Help w Home portrait lighting, cheap
Rolf Hargis
Hi all -
I would like to build a cheapo lighting system at home with supplies
from the local Home Depot hardware store. I intend to use it for
portraits, using either Tungsten film or filtering to compensate for
for the incandescent lighting. I'll be shooting with an EOS A2 and
either the 28-105 USM or the Sigma 90mm f2.8 macro.
I would appreciate any comments or advice on the following plan:
1. Buy two shop lamps with reflectors and clamps, about $8 each.
2. Buy 150 watt conical bulbs, about $8 each.
3. Buy a dimmer switch for each lamp. Not sure of the price, probably
about $10 each. I want to use dimmers, because where I'm working
I don't have much room to work with the distance of the lights
from the subject. I want to get that 3:1 studio portrait effect.
Total about $52.
Questions:
- What is the correct filter to balance for tungsten light on
daylight film? (If I don't use tungsten film, I'll use Provia.)
I think 80A and/or 80B are the correct filters, right?
- If I use Kodak EPT-160 or EPJ-320 tungsten film, is some filtering
still necessary?
- If I adjust the lighting with dimmer switches, will it change the
color temperature (Kelvin) as opposed to just the intensity?
- Should I find a way to diffuse the light, sort of like a softbox?
If so, what's a good way to do this? Maybe softer light bulbs?
- The approach I read about somewhere was each lamp at a 45 degree
angle from the subject. One lamp should be a full stop brighter
than the other, and the camera should be at the half stop in between.
Does this sound right? Also, what is a good height for the lamps?
- Any other lights? Backlighting, hair lighting...?
- What about reflectors... I was thinking about aluminum foil on
cardboard (keeping it cheap...).
- Is there anything I'm overlooking? Anything special I should
do, or anything else to buy? Has anyone else done the same thing?
I should add that the subjects are of Indian origin (Asian, not American)
with medium-dark skin tones.
Any and all help will be appreciated. My girlfriend's family wants me
to take portraits of them and they suffer under the delusion that just
because I have a fancy camera I know what I'm doing. Hate to disappoint
them, so please help.
TIA,
Rolf
--
+--------------------------------------+
| Rolf Hargis |
| IP: r...@tempest.rtpnc.epa.gov |
+--------------------------------------+
Ron Parrett
>
>
>Hi all -
>
>I would like to build a cheapo lighting system at home with supplies
>from the local Home Depot hardware store. I intend to use it for
>portraits, using either Tungsten film or filtering to compensate for
>
>Any and all help will be appreciated. My girlfriend's family wants me
>to take portraits of them and they suffer under the delusion that just
>because I have a fancy camera I know what I'm doing. Hate to disappoint
>them, so please help.
>
>TIA,
>Rolf
>
>--
>
>+--------------------------------------+
>| Rolf Hargis |
>| IP: r...@tempest.rtpnc.epa.gov |
>+--------------------------------------+
>
Rolf:
If you put the time-money-effort into a "fancy" camera, why would
you want to go cheap on the most important part of composing good portraits?
Bag the idea of the "cheap" home depot lighting and go for some real photo
lights. If you go with White-lightning WL5000's, some low cost stands and
umbrellas and a low cost light meter you could be into a fair lighting system
for right about $600.00 to $800.00
You could even go with one of the SP lighting kits and be better off than trying
to botch something together that you will either throw away or bag and put on
a shelf because you have grown tired of taking sub-quality photos.
Your portraits you take of other people are an extension of your own creative
ablities. Take the time-money-effort to make them good - - - or don't bother
taking them.
Ron Parrett dba
Mystic Image Photography
127 SW Broadalbin suite #5
Albany OR. 97321
(503)928-2051
Mark Knutson
>Hi all -
>I would like to build a cheapo lighting system at home with supplies
>from the local Home Depot hardware store. I intend to use it for
>portraits, using either Tungsten film or filtering to compensate for
>for the incandescent lighting. I'll be shooting with an EOS A2 and
>either the 28-105 USM or the Sigma 90mm f2.8 macro.
Let me say right off the bat--can you do an outdoor shot to get past
this whole issue?
I appreciate the good intentions of those who recommend the studio
flashes--which I am a few hundred short to buy but will get some
eventually. I have spent quite some time struggling with this myself.
I have seen other photographers say the same thing--don't cut corners
on lighting. And any money you spend on the junk setup will be money
you could have spent on the good setup.
But be that as it may, what I am working on now is a setup involving
the on-camera flash from my nikon set on a stand. Alone this is very
contrasty and leads to "artistic" but not flattering pictures. Lens
paper over the flash does not make a noticable difference that I can
tell.
I have just put together a 2.5 x 5 foot foam board with white on
one side and aluminum foil on the other. A local photographer looked
at my shots and recommended that I have the flash on one side of the
camera (I will use 45 degrees) and the reflector on the other side.
The flash is to point at the reflector so that the subject will get
the less harsh fringe light from the flash and the reflector will get
a good shot of light to diffuse and get the other side of the subject.
I do use a quartz-halogen for brief intervals to set the focus.
I did spring for a $350 dollar flash meter, as my nikon ttl does not
cover flash (plus I use it for large format). Since this kind of
flash is puny, you may want to use faster film.
Using a flash should handle skin tones with accuracy. Tungsten is a
wild card in this respect. Also, two quartz-halogen lights would tend
to make the subjects feel like residents of a barbecue. A dimmer
would change the color temp, and I think this would prove impossible
to color balance.
I have not tried this setup yet, but if you are interested, I will
let you know.
Regarding the family's expectations, I am reminded of a saying from
the show Kung Fu "Better to be silent and appear a fool than to open
one's mouth and remove all doubt" :) That is to say, get the setup
working before having them pose.
Joven Luspo
r...@tempest.rtpnc.epa.gov (Rolf Hargis) wrote:
>
>Hi all -
>
>I would like to build a cheapo lighting system at home with supplies
>from the local Home Depot hardware store. I intend to use it for
>portraits,
>Total about $52.
>
Rolf,
You'd be better off taking your $52 and RENTING good professional studio
lighting set. You may even get change for your $52. I do this about once a
year for my family and get excellent results.
Joven
Arthur Entlich
In a previous article, r...@tempest.rtpnc.epa.gov (Rolf Hargis) says:
>Hi all -
>
>I would like to build a cheapo lighting system at home with supplies
>from the local Home Depot hardware store. I intend to use it for
>portraits, using either Tungsten film or filtering to compensate for
>for the incandescent lighting. I'll be shooting with an EOS A2 and
>either the 28-105 USM or the Sigma 90mm f2.8 macro.
>
>I would appreciate any comments or advice on the following plan:
>
>Questions:
>
>
> - What is the correct filter to balance for tungsten light on
> daylight film? (If I don't use tungsten film, I'll use Provia.)
> I think 80A and/or 80B are the correct filters, right?
>
This depends on teh wattage and type of incandecents you use.
The "80" series of filters are needed. 80A is used for 3200K to daylight
80B for 3400K to daylight. 80c from 3800K to daylight Then the 82
series is for finer changes such as 82B is used to move from 3200K to 2900K.
Most 100 watt bulbs and halogens are 2900K, which means you need both a
80A AND an 82B to get to 5500K (daylight)
>
> - If I use Kodak EPT-160 or EPJ-320 tungsten film, is some filtering
> still necessary?
>
>
These films are designed for 3200 or 3400K (can't recall which), so
depending on your lighting, yes, you might still need an 82 series filter.
> - If I adjust the lighting with dimmer switches, will it change the
> color temperature (Kelvin) as opposed to just the intensity?
>
YES YES YES, and this is the problem with the dimmers. The color
tempterature of tungsten lighting is directly affected by voltage. As it
is your smaller wattage bulbs are already quite red (2900K and below), so
dimming a bulb with make it beyond filtering.
>
> - Should I find a way to diffuse the light, sort of like a softbox?
> If so, what's a good way to do this? Maybe softer light bulbs?
>
Yes, relectors with a brushed surface, or a non-flamable diffusing cloth
over the lamps is best.
You can also reduce your intensity via diffusion materials or with
neutral density gels.
>
>
> - The approach I read about somewhere was each lamp at a 45 degree
> angle from the subject. One lamp should be a full stop brighter
> than the other, and the camera should be at the half stop in between.
> Does this sound right? Also, what is a good height for the lamps?
>
> - Any other lights? Backlighting, hair lighting...?
Could write a book about this... suggest you visit your library and get one.
>
> - What about reflectors... I was thinking about aluminum foil on
> cardboard (keeping it cheap...).
>
Careful with cardboard... again... flamable!... keep the foil away from
the electrical sockets.
> - Is there anything I'm overlooking? Anything special I should
> do, or anything else to buy? Has anyone else done the same thing?
>
>I should add that the subjects are of Indian origin (Asian, not American)
>with medium-dark skin tones.
>
You might want to rent some equipment rather than try to make your home
brew work. Different films respond differently to skin tones.
>Any and all help will be appreciated. My girlfriend's family wants me
>to take portraits of them and they suffer under the delusion that just
>because I have a fancy camera I know what I'm doing. Hate to disappoint
>them, so please help.
>
>TIA,
>Rolf
>
Good luck.
Art
RichCasale
household bulbs will change and your filtration will be off. Another
point to consider is that when you use orginary house hold bulbs for
photography, their color temperature changes as they get older. I'm not
talking about months and years, I'm talking about consistant use over
weeks. You're eye will not pick this up, but the film will and you will
get difference color balances over time. Go with a flash and some
reflectors, with a nice meter if you can't afford several, or just take it
outside. There is something about shooting in the great out doors. The
backgrounds are a lot cheaper too.
Richard L. Casale
Internet Services Administrator
American Psychological Association
E-mail: rlc...@email.apa.org
Josh Wand
looks much more "classy" & "professional."
In addition, you won't have to worry about all the color temperature
technobabble. Makes life easier, plus, you get cooler looking results.
Then again, if you or your "clients" are biased towards color, then good luck,
I can't help you.
BTW, I was planning to something like that myself. Just how would you do the
wiring for the dimmers?
--Josh Wand
ge...@ccs.neu.edu
bill almond
system available. No worries about colour balance. Make up a couple of
reflectors with aluminum foil on cardboard or use some sheets of white
foam insulation board and you are in business. You can do the same
thing indoors using window light. The suggestion of using B&W film is a
good one again no worries about colour balance. Keep everything simple
to start and concentrate on getting good images before you get hung up
on equipment.
Bill Almond, Pizzazz Images Photography, Vancouver,B.C.Canada
piz...@cyberstore.ca
Altha J Cravey
: Why not try good old fashioned day light. It is the cheapest lighting
: system available. No worries about colour balance. Make up a couple of
: reflectors with aluminum foil on cardboard or use some sheets of white
: foam insulation board and you are in business. You can do the same
: thing indoors using window light. The suggestion of using B&W film is a
: good one again no worries about colour balance. Keep everything simple
: to start and concentrate on getting good images before you get hung up
: on equipment.
Excellent advice. In fact, natural light may be the most *underused*
light source for portraits. Historically, many well-known portrait
photographers used nothing but natural light. It has a special look
unattainable through artificial lighting, despite the convenience and
predictability of using expensive strobes.
-JB
John Gerecht
hardware store and bought a clamp light and photoflood at the camera
store and went to it. The results were adequate. Hell, some of the
pictures were excellant.
Finally decided to improve and bought a single studio strobe. Used it
for years with excellant results! Learned a hell of a lot about
photography and lighting with a single light and reflectors. Used my
old Vivitar 283 for a background light, but it was much weaker than
the 400 ws strobe. But it worked. Finally, the strobe died and I
replaced it with three 400 ws Sunpak studio strobes. LOVE them!
So, my advice would be to get a single strobe, if you can afford it.
Or go cheap with photofloods. I used the 500 watt ones ended with
four of them. They blew the circuit breakers about every 20 minutes
due to the extremely heavy load though, so be very careful.
==========================
r...@tempest.rtpnc.epa.gov (Rolf Hargis) wrote:
>Hi all -
>I would like to build a cheapo lighting system at home with supplies
>from the local Home Depot hardware store. I intend to use it for
>portraits, using either Tungsten film or filtering to compensate for
>for the incandescent lighting. I'll be shooting with an EOS A2 and
>either the 28-105 USM or the Sigma 90mm f2.8 macro.
>I would appreciate any comments or advice on the following plan:
>1. Buy two shop lamps with reflectors and clamps, about $8 each.
>2. Buy 150 watt conical bulbs, about $8 each.
>3. Buy a dimmer switch for each lamp. Not sure of the price, probably
> about $10 each. I want to use dimmers, because where I'm working
> I don't have much room to work with the distance of the lights
> from the subject. I want to get that 3:1 studio portrait effect.
>
>Total about $52.
>Questions:
> - What is the correct filter to balance for tungsten light on
> daylight film? (If I don't use tungsten film, I'll use Provia.)
> I think 80A and/or 80B are the correct filters, right?
> - If I use Kodak EPT-160 or EPJ-320 tungsten film, is some filtering
> still necessary?
> - If I adjust the lighting with dimmer switches, will it change the
> color temperature (Kelvin) as opposed to just the intensity?
> - Should I find a way to diffuse the light, sort of like a softbox?
> If so, what's a good way to do this? Maybe softer light bulbs?
> - The approach I read about somewhere was each lamp at a 45 degree
> angle from the subject. One lamp should be a full stop brighter
> than the other, and the camera should be at the half stop in between.
> Does this sound right? Also, what is a good height for the lamps?
> - Any other lights? Backlighting, hair lighting...?
> - What about reflectors... I was thinking about aluminum foil on
> cardboard (keeping it cheap...).
> - Is there anything I'm overlooking? Anything special I should
> do, or anything else to buy? Has anyone else done the same thing?
>I should add that the subjects are of Indian origin (Asian, not American)
>with medium-dark skin tones.
>Any and all help will be appreciated. My girlfriend's family wants me
>to take portraits of them and they suffer under the delusion that just
>because I have a fancy camera I know what I'm doing. Hate to disappoint
>them, so please help.
>TIA,
>Rolf
>--
>+--------------------------------------+
>| Rolf Hargis |
>| IP: r...@tempest.rtpnc.epa.gov |
>+--------------------------------------+
==========================
-- John Gerecht
jger...@wln.com
Olympia, Washington USA