These are really tough to do!!

Agreed...very tough....but you did it very well Mitchell...great job!

Originally Posted by Swartzy Agreed...very tough....but you did it very well Mitchell...great job!

Your lighting is great, nice and soft. Maybe it's my monitor but I see bright spots under your eyes

Originally Posted by Mitchell These are really tough to do!!

Yes, but yours is er... pretty much close to... uh... perfect.

Wow. I seriously love it!

The soft lighting is a given as a major plus, but I also particularly like the background-that-isn't-a-background - it's so *natural* looking. You manage to combine the best of portrait/studio and natural lighting/candid "looks" to the picture. One teeny tiny nit: the vignette on the right has a little bit too much hard edge on my monitor - I can see it (feather it slightly more, perhaps?)

Can you enlighten the rest of us on what you did? Magic Garage, presumably, but can you give us the skinny on the rest of the setup?

Originally Posted by divamum The soft lighting is a given as a major plus, but I also particularly like the background-that-isn't-a-background - it's so *natural* looking. You manage to combine the best of portrait/studio and natural lighting/candid "looks" to the picture. One teeny tiny nit: the vignette on the right has a little bit too much hard edge on my monitor - I can see it (feather it slightly more, perhaps?) Can you enlighten the rest of us on what you did? Magic Garage, presumably, but can you give us the skinny on the rest of the setup?

You should be able to come close to reverse-engineering the lighting by looking at the shadows and the catchlights in the eyes.

Here's my take on it:
There looks to be only one light source and it's just a little bit to camera left. There might be a reflector or low-power light source to camera right cause his left ear is pretty well lit, but I don't see the corresponding shadows on the right side of his nose.

As a tiny critique:

• Turn the head just a touch more away from the camera - the sliver of ear is not a goodness.
• Could have used a light from behind to seperate dark t-shirt from the background - we have a floating head.

Originally Posted by Scott_Quier You should be able to come close to reverse-engineering the lighting by looking at the shadows and the catchlights in the eyes. Here's my take on it: There looks to be only one light source and it's just a little bit to camera left. There might be a reflector or low-power light source to camera right cause his left ear is pretty well lit, but I don't see the corresponding shadows on the right side of his nose. As a tiny critique: Turn the head just a touch more away from the camera - the sliver of ear is not a goodness. Could have used a light from behind to seperate dark t-shirt from the background - we have a floating head.

Good point about starting to reverse engineer - I guess I've learned enough that I *should* be able to start doing that, however ineptly ... Thanks Scott - you're always leading me in new directions to explore. Appreciated!

But what I do still want to know is whether it was predominantly natural or predominantly artificial light - it's as much the *quality* of the light as its placement that's piqued my interest

Fwiw, on my (uncalibrated) monitor, the shirt and background are nicely distinct since one is dark blue and the other a rather less dark brown.

Originally Posted by divamum Fwiw, on my (uncalibrated) monitor, the shirt and background are nicely distinct since one is dark blue and the other a rather less dark brown.

Consider what a bare light from behind might do for/to the shirt - supply something of a rim-light to outline it against the background.

Really nice job! :)

With respect to the shirt and background, on my monitor at work (uncalibrated) I can see a slight distinction. It was one of the first things I noticed actually (after the nice lighting on your face). The shirt looks black or dark navy and the background looks a dark burgandy. I think I'd prefer to see just a teensy bit more light there as well, but not much.

-- Lisa P.

P.E.R.F.E.C.T

Originally Posted by divamum Yes, but yours is er... pretty much close to... uh... perfect. Wow. I seriously love it! The soft lighting is a given as a major plus, but I also particularly like the background-that-isn't-a-background - it's so *natural* looking. You manage to combine the best of portrait/studio and natural lighting/candid "looks" to the picture. One teeny tiny nit: the vignette on the right has a little bit too much hard edge on my monitor - I can see it (feather it slightly more, perhaps?) Can you enlighten the rest of us on what you did? Magic Garage, presumably, but can you give us the skinny on the rest of the setup?

Thanks!!

There really is no setup here. This was just taken in my garage using the open door for indirect lighting. No reflectors were used.

As to the vignette, I didn't appreciate the edge until you pointed it out. I am using OnOne Focal Point pluging for this. I'm still fairly green with this and will go back to adjust the feather a bit. Good eye.

Originally Posted by Scott_Quier Consider what a bare light from behind might do for/to the shirt - supply something of a rim-light to outline it against the background.

I took these much later in the day than usual. As such there was very little light. With the falloff, there was not much light reaching the rear of the garage. I've never used additional lights in my garage, but perhaps I could have gotten some better separation.

My shirt is black and the background are some brown, wooden cabinets. On my monitor, I see enough of a distinction to separate the two.

I like the way you analyze and think about the lighting. I'm constantly doing that when I look at photos in ads and photo mags. Very helpful.

This would be perfect for your avatar.

Cuong

As difficult as SPs are, you really nailed it. Magic Garage, indeed!

Beautiful portrait. Makes me want to clean out my garage.

Caroline