Gene51 Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)

That reminds me of the guy that I once did second shooter work for one of his wedding shoots. He had this huge "erector set" flash bracket, a double sling, with a pair of D300s each with a battery grip. He explained that all of that "paraphernalia" was meant to help him "look" professional. I showed up with a hot shoe mounted flash with an articulating head, and when the couple saw the complete set of images, 70% of those they selected were mine. Partly because I shot raw and he didn't, and I was able to batch process all of my shots and all he could do was show them unedited out of the camera jpegs. But I don't want to start a raw vs jpeg discussion - just that while client perception is important, it is not nearly as critical as delivering an exceptional product - regardless of whether you light the subject with a candle or use a full-blown Hollywood movie set lighting setup.

dbrugger25 Loc: Raleigh, NC

I don't understand why all the front lighting is placed so high. Wouldn't that create chin shadows and other problems?

MMac

Exactly what I wondered: is it possible to see the final result? That would demonstrate (at least to some extent) the impact of the lighting set up, and serve to confirm the validity of the reasoning and suggestions that have been made. Love it as a learning experience!

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

Definitely. I remember seeing something like that in a movie. A tow truck operator went to great lengths to hook up a car for towing. He told his newbe partner that putting on a show makes the customer think he is getting his money's worth.

It's always been a toss-up between getting the job done and putting on a show. People feel better if the workman seems to be really working. Getting a job done in thirty seconds makes it look too easy, even though the customer got what he paid for.

azted Loc: Las Vegas, NV.

Exactly my point! I will be looking for this photo, and returning to the scene of the crime to see if I can find out more. There are so many possibilities, like the developer, newspaper, local magazines, etc.

rmorrison1116 Loc: Near Valley Forge, Pennsylvania

Ok. Have a nice day.

tgreenhaw

A photo shoot with that many people is expensive and reshooting because the weather and lighting didn't cooperate isn't an option. The pro likely took many shots with available light as well as fill to get the best possible results.

Additionally with the yellow building and strong reflected available light, an unwanted color cast might have skewed the rendition of the uniforms and faces making post processing a major pain.

burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC

Main light off to the left is for facial highlights.
Fill Lights on camera axis are for softer shadows.
Hair and Separation Light is to rim light shoulders and add some sparkle to the hair.

This is typical portraiture in progress... Even school portrait photographers are known to use three or four lights with large umbrellas and soft boxes. I've set up a job where we had 15 four-light setups with cameras and computers in a hotel ballroom! (It was a corporate sales meeting for all divisions of Herff Jones, back in 2007.)

burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC

Those lights are at about a 45° angle to the subjects. There will be a slight nose shadow under the nostrils, typical of "butterfly" lighting. However, there will be a "Rembrandt" lighting effect from the main source added to it. This setup is more complex than meets the eye, which is why it confuses some folks.

azted Loc: Las Vegas, NV.

Thank you for your expertise on this situation. I have been seeing and attending so many "one light" seminars, that this scene concerned me that I don't have enough equipment to come across as "professional". But there is more than one way to skin a cat, and so this was where this photographer and customer chose to do the pose perhaps because he felt more comfortable using a studio setup, and not the natural lighting that was available elsewhere in the Tivoli complex.

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

I've been involved in all kinds of photographic lighting for the better part of my life- it's part of my job as a professional photographer. Yet, I can not assess, analyze, precisely comment on the lighting scenario in question here without being right on the location with the photographer, speaking with him, finding out the exact nature, usage of the resulting images, and his approach and methodology to meet the requirements. If, however, you are really interested in professional light techniques, here are some facts to ponder.

There are lots of situations that can be addressed with one light, however, depending on the specifics of the job at hand, oftentimes multiple light sources are required.

When shooting in natural daylight, under the ideal circumstance, the photographer can select a specific location at the best time of day, find and recognize the best area for placing the subject(s) as per the direction of light, and the background elements. Oftentimes, however, a particular location is required, perhaps something in the background needs to be in view but the lighting on the subject is insufficient in volume or quality and NOT aesthetically acceptable for any number of reasons- quantity, quality, direction, evenness, or mood. The photographer has to then take full control to create believable lighting. The ambient light may still be part of the equation but flash application becomes the principal source.

There is a major misconception about FLASH usage with daylight. Not all flash applications are "flash fill". Flash fill is simply applied to reduce the density of harsh shadows and render them more natural and transparent as our eyes perceive them and some detail in the shadows is revealed. The technique involves providing a FLAT fill source on or near the camera, a light that has no highlight /shadow pattern of its own, and establishing a lighting (flash: natural light) ratio that will fill the shadows sufficiently but not entirely negate the ambient light. The fill light is at ZERO degrees to the camera/ subject axis.

If you move the flash light source off the camera/subject axis, at anywhere from 20 to 135 degrees, and elevated, whereby it begins to create highlights and shadows of its own, it is no longer a fill source but becomes the main or key light. It may require a fill light to modify its shadows or the ambient light may become the fill source.

The lighting setup in the image in question is typical wrap-around lighting with possibly multiple fill sources- one higher to prove more depth of lighting, the main off-axis light to provide modelling, mood, and form, and a kicker that will highlight hair, accentuate profiles, and/or provide separation for from the background. The exposure is based on the flash and the shutter speed will control the amount of ambient light.

For both basic methods, electronic flash, in my opinion, is the best kind of light source to fill in or augment daylight. Its color temperature is very compatible with a crosssection of natural light qualities. If critical colour temperature matching is required, gel filtration can be employed to warm or cool the flash lighting. Most better flash units and speedlights have adjustable output, many are powerful enough to provide adequate fill for subjects photographed under bright daylight and can be powered down sufficiently to accommodate lower light volumes or the use of wider apertures for selective focus, and bokeh effects.

The aforementioned are very basic concepts. There are many variations such as utilizing various modifiers, softboxes, parabolic reflectors, reflector flats, beauty-lights, diffusers, umbrellas, bare bulb, and feathering techniques.

So...using more elaborate multiple light setups in out-of-doors shooting is not necessarily "overkill". Most serious and creative professionals are not interested in impressing their clients or other photographers by flaunting excessive inventories of equipment. On location assignments, even with fastidious planning, one never knows exactly what can go sideways in terms of lighting or weather conditions. The shoot can be a business event, an assembly of people that can not be reconvened, and can not be postponed, re-shot, or reenacted nor can the location be changed at the last moment. In cases lie that, if the light ain't right, you need to create your own and the gear needs to be at the ready.

Sometimes minimal lighting gear is more practicable with certain subjects such as active children, nervous subjects, and/or where time is limited. It comes best to minimize the need for excessive equipment manipulation so that the photographer can concentrate on spontaneous expressions, etc.

azted Loc: Las Vegas, NV.

Thanks for taking the time to specify your reply. Today I went to the location of the shoot, and did some cold calling. It turns out that the shoot was done at the local Merrill Lynch office, and the results were for internal Merrill Lynch usage, and not an advertisement or public promo. The person I spoke to did not know the photographer. I'm sure though that they will be happy with the results. Interestingly, there are two quite large photographic studios in the same complex. When I walked by, both were closed at the time (2PM). I now have to assume that the photographer must work closely with Merrill Lynch here in Las Vegas. Thanks to all who posted and helped me to understand and grow!!

amfoto1 Loc: San Jose, Calif. USA

I can't tell what models of lights he's using, but I suspect they are fairly low powered. Notice that he has two of them ganged up to act as his main light. I do that too with my "location" lights, because they are only about 320 watt seconds each. One reason for the lower power is that I have the option to use batteries with them, when there is no power available. Maybe that's the case with his lights, too.

His arrangement actually looks a lot like what I've used over the years: a main light (two lights ganged), a fill light to the other side, then a light in the rear. He appears to be using the rear light for rim lighting the subjects... I'll sometimes do that, other times use it to illuminate a background. I also have fifth light that I sometimes put on a boom above the subject for a hair light.

Probably the earlier response is right... that he's using the lighting to have more complete control. By reducing his exposure so that the lights become the dominant light source it gives him a lot more control than if he tried to mix it with ambient light or just use ambient light alone. Saves a lot of time later in post-processing.

This is actually a fairly simply lighting setup. A friend of mine did a lot of high-end architectural photography in the past. Most of his jobs paid 5 figures and some paid 6. He traveled a lot and would show up with a van full of lighting gear and sometimes spend 6 or more hours just setting up the lighting in a large, complicated interior. He even had boxes of bulbs to replace all the existing ones in fixtures at the location, in order to have correct color match. That was back when he was shooting film (large format). Today with digital he's been able to simplify it quite a bit more, but still spends more time setting up shots than actually taking them.

Executive head shots for use in annual reports, on websites and elsewhere can be good paying gigs. That might be what's happening here.

User ID

Based on experience it looks about normal to me.

User ID

Hogsters can frequently demonstrate toadal immunity to learning.