Light intensity.....

[BeckyMax]

Really, this is most embarrassing to even ask. I've been very diligent about metering my lights, making sure the light meter, lights, and camera all match. But I have been unhappy in how harsh the light looks. It has finally hit me, that sure I've been metering the lights, but I think they are too strong, or too far away, or something not right. I have Photogenic 1500 lights, 2 of them and 1 750. I have a giant softbox from Calumet, and a 24x24 Photogenic softbox.

This weekend I had the giant softbox at camera left at about a 70 degree angle and the smaller softbox right beside my camera. The camera was about 20' from the backdrop and about 14' from the subjects. The boxes were approx 8 1/2' high and man, were the shadows behind the subjects awful! The only way to get rid of the shadows, was to move the fill closer and it ended up almost directly across from the key light. So it looked completely and totally fake, PLUS the light is so harsh. Where's the softness come from? How do you decide how strong to make the lights? I'm just not seeing it right I guess. I thought with that bigger softbox that maybe I would not even have to use the fill, but I don't have the hang of the reflector down yet. Darn thing is always twisting around and getting in the picture, so I hate it. Probably just too big!

Oh, and I was shooting ISO 100, ss 1/125, and F8 or 9. I was totally worn out from fighting with it all day.

The question is, how do I "see" the light on the subject before I shoot? or meter? I have the modeling lights on at all times, but it seems to me even when I change the flash intensity the modeling light stays the same.

[ueb0258]

Can you post an example of what you are talking about?

[Lotto]

How far was the main light from the subject? Setting the SB at 70 degree and 8.5' high is unusual for portrait, what's your reason for that?

[BeckyMax]

I had the softbox in the vertical position, so the top of it was 8 1/2' high. The smaller softbox I always have above the camera, it might have only been 7' high. I wanted the giant softbox to wrap its light around my subjects. BUT I really don't know exactly what I'm doing. Doing a lot of reading and experimenting. Shouldn't some of the experiments work???

[nadtz]

Doh, misread! Like lotto asked, how far away are the lights? And maybe a sample pic?

[BeckyMax]

The extra large Calumet is maybe 3 feet from the subject, I have it horizontal if they are sitting on the floor, vertical if standing. The fill is 10-12 feet in front of the subjects. Makes a horrible shadow behind them. The shadow ALWAYS comes from my fill. Am I reading it wrong? If the main is reading 8.0, the fill 4 or 5.6 I thought that was right. Is it backwards? It always looks like the fill is stronger when I examine the photos on the computer screen. Truthfully, I was hoping just to use the extra large softbox and maybe a reflector but evidently, I am blind in one eye and can't see out of the other. I can't get the reflector to do what I want yet.

[bieber]

It's going to be all but impossible to help you without example images...

[Wilt]

Modelling lights are not necessarily variable, unless the light is designed to have 'proportional' modelling lights. Some lights are manually 'variable' but not 'proportional' automatically according to power setting.

Think of lights as mimicing the normal settings around you. You do not need huge softboxes for the main light. Remember. 'main' is 'highlight', fill is fill. So like when you're standing near buildings in sunlight, relatively tiny sun provides highlights, bouncing light from buildings provides fill. Or if cun is covered with some clouds, the source becomes bigger and softer, but it still is providing highlight while building provides fill. Then in overcast, huge overhead main light (with virtually no highlight) and it all is fill.

[BeckyMaxfd]

I'm so excited. I'm starting to get it I think! I had the fill light way too far away from the subject. I don't know why but I had it in my mind that the subject was 6 feet away from the backdrop, the camera was 10 or 12 ft away from the subject with the fill ight slightly behind the camera. Cooking supper I saw that if my hand was right above the counter, heavy shadow but if I raised my hand toward the light, no shadow. We went down to try it out, moved the main just a little more into an angle, moved the camera and fill WAY up close and voila, no shadow or not much anyway. If I wasn't so sick tonight, I'd mess with it more. But finally I have hope. Plus I wonder if I haven't been reading my meter incorrectly, I would meter the main at F8 and the fill at F4. From the photos, that looks exactly backward. The fill was more intense than the main. More experimenting when this cough and sinus go away!

Thanks everyone for your input tho! Much appreciated.

[ueb0258]

From the photos, that looks exactly backward. The fill was more intense than the main.

Dont forget about light overlap. If you fill is overlapping you main the light will be brighter due to the combination.

[BeckyMax]

Overlap? How can you avoid that? Wouldn't there always be some? The big softbox at the 45 degree angle, the fill on the camera axis ?

[Wilt]

Overlap? How can you avoid that? Wouldn't there always be some? The big softbox at the 45 degree angle, the fill on the camera axis ?


Becky, you do not need to avoid overlap. In fact, a common lighting arrangement is for 'fill' at/near camera position, that casts light on the entire area of the face which is visible from the lens, and then the 'key' light is off to one side to provide the highlights, so that portion of the face is getting light from both sources.

If the 'key' was twice as strong as the 'fill' at the subject, the resulting lighting yields 3:1 contrast ratio (2+1:1)