Problem: I think a lot of photographers (myself included at some point in the past) pour too much strobed light into an image out of technical misunderstandings rather than stylistic choice. Under-exposing 2 stops and then popping your subject from 5 feet away with a direct shot from your strobe is certainly a style, but unless it’s done deliberately as a style, it often distracts the viewer from the image rather than adding to it. I’d say it’s the most common mistake that plagues photographers new to off-camera strobes: just because some is good, it doesn’t mean more is better.
Solution: I’d encourage you to think of artificial light in a photo more like good service at a restaurant: it’s often best when it’s there, but you don’t notice it at all. Thus, enter what I’d call subtle light. And the beauty of making subtle light is that it doesn’t have to be difficult. In fact, most shooters I know over-think it. At it’s root, it’s really about just a few things: your ambient exposure, bouncing and/or diffusing light.
Balancing your strobes with the ambient exposure (the natural exposure of the light in the room/location) is the first key. Simply put, if your goal is to make some subtle light you shouldn’t really be able to “see” that light source. And if you’re subtle light is adding to light already in a scene, you shouldn’t be able to see a difference between the value (brightness) of the light that’s already in the scene with the light that you’re bringing in.
To illustrate this concept, I’ll use the really simple editorial-feeling image atop the page that I shot just a couple weeks ago…[click the 'continue reading' link below - more pics, lighting diagrams after the jump...]
–
…as an example.
First, I set the exposure to get a nice bright, natural feel out of the windows behind my subjects. My next goal is then to match that exposure gently with the lights that I’ve brought with me. A mistake would be to blast model Rusty’s eyeballs outta his head with 1200 watt seconds of flame-thrower-bare-naked-flashtube aimed right at him, revealing all my artificial light. Instead, the AD and I agreed that a simple, more subtle light–one that looked like it was from big set of wrap-around windows, with a similar light value to what’s happening outside–would be the ticket to drop into this scene and brighten our happy travelers. Nothing extraordinary, just something that looked natural.
The most common way to make a big, soft, artificial light is to have a big, soft source…a 12′x12′ silk that you can shoot a bunch of light through, a big 8-foot wide Para umbrella, or similar. The only problem with this is that we photographers quite commonly find ourselves in need of such things, but without them (through lack of planning, laziness, or needing to stay light and fast…). Enter stage left, the secret weapon of any good photographer: the ability to think on your feet…which is exactly what I did when I found myself in Colorado on this particular day in a mostly dark room, sans 12 foot silk, without giant umbrella, but with my trusty 1200 w/s battery powered strobe kit.
First, the bounce. In order to make the light falling on this scene seem like it was from a big wrapping set of windows, I wanted to create the biggest light source I could – something much larger than the 2’x3’ softbox that I had with me. And so I created that source by bouncing light from a single head fired off my 1200w/s Broncolor Mobile kit right off the 14-foot ceiling. Like magic it turned my 2′x3′ softbox into a 20 foot wide source of light just by firing it at the ceiling. (Note: the deed was further amplified by the fact that the ceiling was made up of reflective metallic tiles – keep your eyes peeled for such things that can play in your favor).
I was instantly in a much better place. Once I got the “right” amount of light coming outta the gear and bouncing around–actually the right amount for the dark wood all over the bar, and for the other model, Chris’ dark skin color–I noticed that Rusty was getting overpowered. His red jacket and fair skin needed less light.
Enter subtle light technique #2: Diffuse. Diffusion can look like a lot of different things. You can shoot light thru a milk carton, a sheet, a silk, some clouds, whatever. The principles are all the same. Your goal is to knock down light pouring on the subject. Since we had the entire scene looking good with light except for our featured talent, pulled back the light falling on Rusty using the one partially opaque thing we had on hand – my PhotoFlex Translucent Lite Disc. My second assistant, Mario, simply held that disc between Rusty and the lit-up ceiling, and we nailed it. You’re no doubt picking up what I’m putting down: subtle light is about adding light gently (big light source, bounced, etc) and take it away in the same manner (diffusing hard light with scrims and silks).
Here’s the top view, sketched out:
And here’s a shot that Scott snapped with his iphone to illustrate what’s going on from the side. Note that I drew in a tripod on my sketch. This image was snapped moments after deciding not to use the tripod so I could tweak my camera angles a little more freely…
Now, as we’ve said before, there’s a million ways to skin a cat. Because of the limited amount of gear I had with me, I chose to light the whole room for the darkest bits and then scale back the things that were a little to hot with some additional diffusion. I could have done just the opposite–lit the overall room for the base value I wanted and then brought in additional light on the dark bits with some more light, but given the lack of gear I had because we were in a pretty remote location, I chose the latter. It worked in my favor here.
The long and short is that we ended up getting the subtly lit shot we were looking for, with keeping just a few simple things in mind: exposure, bounce, diffuse. Whether it’s with specialty light modifiers, or with do-it-yourself stuff, dialing in your ability to partially- and subtly light your subjects will drastically help your photography.
[A vid of the gear we had in the back of the truck with us on this shoot can be found on my Facebook Fan Page. Become a Fan if you'd like to check it out.]
–
Get my every move: Follow Chase Jarvis on Twitter
Get exclusive content: Become a Fan on Facebook
Related posts:
---
Get my every move: Follow Chase Jarvis on Twitter
Get exclusive content: Become a Fan on Facebook
My approach philosophy also, there is only one sun, everything else is reflected…unless the AD wants party gels.
This is great, Chase. I struggled last night with a photo problem and now I know why.
And thanks for the McNally-like sketch (not that he has a corner on that market, though). This whole post…and blog…is very helpful. And as someone in "corporate" who often hires photographers, we go more for that natural or subtle look, even if lighting is used.
Great post Chase. One quick question – did you use any gels or such to change the white balance of the light from the strobe to match the light from the windows?
Cheers,
James
@ james: i didn't use gels to balance the light temp. outside was bright overcast, and since the ceiling was made of metallic silver tiles, I was able to get a pretty good balance without 'em, although i recall tweaking the temp a little in aperture.
Nice post Chase. One question: Do you consider where or how the image is going to be used when you decide on a lighting technique?
Here's what I'm wondering:
Printing that image on a 160 lpi halftone reproduction press will hold the detail in both Rusty's face and Chris's head, but on 85 lpi newsprint, both those image areas previously mentioned may block up the shadows areas and cause the loss of the subtle facial details that you've captured.
In the newsprint case, wouldn't you want a bit more light to fill those areas to hold the detail?
Or maybe in your world you don't need to worry about crappy newsprint.
Best regards.
This is great guys! Would love to see more of this type of post. Thanks for sharing.
I'd love to see a photo of the room without the strobe just to get an idea of how subtle the light is.
Exactly. it is what i strive for in most of my lighting! I consider it a compliment when new clients ask if I use any lighting.
Woooow you actually drew it and showed it to us, now thats what i call have a deep look.
It's about time somebody said this.
Nice post, and I agree your light is subtle, but totally lacks the look of "big wrap around windows" that you mentioned you were going for.
Ceiling bounce and window light come from different directions. Your light looks completely artificial to me since it comes directly from the ceiling, as opposed to from low to high which is how light comes through a window(unless you were thinking skylights).
Good shot, I thought it was with a 580 bounced into the ceiling, which would have worked just as well.
Thanks for posting these "BTS" shots, fun to watch a pro at work.
its very nice posting. you have done a good job.
Thanks a lot for setting up my mind again to re-think my common practices using flash lights. Reviewing some of my latest pictures of people taken outside in heavy sunlight the pictures taken with "low-level" fill-in flash looked the best.
Thanks for the post Chase. I'm always an advocate of less is more, but of course that doesn't mean it's necessarily easy. It definitely takes some thought, creativity, and resourcefulness, especially on location. Recently, on a location shoot, we discovered we didn't have anything on hand for a large fill-card. We stole a bed-sheet from the hotel and hung it from the gobo arm of a C-Stand. Not pretty, but effective.
thanks for sharing!
cool shot!
Well-stated. "Salting" to taste with strobes is something I find no different than cooking: a little can be good and add enhancement, yet too much can ruin a perfectly good dish. I never thought cooking 101 and lighting 101 could have shared such a similiar cross-over. Then again, nothing like a dose of salty McD's french fries every so often
"Under-exposing 2 stops and then popping your subject from 5 feet away with a direct shot from your strobe is certainly a style,…"
heh, it's the look most of us have come to hate, as it's been overdone to death. thanks to strobist for providing the formula… ahem… i mean "style" to the sheepish masses.
Long time reader firs time poster..
Just wanted to say I love this post. Been quite uninspired with the "strobist" movement for a while. Of course there is a lot of good photos out there but many (including my own) add to much light just because we can. I guess this is just part of the learning process.
This just resonated a lot. Love the photo as well.
thanks for sharing
This is so very true
. Must say i've been guilty of that far too often. Destroying the natural quality of a scene with my little strobes 
.
@ RJ Kern: "salting to taste" is a great way to think about lighting…
Hey! I was just flipping through my REI catalog and saw this pic in there. I knew I saw it on your blog a few months back… and here it is. Awesome work, Chase. Love your work!
Balancing ambient with flash is always a struggle for me. Chase's approach makes perfect sense. Of course I have to put it into practice for it to truly work for me.