Studio: Earring Grunge

[JBW]

[chaman]

Light seems to be too harsh. It needs more diffuse light to avoid those strong shadows. Focus is fine though.

[Shadowman]

Nice one, I like warmth.

[JBW]

Light seems to be too harsh. It needs more diffuse light to avoid those strong shadows. Focus is fine though.

It was shot with a small spotlight powered off of my computer. I could back it up a bit not much.

[JBW]

Nice one, I like warmth.

so do I

[xpatUSA]

It was shot with a small spotlight powered off of my computer. I could back it up a bit not much.

Some tracing paper placed between the spotlight and the subject would give some diffusion, perhaps enough ...

[JBW]

Some tracing paper placed between the spotlight and the subject would give some diffusion, perhaps enough ...

I'll asdk M'lady to see if she can find some in Dumaguete.

[Jim A]

I have been too infrequent a visitor here, Brian, life gets in the way! This is quite a departure, in some ways, from what I have been used to seeing from you, the insects and macro. However, to comment and not write a whole narrative, I find myself itching to get rid of the imperfections (real, not photographic) in the central part of the image, however that is me. Will follow this post with interest, as I will probably learn a thing or two.

[JBW]

I have been too infrequent a visitor here, Brian, life gets in the way! This is quite a departure, in some ways, from what I have been used to seeing from you, the insects and macro. However, to comment and not write a whole narrative, I find myself itching to get rid of the imperfections (real, not photographic) in the central part of the image, however that is me. Will follow this post with interest, as I will probably learn a thing or two.

But this is within spitting distance of a 1x1 macro. Each side is about 1/2" long and I shot it at 1x1.2 give or take.

[Dave Humphries]

Hi Brian,

Apart from the diffusion of the light source (to make it 'bigger' relative to the subject), consider (if lit by a single source) the contrast ratio of the shadow areas, suggesting that a white reflector (paper/card) opposite the light source would help.

The real knack with shooting such (e.g. shiny) items is to consider what's reflected back to the lens. This suggests you need to arrange suitable colour/brightness surfaces to appear as the the reflections. Depending upon the shape of the item this can be easy or much harder and while I (generally) understand the theory, I don't have enough experience yet to know all the answers.

With sufficient time, I suggest we just tackle each subject as a mental exercise in predicting the reflections the camera will see, then place white or black card around the subject to ensure these contribute to either lighting the subject, or defining its shape. In other words, there's no point having a perfectly flat/evenly lit subject if that very lighting doesn't allow us to see what shape it is, that's where the black card comes in.

Sometimes, usually for larger subjects than this, it is necessary to shoot multiple exposures (with different lighting for each to enhance specific areas) and combine those different areas of the subject in post processing to achieve a 'great' image. This is particularly true of subjects which are both shiny and translucent/transparent. Having said this normally applies to larger subjects, it is equally applicable for your macro-sized subjects, just that everything has to be scaled down accordingly - and I suspect things might get impossibly fiddly, if you know what I mean.

HTH,
Dave

[JBW]

Hi Brian,

Apart from the diffusion of the light source (to make it 'bigger' relative to the subject), consider (if lit by a single source) the contrast ratio of the shadow areas, suggesting that a white reflector (paper/card) opposite the light source would help.

The real knack with shooting such (e.g. shiny) items is to consider what's reflected back to the lens. This suggests you need to arrange suitable colour/brightness surfaces to appear as the the reflections. Depending upon the shape of the item this can be easy or much harder and while I (generally) understand the theory, I don't have enough experience yet to know all the answers.

With sufficient time, I suggest we just tackle each subject as a mental exercise in predicting the reflections the camera will see, then place white or black card around the subject to ensure these contribute to either lighting the subject, or defining its shape. In other words, there's no point having a perfectly flat/evenly lit subject if that very lighting doesn't allow us to see what shape it is, that's where the black card comes in.

Sometimes, usually for larger subjects than this, it is necessary to shoot multiple exposures (with different lighting for each to enhance specific areas) and combine those different areas of the subject in post processing to achieve a 'great' image. This is particularly true of subjects which are both shiny and translucent/transparent. Having said this normally applies to larger subjects, it is equally applicable for your macro-sized subjects, just that everything has to be scaled down accordingly - and I suspect things might get impossibly fiddly, if you know what I mean.

HTH,
Dave

I do indeed know what you mean. Part of my problem is a ridiculously short tethering cable. This shoprtness means i must set everything up between my desktop and monitor. Tether Tools puts out a nice beginners package which will be coming for my birthrate in Sept. Then I'll have room for cards, lights, etc.