Is your modeling light output enough?

yogestee wrote in post #11772708
I prefer dilated pupils and large soft catch lights, especially in female models..

It's a pretty standard technique when shooting beauty to bring out the colour of a model's eyes. If the modelling lights can't do the job I set up an eye-light.

When images are reproduced in print, especially low quality print like packaging and magazines, it makes a big difference.

I started by switching my 150w modeling lights and moved up to 250w. Then I stopped using them for only studying the key light and actually have been able to get a better idea by getting to know my viewing screen on my camera very well to dial in the lighting. I later switched down to a 150w bulb to facilitate fitting inside of the satin glass dome from Elinchrom that I use when mounted on a Mola Beauty Dish. I basically use the modeling light as I said for adjusthing the key and then to aid the focus in the camera.

One thing that does come in as an influence if the modeling light is small when photographing people is that it affects how large the pupil is in the eye. I have not run into this but I've seen it in others work where the pupil was unnatuarally large and I found it distracting.

Hermes wrote in post #11776685
It's a pretty standard technique when shooting beauty to bring out the colour of a model's eyes.

This technique has been around since Adam was a boy, and there's a reason for this,, dilated pupils are a sign of sexual arousal in women..

Just need to take a look at beauty advertisements for cosmetics companies - the norm is for small pupils and more eye colour. Pretty standard practice.

IMO bright modelling lights in the studio are a necessity - the modelling lamps in the Rangers aren't sufficient.

Rai33 wrote in post #11780642
- the modelling lamps in the Rangers aren't sufficient.

Is this because of the pupil issue and/or other?

Thanks

That and versatility ie. I want to be able to turn the modelling light up when I need to.