DSLRUsers.com

Hi all

These 2 pics were taken last weekend during my 1st Portrait session. I set up 2 sets of hallogen lights (as suggested in this forum - thanks for the tip) with 3 different backdrops - all blockout material in a mottled pattern: black, light blue, dark blue.

I had the lights set up at approx 45 degree angles in front of the subjects, with the backdrops hanging about 3 feet or so behind the subjects and then across a table, so they were sitting on the backdrop as well, which then flowed down onto the floor (attempt at continuity).

My question is about the effect of the different backdrop colours on the skintones of the subjects. It seemed that the black drop produced the most natural skintone, but both of the blues seemed to produce very yellow skintones from the subjects. Hope this is making sense!

I hope you can see from the photos what I mean: the 1st one (which I've called "The Conspirators" (or "Trouble for Mummy") ) has a black background and their skintones are quite natural. I only brightened up this one a bit, plus sharpening.



The 2nd one ("Daddy's Boy"), which I have only sharpened, has the dark blue background and is very yellow, and I don't just mean the t-shirt. Their skin is very yellow too. Could this be because of the backdrop colours, or would it be the position of the lights? Or could it be because of something else?



Can anyone give me some advice as to why this would be? And your suggestions for future attempts? I really know about zilch about studio lighting, so any tips would be greatly appreciated.

Also - any comments and suggestions about the shots themselves would be welcome.

Thanks all

Simple matey, get yourself an Expodisc and use pre-white balance then you will get natural skin tones all the time, no matter what lighting you use.

OK Steve, I'd like to pretend that I know what you're talking about, but I don't. What's an Expodisk?

Sorry to show my ignorance but there you go ... (I should be getting used to it on this forum! )

hehe, fair enough.... I tried to project my thoughts to you but you must live too far away.

http://www.expodisc.com has all the answers. There's a few of us on the forum that use it and we all reckon it's great. You may even get away with a pringles lid but if you want info on that then search for 'pringle' on the forum search link

Killakoala wrote:You may even get away with a pringles lid but if you want info on that then search for 'pringle' on the forum search link

Steve, mate - I reckon we live so far away from each other that we seem to be on different planets!! You've lost me again, but that's OK. Don't worry about explaining the Pringles, I'll probably blunder into some sort of comprehension about this comment when I visit that site!

Thanks for the tips anyway.

Your shoots look good, the only thing I would have added would have been a hair light comming from behind up about 6 feet, re the color cast did this happen when shot or after with processing, look like you changed something between the 2 shoots but can be fixed in PS by adding blue and a bit of cyan

cheers
bp

Nikkofan - take your pic and open in Photoshop.

Do an auto colour on the pic then go into colour balance and with midtones selected set the Cyan/Red slider ot -85, Magneta/Green to -3 and finally Yellow/Blue to +67.

Both auto colour and colour balance are under Image - Adustments

Not perfect but better

Apart from the obvious change of our boy's t-shirt, the backdrop was the only thing changed.

I actually did the shoot on request from the in-laws, so the whole set up was to shoot them in a formal Portrait shoot but I managed to get the kidlets into it for a short while as well. I noticed the yellow effect on the in-laws immediately, having started with the light blue drop. I had the WB set to Tungsten, but then switched it immediately to Auto, having decided I could PP the shots if necessary. But then as soon as we switched the light blue for the black, their skintone was much more natural. But then as soon as we changed again for the dark blue drop, the yellow skintone came back.

After some very minor PP'g, they were very happy with the shots taken but, for me, it really brought up some questions about lighting positions and backdrop colours and, perhaps, some other issues I don't even know about!

Help ? .....

The change of background should not have had any effect to the color balance of the subjects as this comes from the lights, how far did you move the lights, or did you change a globe in the lights. To change WB mid shooting in controlled conditions with using the same lights and only changing backgrounds which both are dark is not good color management. You should always check your camera viewer or download a test of lighting to a laptop if you have one.

Hope this helps
bp

mmm well its a start, nice bg btw
yes make sure your lighting source matches the film/digital your using. btw did you turn off all your lights except for your shooting lights? e.g fluro
room lights or black out window with sunlight?

(sorry, try again) Well, I didn't exactly change WB mid-shoot. I did a test shot beforehand and then changed from Tungsten to Auto immediately. I had been advised by a Pro Photo friend that the tungsten setting would be the most suitable for hallogen lights, so I started with that. When I noticed the yellow on the test subject, I changed to Auto, thinking that I could PP (which I did, with good results).

But I still got the yellow for the light blue (1st drop) and the dark blue (last drop) but not, as I said, for the black (2nd drop).

I had no lights on in the room, but it was shot mid-afternoon, with some natural light coming in from the nearby window which, I take it was a bad move?

Redline when you say "mmm, well, it's a start", can I take it that you think the photos stink? If so, can you make some suggestions, which I'd be happy to hear about and try. BTW, the backgrounds I bought at Spotlight - $7.99 per metre and they have heaps of colours. I'm regrettied at first that I didn't get the mottled grey instead of the black but now, having seen the effect of the black, I'm glad that I didn't. I've since used the black bg again in other shoots and have been pretty happy with the results. But, again, any suggestions would be most welcome.

NKF

Nikkofan wrote:I'm regrettied at first

Sorry, that's obviously supposed to say "I regretted at first" ...

Hi.

The first one is okay. It is what we call the "beauty shot". Frontal lightings. Studo lights allow you to control the intensity of each light so that you can create shadows and mood. I think in this case you can do that by moving one of the lights further away.

You got white balance problem with the second picture. Change the white balance or use fill flash.

regards,

Arthur

Nikkofan wrote:

Killakoala wrote:You may even get away with a pringles lid but if you want info on that then search for 'pringle' on the forum search link

Steve, mate - I reckon we live so far away from each other that we seem to be on different planets!! You've lost me again, but that's OK. Don't worry about explaining the Pringles, I'll probably blunder into some sort of comprehension about this comment when I visit that site!

Thanks for the tips anyway.

If you were using auto wb, then the blue background would have an effect on this, and that is why the second image looks so yellow. There's much more blue within the image frame, and the camera is trying to compensate for it.

Given that your lighting conditions were static, Steve's advice - to use an expodisk or Pringles lid - is exactly correct. Failing that, starting with tungsten wb, shooting a couple of tests to fine tune it, and then not changing the wb at all throughout the duration of the shoot would be the correct action.

Consider that wb permits you to adjust the underlying colour temperature for a given set of lighting conditions. Given that, for this shoot, the lighting conditions have not (and will not) change, your wb should be constant throughout the shoot.

Now ... for an explanation of the expodisk method, check out the two white balance tutorials we have on the forums. Everything will become as clear as daylight.

Oh yes ...

Did you shoot raw or jpg ?

Gary

I shot JPEG, but the reason I changed from Tungsten to Auto was because I got the yellow immediately with the Tungsten. What fine tuning with the Tungsten would you have recommended?

I confess that I was a bit nervous before the shoot (although I enjoyed it) because if was my 1st Portrait session and it was my in-laws sitting for it. So I probably should have stopped, assessed it, made adjustments and then continued but I sort of just ploughed ahead anyway, thinking that I could fine tune in PSCS (which I did).

But I'm not really satisfied with just saying "Oh, I can adjust it in PS". I want to know why it happened and how to avoid it in future. It probably goes back to my film days but I guess I still think the shot should be close to perfect 1st time and not need any post-processing. I know this probably sounds ridiculous to you Digital Gurus, but I'm not quite in the "digital" mindset yet!

I actually quite liked both of these shots (but then I'm emotionally involved here and admit it) but (apart from the yellow) what did you think of the shots themselves (composition, expression, etc)? Can you give me some feedback as to what you would have done differently? I have lots of friends with kids, of course, and will be doing portraits of them down the track, so any tips are welcome as this is a new area for me.

Nikkofan wrote:Gary

I shot JPEG, but the reason I changed from Tungsten to Auto was because I got the yellow immediately with the Tungsten. What fine tuning with the Tungsten would you have recommended?

With the wb switch engaged, if you rotate the front command dial, you can alter the applied values for each of the available wb settings. If the supplied setting is too warm, you can dial it down, and thus fine tune the work.

Did you say you were shooting quartz? If so, that's probably a different colour temperature from tungsten, and so some fine tuning (probably before the shoot) would be in order. Just put a doll, or one of your kids, into the fram and shoot a few images, checking each one as you go until you get the results that you're happy with.

It really shouldn't take more than a few minutes, and once you're happy with the results, record the values that you have, because they will become your starting point for the next time you do this.

And there should be little change from those values, next time up.

But I'm not really satisfied with just saying "Oh, I can adjust it in PS". I want to know why it happened and how to avoid it in future. It probably goes back to my film days but I guess I still think the shot should be close to perfect 1st time and not need any post-processing. I know this probably sounds ridiculous to you Digital Gurus, but I'm not quite in the "digital" mindset yet!

The "why" is easy - auto wb was compensating for a blue response (due to the background) that simply wasn't present in the actual lighting conditions you were using.

Throwing away the PP options is based upon the false assumption that PP is a digital "thing" and not really a part of making an image.

But as I said, that's a falsehood: every photo is subject to some form of PP, whether film or digital. I know I've done some dastardly deeds in a darkrrom, and some of them were even to the photos I was working with.

In this case, had you shot in raw, at the most basic level you could have had a play with your wb values, and actually seen how the different settings affected the one image. If you have a few moments, I'd even suggest repeating the shoot (with one of your kids as the model) shooting firstly with auto wb but into raw, and then dropping the images onto your pc and seeing how the different wb settings you have available will affect the outcome.

Then, reshoot again, this time using manual wb, but playing with and fine tuning the values as you go.

You'll be surprised at just how quickly you'll get this issue under control.

I actually quite liked both of these shots (but then I'm emotionally involved here and admit it) but (apart from the yellow) what did you think of the shots themselves (composition, expression, etc)? Can you give me some feedback as to what you would have done differently? I have lots of friends with kids, of course, and will be doing portraits of them down the track, so any tips are welcome as this is a new area for me.

I'd be very happy with these shots. The posing is great, the lighting is fine, they're well exposed, and they're full of life and emotion.

So how well does a pringles lid work??
How do you use it?
I presume put it over the lens and set WB. (I know I've seen how to set the WB in the manual somewhere)

embi wrote:So how well does a pringles lid work??
How do you use it?
I presume put it over the lens and set WB. (I know I've seen how to set the WB in the manual somewhere)

Exactly.

Download the wb tutorials, and look at the instructions given for an Expodisc. Replace the Expodisc with a translucent pringles lid (not the clear ones) and you're there.

Excellent...thanks gstark

Nikkofan
Confused? Let's look at some simple fixes. First...next time you set up your tung lights do a WB pre-set. (Instructions in your D70 manual). That should fix your colour balance problem. You don't need to buy an expensive expo-disk...buy a Koday grey card from your local camera store for about $20 and take your WB off that. Next...you should not place your lights for portraits at 45 degrees in front of your subject. That lighting is used to flatten your subject and minimises texture and form. Use 1 light at about 30 degrees and place it high. This is your main light and represents the sun. Your second light is placed to lighten the shadows created by your main light and is called a fill light. It should be about 1 stop less than the main light. The further you move the fill light away then the darker the shadows will be. The closer your bring it then the lighter the shadows will be. Experiment. Place a large ball or a bunch of pillows into your setup and experiment with the position of the lights until you get the effect you want. That's where the lights should be for your portraits.
Enjoy your studio experiments and keep refining your setup until it gives you the beauty you are after. Also, be aware that small changes in the intensity or direction of the lights can have major effects on the final result you are after.

Great post Matt, thanks for that, interesting stuff!

and don't forget the back light to lift the subjects off the background......

bp

big pix
And the rim light and the hair light and spec highlight light and the catchlight and the etc etc.....
None of which are really required. The more lights I see a photographer setting up the less confident I am of his abilities. Whilst there is a valid use for a backlight I am trying to walk beginners through and keep it as simple as posiible. Learn to use your mainlight and your fill light first. there are years worth of lessons there. Add lights as you become confident only if you think they have somtehing to add to your image.

I agree.......but what do you do with a subject who has dark hair shot on a dark background wearing a dark top, do you let the subject blend into the background, put a light on the background to make it lighter or as we say use a hair light to lift them off a background, one front light at 45 degrees a reflector on the other side for fill and a hair light is the simple way to light a portrait .........this is basic lighting for portraits......easy and very straight forward

bp

here are some simple examples of lighting for portraits borrowed from the web....... for more info just look up portrait photography on the web and there is more info and examples..........

Thanks very much Matt, Big Pix & everyone else, for your tips & suggestions. Will take them on board & hopefully have no further problems with this issue.