Black Objects

[Shadowman]

This is one of many attempts at photographing a black object (f/5, 4 sec, ISO 100) and the eventual goal is to do a low key shot. Are black objects good candidates for low key?

[Shadowman]

Processed with SilverEfex.

[Shadowman]

I have a few shot attempts using low key technique, not particularly happy with the results so far. Either the background goes completely black and I lose a lot of detail on the lens or I get light leak onto the background and more detail on the lens. I used settings of f/16, ISO 100, 1/200s and either one or two flash units and a standard bulb about 4 feet from the subject.

[bambleweeney]

John,
The trick is the lighting I guess. I'd shoot against a black background with the object a good foot or two in front of it. What you could aim for is to have the background completely black with the subject lit pretty normally (inverse square law - you want a good stop or two difference between the subject and the background so about twice the distance from the flash to the background as you have between flash and subject). If you're shooting a black/dark object such as a camera then you want to expose it properly or maybe slightly underexpose it. (It's pretty dark anyhow so expose properly and that's how it will appear in the image) I'd also light for texture (i.e flash off to the side and maybe a reflector of some sort to throw a little light back into the shadows so they don't completely block out). Consider a light modifier like a snoot or something and theoretically you should be up and running. I've never actually tried this but I might give it a go to see if I'm giving you really bad advice or not :-)
A flash meter would probably be a real help as well.

[bnnrcn]

Hi John Your edit looks better to me. I would try a different shooting angle though . I think you shot this from a higher level than the camera and that's why the camera seems as if it is looking down.

[Shadowman]

John,
The trick is the lighting I guess. I'd shoot against a black background with the object a good foot or two in front of it. What you could aim for is to have the background completely black with the subject lit pretty normally (inverse square law - you want a good stop or two difference between the subject and the background so about twice the distance from the flash to the background as you have between flash and subject). If you're shooting a black/dark object such as a camera then you want to expose it properly or maybe slightly underexpose it. (It's pretty dark anyhow so expose properly and that's how it will appear in the image) I'd also light for texture (i.e flash off to the side and maybe a reflector of some sort to throw a little light back into the shadows so they don't completely block out). Consider a light modifier like a snoot or something and theoretically you should be up and running. I've never actually tried this but I might give it a go to see if I'm giving you really bad advice or not :-)
A flash meter would probably be a real help as well.

Paul,

Thanks for the suggestions. The black background would make this exercise so much easier, my preference for low key with such a dark subject is perhaps too ambitious. I have a light tent with assorted backdrops and these items will definitely help with the setup.

Thanks again and looking forward to seeing any examples you might be able to provide.

[Shadowman]

Hi John Your edit looks better to me. I would try a different shooting angle though . I think you shot this from a higher level than the camera and that's why the camera seems as if it is looking down.

Hi Binnur,

Thanks for the comments and suggestions. I have additional shots taken from different angles, in this shot I wanted to include the markings on the lens as it added a bit of contrast to the all black surface.

[Mike Buckley]

The fourth edition of Light: Science & Magic discusses photographing black objects on black backgrounds on pages 269 to 282. It includes shiny black subjects and shiny black tabletops and backgrounds.

Paul's advice is consistent with the information in the book if his discussion of exposure means using very little or no exposure compensation out of concern for noise. That detail of the book is a bit outdated if you are using a camera that produces less noise than earlier models.

[bambleweeney]

John,
hastily threw these together. The exposure was 'correct' i.e. neither under nor over exposed. Theoretically (love that word, it lets me be totally wrong with impunity because in theory I'm always right) a white camera on a white background would have given me a high key image. The background was a black cloth covered portfolio case propped up with a cardboard box, the base was an old black T shirt. Manual flash about a foot from the camera and about two feet from the background. Flash about 45 degrees from the camera and on the same level as the subject to get some texture into the image. Exposure measured by flash meter. Limited space meant that this was the only setup I could try. Flash was a speedlight with a honeycomb disk to give the light a bit of 'dimension' and soften it a little and was the only light source. Shot in a fairly bright room in daylight. A diffuser (handkerchief, tissue paper) draped over the flash head would have given a different result although still low key and correctly exposed. Propped up a piece of notepaper just right of frame to reflect a little light back in which may or may not have had much of an effect. Images straight out of camera. It's interesting to note the light fall off between the lens and the rear of the camera body, only a distance of 8 inches or so but still significant, consequently the background, about two feet away is radically underexposed.

[tclune]

This is one of many attempts at photographing a black object (f/5, 4 sec, ISO 100) and the eventual goal is to do a low key shot. Are black objects good candidates for low key?

I think it's a mistake to think of low-key as something for black objects. ISTM that you want to think in terms of the subject, just like any other photograph. The thing that makes a photo low-key is that you are drawn to the subject in a way that is enhanced by the overall darkness of the shot. The attached is one of the few low-key shots that I have taken and like. To my mind, we are drawn to the people precisely because the darkness seems to allow us to invade their space, as it were. I hope that communicates.

[bambleweeney]

Good point Tom. It's light and shadow that produce low key images. e.g. low key portraits/landscapes etc.

[xpatUSA]

Totally off-topic as regards "low key" but I've found that, for sales purposes, using diffused LED light and blowing out the white paper background is quite effective. These are small images for eBay purposes, uploaded here at 640px but re-sampled by tinypix, hence the blur . . .

[Shadowman]

The fourth edition of Light: Science & Magic discusses photographing black objects on black backgrounds on pages 269 to 282. It includes shiny black subjects and shiny black tabletops and backgrounds.

Paul's advice is consistent with the information in the book if his discussion of exposure means using very little or no exposure compensation out of concern for noise. That detail of the book is a bit outdated if you are using a camera that produces less noise than earlier models.

Mike,

Thanks for the information.

[xpatUSA]

Paul,

Thanks for the suggestions. The black background would make this exercise so much easier, my preference for low key with such a dark subject is perhaps too ambitious. I have a light tent with assorted backdrops and these items will definitely help with the setup.

With a light-tent, the inverse square law (as mentioned by Paul earlier) is less applicable - depending where the lighting means are located. By this I mean that a light-tent provides a larger area of diffused lighting close to the subject as opposed to a flash or light bulb at the same or greater distance.

[Shadowman]

John,
hastily threw these together. The exposure was 'correct' i.e. neither under nor over exposed. Theoretically (love that word, it lets me be totally wrong with impunity because in theory I'm always right) a white camera on a white background would have given me a high key image. The background was a black cloth covered portfolio case propped up with a cardboard box, the base was an old black T shirt. Manual flash about a foot from the camera and about two feet from the background. Flash about 45 degrees from the camera and on the same level as the subject to get some texture into the image. Exposure measured by flash meter. Limited space meant that this was the only setup I could try. Flash was a speedlight with a honeycomb disk to give the light a bit of 'dimension' and soften it a little and was the only light source. Shot in a fairly bright room in daylight. A diffuser (handkerchief, tissue paper) draped over the flash head would have given a different result although still low key and correctly exposed. Propped up a piece of notepaper just right of frame to reflect a little light back in which may or may not have had much of an effect. Images straight out of camera. It's interesting to note the light fall off between the lens and the rear of the camera body, only a distance of 8 inches or so but still significant, consequently the background, about two feet away is radically underexposed.

Paul,

Thanks for the example and setup information. I'll give the camera shot another go and will have plenty of time this weekend to experiment. I tried a few different flash configurations, different intensities, bounce flash, different positioning, and each gave me a different look and most of my issues were overexposing the background.

[Mike Buckley]

most of my issues were overexposing the background.

The easiest solution to that is to keep the subject far enough away from the background that your lighting scheme lights only the subject, not the background.

[Shadowman]

I think it's a mistake to think of low-key as something for black objects. ISTM that you want to think in terms of the subject, just like any other photograph. The thing that makes a photo low-key is that you are drawn to the subject in a way that is enhanced by the overall darkness of the shot. The attached is one of the few low-key shots that I have taken and like. To my mind, we are drawn to the people precisely because the darkness seems to allow us to invade their space, as it were. I hope that communicates.

Hi Tom,

The lack of shadows was a main concern for me when trying to capture the camera as a low key image, the idea was formed in my head when I chose a white background; knowing that the low key technique would underexpose the background. Nice image.

[Shadowman]

Totally off-topic as regards "low key" but I've found that, for sales purposes, using diffused LED light and blowing out the white paper background is quite effective. These are small images for eBay purposes, uploaded here at 640px but re-sampled by tinypix, hence the blur . . .

Nicely captured, not as sleek as using a black background but then again cameras are not exactly sexy looking objects.

[Shadowman]

The easiest solution to that is to keep the subject far enough away from the background that your lighting scheme lights only the subject, not the background.

Thanks Mike. I also tried another setup, I placed the camera (subject) on a tripod against a white wall, exposed the image to underexpose the wall and used flash and one continuous light source. Results were good, wall captured as black but too much reflection on the shiny parts of the camera. I'll try both light and dark backgrounds and see how the images turn out.

[Mike Buckley]

too much reflection on the shiny parts of the camera

That's where information in Light: Science and Magic becomes indispensible. Your situation is all about using the Family of Angles to avoid unwanted reflections as explained in the book.