Shooting at 1pm--use direct sun or shade?

[Christopher Steven b]

I'm shooting a Communion on Saturday and hope to be using the church outside to get some shots [portraits of the girl + possibly group photos]. The difficulty I can see is that the lighting is obviously not ideal at that time. Presuming that the sun will be out, would you folks advise using direct sun for light; or should I try to get a more even and controlled lighting by finding shade?

Also: I've seen the term 'open shade' used before--what does this mean?

Gear: canon 5d + 430ex flash.

thanks!

[Mike]

I'd go with shade, it stops the squinting and you can add some flash for fill.

[PhotosGuy]

Shade: Angeline outdoors (http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=483975)

[Wilt]

Shade when it is available, or shade when I can create it (assistant holding a scrim overhead). If neither of those are available, then sun with back to sun as much as possible, and flash fill at about -1EV to not look too unnatural.

[SYS]

Here's my "assistant" holding a sun panel... :)

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3041/3086941571_3b46327fe0.jpg

[Gentleman Villain]

Also: I've seen the term 'open shade' used before--what does this mean?

Gear: canon 5d + 430ex flash.



Here's a diagram illustrating the concept of open shade lighting: http://thomaseven.blogspot.com/2006/09/open-shade-and-natural-reflectors.html

http://i264.photobucket.com/albums/ii176/ConsensusTrance/Reflector_2copy.jpg

Photographers will often use different terms and phrases to describe the same thing. Just like the creator of the blog, I've always used the term "open shade" to describe this particular type of lighting. Other photographers might call it something different...but that's what I call it

To me....open shade lighting happens when a subject is standing in a shadow on a sunny day....but the light from the sun is reflecting from an object and bouncing light into the shadow area where the subject is positioned. So basically, the reflected sunlight from the object is what provides the directional quality to the open shade.

Take a look at that diagram again....Imagine that everything was the same except that there was no object reflecting light from the sun back into the shadow area or shady area. IF there was no reflected light from an object, then the only light source for the shade would be from the open blue (sunless) sky above. Essentially, the blue sky itself is the light source instead of the direct sun. That type of lighting would be called "open sky" lighting. The open sky above the subject would provide the directional quality of the light.

It's important to identify whether the directional quality of the light is coming from open shade or open sky so that a photographer can position his subject for proper coverage of light and mood of light. For example, if the light source is coming from open sky that is above the subject then the direction of the light will be coming down onto the subject. This might make deep shadows under the sockets of the subject's eyes. So the photographer might want to ask the subject to tilt his head up so that the shadows disappear, or the photographer might want to add a bit of fill flash or a reflector card to take away the shadows. But, the directional quality of the light is determined by the open sky. The photographer must be aware of this in order to figure out how to position the subject or whether or not to add fill to the subject.

Open sky light sources are generally high above the subject and are prone to creating deep shadows underneath the subject. On the contrary, open shade sources often come from reflected light that is to the side of a subject so the shadows will go a different direction than open sky lighting.

Remember, everything that is surrounding a subject is either reflecting or subtracting light. For example, grass or tarred roads will often subtract light so they might create dark shadows on the subject. Light colored sidewalks/pavement or light colored sand on the beach might reflect light into the shadow areas of the subject. Even though the main directional quality of the light might be coming from open shade or open sky.....there are still additional elements in the environment that might continue to add or subtract light from the subject. It's good to work with these elements and sometimes they can make excellent fill sources.

That's how I've learned to work with open shade and open sky....Other photographers might use different terms to describe the same thing but basically we all have the same idea. It's not too hard to get the concept down....BUT....it takes years to get good at actually seeing the light. These natural lighting scenarios can contain extremely subtle aspects that can be difficult to see and use without lots of practice....it takes years to get good at identifying these light sources and positioning subjects within them while still creating a pleasing background and composition etc. Hope that helps a bit...good luck with your shooting.

[Christopher Steven b]

I feel sort of like I have been cramming for an exam--headache and all. But I've learned a lot about light. Better: I've learned about how little I know.

Frank: his examples are inspiring. I confess to presuming (for lack of experience) that shooting in the shade -> flat tones. Clearly not so.

SYS: brilliant! he looks happy, too!

Thanks Wilt, Mike.

I very much appreciate your write-up, Gentleman Villain. It definitely helps fill in the picture re: the subtle qualities of light in these circumstances. I have to remember to LOOK. I actually need that tattooed on the inside of my viewfinder.

If I have permission from the client, I shall return with a sample of the results: successful or otherwise!

[cdifoto]

To me, open shade has always been anywhere that the subject is shaded but not directly under something. An example would be standing in the shadow of a tree but not under the tree's leaves. I don't consider a reflecting source necessary to call it open shade. Open sky to me is just being smack dab out there where you'll get a sunburn on your head.

[Gentleman Villain]

Frank: his examples are inspiring. I confess to presuming (for lack of experience) that shooting in the shade -> flat tones. Clearly not so.

Yes exactly! Many photographs taken in shady areas do appear flat. That is usually because the photographer is not identifying the primary light source and cannot adequately determine the directional quality. There are many reflections and subtractions of light taking place naturally in the environment so the primary source can often be hard for a photographer to identify. But once a photographer can identify the primary light source of a shady area to either be an "open shade or open sky source"... then that will help him determine the direction of the light and know where to place a subject so that the final image will not appear flat.

Basically, the whole idea behind differentiating between open-sky/open-shade lighting is to allow the photographer to choose the primary light source so that he can easily see the direction that the light is coming from...

The subtle direction qualities of open shade and open sky lighting can be very difficult for the eye to see when working in the field....However, these subtle qualities will often be very dramatic when captured on film or by a digital sensor.


If I have permission from the client, I shall return with a sample of the results: successful or otherwise!

That would be awesome :D Good luck with your shoot

[Wilt]

Great illustrations, guys, regarding the situations I was referring to in my post 4