How would these photos be lit?

[ChrisAdval]

My goal is to achieve this type of lighting, but for some reason I'm getting the same results I think... Here are a few samples I want to duplicate from...

White backdrop


Brooke Tessmacher - Impact Wrestling by Lee South Photography, on Flickr


Bobby Lashley - TNA Wrestling by Lee South Photography, on Flickr

Black backdrop


Jesse Neal - TNA Wrestling by Lee South Photography, on Flickr


Matt Morgan - TNA Wrestling by Lee South Photography, on Flickr

From both white and black the subject seem extremely sharp and have very high level of detail, but I dont know if its the lighting or the lens/body doing this...

And here's my High Key portfolio set - http://www.flickr.com/photos/chrisad...7627289964451/

[OsmosisStudios]

Very large softbox, camera left, almost 90 degrees from subject, shoulder height, no up or down angle. The background is lit separately.

[zona5101]

I looked at the first one and I'd bet the background was removed and replaced with a white layer. The edges and hair look that way...or maybe it's just high compression for the internet.

[oldwolf]

Brooke has a softbox on camera right as well as camera left. Hardly any shadows under her chin but some on her left abdominal area so I'm guessing light camera left is at about 70-80 degrees while ligh camera right is opposite the front light.

Bobby is close to his softbox 90 degrees camera left. That way you get a little bit of wrap around his face but not too much. Look at how deep the shadows are on his shoulder. He's also got a light behind him. Look at the highlights on the edge of his head where you can see his left ear. It's lit up to get a rim light and give him a little bit of separation. You can see the same light on his left abdominal area and the edge of his left thigh.

Jesse has a light from up top. Look at the shadow below his chin. He's also got a fill light or reflector below him or his face would be in complete shadow. Look at the catch light in his eyes. He's probably got a light behind him on camera right as well. Look at the hairs on his left shoulder. They seem a bit brighter than the hairs on his other shoulder.

Don't have time for Matt but he's probably lit like Bobby but facing a bit differently.

[Doug Sundseth]

The trick with deconstructing lighting is to look at the locations of specular highlights and at the position and hardness of shadows. You should also consider how much detail is in the shadows, which is often the result of a fill light or reflector.

Backgrounds: All of those could easily have been shot on the same background, either gray or white. The difference is how much light is thrown onto the background and how far the background is from the subject, not so much its color.

[oldwolf]

Originally Posted by Doug Sundseth

Backgrounds: All of those could easily have been shot on the same background, either gray or white. The difference is how much light is thrown onto the background and how far the background is from the subject, not so much its color.

This is very true. Zack Arias blogged a tutorial on how he made a white background black by controlling the light fall off on it and exposure settings.

[ChrisAdval]

thanks a lot guys that made a lot of sense, but I've played with these type of lighting and my sharpness isn't the same as the above, I'm assuming its the level of glass lens and/or body?

[oldwolf]

Or it could be the technique with how you hold the camera and press the shutter release. If you're a masher then it's going to be a blurry picture.

If your shutter speed isn't fast enough then you'll introduce shake.

If you're IS is on and you have your camera on a tripod then it's going to blur the image.

The person that took those pictures also sharpened them in post.

Glass plays an important role but the other things I listed play just as an important role in how sharp your pictures come out.

[graciousness]

You also have a tendency to shoot at your widest aperture, like f/1.8 when you use your 50mm which really doesn't help you. Lenses aren't the sharpest when used at the widest setting, plus you are choosing to have a very shallow dept of field. So of course, there is only a small amount of focus area in your images, that is, if you actually land your focus properly with such a shallow depth of field.

I would start using narrower apertures, at least a couple of stops from f/1.8 or whatever is the widest setting your lens has then work from there. You will notice that in the photos above, there is no blurry bits on them from the use of a shallow DOF; they are all shot with narrower f/stops to get a wider DOF.

Your should be able to deliver quite sharp photos with your 50mm. That shouldn't be an issue.

[SGToliver]

it is all about the use of the light to shape the models and give them dimension and some nice post processing. Youre set of high key shots is an improvement over what I have seen from you in the past. They all still seem a little 'raw' or unprocessed in my opinion.