We have all read a great deal of blogs about pros as well as books by pros. In these books, there is a great deal of information about lighting, but the golden rule is if you want to take good landscape photos the best light occurs either early in the morning or in the late afternoon.
The reality of course, is that this is often not an option for us mere mortals. We do not have the flexibility to get up at the wee hours of the morning and trek to a good spot that we scoped out the day before and stay there for several hours getting good shots. If we did this, our families would kill us.
Therefore much of the light we get to shoot in is of the worst kind. It occurs when the sun is high above during the mid day. The other reality is that you may find that the sky is cloudy and ugly on that particular day. However, this does not necessarily mean that all hope is lost. There are a number of options available to you and in this post, as well as future ones, I will go over these in more detail.
As many of you know, I am not into taking pictures of people other than my kids. I have never taken a fashion shot and likely never will. A lot of it is that I find these pictures very fake. I am just not a “look at me” kind of person and do not like others who are.
Still, events I find quite different. The pictures serve a higher purpose than just “look at me” and are a way for those in the picture to remember events for years later. Therefore, when asked I often bring my camera to these events. Still, I had never been asked to bring my camera to a wedding.
Recently, some friends of ours who were not able to hire a professional wedding photographer asked if I could take pictures. I obliged and tried to do the best job possible. In the process, I think some things worked well and some things not so well. Here are several of the shots (note: I did not do any post processing).
To be honest, I was a bit upset at my last real estate shoot. I didn’t think the pictures came out very well and a number of my coworkers agreed. There were numerous problems with them such as
Not correcting for verticals
Blown out areas from the flash
Shadows
Some parts of the photos were too dark
I had a number of theories on how to fix these issues, but for the lighting my idea was to purchase an Alienbees light and an extra Pocketwizard MultiMAX and use it as a third light. One of my coworkers offered to stop by the house with a lot of the equipment that I am looking to buy someday so I was able to get a good look at what it can accomplish and whether it will solve some of my problems.
One note before I show these shots. When we took these photos, we were mainly trying to see what the lights and lenses were capable of and what issues we may have. We did not correct for verticals and I did not Photoshop any of these pictures. In this way you can get a good idea what the equipment did without seeing what it looks like after Photoshop.
This weekend, I had the opportunity to shoot my first property over one million dollars (1.243 million to be exact). The property is in a hot neighborhood and is priced hundreds of thousands below its competition, so I was excited to finally shoot a house like this. The house was also the largest I have shot to date.
Of course, I actually had the ‘opportunity’ to shoot this house twice, as my original pictures taken at night turned out so bad that I needed to reshoot. The following is what I learned from this shoot. Continue Reading…
Posted 1 year, 9 months ago at 2:20 pm. Add a comment
Recently I have started playing around with multiple off camera lights with my real estate photography. I use a Canon 580EX and 580EX II triggered with three Pocketwizard MultiMAX units.
By the way, my wife wanted me to mention that this home has already sold, but if you would like to discuss selling or buying a home with her you can contact her from her web site.
The first light is rather easy to place. Typically I attach it to a silver umbrella, then sometimes bounce it off a wall or aim it straight at the room but reduce the power. Sometimes this is enough to light a room. For example, in this room I wound up using just this one light – which was to the left of the camera.
The tricky part comes with what to do with the second light. First, I have come to realize that the second light isn’t always necessary. For many pictures, it is best left turned off and to the side. However, there are times when having the second light really helps.
Nelya often gets upset at me because I often prefer to buy books rather than get them from the library. With the exception of technical books for work – which go out of date quickly – I prefer to buy books and read them over long periods of time than have the books for only a few short weeks. In addition, I often refer to books in the future. Still, a number of times she does have a point.
However, Light: Science and Magic: An Introduction to Photographic Lighting is not one of those books. This is a book that you will refer over and over to and is well worth the investment. In fact, in my opinion this book is required reading. It is not for beginners, but anyone who hopes to understand light at all should have it.
First, let me stress again that this book is not for beginners. It assumes that you already know the basics of photography and how to properly expose a picture. What it doesn’t assume, however, is that you know anything about light.
In this post I will continue discussing the main reasons photographs are rejected from the microstock sites today. I have already discussed copyrights, noise, and focus. In this post I will discuss framing and bad lighting.
Framing
In simple terms, your picture must not look like a snapshot. A snapshot is typically defined as those millions of vacation shots that come out each year of random things. More specifically, a snapshot is defined as a picture that didn’t require thought and looks like it. OK, so maybe that’s not so specific.
In order to have a properly framed picture, you need to pay attention to the layout of the objects inside it. For instance, watch what is creeping into the picture. Very often trees and other things find their way into the picture. If you find a branch coming into the shot from the side, use Photoshop to clone it out. Over time you’ll find yourself able to notice this when taking the shot and reframe the picture appropriately.
If you are taking pictures of buildings, make sure the tops aren’t clipped off. Many stock sites will reject shots of buildings with their tops cut off – even very tall ones. In general the entire subject should be in the shot – though there are exceptions to this. Distracting elements also should not be in the picture. When taking photos of the beach, try to find viewpoints that have the least amount of garbage – then clone out the rest of the garbage in post processing.
Another interesting aspect of microstock photography is that very often the shot that sells the best has the subject in the center of the photo. This is against the rule of thirds and will make many artists cringe – but the truth is microstock photos are made to be sold – not to be admired.
This weekend, while putting together a presentation on macro photography that I will do for the photography group at my work, I played around a bit with macro flash arrangements. Macro lighting is often not considered by many beginning macro photographers – who spend the time working on whether to purchase a macro lens or diopters or extension tubes but wind up with macro shots that are dark or blurry. Here’s an example of such a shot.
This, and all of the shots in this post, were taken with my MP-E 65 in 1x. While my 180L is closer to being a “normal” macro lens, I have found that I need to light objects taken with my 180L much differently than those from my MP-E 65. Since at 1x the MP-E 65 is close to being a standard 65mm macro lens, in this mode it is closer to the more popular 100mm macro lenses.
As you can see, the shot is very fuzzy. I took this shot in aperture priority mode on the camera. Obviously the shutter speed was not fast enough to compensate for hand holding the camera + lens. When I metered the subject myself and chose a higher shutter speed the shot was completely black. Now let’s discuss how I changed things to improve this shot of one of my kids’ Kinder Toys sitting on a plant.
Recently I have spent some time debating about an off camera lighting solution. As much as I want the Canon 180L macro lens, I am leaning towards improving my lighting possibilities as that opens more doors for me to improve as a photographer. The following are the areas where I see myself using them.
Real estate photography
I have spent some time researching and found that most of the best photographs I have seen use hot shoe strobes. This is the main reason that I am only considering Pocket Wizards or Radiopoppers. The ST-E2 will not work through walls or in other situations necessary for real estate and I have heard of too many problems with the cactus triggers. This is also the area where I expect the triggers to pay for themselves.
Kids
Basically I want to use off camera flash(es) to improve shots of my kids.
Experimentation
There are a number of experiments I would like to try such as the strobist assignments. On a more serious note I would like to use remote flash for background lighting in macro and I would like to trigger the camera remotely. I have tried using the MT-24EX to trigger my 580EX but found it unreliable outdoors.
So after some research, the following are how I see the two stacking up.
Of all the equipment necessary for macro photography, it seems like lighting is the most controversial. I think lighting in general is considered an “unnecessary evil” by many photographers. After all, few photographers would argue about putting down the money for a good 70-200 or 24-70 2.8 lens (assuming they have that much). However, I constantly hear of attempts to make cheap lighting solutions – such as building a simple diffuser for $5 rather than buy a real one for $30 or buy a faulty remote switch for $10 off Ebay rather than buy Canon’s for $60. The fact is, in many situations lighting is more important than the lens. The true pros have known this for a long time – just take a look at what Profoto lights cost. With portrait photography, lighting can make or break a shot.
Here’s the ugly truth, for the majority of macro photographs natural light simply won’t cut it. Yes, there are exceptions of course. I once had a discussion with another photographer on whether the MT-24EX (or the MR-14EX) is necessary when using the MP-E 65. His answer was that he does abstract photography at F2.8. Well, if you want to take blurry pictures at F2.8 (and I must admit that his look quite nice) then you do not need lighting. If you object is stationary, you can use a tripod and macro rail and unnatural lighting may not be necessary – though you will probably find some reflectors and diffusers helpful. For insects and flowers bouncing in the wind though, you will need some lighting.
There are a variety of lighting solutions you can use and there are even more custom solutions out there. The key gotcha in macro is that your standard on-camera flash will not work. It has to do with the angle between the flash and your lens. Because you are getting very close to the subject, your lens will block some of the light. In a number of situations you will also need the light to be powerful – meaning almost right on your subject. On camera flash simply cannot do this. Note that by “on-camera” I mean both the popup flashes you find on some camera models and the hot-shoe flashes (such as the Canon 580EX) that you can buy. There is a difference though. While the popup flash is practically useless for macro, a hot shoe flash can be made useful if you can direct the light better to your subject or get the flash off the camera.
To get the flash off the camera, simply buy an extension cord. They are not very expensive and are well worth it. If you follow strobists, you can also use his techniques for off camera. Another solution is to create a reflective “tunnel” that goes from the flash mounted to the hot shoe to the front of the lens.
When I first started in macro photography, I would manually hold the flash off the camera. I used a tripod to hold the camera and I held the flash and the remote trigger. This took decent photos, but eventually I wanted more. “More”, meant a solution specifically for macro.
Canon happens to sell two different lighting solutions for macro. Nikon also has solutions, but I am not as familiar with them. At the low end is the MR-14EX, which is basically a ring flash. At the high end is the twin flash MT-24EX. There is, of course, debate on which is better. Those who favor the MR-14EX say the MT-24EX is too harsh (the flashes are bare vs. the MR-14EX diffused) and they prefer the effect of the MR-14EX. Those who favor the MT-24EX like its increased versatility and feel the light from the MR-14EX is too flat, too with MR-14EX favorers respond that this can be fixed through settings. Personally, I strongly prefer the MT-24EX. It is true that out of the box the lights are too harsh – but this is easily corrected with diffusers. I prefer this mainly because I can reposition the lights as needed and try more interesting effects – such as changing the direction and angles of the lights.
In terms of what type of lighting you will get, this mainly has to do with money. If you can afford it, and you are serious about macro, get the $650 MT-24EX. If you don’t know how much you’ll get into macro, get an extension cord for your hot shoe flash. For an end today, I will show two photos of somewhat similar subjects to show how lighting (and lenses) can make a difference.
The first was taken with a Canon 500D diopter on a Sigma 80-400mm lens with a 580EX flash off the camera. Notice the shadows and poor details.
This one was taken with the Canon MP-E 65 and the MT-24EX.
Posted 2 years, 7 months ago at 6:15 am. 6 comments
is not one of those books. This is a book that you will refer over and over to and is well worth the investment. In fact, in my opinion this book is required reading. It is not for beginners, but anyone who hopes to understand light at all should have it.
