taken the background into account so the image appears to be over-exposed. There may be times when this would be exactly the effect you want, but more often than not it won't be.

lenscapmeteringseascape.jpg

Penny softbox

Trying something for Lighting 102 yesterday and I needed a way to point a softbox downwards. Gear freak that I am, one thing that I don't have is a boom so this is the cheap alternative I came up with.

papersoftbox-470.jpg
Instructions:

  1. Trim a thin strip off the long edge of a piece of white copier paper.
  2. Tear about an inch off the end of that strip and stick the long and short pieces together so you can fold them out to produce a T shape.
  3. Tape the T shape to the middle of the copier paper.
  4. Tape the other end to the middle of your flash head.
  5. Set the flash zoom to the right amount to cover as much of the paper as possible without spilling over.

You could increase the stability by using two strips, taped to the paper a couple of inches apart and then taped to either side of the flash head. That would prevent the paper from twisting and keep it flatter.

Total cost: One pence (rounded up)

Here's a sample image. The penny softbox was the only lighting used to make this image, positioned about 6 inches above the grater.

341x8287-420.jpg

I've done shots like this before with £1,500 worth of lights and modifiers and the results were no better than this shot made with one flash and a sheet of paper. Admittedly I still use the proper gear for paying jobs, so if you're a future customer then don't worry about me turning up with a load of makeshift DIY stuff. But this example is further proof that you can produce strong images without spending a fortune on all the over-priced light modifiers on the market today.

Improve your small-flash umbrella set-up

A lot of us have started using umbrellas for location portraits with small camera flashes. It's nice to have that big diffused light source to soften the shadows but unfortunately the umbrella adaptors hold the flash very high, so all of your light is firing into the top half of the umbrella. And as you can see I use an external battery pack which lifts the flash even higher. 48be7003-420.jpg

Here's the solution. If you're carrying a light stand and umbrella with you then it's not much of a stretch to carry two light stands. Why not use one to hold your umbrella and the other to hold your flash? That way you can position the flash exactly where you want it.

In the comparison shots below, the image on the left shows light coverage with the flash on the umbrella adaptor. On the right is the light coverage with the flash on its own stand at the right height. Keep the flash a couple of feet behind the adaptor to avoid nasty shadows. Note that in the second image the flash looks higher but it's actually lower, it's just closer to where I was taking the picture from so the perspective is a bit misleading.

umbrellacomparisons070730.jpg Alternatively you could just rubber-band / ball-bungee the flash to the stem of the umbrella. Hmm, wish I'd thought of that earlier. :-)

Ross County vs Caledonian Thistle

Some pics from yesterday's pre-season friendly between Ross County and Caledonian Thistle at Victoria Park in Dingwall.

This was the first time in what must be over a year that I shot a football match with two cameras, one with a 70-200mm f/2.8 and one with a 300mm f/2.8 + 1.4 extender. It paid off with the shot of Andrew Barrowman scoring County's goal which I was able to get with the shorter range of the zoom.

countycaley070728.jpg
County's new manager Dick Campbell is a photographer's dream. He stays right at the side of the pitch the whole time, frequently shouting to players and giving directions. Plus the guy just looks like your classic football hard man. (Okay, maybe not in the second pic, but usually he does.) He seems like a nice bloke too. I've briefly met him a couple of times now and he can obviously tell that I'm the new kid on the block, so he tones down the gruff. Gotta respect that.

dickcampbell070728.jpg
Based on my results from this match (which I'm happy with) and my results from previous matches (which I wasn't happy with) here's what I'd suggest for covering a football match with a two-camera set-up:

  • Sit about 1/3 of the way along one side of the pitch. If you're looking for photos of one particular team then sit closer to the opposing team's goal.

  • Use the camera with your long lens to cover the further half of the pitch, and the distant side of the nearer half. You'll have good range for the opposing team's goals and you'll have the players in 'your' team facing you.
  • When the action comes into the near half, switch to the cam with your zoom. Most of the action you care about in this half will be around the goals.

What would make this set-up really good would be if the zooms had focus-stop buttons on them like the long teles, but you can get around that by using the camera's AE-lock button for focus (which a lot of football shooters do anyway) or you can switch to one-shot focus mode which is what I ended up doing.

Here's a rough illustration of the set-up described above:

football-shooting-position-01c.jpg

Also for about 10 minutes at the end of this match I tried something that I've been meaning to do for ages but kept forgetting. I switched from using only the centre focus point to using all 45 focus points, basically putting the camera into full do-all-the-focusing-for-me mode. Results were encouraging. Yes there was a lot of focus jumping when the action was far away, but you need to balance that with the advantage of shooting much closer action because you don't need to keep the middle of the frame over one player. I'm a sucker for in-your-face action so I'll probably try shooting this way for at least one half of the match next time.

Here's a sample frame. Lousy shot of course but it's just an extreme example to illustrate the point. The players were 15-20 feet away from me at an effective focal length of 546mm. If I'd been using the centre focus point (marked 'X') it may have snapped the focus onto the background at this point. Now imagine if a split second later the players had moved closer together and the ball had bounced up into frame. That would have been a great shot and I'd have missed it. There's definitely a case to be made for using auto-select focusing.

45focussample.jpg