Thoughts on the lighting here?

[elTwitcho]

The world of studio lighting is still one I'm exploring in very small steps, however this shot is from my most recent experimentation. It's not a particularly interesting shot mind you, since I'm really trying to work out my lighting ratios for a future shot I plan on doing this week, but I wanted some opinions and/or pointers on the lighting used. My initial thoughts are that the softbox on the right is too difused causing a loss of detail in the skin texture on the right side of the face. Other than that I am happy however, what do you guys think?

http://www.pbase.com/eltwitcho/image/66337110.jpg

[goatee]

I know nothing about studio lighting. But, I like the ratio of lighting - you seem a little over-exposed, and perhaps the light to your right could move slightly further forward, and the light to your left to move slightly further back to your left?

[fi20100]

Well I know nothing about studio lighting either, but I think it’s an interesting shot. Maybe a bit less light from the right? If you moved it just a little bit further? I like the shot though.

[michael88]

As previously said, I think the right side is a little over exposed. The light may be a little to low also. Try to increase the height a bit. The reason I say the light is to low is because of the soft box reflection in your eyes. Try to get the reflection at about 2 o' clock. By doing that, with the right exposure, I think you will see more texture.

[Benji]

I suggest shooting in RAW and use a hand held meter. The softbox lighting is OK but it appears you are just about overexposed on both sides. The kicker light on the left is too hot. Don Blair called his kicker light a "garlic light" and just like too much garlic will spoil a good receipe too much garlic light will spoil a good image. The kicker should be about the same intensity OR LESS as the fill light.

Benji

[Sam]

It sounds like you are worried about loss of detail in the skin. It all depends on what you want. If you are shooting someone with less than flawless skin and your goal is to hide the flaws then you are on track.

Because the model (you) look the way you do I think the lighting ratio fits on this. It wouldn't be so great for a little girl. In an edgy 20ish portrait I think it works well.

[Dante King]

i like it ElTwitchy. Maybe cut power down just a hair.

[elTwitcho]

I absolutely want to thank you guys for the pointers. I knew something was off about it, but I couldn't quite put it together. Maybe "Overexposed" isn't exactly the case of what happened, but the processing made it seem so. I do go for bright highlights, but the overall tonality of the photo was a bit on the light side, and that blew some of the detail I wanted. I did this revisited version with a few changes to my processing and am much happier how it turned out.

http://www.pbase.com/eltwitcho/image/66374970.jpg

Benji - thanks, I'll play around a bit with different intensities for my sidelight with this kind of shot. I like the really bright effect, but I'm certainly into finding out different techniques which may be more suitable to other situations.

Solinger - Yeah, I think I'm starting to get a grip on the way different lighting is more effective for different moods, effects or people. Depending on the end product, lighting like this might be completely wrong for the task.

Dante- Gracias :)

In other funny news, after using a hot shoe adapter for the past few months, I discovered my camera's PC jack that was indeed there all along. Oh boy I'm a clod...

[JSimonian]

The latest version looks awesome IMO! What did you do differently? Nice job!
J.Simonian

[ImagineTNT]

I actually really like it. As stated the photo IS overexposed, however I like it that way (but then again most people don't like my style of blowing out highlights). I like the way you get depth from the shadow on the left side of the face and then back/hair/whatever lighting from the far left/back side.

[ajbalazic]

I have to agree with what's been said about the highlights- you've gone for a look and the results are very good. I like what Sam said- "an edgy 20ish portrait". Great. This type of lighting lends itself very well to B&W. Have you considered converting it?

[Mike Reynolds]

good job Here's my critique.....I think the left side light is overkill with the shaddow in the center.

[fi20100]

Wow, I really like your second edition of PP. It got a very cool mood to it :) Really nice!

[elTwitcho]

Thanks guys. The second version is much better I agree. Goes to show the difference post processing can make, and why it's important not to rush things at 4:30am as well ;)

J.Simonian - Slightly cooler colour balance (5600 as opposed to 6400) and some different curves work. Brought the mid tones down instead of bringing them up really and was alot more wary of the highlights.

Imagine - Thanks dude. I've seen some of your stuff and I agree we have somewhat similar tastes.

ajbalazic - I've messed around with it a few times although I couldn't really get the look I liked out of a black and white with it. I'm inflexible I think, some shots I look at and say "this has to be made black and white!" which then comes out great, others if I don't see it in monochrome I can't make it look good.

Thanks as well Mike and fi20100