Feathering the light

I understand that feathering is positioning a light so that it's axis is not directly in line with the model; however, I don't understand exactly why this technique is used. Do photographers feather the light both in front of and in back of the subject depending on the effect they want? Any insight in to why this technique is used and different ways/situations to use it would be appreciated. I'm probably going to experiment with feathering tonight for just for fun; however, I think a better understanding of the "why" would help.

Thanks.

You feather lighting to do one thing. SOFTEN the light. When dealing with a light spread as from an umbrella, the light is always hardest toward the center, and softens as you move away from the center of the lightsource. One use for light feathering is when photographing a group of people. If you aim the light source directly at the person on the side where the light is, you'll end up with that person being lit more than those further from the light. Understanding this, if you feather the light, the stronger part of the light spread will be toward the furthest person, but the distance from the lightsource will make it fall off, then the person closer will get less intense light, but they're closer, so you'll end up with more evenly lit groups. Try it out. It works.

Thanks. I have also heard someone mention that they feathered the light in a head shot for faster light falloff. I assume that this would involve pointing the light behind the subject so only the front edge hits the face.

doidinho wrote in post #6211086
Thanks. I have also heard someone mention that they feathered the light in a head shot for faster light falloff. I assume that this would involve pointing the light behind the subject so only the front edge hits the face.

That doesn't make sense, as it is distance that determines rate of falloff, not if it is feathered. For example if light is 4', add more feet and it is -2EV less bright, but if light is 11', add 4 more feet and it is only about -2/3EV less bright!

Another reason for feathering is to take advantage of the lower intensity at the edges of the lit area to illuminate someone who is standing closer to the light, while the more intense center illuminates the people standing farther away from the light.

So is there any reason why you would want to feather the light when shooting one model?

The sweet spot of the light off the softbox is at directly front and center of the box, the light at that spot will also be brighter then the the area higher/lower, left/right of the sweet spot. Imagine the the softbox is placed 45 degree to the right of the model from 4 ft, so right side of the model is brighter than the left side...

1) To reduce the contrast between the high light and shadow sides, we can turn the SB toward the right side, so the sweet spot is placed in front and toward the left shoulder of the model. This works best if we have a reflector at the right of the camera.

2) To make the BG appears brighter relative to the model, we can feather the light toward the BG and away from the model.

Feathering is very important when doing one light portraits. Note that when the light is placed too far off to the side, feathering has less effects, like in the picture below.

Lotto wrote in post #6212090
The sweet spot of the light off the softbox is at directly front and center of the box, the light at that spot will also be brighter then the the area higher/lower, left/right of the sweet spot. Imagine the the softbox is placed 45 degree to the right of the model from 4 ft, so right side of the model is brighter than the left side...

1) To reduce the contrast between the high light and shadow sides, we can turn the SB toward the right side, so the sweet spot is placed in front and toward the left shoulder of the model. This works best if we have a reflector at the right of the camera.

2) To make the BG appears brighter relative to the model, we can feather the light toward the BG and away from the model.

Feathering is very important when doing one light portraits. Note that when the light is placed too far off to the side, feathering has less effects, like in the picture below.

Put another way, you want to have the "sweet spot hitting the subject, to some degree somewhere, so that you have adequate contrast from the light?

Hmm...I think you got it if I understand you wording correctly.

If we use the sweet spot, or "hot spot" of the light hitting the high light side, and let the light falls off naturally to the shadow side, there's "more" contrast.

If we use the "fall off" to illuminate the high light side, and place the sweet spot on the shadow side, we got more even lighting, or less contrast.

Those effects get a lots to do with the flash to subject distance like what Wilt is saying. When we place the light farther away from the subject, we also have less ability to feather the light.

Hot spots are usually bad and photographers spend their whole life working to try and get rid of them

Photographers have learned to "feather the light" in order to downplay hot spots. Feathering helps to harmonize ratios and gives a more even coverage of light to the subject.

High end gear provides more even coverage of light and is less prone to obnoxious center hotspots. Even coverage occurs when the ratios of the light source are similar across it's entire surface area of the modifier. For example, the Elinchrom 74inch octa has only about a 1/3 of a stop difference in light across the surface of it's outer diffuser. Therefore it is less prone to creating a center hotspot and probably won't need to be "feathered" in the same way that an umbrella would...

Another way to provide even coverage of light and downplay hotspots is to move the light source farther away from the subject. But this method also reduces micro-contrast.

The best commercial photographers understand that microcontrast and even coverage of light is what really separates amateur from genuine pro-quality lighting. That's one of the reasons why they'll spend a fortune on lights like Broncolor.

Just some thoughts

Gentleman Villain wrote in post #6213065
Another way to provide even coverage of light and downplay hotspots is to move the light source farther away from the subject. But this method also reduces micro-contrast.

Gentleman Villain.
I'm not arguing - I promise.

I have read and enjoyed many of your post's, you are obviously well informed in the art and technicalities of photography.

However, I am a little confused at the above statement. There are some things I read over and they don't sink in, but I distinctly remember reading from another great thread from the past, of which went into quite good detail about hotspots. On that occasion the information did sink in, hence me questioning the above.

I have included a link below for reference on the thread / post I was referring to.

https://photography-on-the.net …p?p=2611800&pos​tcount=188

I have since understood that to play down hotspots, and give a more even coverage of light is to make the light source larger / move it closer?

I would be grateful for clarification of this.
many thanks

The article written by Scott Smith provides a better understanding of the intensity relationship of specular and diffuse highlights, governed by lighting distance (not size). The sharpness of the shadow edge is governed by the relative size of the source, not the distance per se (although moving a source farther does affect its relative size, too). If you increase size of the source while moving it farther away, you change the intensity relationship of specular to diffuse highlights but do not alter the shadow edge characteristic. So to change the distance and the size is to affect one or two parameters of the light, but has nothing to do with hotspot control, which is the evenness of the light source itself. Feathering takes tactical advantage of unevenness of the lighting and turns that into an advantage.

steveathome wrote in post #6213125
Gentleman Villain.
I'm not arguing - I promise.

I have read and enjoyed many of your post's, you are obviously well informed in the art and technicalities of photography.

However, I am a little confused at the above statement. There are some things I read over and they don't sink in, but I distinctly remember reading from another great thread from the past, of which went into quite good detail about hotspots. On that occasion the information did sink in, hence me questioning the above.

I have included a link below for reference on the thread / post I was referring to.

https://photography-on-the.net …p?p=2611800&pos​tcount=188

I have since understood that to play down hotspots, and give a more even coverage of light is to make the light source larger / move it closer?

I would be grateful for clarification of this.
many thanks

I just skimmed that post...but the author is talking about hot spots in relation to skintones whereas I'm talking about hot spots created by uneven coverage of light. It's all "hotspots"...and hotspots are the enemy of a photographer There are so many of them...they come in all different forms and there are lots of ways to combat them.

His post is correct about eliminating hot spots on skin...but he didn't address how it relates to the quality of the light source....Simply calling a light source "large or small" isn't adequate enough. A photographer has to identify the ability of light source to provide even coverage of light in the first place...before he can know how to place the light or what source to choose for the shot.

I'll post more on it later if anybody is interested...right now I've gotta meet my sister and neice.

But yeah...what I wrote might not make a lot of sense to peopel because it isn't covered in any books I've seen .It's something I had to learn by assisting for a really prominent commercial photographer. It took him a few years to teach me how to see it.

Wilt, and Gentleman Villain
Many thanks

steveathome wrote in post #6213125
Gentleman Villain.
I'm not arguing - I promise.

I have read and enjoyed many of your post's, you are obviously well informed in the art and technicalities of photography.

BTW Steve...just wanted to say thanks for the compliment

It's so nice to read a post that is challenging without being combative...it makes for great discussion....and it is just refreshing

Gentleman Villain wrote in post #6214673
BTW Steve...just wanted to say thanks for the compliment

It's so nice to read a post that is challenging without being combative...it makes for great discussion....and it is just refreshing

I obviously had hold of the wrong end of the stick, but thanks for clearing that up for me.
I would be interested in learning further, its an interesting subject and I have so much to learn.

Many thanks once again.