reflection softbox/umrella in eyes

[mstemmer]

Hi all,
I'd like to know how I can improve my portraits. In every picture I can see the reflection of my softbox and umbrella in the eyes.
I position the softbox in a 45 degree angle. Do I have to lift it also? How can I reduce the reflections?

Matt

[Tony-S]

Photoshop might be easiest. I have the most trouble with glasses. Without modeling lights, it's hard to determine in advance. At least with digital, I can see the results immediately. Film would be some trial and error.

[TMR Design]

Originally Posted by mstemmer

Hi all,
I'd like to know how I can improve my portraits. In every picture I can see the reflection of my softbox and umbrella in the eyes.
I position the softbox in a 45 degree angle. Do I have to lift it also? How can I reduce the reflections?

Matt

Are you trying to reduce the overall reflection and catchlights or just remove the umbrella and have the softbox be the only catchlight in the eyes?
Do you have a sample image?
Recently there were a few threads about having 2 catchlights and most people said they just remove the second one with Photoshop. I recently discovered that I could have just the one catchlight if I used a reflector as fill instead of another light.
As far as reducing the overall effect or brightness of the catchlight, I haven't gotten that far so hopefully some of the other guys here can help with that.

[zacker]

i think its the reflection of softbox in the eyes the OP is asking about.. actually seeing the soft box or brella in the eye...lol like big square catchlights.. I would just use PS to fix it you could try moving the lights but then you would end up PS'ing the catchlights back in anyhow...No?

[ohsnap]

Funny you should mention umbrella catchlights. Since I started as a photographer, I've noticed that many portraits used in headshots and advertising still contain the umbrella-shaped catchlight. Take a look in the Gap windows if you are near one soon. Here in Manhattan, at least, they have this effect.

[TMR Design]

So you just want to remove all catchlight reflection from the eyes? What if you used very soft sidelighting?
Perhaps side and/or backlighting and reflector(s).

[TMR Design]

Originally Posted by ohsnap

Funny you should mention umbrella catchlights. Since I started as a photographer, I've noticed that many portraits used in headshots and advertising still contain the umbrella-shaped catchlight. Take a look in the Gap windows if you are near one soon. Here in Manhattan, at least, they have this effect.

I like the catchlights in the eyes. To me it looks very good and in portraits I like it. The thing I just started noticing was not only the shape of the catchlight but things like the spokes from the umbrellas, which I find very distasteful. I have a Softlighter II that I lovethe light, but I'm not sure I like the catchlights I get from it. Because the light points into the umbrella and is bounced back out the front, you can see the vertical lightstand and the central body of the strobe inside the catchlight. I've tried and it seems that from all angles and distrances you can see it, but of course for very close, softlighting it is pretty dramatic. I think I much prefer solid round catchlights like those from reflecting dishes or square/rectangular ones from softboxes.

And I do realize that a quick trip to Photoshop with a clone tool can remove (fix) catchlights but I would like to avod that step if possible.

[mstemmer]

Thanks fot your comment,
I attached a picture with my catchlightproblem. I don't prefer PS but I assume I'll need it anyway.
I'd like to know your reaction about the catchlight.

Matt

[TMR Design]

Originally Posted by mstemmer

Thanks fot your comment,
I attached a picture with my catchlightproblem. I don't prefer PS but I assume I'll need it anyway.
I'd like to know your reaction about the catchlight.

Matt

Well I'm no expert and also learning about lighting so I can only volunteer opinion. I like the catchlights, however I'm not a big fam of seeing 2 in each eye. Recently I started playing with reflectors and found that by using a reflector I could eliminate the second catchlight. So initially I would try that. I like the larger catch light but to me they lok a bit too large. That is something I hav enot learned how to control so I can't help with that. I don't know if positioning and distance from subject will change the size of the catchlights but you can give it a try. I'm afraid that I don't know a way to light the shot correctly without having at least one catchlight, unless you completely lit it from the side and/or back and used reflectors but I'm not so sure that would work.

[ohsnap]

To me, it looks like there is a double catchlight, one from your main and another from the secondary on camera right. Since the hair and shoulders of your subject are a little dark, you could probably solve two problems by moving the main light back a bit. you'd eliminate the double catchlight, and second, you'd more evenly expose the subject, (if that's what you want to go for).

[TMR Design]

Originally Posted by ohsnap

To me, it looks like there is a double catchlight, one from your main and another from the secondary on camera right. Since the hair and shoulders of your subject are a little dark, you could probably solve two problems by moving the main light back a bit. you'd eliminate the double catchlight, and second, you'd more evenly expose the subject, (if that's what you want to go for).

Can you explain how moving the main light back will remove the double catchlight? I'm very curious about this.

[mstemmer]

Hi all,
I was thinking about a solution. In orde to light both sides I need to use to lights. But maybe I should have moved my umbrella untill the catchlight falls together with the white area of the eye. Is that a solution for the umbrella catchlight?

According to the big catchlight of the softbox. The distance between the boy was approximatly 1.5 meter (about 4 feet?). So, if I put the softbox a bit further I assume the catchlight will be smaller. The only thing is that I need to take into consideration the flash falloff... is this a good solution?

Matt

[NickSimcheck]

Matt,

Yes the mainlight is too close, hot right shoulder (his) and underexposed left. Hotspots on the face are really distracting too.

As far as the double catchlight, you can eliminate it by either moving the fill-light more off to the side or by merging the main and fill lights so that they overlap. I suggest the first solution.

Also, if you want a stronger lighting ratio and good catchlight you can try setting your mainlight way off to the side, then set your fill-light straight on (right next to you) and use it to bring the dark side up to where you want it. Doing so will give you a good straight-on single catchlight.

[akhoopes]

if you look at an olan mills portrait , they all have 2 catch lights in the pictures, i never noticed until i started taking pictures and paying attention, most every day people really dont worry about them, imo yuou cant take all the catch lights out of the eyes, ive tried this and to me the person i just snapped look dead, i think the catch light adds life to the subject being photographed, just my opinion. so it really doesnt bother me, and i agree with the above comment about the gap, look at adds, magazines, anything really they all have catch lights.

[ohsnap]

Originally Posted by TMR Design

Can you explain how moving the main light back will remove the double catchlight? I'm very curious about this.

Sure. First I need to specify that I'm assuming your main light is more or less positioned in a softbox directly over the subject and aimed straight down.

Now, think about the angle made by these three points: the subject's eyes (which are basically spherical), the light, and your lens. With the main light overhead, the light hits the eyes coming more or less straight down and bounces off at a 90 degree angle, straight into the lens. A good way to picture this is to imagine you've dropped a tennis ball (light) onto the front of a basketball(the eyes). You can see how the tennis ball will bounce off at an angle.

Stepping back from the balls metaphor (which sounds dirtier than it is), you can probably now see how the overhead light produces a catchlight if it's given the opportunity to bounce off the subject's eyes. And because light is not a tennis ball, it will radiate outwards over a wide angle when bounced off of a sphere. For this reason, any light source placed in front of your subject will most likely give his/her eyes a catchlight.

So, by moving the main light back a bit, the subject's eyebrows or head will shield the eyes from the flash, and it won't bounce off the eyes and into the lens. You'll still get a catchlight from the other strobe you're using, but you'll eliminate the double catchlight effect. Give it a try.