Show us your setup and the final result!

mhickman wrote in post #19335374
If the lighting on your senior's photo looked like this, would you be happy with the photo?

I ask because each year I re-evaluate the previous year's yearbook lighting and make changes accordingly. The changes I made require more lights, but by changing location of the lights it has given me more room for the senior to move around easier.

For comparison, this is what I did last year. If you notice, I went with a strip box for the fill instead of the curved reflector. Kids kept hitting it and they had to be much closer with the main bouncing off of it. Second I removed the hair light so I can potentially get them standing up instead of seated photos. Next I went from hair light to the rim lighting that would help should I need to composite a photo, which both girls in the above and this photo are replaced backdrops with the above one being replaced from the blue backdrop and this one being replaced from a white one. Finally I moved the backdrop light from the floor to overhead.

mhickman wrote in post #19335377
For comparison, this is what I did last year. If you notice, I went with a strip box for the fill instead of the curved reflector. Kids kept hitting it and they had to be much closer with the main bouncing off of it. Second I removed the hair light so I can potentially get them standing up instead of seated photos. Next I went from hair light to the rim lighting that would help should I need to composite a photo, which both girls in the above and this photo are replaced backdrops with the above one being replaced from the blue backdrop and this one being replaced from a white one. Finally I moved the backdrop light from the floor to overhead.

Hosted photo: posted by mhickman in
./showthread.php?p=193​35377&i=i108094342
forum: Flash and Studio Lighting

Hosted photo: posted by mhickman in
./showthread.php?p=193​35377&i=i115062135
forum: Flash and Studio Lighting

Excellent work!
Her smile is very natural and you capture it well!

peteraustralia2021 wrote in post #19335416
Excellent work!
Her smile is very natural and you capture it well!

Thanks. But how's the lighting between the two different setups? That's what I wanted to know (if I wasn't clear enough

mhickman wrote in post #19335423
Thanks. But how's the lighting between the two different setups? That's what I wanted to know (if I wasn't clear enough

Honestly, I prefer this set up and its outcome, its just my personal interest, I like bright portrait. The other set up seem a bit darker
However, its also up to your clients.

LGabrielPhoto wrote in post #19278864
Hi there!
Here is one with the Mola Setti, A7R IV and the Sigma 105mm 1.4 Art

Hosted photo: posted by LGabrielPhoto in
./showthread.php?p=192​78864&i=i164089501
forum: Flash and Studio Lighting

Hosted photo: posted by LGabrielPhoto in
./showthread.php?p=192​78864&i=i86823929
forum: Flash and Studio Lighting

Really nice work

I just did some research about this Mola Setti and its price beyond my expense lolz

The lighting on this year's photo looks fine but maybe the temp is just a little bit cool? I also think the backdrop is a little dizzying. Technically a nice shot. Others may disagree with my opinion.

peteraustralia2021 wrote in post #19335439
Honestly, I prefer this set up and its outcome, its just my personal interest, I like bright portrait. The other set up seem a bit darker
However, its also up to your clients.

Could be my post processing too. It was a quick photo with my daughter to test it. Of course the lights could always go up a 1/3 stop if needed, but the light meter gave me f/9 at ISO100 and 1/200 sec. Thanks for the input.

mhickman wrote in post #19335450
Could be my post processing too. It was a quick photo with my daughter to test it. Of course the lights could always go up a 1/3 stop if needed, but the light meter gave me f/9 at ISO100 and 1/200 sec. Thanks for the input.

You are doing really good job for both portrait! They both looked comfortable in your photo
And you also highlight really well your client's feminism in the second portrait

For the 1st one, I prefer higher exposure with warmer tone but you might have to fix the jewelry part separately in case it might loose details at higher exposure. Overall its just my personal opinion.

Keep up with the good work

AngelofDepth wrote in post #19335448
The lighting on this year's photo looks fine but maybe the temp is just a little bit cool? I also think the backdrop is a little dizzying. Technically a nice shot. Others may disagree with my opinion.

Thanks. This was just playing around with Photoshop selection of subject. Here's an update with the original backdrop (local school approved) and 1/3 stop brighter.

I like that edit a lot better. Warmer tone and the backdrop is more subtle.

mhickman wrote in post #19335377
For comparison, this is what I did last year. If you notice, I went with a strip box for the fill instead of the curved reflector. Kids kept hitting it and they had to be much closer with the main bouncing off of it. Second I removed the hair light so I can potentially get them standing up instead of seated photos. Next I went from hair light to the rim lighting that would help should I need to composite a photo, which both girls in the above and this photo are replaced backdrops with the above one being replaced from the blue backdrop and this one being replaced from a white one. Finally I moved the backdrop light from the floor to overhead.

Hosted photo: posted by mhickman in
./showthread.php?p=193​35377&i=i108094342
forum: Flash and Studio Lighting

Hosted photo: posted by mhickman in
./showthread.php?p=193​35377&i=i115062135
forum: Flash and Studio Lighting

I like this lighting better than your new set up. Both have that lower catch light the doesn't work for me, neither background works for me.

windpig wrote in post #19336481
I like this lighting better than your new set up. Both have that lower catch light the doesn't work for me, neither background works for me.

Thanks. The background is what the schools require (see second photo of new setup that doesn't show the swirls). As for the under catch light, there's not much you can do with clamshell lighting to get rid of it unless you move the light directly under the subject.

Seeing how minimal a kit I could use:

1- speedlight
1- 2x3' white matte board
2- black foam core 2x3' boards

Photo from ra40's gallery.
Image hosted by forum (1142748)

Photo from ra40's gallery.
Image hosted by forum (1142749)

Seems a bit blown out to me. Reflective surfaces - like this knife - are very difficult to capture. A speedlight is probably not the best way to light it. LED panels are easier as you can manage the reflections and highlights by moving the lighting around. But I am sure you had fun experimenting. And isn't that what it is all about?

vk2gwk wrote in post #19337900
Seems a bit blown out to me. Reflective surfaces - like this knife - are very difficult to capture. A speedlight is probably not the best way to light it. LED panels are easier as you can manage the reflections and highlights by moving the lighting around. But I am sure you had fun experimenting. And isn't that what it is all about?

Certainly was fun to see what can be done if pushed into a minimalism state. I usually shoot with a 24x36" softbox with cutlery. Have also done similar with the speedlight shooting through a 1 stop diffuser. The speedlight output has a narrower coverage area that yields a hot center position. The bounce area here is quite small being 24" up so not great spread to work with. The strobe and soft box makes it much easier.

The radial filter in LR might even this out. The joys of post tech too.