PHOTO: lighting rejection

Displaying 1 to 10 of 10 matches.
lostinbids
Member is a Diamond contributor and has 25,000 - 199,999 Photo downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Video downloadsExclusiveExclusive iStockphoto Videographer
Posted Fri Jan 22, 2010 1:51AM

I have had this one rejected with no resubmit for lighting


file_thumbview_approve


Full size


I was going for a warm look to the series.  However, I am thinking that maybe the colour is a little off, which could be fixed with some desatuation.  


I would like to know what you all think (I have other ones to process from the shoot).
hatman12
Member is a Diamond contributor and has 25,000 - 199,999 Photo downloads
Posted Fri Jan 22, 2010 2:06AM

Nice sharp file from a Nikon D300.


The picture is rather cluttered, and I find my eye wandering all over the place instead of staying put on the main subject.  When I look at the child my eyes get drawn to the green tubes.  Perhaps composition is the reason for the no resubmit.


In terms of lighting there are gaps at each end of the histogram, although a levels tweak won't solve the composition problem.
steve-goacher
Member is a Bronze contributor and has 250 - 2,499 Photo downloadsExclusive
Posted Fri Jan 22, 2010 2:41AM

I think the fact that the darker colours are at the top of the picture makes it appear top-heavy and emphasises the brighter colours at the bottom.  The overall effect being that the lighting 'looks' as if it's suffering from fall-off from front to back.


If you want to see a pin sharp file from a D300 Hatman12, how about this?


file_thumbview_approve  Ha ha ha!
kbwills
Member is a Silver contributor and has 2,500 - 9,999 Photo downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Video downloadsExclusiveExclusive iStockphoto Videographer
Posted Fri Jan 22, 2010 4:44AM

I agree that the bright books dominate the scene too much.


There are conflicting shadows in the background ... handles on drawers go one way (from room light?) and on wall (from fill flash?) 


The child's left hand has some coloured pixels spead acroos it (some orange, some dark) - which looks quite strange.


The main subject looks well lit.


REGARDS
esp_imaging
Member is a Gold contributor and has 10,000 - 24,999 Photo downloadsExclusive
Posted Fri Jan 22, 2010 5:07AM
Posted By kbwills:

I agree that the bright books dominate the scene too much.


Me too. It looks too much front lit, with the front light source too close, hence the books are quite hot.

Why not bash an extra light in from the side, or bounce it off the ceiling above the books so it lights the mid ground and background more.

I'm sure concept is a winner.
Susan_Stewart
Member is a Silver contributor and has 2,500 - 9,999 Photo downloadsMember is a Bronze contributor and has 250 - 2,499 Illustration downloadsExclusiveExclusive iStockphoto Illustrator
Posted Fri Jan 22, 2010 6:06AM

I'd declutter a bit. Most of my lighting rejections have been for slight overexposure on parts of the image that are not central - in this case my eye tends to go to the brightest and lightest objects in the scene which are the rings on the left hand side and the books in front, rather than the kid or the blocks which ae th epoint of the whole shot.


I'm actually suprised this didn't get a copyright rejection for some of the toys - while the rings and the blocks are generic enough, some of the stuff in the background, while out of focus, is identifiable as to brand if you have an ankle biter around and are familiar enough with current toy manufacturers. Usually istock inspectors steer well clear of brand name toys (until fairly recently even generic  alphabet blocks were rejected)
lostinbids
Member is a Diamond contributor and has 25,000 - 199,999 Photo downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Video downloadsExclusiveExclusive iStockphoto Videographer
Posted Fri Jan 22, 2010 6:18AM

Thanks for the replies guys.


The scene was lit exactly the way you said Ed.  There was a four foot octobox just behind the camera and a 45cm X 65cm softbox firing off the ceiling in front of the wardrobe on the right.  The power was quite low to get some ambient in from the window.  I am going to give it another shot with more power on the back and hopefully brighter outside so I can shoot with a faster shutter speed.


The orange smudging is from the 1/5s shutter speed and motion.  It is hard to get these babies to sit still
esp_imaging
Member is a Gold contributor and has 10,000 - 24,999 Photo downloadsExclusive
Posted Fri Jan 22, 2010 6:53AM
^^ Jo, can you get the Octobox further back, or else have a white reflector behind you, against the wall, and shine the front light into that, so the effective light source is as far as possible from the books?

Maybe try lighting the ceiling without the softbox, the light should be plenty soft enough off the ceiling anyway. By altering where the light shines onto the ceiling you may get a bit more versatility in how the light falls on the mid / background.

Is focus meant to be on the blocks? (I haven't checked the full size image). Going for a wider aperture may give you less DoF, make the shot look less cluttered and either give you a stop or two extra shutter speed to freeze movement, or just enable you to get a bit more ambient light in. 
donald_gruener
Member is a Diamond contributor and has 25,000 - 199,999 Photo downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Illustration downloadsExclusiveForum Moderator
Posted Fri Jan 22, 2010 11:47AM
I'd agree that the key problem here is the books & objects in the foreground being overexposed.

Something you can consider with this type of setup is flagging the light - blocking it from hitting those foreground objects. This may take some experimentation but with a flag placed close enough to the light source, you can diminish the light hitting those books without casting an obvious shadow.

I think the items in the background appear generic & incidental enough to not cause a trademark issue.
MikeCherim
Member is a Silver contributor and has 2,500 - 9,999 Photo downloadsExclusive
Posted Fri Jan 22, 2010 12:24PM

Posted By donald_gruener:
I'd agree that the key problem here is the books & objects in the foreground being overexposed.

Something you can consider with this type of setup is flagging the light - blocking it from hitting those foreground objects. This may take some experimentation but with a flag placed close enough to the light source, you can diminish the light hitting those books without casting an obvious shadow.

I think the items in the background appear generic & incidental enough to not cause a trademark issue.


Maybe an ND graduated filter (dark side down) would work as well.
This thread has been locked.
Displaying 1 to 10 of 10 matches.
Not a member?Join