Got some new toys...

[Mike J]

So I splurged and got an inexpensive umbrella and lightstand. It finally arrived yesterday along with my Hands-on Guide to Nikon Creative Lighting DVD (haven't watched this yet). Here are some of the first attempts with my youngest daughter.

Basic setup: SB-800 in remote mode. SB-800 was in manual mode set at 1/4 power. The on-board flash was set to 1/128 power for a little fill.

The umbrella was camera-left at a 45 degree angle. A white reflector was on the right side of Isabel for some fill.

All of these were processed in LR with WB correction and a boost in clarity. I did also clone out a piece of red candy that was stuck to her left cheek :D I do wish I would have spent some time getting her hair under control but I was happy she was willing to spend 10 minutes helping me out.

I would appreciate comments on exposure as I'm learning that what I see on the LCD is not always a good indicator - this was my biggest problem with SP's being underexposed.

Also - in most of these you can see the reflection of the umbrella shape clearly in the corner of her eyes. Is it normal to see the outline of the umbrella so well defined? There is also a second catchlight (a small pinpoint in the center) that I think is the result of the onboard flash. Easy to remove in PP but should the onboard flash be avoided for fill to avoid this?

Thanks in advance for any feedback!

#1
http://thejulianafamily.smugmug.com/photos/464296915_LarAg-L.jpg

#2
http://thejulianafamily.smugmug.com/photos/463756313_jakLw-L.jpg

#3 Can only stay serious for so long...
http://thejulianafamily.smugmug.com/photos/463756109_FcFBR-L.jpg

#4
http://thejulianafamily.smugmug.com/photos/463756623_xqNvc-L.jpg

[lfortier]

Gorgeous little girl!

I've also recently purchased a couple of lightstands & umbrellas for my SB800's so I can understand your excitement.

I love the lighting effect that you've achieved here. On all four of them.
I'm torn between #1 and #4 as a favorite.

Time to practice.

Keep at it. You're doing well. :thumb

[Scott_Quier]

So I splurged and got an inexpensive umbrella and lightstand. It finally arrived yesterday along with my Hands-on Guide to Nikon Creative Lighting DVD (haven't watched this yet). Here are some of the first attempts with my youngest daughter.

Basic setup: SB-800 in remote mode. SB-800 was in manual mode set at 1/4 power. The on-board flash was set to 1/128 power for a little fill.

The umbrella was camera-left at a 45 degree angle. A white reflector was on the right side of Isabel for some fill.

All of these were processed in LR with WB correction and a boost in clarity. I did also clone out a piece of red candy that was stuck to her left cheek :D I do wish I would have spent some time getting her hair under control but I was happy she was willing to spend 10 minutes helping me out.

I would appreciate comments on exposure as I'm learning that what I see on the LCD is not always a good indicator - this was my biggest problem with SP's being underexposed.

Also - in most of these you can see the reflection of the umbrella shape clearly in the corner of her eyes. Is it normal to see the outline of the umbrella so well defined? There is also a second catchlight (a small pinpoint in the center) that I think is the result of the onboard flash. Easy to remove in PP but should the onboard flash be avoided for fill to avoid this?

Thanks in advance for any feedback!

You have a very cute little girl there!

Congrats on your addition to your kit. Lights really expand the scope / range of what you can do photographically - they are so much fun!

To judge the exposure of a shot - Ignore the picture in your camera's LCD - it will lie to you every time!! Look at the histogram. It doesn't tell the whole truth, but it's a lot better then the picture in the LCD!

The reflection you see in your daughter's eyes, called catchlights (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catchlight), is completly normal and is usually a desired quality (as it is in these) as they tend to liven up the model's eyes (compare the eyes in #2 with those in #4). The tiny pinpoint of a catchlight is nothing to fuss over. You will often see professional advertisement photos with mulitple catchlights - so no worries there!

I would guess that your on-board flash at 1/128 fill is not making a significant contribution to the exposure. Usually, fill in something in the neighborhood of 1 to 2 stops less then the key light. If we were to assume that the Guide Numbers on your SB-800 and the on-board flash were the same, your fill is 4 stops less than that provided by the SB-800. And, we know the GN of the SB is quite a bit more than that of the on-board flash:deal:wink.

Comments:

The fill here could have been a bit more. To get more fill, just move your reflector closer to her face. You reflector is acting as a light source and the distance between a light source and the subject has a huge impact on the "power" of that light source. Check out discussions/definitions of the Inverse Square Law for more detail.
This is a terribly cute pose. The lighting is quite nice in that it creates enough shadow to provide some sense of depth/relief in your daughter's face.
Not too keen on the pose :wink and the light is the same as in #2.
Nice example of cross lighting. For a young girl, a little more fill would/might be a goodness (see comments in #2).

[Mike J]

Gorgeous little girl!

I've also recently purchased a couple of lightstands & umbrellas for my SB800's so I can understand your excitement.

I love the lighting effect that you've achieved here. On all four of them.
I'm torn between #1 and #4 as a favorite.

Time to practice.

Keep at it. You're doing well. :thumb

Thanks for the encouragement. I'm already coveting a 2nd stand and maybe the Softliter II to pair with the very old Vivtar 283 that my younger brother handed-up to me.

[ERue]

Those look really nice! Do you have a reflector? I don't remember if I read that in the op or not. It might be a good addition to your new studio set up so that the light is evenly distributed on her face. Unless that's what you were going for...I like the dramatic look, too. :)

[Mike J]

You have a very cute little girl there!

Thanks. I'm very biased but happen to agree with you :D


To judge the exposure of a shot - Ignore the picture in your camera's LCD - it will lie to you every time!! Look at the histogram. It doesn't tell the whole truth, but it's a lot better then the picture in the LCD!

Another lesson learned here.


The reflection you see in your daughter's eyes, called catchlights (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catchlight), is completly normal and is usually a desired quality (as it is in these) as they tend to liven up the model's eyes (compare the eyes in #2 with those in #4). The tiny pinpoint of a catchlight is nothing to fuss over. You will often see professional advertisement photos with mulitple catchlights - so no worries there!

I was just suprised at how defined the umbrella shape was in the catchlights. It makes sense but caught me off-guard. I've also seen differing critiques on the 2nd catchlight so thanks for the reassurance.

Thanks for the detailed comments on each of the shots.. Really appreciate them. I'll play with the reflector some more to bring the fill up - even better will be when a get a 2nd modified and get that old Vivatar 283 working with the SB-800.:ivar

[Mike J]

Those look really nice! Do you have a reflector? I don't remember if I read that in the op or not. It might be a good addition to your new studio set up so that the light is evenly distributed on her face. Unless that's what you were going for...I like the dramatic look, too. :)

Yup - I was sing a white reflector on the the first 3 shots. As Scott pointed out probably need to play with the position a little more. I think it needed to be a little higher and a little closer. The 4th shot did not have a reflector.

[divamum]

Mike, these are absolutely beautiful - aren't the proper tools a wonderful thing? :D Your daughter is an absolute charmer, the light is soft and lovely, the background is clean, no annoying shadows :thumb I think these are great!:clap

My only comment is that on a couple of them I'm seeing some softness - #3 is dead sharp, but the others aren't quite so much. Not sure if your dof was too shallow (fstop choice?) or if you're not sharpening in post or what, but just a little more edge would be my taste. However, I'm not sure it's a dealbreaker in these because the light and subject match so prettily - they're lovely!

[Mike J]

Mike, these are absolutely beautiful - aren't the proper tools a wonderful thing? :D Your daughter is an absolute charmer, the light is soft and lovely, the background is clean, no annoying shadows :thumb I think these are great!:clap
Thanks! She is a charmer. I had to laugh about the background being clean. I have about a 4 ft wide section of wall in our family room that I can shoot against and get a clean background. I put her about 6 ft in front of the wall and I was suprised at how much it looks like a photo backdrop.


My only comment is that on a couple of them I'm seeing some softness - #3 is dead sharp, but the others aren't quite so much. Not sure if your dof was too shallow (fstop choice?) or if you're not sharpening in post or what, but just a little more edge would be my taste.

I thought that too when I first saw them on the monitor but if I do 100% zoom, things stay sharp (at least to me eye). She has very smooth porcelan-like skin that she will die for in 20 years but it could be, as you say, that I'm not doing enough sharpening in LR. I'll play with this later and repost.
The only other thing would have been camera shake. These were all taken without a tripod. The shutter speed was at 1/125 and all were about f/5.6. I was between 80mm and 110mm for these so I was close to the edge but did have VR enabled so that should have helped out.

Just so you know - your enthuasism is contagious!:D :D

[jdfaith]

Very nice job. Your daughter is a doll.

Was there a particular stand/umbrella you went with? I'm looking for a couple myself.

Regards,

John

[Mike J]

Very nice job. Your daughter is a doll.

Was there a particular stand/umbrella you went with? I'm looking for a couple myself.

Regards,

John

Thanks for the encouragement. She is fun...

I ended up purchasing this stand:
http://www.adorama.com/LTSP10AC.html?searchinfo=LTSP10AC&item_no=1

I probably would have been fine with an 8' stand. This one folds down to 33" so it is not too portable.

and the Westcott 45" umbrella.
http://www.adorama.com/Search-Results.tpl?page=searchresults&searchinfo=WEU45WB

Inexpensive and can be used as a shoot-through.

[Mike J]

on a couple of them I'm seeing some softness - #3 is dead sharp, but the others aren't quite so much. Not sure ...if you're not sharpening in post or what, but just a little more edge would be my taste.

So I played with sharpening some more in LR. Not sure if this really makes a discernable different... what do you think?

Okay so here's the original as posted...

http://thejulianafamily.smugmug.com/photos/464296915_LarAg-L.jpg

#2 More capture sharpening (lots more) in LR and more output sharpening on export.
http://thejulianafamily.smugmug.com/photos/464301583_bsgtA-L.jpg

[divamum]

Definitely sharper. But I'm still wondering if it's DOF related, simply because the detail on her rh shoulder - the shirt texture - is DEAD clear in both, but her eyes which are a little bit further back than that seem slightly soft (at least at this size - if it's clear when you look at it onscreen 100%, then chalk it up to vagaries of monitors and ignore all my comments!).

Have you tried stopping down even further if only to compare? Your shutter speed is going to stay in the 200 region because of the flash, so as long as you have enough light... perhaps stop down just a little more?

One thing I've noticed with my Canon system (so may not apply to you, but fwiw) is that it is seldom as sharp when I'm set on the 1/3 stops as it is on the 1/2 stops (my xsi lets me choose the increments for stops, and the "extra" ones in the 1/3 settings are the ones that aren't as sharp generally). It also seems to have very marked "sweet spots" which are noticeably sharper than other settings. FWIW, my Tamron gives me the sharpest shots at 2.8 (yes wide open), 5.6 and 8. My nifty fifty 50mm 1.8 is quite good around 2.0, but UNFREAKINBELIEVABLE at 8.0 (the shot below was straight out of camera, thus NO extra sharpening AT.ALL. I couldn't believe it when I saw the detail in the coffeebeans themselves! I linked these at the small size so's not to clutter up your thread, but if you go to the enlargement at http://www.smugmug.com/photos/464408183_LbGBt-X2.jpg you'll see what I mean)

http://divamum.smugmug.com/photos/445219286_rH5vy-M-1.jpg

And a closeup
http://www.smugmug.com/photos/464408183_LbGBt-S.jpg

The other thing I wonder (since the hair on the top of her head is clear) - have you checked your filter for smudges? I'm shooting in the dark here as I'm no authority, I'm just brainstorming right along with you!

[Ed911]

I hope you don't mind, I pulled your photo and worked on it a little. The face is exactly the same shape and size as the original post, but with the shadows and lighting reworked and the skin tones adjusted, and a little sharpening. It's essentially the same way the women use makeup. Oh, and I did give her a smile.

I have a similar setup...and I shoot so that if I err, it's on the low side...tending to slightly under expose so that I can fix it in PS. You can do a lot with a slightly under exposed shot, that you can't do with a slightly over exposed shot. At least with digitals.

Since you are new to working with umbrellas, I just wanted to help you have a better understanding of how you could use the shadows that your setup generates to your advantage.

Thanks for sharing.

Original
http://www.pumpkinriver.com/photos/464447032_okyKx-L.jpg

Retouched image
http://pumpkinriverphotography.smugmug.com/photos/464653987_uBshr-L.jpg

[Scott_Quier]

Your re-worked image not showing and the URL for it comes back as "not found"

[Ed911]

Your re-worked image not showing and the URL for it comes back as "not found"

Scott, I think that fixed it. I verified the link against the one generated by my site, and it looked okay to me. Anyway, you should be able to see it now. Go figure. Hmmm...puzzles...

[Mike J]

Scott, I think that fixed it. I verified the link against the one generated by my site, and it looked okay to me. Anyway, you should be able to see it now. Go figure. Hmmm...puzzles...

Hi Ed,
Thanks for taking the time to rework but the retouched is still not showing up. Your repost of the original is fine but not the other... interested in seeing what you've done.

[Scott_Quier]

Scott, I think that fixed it. I verified the link against the one generated by my site, and it looked okay to me. Anyway, you should be able to see it now. Go figure. Hmmm...puzzles...
Nope - me neither. Maybe try a browser refresh to see if it will download the image or not.

[Elaine]

I love the light and pose in #2! What a cutie!

I also like the nice big catchlights from the umbrella. I'm thinking this sort of set-up may be where I need to go next, for some indoor shooting freedom. Are you happy with your umbrella and stand choices? How did you choose what type of umbrella to get?

[Mike J]

I love the light and pose in #2!

Thanks. I appreciate the feedback.


Are you happy with your umbrella and stand choices? How did you choose what type of umbrella to get?

So far so good but I have to admit I've played with all of 3 times now. As I mentioned in an early post, the 10-ft stand does not fold down all that small. I think the next one I get will be an 8' stand.

How did I choose? I typically will research products to death and then can never pull the trigger to order. Not this time. For these, I was looking for low-cost but something I thought would hold up. I limited my choices to Adorama and B&H and looked for the lowest shipping. Between the stand, the adapter, and the umbrella I spent slightly over $100.

By the way, I read somewhere that most adapters come with the hotshoe on the wrong end and I can confirm that mine came with the hotshow on the wrong end!

[Ed911]

Okay,

Just got home...thought this was fixed...hmmm...got me. Here goes. Okay, I think I have it now...I had to reload the photo to my website. I used the same technique to load the original as the retouched. I even pasted it in...oh well. I'm sorry about the upload problem.

Original
http://www.pumpkinriver.com/photos/464447032_okyKx-L.jpg

Retouched
http://pumpkinriverphotography.smugmug.com/photos/464653987_uBshr-L.jpg

[Mike J]

Okay,

Just got home...thought this was fixed...hmmm...got me. Here goes. Okay, I think I have it now...I had to reload the photo to my website. I used the same technique to load the original as the retouched. I even pasted it in...oh well. I'm sorry about the upload problem.

Original
http://www.pumpkinriver.com/photos/464447032_okyKx-L.jpg

Retouched
http://pumpkinriverphotography.smugmug.com/photos/464653987_uBshr-L.jpg

Thanks for coming back to this...I like seeing another interpretation of the photo.

What I like...
The overall added warmth
the highlights in the hair
the work on the eyes and lips

The skin is a little too far for my tastes. I think somewhere between the original and yours would be more to my taste.

Do you do you work in Photoshop? Portrait Pro?

[Mike J]

After a little more retouching...

http://thejulianafamily.smugmug.com/photos/464773051_oBEsf-L.jpg

[Ed911]

Thanks for coming back to this...I like seeing another interpretation of the photo.

What I like...
The overall added warmth
the highlights in the hair
the work on the eyes and lips

The skin is a little too far for my tastes. I think somewhere between the original and yours would be more to my taste.

Do you do you work in Photoshop? Portrait Pro?

You are welcome, Mike. I used PS CS3.

[divamum]

After a little more retouching...

http://thejulianafamily.smugmug.com/photos/464773051_oBEsf-L.jpg

She's just a cutie, and that's an awesome picture of her in ALL versions (and I do like this final iteration - I agree that the skin can't go too far with retouching she's got perfect little-girl skin to start with :D). I really love the colour balance and softness of the light so much! You're making me hanker after an umbrella now... I love my little home made softbox, but it's small and I'd really like to something to give me an even larger more diffused light source. Added to my (ever growing) list!!

:thumb

[Mike J]

You're making me hanker after an umbrella now... I love my little home made softbox, but it's small and I'd really like to something to give me an even larger more diffused light source. Added to my (ever growing) list!!

:thumb

Go for it. For my next light modifier (I'm lousy at DIY projects...one of our bathrooms has been torn apart for too long now), I'm considering the Photek SoftliterII. You may want to check that out as well (and add to your list :D ).

[joshhuntnm]

3. Not too keen on the pose :wink and the light is the same as in #2.

Gotta take issue with you Scott. LOVE the pose in #3!!!!!!!!!!!!:barb

[Mike J]

Gotta take issue with you Scott. LOVE the pose in #3!!!!!!!!!!!!:barb

Thanks Josh... I think I got this one from a portrait posing book I found on Ebay... they called it the "I'm bored fish lip pose." :rofl :rofl :rofl

[joshhuntnm]

ED-

That is some fine PS work. Just when I think i am getting this I see there is a whole other level. Great work.

[marlof]

That's some beautiful lightning for a beautiful girl. I like these images a lot. As for the softness: I don't mind a little softness in a child portrait one bit, but I'm curious as to why some are sharper than others.
As for Ed's work: as a a standalone picture, his reworked images is a nice thing. But somehow in these edits, to me the character of the child is changed from a regular kid, to a kid model. I miss the shapes of her cheeks, and I prefer the eyes in the first picture, even if they're a little shaded underneath. But I guess that's a matter of taste: I like my portraits a little more au natural, even if that means with a few flaws.

[Ed911]

ED-

That is some fine PS work. Just when I think i am getting this I see there is a whole other level. Great work.

Thanks, Josh.