Low-key Family group

[ionian]

Here's a shot from a photo shoot I did today for a young family. I'm working on a series of baby portraits and group shots for them, but I haven't done much low-key before so I'm interested in your feedback for future gigs - this was a paid engagement so there's no reshooting it, but I can learn for the future.

Set up was a single reflective umbrella to the right and just in front of the group, with a reflector behind mum, quite a distance, just to add shape. Grey backdrop and continuous light which was not ideal - the baby did not like the flash, had a cold and it seemed like the best solution although it did reduce my keeper rate considerably. I would prefer strobes and would use them where possible.

I'm relatively happy - I'd like more light in the dads eyes but not at the expense of the mood. Comments, positive and negative, are very welcome.

[Shadowman]

Nicely captured, top crop is fine but the bottom should have more of the moms hands.

[rpcrowe]

Absolutely loving image! However, I like the dad's face to be a bit less in the shadows. Square crop is entirely arbitrary...

[ionian]

Nice edit Richard - yes, I will work on his face some more I think. As for crops, that will depend on what format they want to print, but I agree the square crop works well.

John - yes, I should have shot slightly wider, especially in these circumstances where you have to crop to fit the size format the client wants. I was struggling to keep the three of them on my travel backdrop - I was working in their living room.

[IzzieK]

I like the drama of the first one with the dad's side being on the darker side, but not that dark. Richard's edit is good but in my opinion, he made the dad's face too bright that his eyes became to noticeably ugly (sorry for the word "ugly". I can't think of a better term. I hope you understand what I mean...) With Richard's edit now that little highlight in his eyes seems like he is looking at his wife and not the child as conveyed in the original shot.

[madcrow]

It's a great image but don't like the hand cut.

[george013]

Nice image. The father is thinking of the next baby already.

George

[cichlid]

Wonderful shop Simon.
The only distraction, for me, is where dad is looking. Maybe an adjustment in the position of his head, of have him look at his child instead.
Beside that, awesome work on lighting.

[Manfred M]

Nice image Simon, but I definitely would not suggest this is low key. Low key images are predominantly dark objects shot on a dark background.

To me a low key image has characteristics along these lines:

[Dave Humphries]

Hi Simon,

I needed to wait until I felt I could say something helpful before I replied here, having viewed the thread a couple of times since it was posted, so apologies for the delay.

I'll just ramble on, as is my way, and hopefully some thoughts might be helpful in negotiating future gigs.


Ah, the site crashed and I just lost all I wrote except the above two sentences

Perhaps I'll try again tomorrow (and remember to copy all my reply to clipboard before clicking any button).

[AlwaysOnAuto]

I think I know what George means. Dad isn't looking at the baby and should be, IMO.
That's all I can say.

[Dave Humphries]

Hi again Simon,

What I was going to say was ...

I can see why you'd call this low key, they are wearing black (or so it seems from the mono conversion) and yet the light tones are properly exposed, where lit. So that's really not so different from Manfred's example shot where the HDD are black with white writing and properly exposed.


You had the issue of Dad wearing a T-shirt with text on (far from ideal in a portrait shoot), but have done what you can by covering this as much as possible in the pose.

While 'sombre' seems a harsh word to describe the image, I wondered whether the idea was the client's?

I am struggling to see the 'relevance' (that may not be the best word choice).
In the modern world, babies are often shot in conditions approaching 'high key' and this imparts a 'happy' feel to the image.
It might be suggested that having (effectively) a single light source harks back to earlier times, when such a scene might be lit by a single bare light bulb, or even a candle (although if you go this far back, clothing to suit the period would be wise), but I digress, the point I am trying to make is that such a light source would be a small area, almost a point source, not what you get with a reflective umbrella. Just a thought, no more, that may be the shadows needed to be sharper edged?


While a re-shoot isn't possible, I think I'd probably give the PP another go, if only for practice; aka learning experience. I think there's scope for significant dodging and burning and to be able to reveal Dad's eye without adversely impacting the mood too much, while also dealing with a few other subtleties that might be improved - I'm talking small changes, e.g. < 1/2 stop (up or down) to specific parts of anatomy.

My personal view is that when in that position, it seemed natural for me to look at my wife, who'd just done a great job of producing our child, with a great deal of love and that's what you have captured here.

With regard to the crop, if setting a specific aspect ratio (e.g. for print) is not a requirement, then I might lose a little off both sides, but I think 'going square' removed just a little too much.

Hope my ramblings are helpful, Dave

[ionian]

Thanks for all the comments - I haven't checked in here for a few days so missed some of these.

I have several other shots in this series, with a variety of poses but all with the same minimal lighting. Low key or not really depends on the definition -I certainly dont want to get into semantics - but the idea was to shoot the group in a different mood to the rest of the shoot, which had largely had a brighter feel. I wanted to illuminate the baby, and the use the directional light from the side-placed source to give shape and texture to the parents.

Some useful thoughts above, much of which I agree with. Many thanks.