Lighting reality check...

I am wondering if someone can look at my setup and tell me whether I'm doing this in the best way possible. My main problem is that I feel like my light doesn't reach low enough. I'm assuming that I will have that issue unless I get a studio light with a large softbox.

This is pretty much how I always have my lights because it seems that no matter how I move them, I just don't get the coverage I need. I know they need to be close, but I HATE how close they have to be. I want my lights not to intrude so that kids have freedom to move instead of only getting good shots when they are standing on one tiny little spot. Is that just par for the course with studio lights?

Soo... what's wrong here, what can I try? I'm not terribly unhappy with the results I'm getting, I'd just like to start experimenting and trying new things, but so far I have done everything with trial and error and I want to get some input. I know I can pull the paper out more to get farther from the backdrop, I just didn't do that for some reason last night.

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO

Well the closer you have the lights the more precise of a spot your subjects will need to stay in to keep exposure even and correct. Not to mention the quicker you will have fall off to the lower part of your scene.

Dont be afraid to move them back. That will make your falloff happen much more slowly and give your much more consistent exposure front to back. Especially if you are shooting kids, kids have low mileage skin and will not show the effects of a slightly harder light. Not to mention you have fill thats going to lift those shadows anyway.

I may not understand your problem exactly. It just sounds like you are not happy with the coverage you are getting but then you talked about needing the lights closer for better coverage. I am not the most experienced here so I may be talking out of turn. But in theory you should have less fall off with more distance. Think of the sun. Its VERY far away and can you tell the difference in light at your head vs at your feet? No, because the relative distance is so minute compared to the distance from the light source (sun) to the subjects.

I don't know. I've always read that you need to get the lights close because moving them back makes them a smaller light source. I've always just seen lights being used very close, so I figured I would start there. When I move them back, I'm not happy with the result. It could be because my light modifiers and lights aren't right for the job, but I need to work with what I have.

AndreaBFS wrote in post #6681265
I don't know. I've always read that you need to get the lights close because moving them back makes them a smaller light source. I've always just seen lights being used very close, so I figured I would start there. When I move them back, I'm not happy with the result. It could be because my light modifiers and lights aren't right for the job, but I need to work with what I have.

A key comment in your first sentence, "because moving them back makes them a smaller light source"...get larger softbox to replace that little (it looks like 12x16") one you have. If you get one twice as large in each direction, you can move it twice as far and have the same quality of light (same apparent size) while having less rapid falloff, and you can enjoy a larger area of coverage. If you get one three times as large in each direction, you can move it three times as far and have the same quality of light (same apparent size) while having less rapid falloff, and you can enjoy a larger area of coverage. (In case you ever wondered about usefulness of geometry, remember congruent triangles and their properties...it is in play here!)

Closer = softer. Softer is not always better.

Usually when I use a shoot thru brolly very close to the subject I just use a single light. I like the wrap around effect of a huge single light source very close. That isn't very feasible if I am trying to evenly light a larger area though, because falloff is so extreme. Which is great if you just want to draw attention to a certain area. If I am using another light for fill I am trying to lift those shadow areas anyway and back my lights out a bit.

Find some static object around the house, set it up, move your light back and forth and notice the effects of softness and how it positioning effects falloff.

Another thing I find when using umbrellas is that when working close they are bad about creating hotspots. Aim the direction of them at the furthest edge of your subject so you the closest parts are not being hit by the most intense light.

AndreaBFS wrote in post #6681265
I don't know. I've always read that you need to get the lights close because moving them back makes them a smaller light source. I've always just seen lights being used very close, so I figured I would start there. When I move them back, I'm not happy with the result. It could be because my light modifiers and lights aren't right for the job, but I need to work with what I have.

You might want to have a look at shootsmarter. (log in may be required, but worth it): Chris Grey shows the difference between a large umbrella (or softbox) from further away, and a smaller up close.

As said: A smaller one up close limits freedom of motion, and gives more rapid fall off. Might or might not be what you want.

You could try to get / make a diffusion panel as a temporary solution. Great light modifier to have anyway IMO

I'm hoping to get a larger softbox at some point, but the one I just bought and returned was useless with my strobe setup. I need to get a studio light first. It's on my agenda. It looks like there isn't much I can do other than this specific setup then?

WOW that is tight!! Closer may be better for the soft light. But I dont think they meant THAT close. I agree with wilt, spend the money and get a bigger soft box, or even a big umbrella. I use a 60 inch umbrella a lot of the time and have have it about 4-6 feet away and is still very soft.

This is a single light with the 60 inch umbrella from about 5 feet.. Had I added the other light, it would be too soft I think. https://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthre​ad.php?t=580234

The best way to tell what you need to do is put someone there and take a shot, move the lights back about 1 foot, take another, move another foot,,,etc..etc

You could go out today and buy the required stuff to build your own diffusion panels like suggested above until you figure out exactly what you want. I like diffusion panels anyway, i can get more out of a single strobe with careful positioning etc.

Here's mine, two of them actually.. i still need black material for the 'blank' panels for negative fill/flags.

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Byte size: ZERO | PHOTOBUCKET ERROR IMAGE

I bought a bigger softbox, but my strobes couldn't power through it so I had to return it. I have to get an alienbee or something. I'll try to move them back when I shoot down there next. I'm just not sure the results will be different from last time I tried (harsh light, shadows, and pinlight catchlights).

as far as a diffusion panel, can I use my reflector with the cover off? I am not sure I have anything to hold it, but are we talking about moving the light source farther from the paper and then putting the diffusion panel in front of the light?

AndreaBFS wrote in post #6682111
I'm just not sure the results will be different from last time I tried (harsh light, shadows, and pinlight catchlights).

It makes no sense that, with a larger apparent size, it would result in harsher, more shadows and pinpoint catchlights!

I don't know... all I can tell you is what happens when I do it. If I move the light farther away, it is harsher and I rarely get catchlights. Maybe I need to change the flash settings or move the umbrella farther from the flash head. I don't really know, that's why I'm asking. I'm going to take my daughter back down as soon as she's awake next.

Wait.... you are useing flashes? I thought you had gotten a set of lights. I didnt look that close to the picture till now.

Just 2 hotshoe flashes. I tested out moving the lights away and upping their power a bit, which makes the light look mostly OK. The problem is still the lack of catchlights. The catchlights I get when the light is far away are ugly flash catchlights. I know it's just something I'll have to deal with until I'm ready to commit to another $500. I'd really rather have my 70-200 before I get more lighting, though. Tough call.