Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
For Your Consideration
Considering the Aspects of Light: part 2 - Harsh and Soft
Page 1 of 16 next> last>>
May 22, 2018 07:27:34   #
Linda From Maine Loc: Yakima, Washington
 
Welcome to part 2 of a four-part discussion series on the aspects of light. If you missed part 1, you can find it here

After part 4 has concluded, we will offer a follow-up discussion in which we invite you to share your impressions and what you took from the series that you can apply to your own goals and interests.

This project is the result of a collaborative effort among several members and we hope to make the series a success with your participation. Many thanks to all!

---

Today's topic discusses the qualities of harsh and soft. What do these terms mean and how do these two aspects of light contribute to mood, emotional impact, story? Here are a few general characteristics, related terms and examples:

- Harsh - Resulting from an intense (very bright), direct light source and producing high-contrast images with dark shadows. Used at an angle, harsh light (aka hard light) can accentuate textures. Examples: outdoors under mid-day sun, indoors with direct flash or a lamp without a covering; a spotlight.

- Soft - Non-directional light that generally produces lower contrast and indistinct shadows. Examples: outdoors in open shade or when the weather is cloudy, foggy or hazy; indoors often achieved with the use of reflectors, diffusers, or natural light through a window. Fog, mist and haze can emphasize depth as contrast and colors lessen with distance. Reflected light is easily found in nature.

- Fill flash can add controlled brightness to a subject.

- High key: the use of unnaturally bright lighting to eliminate harsh shadows. Images are often described as feeling upbeat and happy.

- Low key: these images contain mostly dark tones and colors, with selective use of light and shadow to create a dramatic mood.

In addition to the embedded links above, for those interested in further study I posted more links here

Please share an image that represents a quality mentioned above, and discuss how the light affects mood, story and emotional impact.

Thanks very much for participating!

-

Reply
May 22, 2018 07:28:52   #
Linda From Maine Loc: Yakima, Washington
 
Contrasting moods:

1. Shot through mist rising from a river - between me and the trees - with early morning sun coming from the left side. I thought the diffused light complimented the understated (nearly pastel) late autumn colors nicely. I hope the scene evokes a sense of tranquility.

2. Harsh doesn't have to be a bad thing Shooting towards the sun in summer at mid-day, I set my exposure to emphasize the contrasts between the tall, solid tree trunks and their delicate green leaves. I chose to keep the green and blue circles of lens flare (I think I even enhanced them, as I also did the sun rays) because their position seemed a whimsical extension of the sun's reach into the forest. With this bright and colorful photo, I feel energetic and happy!


(Download)

Did I catch a UHH troll at bottom of the frame?
Did I catch a UHH troll at bottom of the frame?...
(Download)

Reply
May 22, 2018 07:57:53   #
photophile Loc: Lakewood, Ohio, USA
 
Direct, bright sunlight:


(Download)

Reply
 
 
May 22, 2018 08:00:52   #
Linda From Maine Loc: Yakima, Washington
 
photophile wrote:
Direct, bright sunlight:
Welcome, Karin. Please tell us what drew you to take the photo; I'm guessing patterns of light and shadow but we enjoy hearing the photographer's pov. I just discovered you hosted a weekly challenge on light! This FYC series was inspired by CatMarley's main forum topic of a couple weeks ago. We hoped, by breaking down our own thread into four parts, and with accompanying discussion, we could dig a little deeper.

We would love to see participants of this thread offer advice and insights for new users and those who are aware they haven't quite "seen" the light in their own journey with this joyful hobby.

For the opposite of your example, do you have any tips relating to your experience with fog around the lake? Thanks for joining the converation!

Reply
May 22, 2018 08:14:35   #
whwiden
 
Linda From Maine wrote:
Contrasting moods:

1. Shot through mist rising from a river - between me and the trees - with early morning sun coming from the left side. I thought the diffused light complimented the understated (nearly pastel) late autumn colors nicely. I hope the scene evokes a sense of tranquility.

2. Harsh doesn't have to be a bad thing Shooting towards the sun in summer at mid-day, I set my exposure to emphasize the contrasts between the tall, solid tree trunks and their delicate green leaves. I chose to keep the green and blue circles of lens flare (I think I even enhanced them, as I also did the sun rays) because their position seemed a whimsical extension of the sun's reach into the forest. With this bright and colorful photo, I feel energetic and happy!
Contrasting moods: br br 1. Shot through mist ris... (show quote)


Like the mist and the river shot!

Here are three OOC shots that show differences when using flash. YOU SHOULD FEEL FREE TO ALTER THEM. They are followed by 2 shots post-processing the 2nd and 3rd shot.

The first is shot using my manual flash and bounce card. The second is the same scene, but without the flash. You may try to bring it up to par in LR, but it will not look like the shot with the fill flash (see my fourth shot). The third shot is the same scene but no flash, with a wider open f-stop and slower shutter speed (with some post-processing applied in the 5th shot). I think the sequence shows that it is not always possible to replicate, or easily replicate, the result obtained using fill flash by simply opening up the lens, or slowing down the shutter speed. I also think it shows that using fill flash can get you a base shot to work with which looks less harsh than the lower ISO, higher F-stop shot. I took a number of other shots of this scene and will likely post some more shots for illustration, but this is a start. These first three are out of camera shots with no post processing.

Shot #1. F/2.8, ISO 100 1/100th-with flash, Shot #2 same--without flash, Shot #3--F/1.8, ISO 100, 1/50th--without flash. Shots 4 and 5 adjusted in LR.

1st Fill Flash
1st Fill Flash...
(Download)

2nd No Flash
2nd No Flash...
(Download)

Higher ISO, Faster F-stop
Higher ISO, Faster F-stop...
(Download)

2nd shot-PP
2nd shot-PP...
(Download)

3rd shot-PP
3rd shot-PP...
(Download)

Reply
May 22, 2018 08:30:01   #
Linda From Maine Loc: Yakima, Washington
 
whwiden wrote:
..These first three are out of camera shots with no post processing...
What a wealth of information packed into one response, WH. Thanks so much! One of the few lessons I recall from a 1984 class on how to use a film SLR had to do with fill flash You've presented easy to understand examples and solutions. Wonderful!

Reply
May 22, 2018 09:04:32   #
whwiden
 
whwiden wrote:
Like the mist and the river shot!

Here are three OOC shots that show differences when using flash. YOU SHOULD FEEL FREE TO ALTER THEM. They are followed by 2 shots post-processing the 2nd and 3rd shot.

The first is shot using my manual flash and bounce card. The second is the same scene, but without the flash. You may try to bring it up to par in LR, but it will not look like the shot with the fill flash (see my fourth shot). The third shot is the same scene but no flash, with a wider open f-stop and slower shutter speed (with some post-processing applied in the 5th shot). I think the sequence shows that it is not always possible to replicate, or easily replicate, the result obtained using fill flash by simply opening up the lens, or slowing down the shutter speed. I also think it shows that using fill flash can get you a base shot to work with which looks less harsh than the lower ISO, higher F-stop shot. I took a number of other shots of this scene and will likely post some more shots for illustration, but this is a start. These first three are out of camera shots with no post processing.

Shot #1. F/2.8, ISO 100 1/100th-with flash, Shot #2 same--without flash, Shot #3--F/1.8, ISO 100, 1/50th--without flash. Shots 4 and 5 adjusted in LR.
Like the mist and the river shot! br br Here are ... (show quote)


While you are free to alter the photos, that is for your own information. I would not clog up this thread with examples of alterations.

Reply
 
 
May 22, 2018 09:11:51   #
Linda From Maine Loc: Yakima, Washington
 
whwiden wrote:
While you are free to alter the photos, that is for your own information. I would not clog up this thread with examples of alterations.
Thank you for clarifying, WH. And also for your generous offer to folks who best learn via the hands-on experience. Much appreciated!

Reply
May 22, 2018 09:34:31   #
guardineer
 
Great misty photo, Linda. Definitely wall worthy. I'm laughing at myself WH. I had to really think about my camera, a D5500, as to whether or not it has a flash. Obviously flash photography is something I don't do. But since I am traveling 700 miles for grandson's birthday on Sunday the flash unit will be employed, along with some sort of home made diffuser. Linda's flares also are present on my only sun star photo. I want to remove mine. I'll be looking for a you tube video.

Reply
May 22, 2018 10:14:53   #
whwiden
 
guardineer wrote:
Great misty photo, Linda. Definitely wall worthy. I'm laughing at myself WH. I had to really think about my camera, a D5500, as to whether or not it has a flash. Obviously flash photography is something I don't do. But since I am traveling 700 miles for grandson's birthday on Sunday the flash unit will be employed, along with some sort of home made diffuser. Linda's flares also are present on my only sun star photo. I want to remove mine. I'll be looking for a you tube video.


I generally do not like the on camera flash. You must be careful or you will get harsh light. They also run down your battery. For a wedding situation I would pick up a separate flash unit and bring extra batteries if you can.

Look at the Nikon SB-500. I use it for weddings. Maybe get a little white attachment to soften the light. Point it up. Practice at home before the event.

Reply
May 22, 2018 10:43:25   #
Uuglypher Loc: South Dakota (East River)
 
Linda From Maine wrote:
Contrasting moods:

1. Shot through mist rising from a river - between me and the trees - with early morning sun coming from the left side. I thought the diffused light complimented the understated (nearly pastel) late autumn colors nicely. I hope the scene evokes a sense of tranquility.

2. Harsh doesn't have to be a bad thing Shooting towards the sun in summer at mid-day, I set my exposure to emphasize the contrasts between the tall, solid tree trunks and their delicate green leaves. I chose to keep the green and blue circles of lens flare (I think I even enhanced them, as I also did the sun rays) because their position seemed a whimsical extension of the sun's reach into the forest. With this bright and colorful photo, I feel energetic and happy!
Contrasting moods: br br 1. Shot through mist ris... (show quote)


Contrasting harsh/soft light in animal portraits: To my eye these images exemplify the major differences between harsh and soft light:
“Caravaggio’™s Rendering of a Flamingo”
Flamingo in classic chiaroscuro:
Light source, Harsh: direct full, high sun from almost directly above the bird through skylight window (acting almost as a point source) with the pose of subject dictating shadow casting and revelation of fine modeling of contours and definition of surface detail of plumage.
Effect:
1.Demands use of camera’™s full dynamic range to capture all tones from specular reflections of the light source to deepest shadow black. Exposure was EBTR(Expose beyond the Right) to utilize the full, available dynamic range beyond the JPEG DR suggested by the in-camera histogram frame.
2. high contrast
3. Rendition of classical chiaroscuro effect of such classical artists as Rembrandt, Leonardo, and Caravaggio.
Note the reflected illumination of the underside of the bird’™s head and throat from the brightly illuminated far side of the bird’™s neck...that illumination being otherwise evident to the viewer by the fine, bright fringe of backlighting on the recurve of neck below the chin and throat.

“œYoung Lion in a Pensive Mood”
light source: soft; in open shade under a heavily overcast sky (outdoor, natural version of a studio “softbox”)
Effects:
strongly constricted dynamic range.
Detail rendered to extent permitted by sensor resolution, lens acutance, and focus, rather than depending upon reliance on contrast of harsh shadowing.
There is total absence of defined shadows ...”a gentle, sensitive portrait...” was the comment of a show judge.

Dave


(Download)


(Download)

Reply
 
 
May 22, 2018 10:45:27   #
whwiden
 
Uuglypher wrote:
Contrasting harsh/soft light in animal portraits: To my eye these images exemplify the major differences between harsh and soft light:
“Caravaggio’™s Rendering of a Flamingo”
Flamingo in classic chiaroscuro:
Light source, Harsh: direct full, high sun from almost directly above the bird with the pose of subject dictating shadow casting and revelation of fine modeling of contours and definition of surface detail of plumage.
Effect:
1.Demands use of camera’™s full dynamic range to capture all tones from specular reflections of the light source to deepest shadow black. Exposure was EBTR(Expose beyond the Right) to utilize the full, available dynamic range beyond the JPEG DR suggested by the in-camera histogram frame.
2. high contrast
3. Rendition of classical chiaroscuro effect of such classical artists as Rembrandt, Leonardo, and Caravaggio.
Note the reflected illumination of the underside of the bird’™s head and throat from the brightly illuminated far side of the bird’™s neck...that illumination being otherwise evident to the viewer by the fine, bright fringe of backlighting on the recurve of neck below the chin and throat.

“œYoung Lion in a Pensive Mood”
light source: soft; in open shade under a heavily overcast sky (outdoor, natural version of a studio “softbox”)
Effects:
strongly constricted dynamic range.
Detail rendered to extent permitted by sensor resolution, lens acutance, and focus, rather than depending upon reliance on contrast of harsh shadowing.
There is total absence of defined shadows ...”a gentle, sensitive portrait...” was the comment of a show judge.

Dave
Contrasting harsh/soft light in animal portraits: ... (show quote)


Nice examples!

Reply
May 22, 2018 10:47:58   #
camerapapi Loc: Miami, Fl.
 
Soft and hard lighting: which one is better?

Light is what makes possible that we record images on film or a digital sensor. The quality of the light, its direction, its color and its intensity is what makes the viewer to react emotionally to our subjects.
Most recently the quality of backlighting was explored. This is light coming from in front of the camera. It is the typical light we use for silhouettes. The subject with this light is usually surrounded by deep shadows. Backlingting could be very dramatic when used properly.

In addition to front light, backlighting and side light we also have soft and hard light. The typical soft light takes place with ambient light during a cloudy day or when using a soft box in the studio. It is the beautiful light we see in late evening or the light of open shade. The shadows are very soft or nonexistent, contrast is usually low.

On the other hand we have hard light when the source of light is small or when the light, like that from the sun is at a distance from the subject. Subjects hit by front light, from a flash or from the sun, usually between 10 AM and 4 PM and especially during the summer months experience hard lighting. Hard light can be also found in the studio when a flash is directed straight to the subject without a diffuser casting ugly shadows behind it. Any source of light at a certain distance from the subject will act as hard lighting. With hard lighting the shadows have a defined edge and contrast is exaggerated.

Photography is very possible with both types of lighting depending on the effect the photographer wants to achieve and his or her artistic style. Hard light was the norm in the 40's in Hollywood. Today that kind of light looks better in portraits of men. Hard light at an angle is excellent to bring about details in the subject.

The first two images show the effect of soft lighting. Note that the light is very soft and the shadows are soft or non existent. The last image shows the harsh midday light casting ugly shadows around the subject. Does hard light makes for a bad photograph? Not at all and that is why I said that using one type of light over the other is a photographer's choice depending on the subject, his style and creativity.

I hope this brief explanation about soft and hard lighting helps you make better images.


(Download)


(Download)


(Download)

Reply
May 22, 2018 10:56:14   #
artBob Loc: Near Chicago
 
I picked this shot because it is overflowing with light aspects, from the harsh light on the floor created by the window masking, to the more natural light outside the window, to the soft light in most of the stairway, created by bounced light from the window and other sources in the stairs.


(Download)

Reply
May 22, 2018 10:57:25   #
whwiden
 
Clouds generally mean soft light. But, as you can see in the first shot, there are some harsh aspects in the sky and on the water. You need to be careful, even with a cloudy day as the sun can poke through. In the second and third shots, we have an example of what I would consider very soft light.


(Download)


(Download)


(Download)

Reply
Page 1 of 16 next> last>>
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
For Your Consideration
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.