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

In this forum, thereis some discussion about lighting equipment, some discussions about the physics of light as per colour temperature and white balance, and the quantity of light as per exposure but little about the dynamics and aesthetics of light.

No doubt, the science of light is interesting, things like photons, wavelengths and spectral properties, but if you are an artistically inclined photograher there is much to discuss as to how some of the physical properties of light as to the quality, reflection, concentration, diffusion, and direction of light influence the aesthetics of our work.

Some folks associate "lighting" with controlled studio work as opposed to natural, existing, or available light. The fact is, however, if you have a good working knowledge of controlled studio-like lighting methods, you will more easily recognize and effectively utilize natural or exiting light. Inversely, if you have a knack for "SEEING" natural ligh, you will be better equipped to simulate various kinds of light in a studio environment.

In some people, "seeing" the aesthetics of light, havig an "eye" for light is an inborn talent like havig and "ear" for music, however, these traits need to be developed and can much be learned.

No matter what you shoot, landscapes, birds, wildlife, flowers, insects, sports, portraits, architecture, whatever, mostly you are attempting to render a three-dimension subject on a two-dimensional sheet of paper or a flat screen. The degree of success in that area is mainly dependent on lighting. You can have the sharpest lenses, the most advanced camera with incredibly high pixel counts, and the most sophisticated lighting gear, if the aesthetics of light are not factored into your work, your images will be flat, lacklustre, and lack modelling, depth, mood, and the illusion of dimensionality.

My question here is not only "what do you know about light and lighting"? but what do you want to know, learn, share, and discuss about this topic? I know that many of the specialized volunteer-managed sections are not very popular or highly trafficked on UHH, however, do any of you feel that a LIGHTING would be an asset or a popular resource.

I have noticed many questions about various kinds of lighting gear. There are discussions of price, features, and equipmet compatibility but hardly anything about aesthetics. Folk ask should I buy umbrellas, softboxes, beauty dishes, etc. If they knew specifically how they work, differ, and how they can be used most effectively, they would be in a better position to decide on the right gear for the job at hand.

I would appreciate y'all's feedback! EnLIGHTEN me!

texasdigital Loc: Conroe, Texas

I for one would be interested. Lighting is one of those mysteries that need training.

chuckrem Loc: Katy, Tx

Yes, I would be interested.

Najataagihe

Count me in.

wolfMark Loc: Southern Oregon

As I lifetime student of light (I'm pushing 70), I would be very interested in learning as much more as I can. YES!

cbtsam Loc: Monkton, MD

Me too.

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

For those who are interested, what aspects of lighting or light usage would be especially interested in?

Najataagihe

For me, something relatively simple - on-camera flash as trigger and fill, a more powerful flash hand-held.

Subject: people in their native environment - indoors and outdoors.

Impromptu portraiture, if you will.


So far, these new cameras do a marvelous job of "getting the shot", but I would like to know more about "painting with light and shadows".

I know placement of the main flash can change the mood of the photo, but I don't really know how to predict it.

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

You are right! Modern cameras can take a lot of the toil and guesswork out of many aspects of photography. There are many built-in features in today's camera that can quantify light and manage exposure but there is no such mechanical, digital, electronic or computer-driven function that can automatically address the artistic aspects of lighting.

The simple usage of a 2 light system with one on the camera light and one remote light is a great method for many kinds of work, including impromptu portraiture. I have personally used that system since 1958 in shooting weddings, events, press coverages and more. Even without modifiers, the results are far superior to a single on-came flash. You can conto over ligh and shadow, rendition of texture, dimensionality, and even address the effect of the inverse square law as it affects single on-came flash usage. You can say goodbye to the overexposed foreground and black-hole backgrounds.

As you mentioned, it can be difficult to predict the exact resultat, especially in a hand-held quick shooting circumstance. Most Speedlight and even more advanced on-camer strobes do not have modelling lamps so you need to be able to be to guestimate the position of you (main) off came light. There is a solution to that issue.

If you have the patience to get into a bit of basic "studio lighting", that is the placement of lights at various angles to achieve the results you want. You can even practice with ordinary lig bulbs in simple reflectors. When you get the feel of the angle, height, distance, etc. you will be able to somewhat replicate it without the use of modelling lamps. Thereis also the matter of ratio, that is the relationship between one man and fill light that determines the contrast between light and shadow and thus, the mood. That too can be predetermined by variations in the power settings.

With that 2-light system, you can create dozens of lighting forms, effects and moods.

If I can get a section going, I will put together a few tutorials in this and other methods.

The areas I would like to establish a special section is not that some of these things come not to be addressedd in the main section or the portrait or commercial sections. It's just that I would like to isolate it for someof the cross-fire that sometimes occurs where fols bring in business matters and other distractions. It will take a bit of work and participation so I will like to keep on track.

If there is more interest, I will approach the admin. and try to develop a new section.

cbtsam Loc: Monkton, MD

I do table top work - flowers, weeds, and other things - close up to nearly 1:1. I've been working with one 32 inch octagonal softbox with fluorescent bulbs, and a reflector. Any suggestions would be eagerly consumed.

GreenReaper

I like doing table top shooting, mainly because of a lack of space. I started with some cheap clamp on lighting fixtures from Ace. I then went to LED lights I found at Home Depot, I'm still using those. I then graduated to a set of fluorescent lights from Amazon. They work quite well and have never been a problem and work quite well for what I want to do. My choice was mainly from space and a VERY small budget.

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

If you are getting the results you are after with your present setup there is no reason to change anything. Without seeing your results I assume yo setup will be very much like photographing the flowers and another small subject by daylight or skylight on a cloudy/bright, light overcast, day or in open shade. This is the kind of light a large softbox would simulate and your reflector will be proved with fill illumination and or more directly reflected light. If you want to change things up to perhaps render more texture, transilluminate certain flower petals, or create a more pronounced or dramatic lighting effect, you may want to consider smaller or more concentrated light sources. Some photograher that special in macro work will use relatively smaller light sources.

One of the principles of the softness or hardness of light has to do with the relative size of the light source to the size of the subject and the distance at which the lights are placed. Generally speaking the close the softer the further the harder and the smaller they are and the larger the softer. When yo are place yir lights, movie them back and forth or change the size relationship, you will SEE the differences. Of course, wehn same lig source, regardless of size or distance is moved to a different angle to the camer/subject axis, the highlight/shadow pattern changes as well.

So, in the proposed section I do not want to tell fols what kind of effect they should produce but rather how to get the effect they want by having control over the lighting. There is more to discuss and exchange than most folks would think. None of it is terribly complex nor does it necessarily entail expensive equipment.

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

Take a look at what I wrote in my last post. about size and types of lighting gear. If you are squeezed for space, your present system seems workable.

I know a very successful commercial photographer who specializes in small products, jewelry, precise tools etc. He uses a bunch of small so-called high-intensity desk lamps. His table-top set up os a very small table. Samll mirrors can be used as reflectors as well. I use a softbox suspend over the table for many small items. If you post an image, I could make more specific suggestions. Nowadays with easily obtainable whte balanced LEDs and many other light sources are usable.

R.G. Loc: Scotland

Most people know good or interesting lighting when they see it but aren't familiar with the sometimes very subtle art of being able to reproduce the sort of lighting that they want or like. And to understand light you also need to understand shadows and what is often a subtle interplay and subtle balance between the two.

cmc4214 Loc: S.W. Pennsylvania

Another very interested person here