Rock On!

[JBW]

An absolute black background can make quite the difference

[Manfred M]

Don't you find that the crop is too tight here? A bit more negative space would result in a more compelling image; here the rock looks quite crowded in with this framing.

As for the black background, it can be effective, but I suspect this might have worked better with a lighter background. This would look really interesting against a white background.

[DanK]

Did you light this with a camera-mounted flash? The light looks like it is straight on. That's not ideal, I think. A plain background often works best when it contrasts sharply with the subject, but in this image, the rock just fades into the background in some places. Sometimes other kinds of lighting work better--for example, lighting diffused by being bounced off an umbrella or aimed from the side.

[Wavelength]

I like the colors texture of the rock; but as have been already pointed out, cropp is very tight; also won't a uniform lighting might work better?

[JBW]

Don't you find that the crop is too tight here? A bit more negative space would result in a more compelling image; here the rock looks quite crowded in with this framing.

As for the black background, it can be effective, but I suspect this might have worked better with a lighter background. This would look really interesting against a white background.

I am thinking a reshoot is called for. maybe shoot a little further back, white bg, and a looser crop. Unlike flowers rocks don't wilt

[JBW]

Did you light this with a camera-mounted flash? The light looks like it is straight on. That's not ideal, I think. A plain background often works best when it contrasts sharply with the subject, but in this image, the rock just fades into the background in some places. Sometimes other kinds of lighting work better--for example, lighting diffused by being bounced off an umbrella or aimed from the side.

nope a tiny spot light from the side.

[JBW]

I like the colors texture of the rock; but as have been already pointed out, cropp is very tight; also won't a uniform lighting might work better?

wouldn';t a uniform lighting cut down on the shadows and textures?

[DanK]

wouldn';t a uniform lighting cut down on the shadows and textures?

Perhaps somewhat. One reason I use continuous lighting rather than flash for things like this is that I have a hard time predicting what various lighting placements will do. With continuous lighting, I can move the lights around and see what it looks like.

I confront this mostly in shooting flowers. Most often, I use one bounced light for general illumination and a second direct light (also diffused but not bounced) to generate shadows and depth. Here is an iPhone shot of a setup I posted here years ago:



Here's an image shot that way. It's an Ito peony, but I think not the one in the shot above because the direct lighting isn't coming from that side. You can see how the side lighting creates shadows;



One nice thing about the lighting I use is that it is cheap. I bought two very inexpensive "hair lights", which portrait photographers use to get illumination from above the subject. One of them (a B&H store brand) has a socket for holding umbrellas. For diffusing material, I tried all sorts of materials designed for photography, but in the end, I settled on sheets of parchment paper my wife had lying around for baking. The lights are halogen floods that you can buy in any hardware store. They are fairly warm (3000 degrees kelvin), but I shoot one image with a whiBal card and then use that to adjust the white balance of all the rest of them.

Here's an image that shows what I mean about a crisp border between subject and background.



Apologies to folks who have been here a long time and have seen these images before.

[Manfred M]

+1 to Dan's comments

I have done a bit of tabletop work and as I use studio lights, which have built in modelling lights, it gives me much of the same benefits as using fixed lighting, but I have more control as I can easily vary the intensity of the lights as well as the light quality (and direction), depending on the light modifiers I happen to use.

As a general rule, I use at least two light sources; a key light and a fill light. My fill light is often just a piece of white foam core that acts as a reflector that reflects the light from the key light. I will sometimes get a bit fancier, like in Dan's shot and will use a second (or more) active light.

[JBW]

Perhaps somewhat. One reason I use continuous lighting rather than flash for things like this is that I have a hard time predicting what various lighting placements will do. With continuous lighting, I can move the lights around and see what it looks like.

I confront this mostly in shooting flowers. Most often, I use one bounced light for general illumination and a second direct light (also diffused but not bounced) to generate shadows and depth. Here is an iPhone shot of a setup I posted here years ago:



Here's an image shot that way. It's an Ito peony, but I think not the one in the shot above because the direct lighting isn't coming from that side. You can see how the side lighting creates shadows;



One nice thing about the lighting I use is that it is cheap. I bought two very inexpensive "hair lights", which portrait photographers use to get illumination from above the subject. One of them (a B&H store brand) has a socket for holding umbrellas. For diffusing material, I tried all sorts of materials designed for photography, but in the end, I settled on sheets of parchment paper my wife had lying around for baking. The lights are halogen floods that you can buy in any hardware store. They are fairly warm (3000 degrees kelvin), but I shoot one image with a whiBal card and then use that to adjust the white balance of all the rest of them.

Here's an image that shows what I mean about a crisp border between subject and background.



Apologies to folks who have been here a long time and have seen these images before.

But there are many people here who haven't I took your advice and the advice from the others seriously.

[JBW]

An absolute black background can make quite the difference

I'm no fool so here is my new and improved version. As suggested I used three light sources, changed the crop, put some colour into the bg, and pretty much changed everything. The top of the dark rock looks very dark perhaps because it was still wet. This is a 14 shot stack but even so I missed the extreme back of the rock focus.

PS it looks a lot better in the Lightbox

[xpatUSA]

I'm no fool so here is my new and improved version. As suggested I used three light sources, changed the crop, put some colour into the bg, and pretty much changed everything. The top of the dark rock looks very dark perhaps because it was still wet. This is a 14 shot stack but even so I missed the extreme back of the rock focus.

PS it looks a lot better in the Lightbox

Lookin' good ... the latter being mo' better, I reckon. Focus stacking required now, d'ya think?

Is that a pestle and mortar, Brian, an actual kitchen item?

[JBW]

Lookin' good ... the latter being mo' better, I reckon. Focus stacking required now, d'ya think?

Is that a pestle and mortar, Brian, an actual kitchen item?

nope just two rocks that are interesting together. I did do focus stacking. But I wasn't able to get the back in focus.

[mknittle]

Brian, do you have the book Light Science & Magic? It is really very good. by the way the last image looks good.

https://www.barnesandnoble.com/w/lig...iABEgIxafD_BwE

[JBW]

Brian, do you have the book Light Science & Magic? It is really very good. by the way the last image looks good.

https://www.barnesandnoble.com/w/lig...iABEgIxafD_BwE

I have it on disc. For reasons that escape me I have never finished reading it... though I have started quite a few times

[billtils]

I have it on disc. For reasons that escape me I have never finished reading it... though I have started quite a few times

You should Brian! Rather than working in a linear manner from start to finish I'd suggest selecting a chapter that aligns with what you shoot (or are shooting at the time) and follow it in detail. In this case you could do worse than start with chapters 4 and 5 of the 5th edition ("Surface appearance" and "Revealing shape and contour").

[JBW]

You should Brian! Rather than working in a linear manner from start to finish I'd suggest selecting a chapter that aligns with what you shoot (or are shooting at the time) and follow it in detail. In this case you could do worse than start with chapters 4 and 5 of the 5th edition ("Surface appearance" and "Revealing shape and contour").

I shall take your suggestion

[Wavelength]

i really like your new version

[JBW]

i really like your new version

it is a lot nicer