Concentrating Light

I did this exercise although there was no suggestion in the text as to how many photographs were required. I set up my camera on a tripod and fitted a flash unit directly to the hot shoe on the camera. The flash was fitted with a snoot to concentrate the light. I took 13 photographs in all, partly to establish where the light would fall but also to get an acceptable image. Results varied from a 'black hole' with barely any light to a fairly well lit room with the spotlight visible. This latter effect was caused by the way that I had set the flash which is an ETTL unit. Back to the instruction booklet. The best result was:

There has been some enhancement in Photoshop to lighten slightly the area outside the spotlight and also to sharpen the image.

I found this a very useful exercise that caused me to think about what I wanted to achieve and how to achieve it. It was the first time that I had used a snoot and as it came with two grids I had to experiment to find what produced the best result. The final choice was the snoot without any attachments as this provided a spot of sufficient size to light the chosen area.

I was not too happy with the focus and in future uses would set the camera at manual focus prior to any shooting.

Shiny Objects

After working out how to make a cone (back to primary school learning) and overcoming the fact that my camera had difficulty focussing when the cone was place over the object (resolved by setting camera to manual focus) I proceeded with this exercise. Throughout the exercise the light source is a single halogen bulb reading light. The subject is a chrome bowl placed upside down

This first image was taken without the cone diffuser. As can be seen the are a number of different reflections in the surface including the legs of the tripod, the camera and the surrounding room fittings.

In this second image the diffuser (a cone of heavy grade tracing paper) has been fitted. The light source was unchanged. The highly reflective surface has now been 'lost' presumably because of the highly diffused light created by the tracing paper. Although the camera can be seen in the centre of the image all other reflections have been lost. The 'white' triangle apparent in the image that stretches from the centre base of the object to almost the centre top  is created by the overlap of the tracing paper cone which is, at this point, double the thickness of elsewhere and therefore effects the relocation and absorption of light. It occurs in all the photographs.

The light has now been moved to a low position and in front of the cone. The overall effect is to lose the definition of the subject  at the top of the image as it falls in shadow.

The light has now been moved some 6 feet away from the base of the cone and approximately 5 feet above the base line. There is a more diffuse light that I find effective although there is some loss of the sense of form of the bowl. There is also another light source which is probably a reflection of the original source from an appliance in the room.

The source light remains at the same height but has now been moved some 10 feet away. The sense of form of the bowl is partially restored but I still find the result unsatisfactory.

General conclusion: The use of the tracing paper cone as diffuser is effective and removes most of the problems created by a highly reflective surface. Of the results the first use of the cone, for me, provides the most acceptable result although in a very real sense the qualities of the original surface have been lost. The diffusion gives a matte appearance to the subject that is in one sense false. Much would depend upon the purpose of the photograph but if asked to choose I would go for the original.

Tungsten and Florescent Lighting

Exposure readings with an ISO of 100 and an aperture of f2.8 suggested a shutter speed of 1/60 to 1/100. At the latter speed I can just about use the camera hand held but experience tells me that anything below 1/125 is a gamble that usually end unsatisfactorily. Wherever possible I will use a tripod and where this is not practical I will increase the ISO as far as possible without sacrificing the quality of the photograph.

The following photographs were taken when I judged that level of light internally and externally was about the same.  Not easy.

Camara set to Auto White Balance

Camera set to 'Daylight'

Camera set to 'Tungsten'

Of the three images the one taken with the camera set to 'Tungsten' gives the closest match to the colours as seen in normal daylight. The 'daylight' shot is far too orange overall whilst the 'Auto' although acceptable still retains an orange cast.

For the second part of the exercise the first pair of shots was taken in a room with CFL lamps providing the lighting whilst the second pair was taken in a room lit by fluorescent strip lighting.

Camera set to 'Auto'

Camera set to 'fluorescent 4000k'

The first image of this pair seems almost right although there is a blue cast to the image that is shown in the ceiling of the bay window. The second appears to be too 'warm' with a slight orange cast to the walls and the ceiling above the lights.

Camera set to 'Auto'

Camera set to 'Fluorescent 4000k'

Whilst both pictures lie within an acceptable range neither are quite right. Of the two the one with the camera set to 'Auto' is the closest to our normal perception.

The temptation here was to adjust the colours in photoshop which would have made the whole exercise worthless. It is perhaps too small an example to make any judgement on the best way forward when faced with artificial lighting particularly as fluorescent tubes can offer a wide range of temperatures but leaving my particular camera on 'auto' seems the best option.

Contrast and Shadow Fill

This first image is taken without a diffuser. The camera and flash were set up in accordance with the instructions outlined in the exercise material. The flash is to the right of the photograph as is evident from the highlights on the right of the objects in the still life. There is also a strong shadow thrown on to the goblet by the candlestick to it's right.

The second image is with a diffuser attached all else remaining the same. The light is much softer and there is less 'burn out' of the colours. The shadow remains on the goblet but there are now no hard edges.

Here a white card has been placed opposite the flash source approximately 3 feet from the subject. There appears to be very little difference between this shot and the preceding one.

The card has now been moved so that it is approximately 18 inches from the subject. There is a noticeable increase in the light falling on the left of the objects particularly when compared with the diffused only shot.

Foil with dull side facing out has now been added to the card and the card placed 3 feet from the subject. There is an increase in the amount of light falling on the left hand side of the objects in the image and is perhaps most noticeable on the goblet although there is slightly more detail visible in the other objects - see particularly the balls in the Galileo thermometer.

In this shot the foil has been crumpled and the card placed 3 feet from the subject. There is very little difference between this image and the preceding one

The card with the dull foil has now been moved to 18 inches from the subject. Comparing this image with the immediately preceding one there is an increase in the amount of detail that can be seen in the left of the 'wreath' at the base of the candles. There is again more light on the goblet that is beginning to give more shape.

The foil has been crumpled and the card placed 18 inches from the subject. There is no noticeable difference between this on and the preceding one.

The shiny side is now being used with the card 3 feet from the subject. The light reflected is now harsher as can be seen from the line of strong light on the left side of the goblet and the increased level of detail in all the objects.

Here the foil has been crumpled with shiny side facing and 3 feet from the subject. There is a definite softening of the light and some loss of detail when compared with the preceding image. 

Keeping the shiny side but moving the card to within 18 inches of the subject provides a well lit image with both sides almost equal in strength. The candlesticks now have shape as does the goblet.

Crumpling the foil but keeping the card 18 inches from the subject produces a softer image with just about sufficient detail visible. 

It can be deduced from the exercise as a whole that the brighter the surface of the reflector the greater amount of light thrown back onto the subject. What was surprising was how much difference there was between the amount of light from the same type of reflector but where the distance had ben changed. One presumes that this is caused by the amount of light that hits the reflector with more 'escaping' from the diffused source the further the reflector is away.

The exercise was the first time that I had used a flash in this way and only the second time I had used the flash off camera. It was an invaluable lesson in what could be achieved with very simple reflectors.

Cloudy Weather and Rain

The topmost image is taken in sunlight whilst the lower of the two images is taken with cloud obscuring the sun. The camera was set at AV and an ISO of 500 allowing the camera to set the shutter speed. Both were shot at f11. In the case of the sunny image the shutter speed was 1/640 whilst the cloudy image has shutter speed of 1/320. As predicted in the text the cloudy picture has a slight blue cast probably most noticeable in the blocks of the wall. Of these two images I prefer the cloudy shot as there is more definition of the texture of the materials photographed.

As asked I checked through my library of photographs but could not say with any certainty that any taken on cloudy days would not have been better taken in sunlight. I found it almost impossible to replace the actual image in front of me with one created by my imagination. I found that the response evoked by any particular image clouded any judgement that I could make.

All three images were taken on a very overcast day with a light drizzle making conditions less than ideal.

In the case of the tree trunk the amount of detail is surprisingly high given the conditions. I anticipated that the definition would have been muted by the shadowless light and in part this is true although not to the extent that I expected. PiPi is a fairly uniform grey and there is a softness about the image that is both pleasing and effective in bringing out the texture of the dominant subject. The leaves of the tree appear in the photograph to be very muted compared with what one sees in nature. 

The tree is a good illustration of the difficulty I found in deciding whether an image is 'better' in sunlight or taken on an overcast day. In sunlight the leaves of the tree are vivid and display a range of yellows and greens but here the muting of the colours by the overcast light has a pleasing, gentling (is that a word?) effect that I find attractive.

These two images were taken on different days from my back garden. The top one is looking to the north-east whilst the lower one is looking almost directly east. The first shows almost the whole spectrum of colour  whilst the second is a shot of the 'end' of the rainbow (no crock of gold found!!). I particularly like the second because of the happy coincidence of the electricity pylon that is silhouetted against the vivid red and oranges, whilst the putative rainbow can just be discerned as though that of a rocket trail.

As you can probably guess from my rather colourful prose I have a thing about photography in the rain or the period immediately after when there is a clarity of light that is well worth suffering the discomfort of the rain or drops from the trees trickling down the back of your neck.

Judging Colour Temperature 2

The question as to whether I would prefer the picture taken in the shade to be completely neutral rather begs the question do I understand what 'completely neutral' means. I am not sure that I do; something is neutral or not neutral, there are no shades of neutral which is the concept that arises from the inclusion of the word 'completely'. I assume that the term relates to the lack of a colour bias in an image. If that is the case then my answer would be 'No'.  Would I prefer the image to be 'slightly less blue' - no I don't think so because like most people I am largely unaware of the blue colour cast unless my attention is drawn to it.

The same response is relevant to the question whether I would like the low sun shot to be 'less orange'. Probably not as the orange captures the fact that the photograph was taken at or close to sunset.

The first three images were taken at about 2.00.p.m. with the subject in sunlight.

Camera setting - Auto

Camera Setting - Daylight

Camera Setting - Shade

Of the three settings I prefer the 'daylight' setting. I find the 'Auto' setting too cool and the 'shade' setting too warm.

The next three were taken at roughly the same time but this time with the subject in the shade.

Cameras Setting - Auto

Camera Setting - Daylight

Camera Setting - Shade

In the case of these three images my preference lies with the image using the 'shade' setting. The 'warmth' of the picture feels about right whilst the other two feel too 'cool'. It is an interesting thought as to whether my preference arise from my feelings at the time of taking the photograph.

The next three images were taken as the sun was low in the sky approximately half an hour before sunset.

Camera Setting - Auto

Camera Setting - Daylight

Camera Setting - Shade

Again my preference is for the 'shade' setting and for the same reasons.

Overall both this exercise and the previous one strengthened an 'awareness' (definitely I would not call it knowledge) about the differing colour of light throughout the day and its variance depending upon the weather. I also used the white balance settings on my camera for the first time in the 12 months that I have had the camera.

I tend to leave my camera at Auto White Balance and then adjust the temperature in Photoshop to complement the image as this allows for greater subtlety and control. Also, given the nature of the British climate, light can vary between the time you decide to take the picture and the time that you press the shutter. To add into this the time taken to set the White Balance and the light you so wanted to capture may well have disappeared.

I can see the value of selecting an appropriate White Balance setting in controlled lighting conditions if a particular effect was desired but again light is not that consistent as it bounces off whatever is around and subtly changes colour as the photographer changes his position in relation to the subject.

Judging Colour Temperature 1

The three images were taken in the following order:

The first was taken at 2.00.p.m. in bright sunshine, and the second shortly afterwards by placing a large umbrella to shade the subject. The third was taken at approx. 8.00. p.m. on the same day with the sun low in the sky and coming from the right of the picture.

The one taken in the shade is softer with with a slight blue tone to the whole image. Comparison of the cover to the sun bed in the two images reveals the change most clearly.

The one taken with the sun low in the sky is more orange/red in tone as one would expect.

Referring to my notes taken at the time there are no significant differences between what I 'saw' and that recorded by the camera. Given that I was pre-conditioned by the text in the Course notes this is hardly surprising. 

There is reference in the text to a wallaby although there were no such images.

Light through the Day

Just returned from a 12 day holiday in the South West of France. Took the opportunity to catch up on some of the projects. This particular one covering approximately 14 hours of a day was taken by the side of the pool at the villa we had rented. A more pleasant way to complete a task can hardly be imagined. However because of cloud cover forming on the first day at about 6.00.p.m. it was necessary to complete the project on the second day. The weather and level of sunshine was much the same so comparison of the varying light is possible.

The scene chosen offered a number of advantages. The presence of the water tower on the horizon, the bungalow to the top left of the picture and the small tree more or less in the middle provided three elements that could be used to assess the changes. The water tower appeared to be a very light cream colour when viewed close up, the house was a darker shade whilst the tree provided evidence of the position of the sun during the day. All the shots were taken with the camera on a tripod and triggered by a remote control. The aperture value was set at f11 and the camera adjusted the shutter speed.

The following pictures are a selection from a great number taken during the day. They are in sequence from 0553hrs to 1947hrs.

0533hrs

0633hrs

0659hrs

0729hrs

0814hrs

0849hrs

0939hrs

1054hrs

1154hrs

1400hrs

1700hrs

1800hrs

1847hrs

1937hrs

1941hrs

The early morning light was blue although this was slightly before the actual dawn. It is a cold light that to me is not very attractive when used in this scene although I can see it as being ideal for an early morning shot across a very still stretch of water with just a very light mist. 

It changed quite quickly about 7.00.a.m. as the sun rose above the surrounding hills. Interestingly I did not remember this amount of difference in the colours and the 0659 and 0729 shots are much warmer that I remembered. As stated in the Course material there was little or no change in the apparent value of the light from approximately 10.00.a.m. to 5.00.p.m. as seen from my vantage point.  A closer examination of the images shows that there is a gradual change from 2.00p.m. onwards with a darkening of the light. As the sun sinks lower in the sky there is a noticeable difference in the red tones and for the last two images we have an almost 'violet' quality to the light. Again my perception of the light was that it was much lighter. Obviously my eyes had adjusted and presumably we also impose some part of the image that we 'remember' onto to the actual visual perception.

My chosen image would be the one taken at 0659hrs. The softness and colour of the light meets the needs of the scene. This was not my original choice because from memory the 1937hrs shot was much more atmospheric than the final outcome on the screen.