How to Achieve Perfect Butterfly Lighting
Butterfly Lighting is one of the most flattering and artistic ways of lighting the face. As it’s name would denote, Butterfly Lighting is created by the way in which you angle the light to fall on the face of your subject. Often used by celebrity photographers, this style of lighting can be achieved by a single off camera light and a reflector.
Image by Kathleen Thomas Photography
Here’s a step by step guide of how to achieve perfect butterfly lighting:
1. Face your subject at 7.8 view: Start by facing your subject directly to the camera, then turn the head just to hide the far ear. This view of the face is most flattering as it minimizes the face.
2. Hold your off camera flash 1′ above your subject, and 3′ toward the front to eliminate any possible shadowing on the face. You will also create a shadow beneath the chin, thus hiding any excess weight there.
3. Place a reflector just below the edge of your frame. The closer your reflector is to your subjects chin, the more even the spread of light. This reflector will soften that shadow and eliminate a harsh contrast.
4. Light for catch lights: You want your subjects eyes to be well lit and fortunately, with the angle of your main light in front/above, and the fill light coming in from below, your subject should have large round catch lights in both the bottom and top part of the eye.
For such beautiful results, Butterfly Lighting is among the most simple of the “directed” studio lighting options. As you can see, Butterfly Lighting will yield gorgeous results, without a great deal of precision or drama.
33 Responses to “How to Achieve Perfect Butterfly Lighting” - Add Yours
November 15th, 2009 at 7:37 am
Actually, this is called clamshell lighting, not butterfly lighting.
and what does, “Face your subject at 7.8 view” mean?
And this isn’t going to look flattering with a bare flash at 3ft from the subject
November 15th, 2009 at 8:45 am
I’m not sure, but when I read it I thought she meant where to position the person in your frame.
November 15th, 2009 at 9:02 am
I’m not arguing on the name of this technique or the beauty of the 7/8th view.
Here is an example of the same. I did this with a softbox powered by an SB-26 and a silver reflector held directly below the subject’s face, as suggested in the article. Its not a true one-light setup as the backdrop (actually a wall in the model’s house) is being lit by an SB-28 on the ground.
Click and view in large size to see the catchlights.
November 15th, 2009 at 10:06 am
You’re both right… butterfly lighting is “style” terminology that many photographers use. Clamshell is the “technical” term for how to set it up. (Go ahead, type “butterfly lighting” in google and you’ll quickly see that a lot of photogs use this “term” and many of them ARE professional, well known photographers).
November 15th, 2009 at 11:03 am
It is both called clamshell and butterfly lighting. Two words for the same type of light. A google search reveals that the term butterlfy lighting is much more common than the term clamshell lighting. Clamshell lighting also incorporates two umbrellas on top of each other, shooting in between them. Butterfly lighting involves one light on top, and only optionally a reflector below.
I do however agree, that the term “face your subject at 7.8 view is one I’ve never heard before. Would the author please elaborate :-)
Last, of course this light needs to be softened. A bare flash that close to a subject will not look any flattering.
November 15th, 2009 at 3:11 pm
I found it interesting and like the effect but I am confused by the 7.8 view. I almost thought of it as a clock where 6 would be looking straight on seven would be turning the head slightly
November 15th, 2009 at 5:46 pm
I’m not arguing on the name of this technique or the beauty of the 7/8th view.
Here is an example of the same. I did this with a softbox powered by an SB-26 and a silver reflector held directly below the subject’s face, as suggested in the article. Its not a true one-light setup as the backdrop (actually a wall in the model’s house) is being lit by an SB-28 on the ground.
November 15th, 2009 at 7:29 pm
An article that would have been much improved by adding a diagram showing the intended setup.
November 16th, 2009 at 12:58 am
The author describes the 7.8 view: “Start by facing your subject directly to the camera, then turn the head just to hide the far ear.” However, both examples show both ears — they’re both full head-on poses.
November 16th, 2009 at 1:18 am
@Tom: Agreed. It’s kind of difficult to decipher the info or envision the setup to a beginner.
November 16th, 2009 at 1:36 am
OK, I get the placement of the flash having used it before, but just didn’t place a name on it, but the article says to turn the subject’s head so that one ear is hidden, but both the example by the author and Thukral’s examples show point blank face-on shots. Obviously the system works well for both.
November 16th, 2009 at 1:51 am
I remember when the single catch light was desired.
Then they came up with large umbrellas and boxs and now folks
seem to like huge rectangles and such shapes in the eye. Actually the viewers are to asleep to even recognize a catch light when they see them much less discern what the solar catchlight is about.
I prefer a more natural single catch light where it should be-in the pupil.
November 16th, 2009 at 5:16 am
I agree with Tom that this “how to” would GREATLY benefit from a shot/diagram of the set up showing the lights/reflector in position.
Also, in the description, you say to turn the subject’s head “just to hide the far ear.” Am I wrong? I still see both ears.
I also do not see the two catch lights in the eyes. And personally I prefer just one anyway.
Just my 2 cents and my questions…
November 16th, 2009 at 5:57 am
I’ll clear a few things here.
The author is talking about two things.
1. Pose of the face (the 7/8th shot)
2. Lighting technique (butterfly/clamshell)
When I put my comment(s) int (the website was playing games which lead to the double post), I was focusing on the lighting technique. In my example, the post is straight on and not the 7/8th. Hence you see both her ears.
I’ll write a brief article on the poses (straight on, 7/8th, 3/4th and profile) in a few minutes and attach a link here.
November 16th, 2009 at 7:22 am
Here is the article on head positions I mentioned I’ll write.
http://digital-photography-school.com/forum/tutorials/87549-head-positions-portrait-photography.html
November 16th, 2009 at 12:29 pm
Actually this isn’t butterfly lighting. Butterfly lighting comes from a light source above and slightly more to the side than this article states. It’s name comes from the shape of the shadow that you get when the light hits the subjects nose…because it looks like a butterfly. Neither the article or the photograph demonstrate this technique and I think that is what is confusing people.
November 16th, 2009 at 12:31 pm
P.S. the lighting that they describe here and demonstrate is often called glamour lighting. And it is flattering and often used for Magazine covers.
November 17th, 2009 at 12:57 am
This type of lighting tends to reveal every imperfection of the subject’s face — as the sample photo at top painfully demonstrates. That’s why magazine covers are retouched extensively.
This works best on people with clear, smooth skin, otherwise, prepare to Photoshop.
November 17th, 2009 at 1:48 am
Well, that is where the reflector comes in. It tries to fill in the wrinkles and spots on the face that would otherwise case a much harsher shadows.
Doing it properly, you might want to use something like this http://www.lastolite.com/triflectormkii.php. It puts in so much reflected light from all other sides (except from the direction of the key light) that those imperfections are more or less eliminated.
November 17th, 2009 at 4:01 am
Thanks for the article… It was quite useful, however I seem to have the same questions and notes as most of the other comments. I dont quite know what 7.8 view means, and although it mentions to hide the ear furthest from the camera, both ears are visible.
Also, by having the flash that close (3′ away?) I think a soft box would be necessary no? Humm… I’ll have to try it and find out! Thanks for getting my brain thinking about the magic of lighting once again! =)
I would have really appreciated a photo of the setup as well.. or at least a drawing.
November 17th, 2009 at 1:22 pm
I understand 7/8 view (thanks Thukral for the nice article), but the original post example is head on, so that’s where the confusion came from on my end. The description doesn’t match the shot.
Does anyone else have any other examples of what they would term “butterfly” or “clamshell”?
November 19th, 2009 at 6:44 am
Wow, this it totally not what I thought the post would be about when I read the title “butterfly lighting!” I was expecting instructions on how I could better photograph butterflies, which is one of my own ongoing personal macro challenges:
However, I will remember the human related butterfly lighting technique for my next headshot session.
November 19th, 2009 at 6:45 am
I meant to include this in the above comment:
November 20th, 2009 at 5:29 am
Well, kudos to Christina for trying. But the responders do make good points. The photo she used as an illustration doesn’t really fit what she was talking about at all. It did make me think about portrait lighting in a new way and that was of some value. The responders also made me think about lighting, even lighting real butterflies.
Christina, come back with a better photo of what you are talking about. And I think it would be useful for someone to photograph the photographer actually doing the setup, showing the position of the main light and the reflector.
November 20th, 2009 at 6:49 am
I have to agree with several of the previous comments. Photographers are, by nature, visual people. A visual diagram certainly would have improved this article. In addition are we talking 7.8 as written by the author or 7/8 as written by others? 7/8 certainly makes more sense to me, but if there is a 7.8 I’d like to learn about it. And like most of the others I count two ears. I don’t mean to be critical, but I learned more from the comments than the article, and I’m still not a big fan of “butterfly/clamshell” lighting – Oh – and I don’t care what you call it as long as we know what it is.
November 20th, 2009 at 7:14 am
The article describes a contemporary lighting technique popularized by glamour makeover portrait salons. The term Butterfly Lighting as I learned is also referred to as Rembrandt Lighting. This term attributed by some to cinema figure Cecil B DeMille actually mimics the lighting used by painting Master Rembrandt van Rijn.
In classic photographic portraiture, Butterfly Lighting is actually achieved by the use of a single main light, usually with a large pan reflector although spcular umbrellas can be used. The main or key light is usually placed in the front of the subject and to one side, slightly higher than the subject’s face. The subject’s face may be turned [only] slightly away from the camera, and the key light is used in a short lighting set-up. A fill reflector is placed opposite the key light, slightly lower, filling the shadow side of the subject but not so close as to raise the highlight/shadow ratio. The key telltale signature of Butterfly Lighting is a triangular highlight on the subject’s cheek opposite the highlighted side of the face. The elevated key light will also cast a shadow under the nose on the subject’s upper lip somewhat resembling a butterfly. Hence the name.
November 20th, 2009 at 9:20 am
I cannot hope to comment on the technicalities of technique names or correctness, etc. However I did want to give some positive feedback. At my level of experience, I was able to gain some great intel from this article, which is severely needed given my non-existant budget.
Sometimes I fear we get too technical as to not appreciate the simple sharing of knowledge to help people like me.
Thank you, Christina.
November 20th, 2009 at 10:19 am
As I learned it, and have taught for many years, Butterfly and Rembrandt lighting are two distinctly different lightings alike in that for both, the key light is raised high above the subject. In Butterfly lighting, the key light is in line with the subject’s nose casting a shadow directly underneath the nose and creating shadows accentuating the cheekbones thus creating the pattern of a butterfly’s wings on the face. The lighting described by m.watanabe above is Rembrandt lighting which is off to the side casting a triangular highlight. The shadows of both are lightened using a fill light or reflector. The other three basic lightings are Broad (near side of subject’s face key lit), Short (Far side of subject’s face key lit) and Split which comes from either side desired to throw the face in half shadow (for dramatic effect or to possibly hide a facial defect or scar.) There is also Monte Zucker’s famed modified loop lighting but that has been a bit involved to introduce in Photo I.
I wish I could include my example pictures from class but do not have a website at this time.
I would like to add my thanks to Christina for instigating a rather involved discussion and getting us to all take a look at how we can improve ourselves as photographers.
November 21st, 2009 at 2:51 am
I was appalled by your “butterfly lighting” article. After 50 years as a commercial photographer I have never heard the term.
Your picture doesn’t match your instructions.
What does 7.8 mean
How big is your off camera flash? It looks like one of those crappy little 2″ X 3″ strobes that is the most unflattering light devised by man
Your fill light breaks all the rules of good beauty or portrait photography. Never use a second light for fill unless it’s really big and soft.
Your subject has bad skin which screams for the tried and true 3′ umbrella or light box with a 20″ X 30″ white fill in card.
Umbrellas have only been around since the 50’s, ‘cmon get with it!
You got a lot of nerve writing that article because you clearly know NOTHING about lighting!
November 21st, 2009 at 4:06 am
I’m not sure it’s quite as bad as that, David ,-) ! Though, true, it’s maybe not quite up to the usual DPS standard…
I’m a complete amateur, and I’d have been quite content with the image if it were mine…
November 21st, 2009 at 5:23 am
I saw David’s website and it has some really well done work. But…
50 years of commercial photography and never heard the term?
I did a simple Google web search (http://images.google.com/search?q=butterfly+lighting) and Google Images search (http://images.google.com/images?q=butterfly+lighting) and I found over a million hits. A few of them say that its synonymous with Paramount lighting, perhaps made famous by Paramount Studios in the 30s.
Whatever the situation, I believe David’s comment was too harsh on the author.
November 21st, 2009 at 12:32 pm
I agree Thukral, no need for viciousness. Christina used a term that has been around as long as lighting. It surprises me that David has not heard it. Generally, butterfly lighting is a two-light set up that sets the two lights wide, an equal distance from the subject, and slightly higher, so that they point down and across the face. It minimizes shadows, and facial flaws, so it works well for teens with bad skin. It’s not very dramatic, but improves most faces. Improving the way people look, and drawing “feeling” out of them, so that they like how they look in the picture – that’s what portrait photographers DO.
November 21st, 2009 at 1:06 pm
Follow up – Christina has written this article, I think, more for the beginner who doesn’t have much equipment. Therefore, she describes making a two light set-up with one light and a reflector.
It’s also handy when you’re out on location, and don’t have all your studio gear available.
Leave a Reply