Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Photo Sharing & Visual Enjoyment People 
Thread started 27 Jan 2018 (Saturday) 19:58
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Portable studio with "lollypop softboxes"

 
ShutterKlick
Senior Member
Avatar
313 posts
Gallery: 18 photos
Likes: 158
Joined Oct 2017
Post edited 6 months ago by ShutterKlick.
     
Jan 27, 2018 19:58 |  #1

The end result was actually (IMHO) pretty good! Mind you, I am still learning and practicing the art.

Equipment used was:
Nikon D5300
Three Godox TT600 speedlights
Godox speedlight controller
Pop-Up backdrop
24" reflector
Three "lollypop softboxes"
Four budget stands
Variable Neutral Density filter
35mm F1.8 AF-S DX (Love this lens!)

The portrait is untouched JPG fright from the card.

Constructive criticism is welcome.


HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.


HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.


"Camera rich, Cash poor"
http://shutterklick.co​m (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
ShutterKlick
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Avatar
313 posts
Gallery: 18 photos
Likes: 158
Joined Oct 2017
     
Jan 27, 2018 20:01 |  #2


HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.


HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.


"Camera rich, Cash poor"
http://shutterklick.co​m (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ShutterKlick
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Avatar
313 posts
Gallery: 18 photos
Likes: 158
Joined Oct 2017
     
Jan 27, 2018 20:03 |  #3


HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.



All in all, the slip on disk ($15 variation from Amazon) actually do pretty decent!

If you need links to any of my gear let me know, Im pressed for time and
didnt get to do them but will later if anyone ask.


Thank you for looking and commenting!

Andrew

"Camera rich, Cash poor"
http://shutterklick.co​m (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
gonzogolf
dumb remark memorialized
29,003 posts
Likes: 987
Joined Dec 2006
     
Jan 28, 2018 05:26 |  #4

What focal length did you use? This sort of shot would be much more flattering to her if you used a longer lens.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ShutterKlick
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Avatar
313 posts
Gallery: 18 photos
Likes: 158
Joined Oct 2017
     
Jan 28, 2018 19:37 |  #5

For the first photo, the portrait, the 35mm f1.8 was used. Had I gone much longer, I would have had to knock a hole in the wall (My living room just did support putting the lights up and the backdrop in place! After that my back was to the television when I shot the portrait). But I agree, a little longer lens would have been nice, Im looking to get a 50mm f1.8 soon, which will give me 75mm effective focal length.


Here is a picture from tonight's photo shoot using the "lollypop softboxes", they were easy to move around QUICKLY and the light
was a million times better than DIRECT flash!

IMAGE: https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4630/39058259385_4bf052784d_b.jpg

Thanks for looking and commenting!
Andrew

"Camera rich, Cash poor"
http://shutterklick.co​m (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
gonzogolf
dumb remark memorialized
29,003 posts
Likes: 987
Joined Dec 2006
     
Jan 29, 2018 06:02 |  #6

For a lady like your first subject you want to be at least at 85. Perspective distortion is a huge factor here especially when dealing with a more rounded face.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sfinkernagel
Senior Member
385 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Likes: 31
Joined Apr 2006
Location: Pocono Lake, PA USA
     
Jan 29, 2018 11:41 |  #7

I realize that my thoughts may be contradicted by the feeling you want to create, and your vision, but the first photo is underexposed to me. I look at her eyes, and I want the whites to stand out more. There is very little catchlight, and the shadows around her nose and mouth seem to accentuate those creases. I might prefer this if you brought your main light (the one on camera right) around to the front a little more, and consider increasing the exposure overall. You are at iso 100, if you want to stay there, you can adjust the output from the flashes. Bumping the iso to 200 or so might be a simpler solution.

I feel much better about the second shot. It has a nice edgy feel that is very pleasing.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
mihazero
Member
158 posts
Gallery: 7 photos
Likes: 196
Joined Dec 2013
     
Jan 30, 2018 00:19 |  #8

This is my contribution to lollypop softboxes :)



HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.




HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sfinkernagel
Senior Member
385 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Likes: 31
Joined Apr 2006
Location: Pocono Lake, PA USA
     
Jan 30, 2018 19:22 as a reply to  @ mihazero's post |  #9

Those are great!




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
mihazero
Member
158 posts
Gallery: 7 photos
Likes: 196
Joined Dec 2013
     
Jan 30, 2018 21:36 |  #10

sfinkernagel wrote in post #18552920 (external link)
Those are great!

Thanks, it was first test using these.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ShutterKlick
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Avatar
313 posts
Gallery: 18 photos
Likes: 158
Joined Oct 2017
     
Jan 31, 2018 14:10 |  #11

sfinkernagel wrote in post #18551708 (external link)
I realize that my thoughts may be contradicted by the feeling you want to create, and your vision, but the first photo is underexposed to me. I look at her eyes, and I want the whites to stand out more. There is very little catchlight, and the shadows around her nose and mouth seem to accentuate those creases. I might prefer this if you brought your main light (the one on camera right) around to the front a little more, and consider increasing the exposure overall. You are at iso 100, if you want to stay there, you can adjust the output from the flashes. Bumping the iso to 200 or so might be a simpler solution.

I feel much better about the second shot. It has a nice edgy feel that is very pleasing.

Understood, but know that I had to move the key light more to the side in order to eliminate reflection in her glasses. Had she not been wearing glasses I would have preferred it more in front, and minimize that AMOUNT of shadows you see. When I did bring it in front and raise the flash, the light was looking no-good with accentuated butterfly shadow.

The portrait as I took it was the best I could do and keep the glasses on.

I am re-reading your reply and digesting it for what I can apply for next time.

Thank you for looking & commenting!

Andrew


"Camera rich, Cash poor"
http://shutterklick.co​m (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ShutterKlick
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Avatar
313 posts
Gallery: 18 photos
Likes: 158
Joined Oct 2017
     
Jan 31, 2018 14:13 |  #12

gonzogolf wrote in post #18551549 (external link)
For a lady like your first subject you want to be at least at 85. Perspective distortion is a huge factor here especially when dealing with a more rounded face.

For the distance I had to work with, very small and cramped, I couldt have used the 85mm effective focal length, I was running my 35mm (52mm effective) focal length and that was as far back as I could get.

HOWEVER, I do have my eye on a 50mm f1.8 (75mm effective) focal length lens to do future portraits with (if space allows).

Thank you for viewing & commenting!
Andrew


"Camera rich, Cash poor"
http://shutterklick.co​m (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sfinkernagel
Senior Member
385 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Likes: 31
Joined Apr 2006
Location: Pocono Lake, PA USA
     
Jan 31, 2018 20:53 as a reply to  @ ShutterKlick's post |  #13

Just an FYI on reflections- 2 ideas. Broad lighting usually eliminates them, so you can turn her that way. As a last resort, you can ask your model to tilt the frames. If they lift the ear pieces so they are a little higher than the ears, the glass faces down enough that the reflection is gone. Depending on angles, hair, etc, it's usually un- noticeable.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
gonzogolf
dumb remark memorialized
29,003 posts
Likes: 987
Joined Dec 2006
     
Jan 31, 2018 22:51 |  #14

ShutterKlick wrote in post #18553494 (external link)
For the distance I had to work with, very small and cramped, I couldt have used the 85mm effective focal length, I was running my 35mm (52mm effective) focal length and that was as far back as I could get.

HOWEVER, I do have my eye on a 50mm f1.8 (75mm effective) focal length lens to do future portraits with (if space allows).

Thank you for viewing & commenting!
Andrew

If space allows is a poor excuse. You are spending time and money on tools and techniques that will be undermined because you pick a lens and working distance based on convenience. If you don't have room to make good photos then find another place to work rather than surrender quality to convenience.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ShutterKlick
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Avatar
313 posts
Gallery: 18 photos
Likes: 158
Joined Oct 2017
Post edited 6 months ago by ShutterKlick.
     
Feb 01, 2018 20:59 |  #15

gonzogolf wrote in post #18553810 (external link)
If space allows is a poor excuse.

1) Ive got feelings too..
2) I have no alternative space


Andrew


"Camera rich, Cash poor"
http://shutterklick.co​m (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

2,183 views & 23 likes for this thread
Portable studio with "lollypop softboxes"
FORUMS Photo Sharing & Visual Enjoyment People 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is S7TSLLC
691 guests, 247 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 6430, that happened on Dec 03, 2017

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.