Timmers Loc: San Antonio Texas.

Your question is/was: "What's your point?" I think that I have made it. Simply put, either you control the out come of your equipment or it will control the results that you get.

Much of what is put out there is based on mere technology. This position has major flaws inherent in the notion of a persons work. What is important is to grasp that when you control your work you will discover that there are issues and subjects that appear hidden, and yet these issues are at the heart of what is the vision that you express in your work. In fact, your photographs represent you and not the camera, Photoshop technology or the mind sets of others working in the area of photography.

Pupilation is a subject in photography, your doctor may know about pupilation, and then again they may not as there is no reference for they to concern themselves with. Honestly I don't know that they would be much concerned with the subject. Then again a person running for office may not know about pupilation in their image but I am certain that those who are charged with representing them through an image MUST understand such matters or they are inept in their responsibility to seeing to the persons election.

The story goes that Richard Nixon did not attend to his image while on TV, while John Kennedy did. Analyses after the fact revealed that this over sight probably caused him to loose the election. Presidents ware make up when dealing with the media we are told, it is part of the image shaping.

So, if one is doing portraiture then knowing what to do is important. That could be make up, or most likely it is to know how you as a photographer is shaping the image that is being presented. The portrait artist Arnold Newman his portrait of Krupp was not made on a whimsical effort. You can Google the image and through Google find videos of his statements about the image. I reproduce a copy from Google search so that you are sure about the image. I will leave it to Arnold to tell you about this portrait and the how and why it was made. Yes, he was paid to make this portrait but if anyone thinks this was a commercial portrait then I give up because there is no soul in you to help speak with.

Hope this answers your observation of my post regarding the use and control of modeling lights in portraiture.

(Download)

E.L.. Shapiro Loc: Ottawa, Ontario Canada

Thanks for the conversation, your points and observations are appreciated.

Timmers Loc: San Antonio Texas.

Thanks, I always enjoy your intelligent information and observations. Lets face it, we write too much for most of the people here. To get information and inputting ideas and information takes a bit of effort.

Tim.

MrT Loc: Gilbert, AZ

Im new to this group, i bought some used Elinchrom 500 watt lights and need an education so i didnt waste the $600. and Mr. Shapiro gave me a bunch of "homework". Im just getting started and you seem to be farther along than i am so you got different advice. I just started reading the "Zeltsman Approach" yes it is based on film and dated but the ideas about light and posing are still relevant. If i lived closer to Ottawa I offer to by E.L Shapiro a coffee or a beer and pick his brain for hours.

E.L.. Shapiro Loc: Ottawa, Ontario Canada

No doubt, there are many books, online tutorials, and actual classes available learning orportraitura and photographic lighting in general. I'm sure many of them have much to offer to anyone who is willing to learn and improve their photography.

The only things I find problematic with some of these resources is that many of them place too much emphasis on equipment and certain brand names and not enough emphasis on basic and essential theory. Of course, we all need to be familiarized with the "tools of the trade" and what is available on the market and which types are most applicable to what we are doing ,however, when we understand all the basics of lighting along with posing, composition, and post-processing, we will all know enough to make the correct equipment choices based on all the underlying theory and knowledge.

Sometimes I compare photography to other disciplines such as writing and literature. Imagine a creative, artistically inclined, and the knowledgable person wanting to become a writer, a poet, even a technical writer and suddenly realizing that he or she is seriously deficient in basic grammar, spelling and ordinary composition (like me)! So... they go out and purchase a high-tech computer word processing system with all the bells and whistles and still experience problems, issues, and frustrations because of their basic deficiency. That's why I recommend Zeltzman lessons. All the basics are there and they transcend film, digital and whatever medium is coming in the future. Light is light, posing and human body mechanics, composition, placement color usage, contrast, and all the other aesthetics remain the same regardless of the materials. Most of the film technology as to dynamic range, exposure, lighting ratio, angle of incidence and sensitivity can be easily correlated to digital theory- there is usually equivalent theories or processes that are common to both.

I advise folks who are learning photography NOT to "join a cult" and worry about emulating the exact style of their teachers. First, learn the theory and adapt it to your own psychological and aesthetic approach.

There is a trend in learning photography to "run before learning to walk " and a preoccupation with equipment acquisition. When a lighting question arises, here on this site, there is usually an immediate flow of well-meaning responses suggesting all kinds of lighting gear- beauty lights, umbrellas, softboxes, Octoboxes, and much more. It's almost difficult to believe that many of the iconic portraits we all love and discuss, made by many of the grand masters of photography, were made with a simple flood lamp in a 12 or 16-inch metal parabolic reflector and a set of barn doors- perhaps a spun glass diffuser- nothing more than a bright light bulb in what looks like a metal bowl or by the light of a window with exposure to the northern sky- perhaps even a candle.

Many decades ago when returning from the service, I SPLURGED, and spen 2 months at the Winona School of Profession Photography to brush up on my "civilian' photography. I was fortunate to have 3 of my favorite portrait teachers- all doing work that I greatly admired. The first guy did EVERYTHING with 2 umbrella units. In the second class, the teacher was running a dozen lights, and in the last portrait class- the teacher never entered a studio and did everything with natural light. Enough to confuse even the best of students- let alone me! Thing was, the approaches and styles were very different but the underlying theories had more similarities than differences. That was one heck of a good experience.

PS. Regardless of geographic distances, ONLINE brain-piking is always invited- keep in touch!

JohnSwanda Loc: San Francisco

Modeling lights were more important shooting film, since you couldn't see your results right away. But with the ability to shoot tethered (and I can't image anyone shooting portraits digitally NOT shooting tethered to see the shots right away) you can check the lighting on your computer monitor. I have studio strobes with modeling lights, but I still check the lighting as I go along on the monitor, where I can see the lighting much better than I can with the modeling lights.

bkyser Loc: Fly over country in Indiana

Well John. Those of us who started in film, and have been shooting portraits since 1982 can tell you what a shot will look like without tethering, chimping, etc. just based on the meter reads and looking at the subject under the modeling lights.

Not attacking your way of working, just trying to state that you shouldn't make broad assumptions about how other people work.

E.L.. Shapiro Loc: Ottawa, Ontario Canada

So...Everyone is an EXPERT! Jimmy Durante used to say "Everybody wants to get into the act"! I agree- everyone is an expert in what THEY do, what THEY want and expect to from their work. Everyone is entitled to their own concepts. That's why I am not here to argue or disparage anyone's working methods. Nonetheless, here's my CASE for modeling lamps.

As I mentioned previously, I can SOMEWHAT effectively use Speedlights or portable strobes without modeling lights to make portraits. I did that for many years shooting weddings. When I first started out in portraiture, long ago, I could not afford studio strobes, all I had to work with was my wedding lights. At the studio I worked at, I learned portraiture on continuous tungsten lights. I could simulate some of the finer lighting techniques with my strobes but certain finite methods were more difficult to perfect- feathering, precise placement of kicker lights, hair lighting and the use of snoots and barn doors.

Of course, back in the film era, in professional circles, we had to know what was gonna be on the film before we released the shutter. There was no "chimping" or tethering to a computer. We had to know our exposure and ratios down pat! We assessed our lighting by eye and from what we observed on the camera's viewing screen or viewfinder. I still maintain this concept in digital photography and here's why:

Let's start with some of the basics. One of the most most important aspects of good portraiture capturing good, natural, characteristic expressions, and poses. Not every subject that we photograph is a professional model, entertainer or celebrity. Some folks are nervous in front of the camera, self-conscious, fidgety, impatient or may have certain features that are not particularly photogenic. Good expression or posture can be fleeting. Oftentimes we are photographing active children babies and pets. Sometimes a portrait session is more like shooting a rapidly moving sports event or trying to photograph wildlife. There is no time to constantly chimp or take time to scrutinize the results on a tethered screen. All the time during a shoot needs to be devoted to directing, cajoling, and conversing with the subject(s), quickly moving lights into place and paying attention to detail. Aesthetics as to camera position and lighting placement to accommodate individual facial and physical features have to be done swiftly and precisely- there is no time to fumble with the gear. You need to SEE exactly what you are doing. On certain assignments, I may have several sessions per day within limited time frames and yet each subject or group may require very different lighting approaches. This is where model lamps are nearly mandatory.

Then there is the matter of precision- consider these techniques: Using a Fresnel spotlight or a raw unmodified parabolic reflector unit each requiring feathering. Aiming a hair light so it does not spill on the forehead. Usage of kicker lights at 135 degrees to the camera/subject axis- feathering and making sure that extraneous light is not striking the lens, placing a gobo or a head-screen. Even if you are down to one light and a reflector, precise feathering is required.

I don't usually tether on portrait sessions although I do with commercial work, still life and products shots. I don't want a big bulky unit on or near the camera- I like it to be mobile and nimble. I don't want to show any images during the shoot- I never worked with a mirror at the camera either. I find folks may become overly self-conscious, begin to "ham" the camera, force fake smiles, and affectations in posture, pose or expressions. If they see a bad expression or something awkward on the screen the may become discouraged.

These are my working methods and what I teach and train my staff in. Others may differ and that is all good. Experienced portraitists can work with speedlights without modeling lamps but they have a pretty good idea of what they are gonna get. Others may not be into very finite methods and just want to produce general lightings- that's OK too! For folks that are learning advanced portraiture, it's best to learn how to SEE light and understand all the basic and time-honored principles and then devise the own methodologies from there.

And an as old Jimmy would say "Goodnight Mrs. Calabash, wherever you are"!

Kindest regards, Ed

Timmers Loc: San Antonio Texas.

A lot of beating around the bush here. It might just be simple to say that modeling lights are a part of the flash system, be they mono lights or on a power base. One of the important features of modeling lights that are used with portraiture need to have the option of variable output control. That means can you dim the lamp and/or can you also select the total watt output. The word here is control.

These options help us to control the final image. Mostly the modeling lights are not used to add much to the final exposure outcome in flash photography with living subjects. Think of these lights as non essentials for exposure, but do think of them as an additional tool for controlling and making a photography with the primary out put the flash.

If you think of the modeling light as a tool at your disposal, like having a certain screwdriver on your peg board in your work room, it is there as you need it but you don't necessarily use it, it's your option and your call as needed.