Controlling Lighting

There are two primary reasons to try all different kinds of photography.

One is to improve your chops.

The other is to find out what each kind of photography is like to do and whether it's for you.

When I took studio lighting in school (from a man who would later be a good friend and who is also my son's grandfather), I wasn't very interested in it. There were several reasons for this. One is that I don't like photographing what I can't see. I disliked all my experiments with flash for this reason. Somewhere, I have a set of pairs of pictures I used as teaching tools, of different scenes or subjects, identical except that one was taken with on-camera flash and the other with available light. I didn't like taking pictures with flash, for the simple reason that I didn't know what the result was going to look like.

The other reason is that control doesn't appeal to me. The opposite—serendipity—appeals to me much more. I want to explore with a camera and be surprised by what I find—adapt on the fly to what I see.

Lots of people, however, love the control aspect of photography. There's nothing wrong with that if it appeals to you.

I mentioned recently that I once was a full-time assistant for a studio pro for six months. I learned a lot in that time. My boss was a total control freak when it came to his pictures, and for very good reason—his sets and models cost money, and hence, unpleasant surprises or technical breakdowns or delays cost money.

One little story about him (I won't name him—he was so difficult to work for that one of his former assistants had T-shirts made for all the other assistants in town that said "I Survived ____ ____.") He once had to shoot a brochure for a travel company. One of the pictures he wanted to take was an overhead view of a man and a woman in bathing suits floating on air rafts in a swimming pool. The would be facing opposite ways, holding hands in the middle, and each would be holding a drink in the other hand. He rented a scaffold, hired the models, devised his lighting scheme, found a swimming pool painted the right color of blue, etc.

To assure himself he could get the brilliant effect of sunlight on water, he rented an indoor pool and lit it with artificial light. But there was a problem—the lights couldn't reach the bottom of the pool. He threw all the watt-seconds he could at it, but the light couldn't penetrate the water with sufficient intensity. So he had to switch to an outdoor pool. But it drove him up the wall that his shoot was dependent on sunlight. Never mind the fact that it had been sunny for a month and there was nothing but sun in the forecast—he just hated having to rely on God rather than Speedotron for the lighting for his shot. Everything went fine, the day of the shoot was sunny, and he got the shot. But he complained for a long time afterwards about not having been in control.

There's nothing wrong with having ironfisted control of every aspect of the shots you want to make, including your lighting. I will freely admit that my long-ago boss, the studio photographer control freak, probably made more money from sales of photographs in one year than I have made in my entire career. His was a true Mom-and-Pop business—he did the shooting and oversaw the technical stuff, and his wife did the books and ran the business side of things. They had a 50-foot sailboat, if that's any indication of their success.

As for me...well, one of my favorite lighting situations was shooting a portrait of a friend. There was a north-facing window in the attic of a garage at my grandparents' summer cottage. There were old sheets covering disused furniture in the attic and I used one of them as a reflector. It was hot as hell and I wanted her to wear a particular sweater I thought she looked great in because its green-gray color matched her green-gray eyes. She did, but the "sweater" in this case was literal—it made her sweat! Windowlight on one side, a large sheet hung on the other side, her tanned skin glistening, and the dark rafters of the garage making the background all but black—the light was utterly gorgeous. But it was all completely improvised as I went along.

We all need to know what our own character and personality is. And it's best to go ahead and go with that.

Anyway, all I wanted to say today is that the best way to play around with lighting on a small scale are probably portraits, still life (that's the plural of "a still life"), or macro shots. Start by finding examples you might want to emulate.

The smaller the subject, the less you need a studio, or an improvised studio space, to set up your lighting in.

Triptych by Sean Tucker. Rembrandt lighting with a single Godox AD200.

If you didn't see the video Wolfgang Lonien linked the other day, you should watch it. It's good. The photographer's name is Sean Tucker. I really like the work, the lighting, the planning, the concept and all, but those aren't even the only great things about the video; Sean's seriousness and his work board are both inspiring examples to follow. Well worth the time it takes to watch—it has stuck in my mind for two days now.

Mike

Original contents copyright 2018 by Michael C. Johnston and/or the bylined author. All Rights Reserved. Links in this post may be to our affiliates; sales through affiliate links may benefit this site.

B&H Photo • Amazon US • Amazon UK
Amazon Germany • Amazon Canada • Adorama

(To see all the comments, click on the "Comments" link below.)
Featured Comments from:

Bill C: "An engaging post. I began my journey into photography with a landscape and urbex focus, and later (after I had kids) evolved into shooting events, with a particular interest and investment in learning how to shoot ballet and dance. So working with the available light has been the norm. However, I've more recently been challenged to shoot studio type work, like promotional work and headshots, that require using studio lighting. I've enjoyed the learning process, even if it is a bit frustrating at times.

"Having control over light means having the responsibility of control over the light, and that definitely adds to the workload. The additional equipment and technique required is also a steep learning curve. But it is very satisfying on those occasions where you manage to capture it! It definitely gives me significant appreciation for the experience and talent of true professional photographers. Finally, I have to say that the Sean Tucker video is one of the absolute best I've seen on YouTube. It is honest, informative, and inspirational on many levels. Thank you so much for passing it along to your readers!"

Robert Fogt: "Having worked for thirty years as a museum photographer, I have to say that lighting—without a doubt—was perhaps the most challenging and FUN part of the entire experience. My 'small parts' bag held, among many other widgets, wire plate stands and various little bits of reflective materials, and small concave cosmetics mirrors to position behind the subjects for edge light. I'd go so far as to compare it, Mike, to playing pool! After digital became the new Polaroid and offered all that detailed and immediate feedback, I would occasionally have to remind myself that it was time to just take the picture and move on to the next. You could just get sucked down the lighting rabbit hole! Fun, indeed."

Roy J Feldman: "Your first point and second don't really match up. You don't like flash because you don't know the outcome; you don't like total control. Well which is it?"

Animesh Ray: "On the one hand, you don't like to take photographs with flash because you like to see what is being photographed, on the other you like surprises. I find flash photography in near darkness, especially on the streets, is full of surprises. What you are after, I think, is control but not too much and surprises but not too much. (Smiley face!)"

Brian Taylor: "Sean Tucker's impressive video reminded me how much richer portraits can become when they emerge out of real relationship. As you probably know, the question of absent fathers, and mentoring, has surfaced regularly in discussions of men and masculinity. With good reason I think. Like many men whose fathers had been traumatised during the second world war, my younger self was unable to find, or accept, the kinds of relationship Sean evidently had with his portrait subjects, so I was pleased to see the subject being explored photographically. I was also pleased to hear Sean's cautions and reservations about street photography (in another of his videos), though much more could be said about that ethically complicated genre."

Warren Jones: "Ha! My father in law loves doing studio work with lights. He has seemingly every kind of light, light stand and light modifier imaginable. He always talks about getting the light just right. Yep you guessed it...he is a control freak!"

Michael: "Thanks for that, Mike. All of Sean Tucker's videos on YouTube are worth watching. He is serious in a way that invites us all to be serious with him, and to understand that photography is like life: it's all there, to learn, to suffer, to enjoy, and even sometimes to be enlightened."

Comments

[Jim A]

FYI - Sean Tucker has another YouTube video on how he edited the portraits in Photoshop.

[Steve Jacob]

Video lighting is far more difficult. At least with stills, you only need one shot, so you can adjust and re-shoot. With video, one mis-step, and you have to redo the whole take.

One reason I never liked shooting video.

[John]

When I first starting using lights, I was struck by how reactive my photography had always been. It was like I had to learn a completely new skill set, one that not only included the lighting, but also location, posing and props. A long way from ‘f/8 and be there.’ I did - and do - love that challenge, even though at heart I’m still the guy who just goes places to see what he can shoot there.

[Wolfgang Lonien]

Still glad you liked it Mike. And yes, Sean is good - I was like binge-watching his content there on Youtube once I saw the first (or better: one of his last), which was about street shooting with the XT-20 or so.

I even like his approach to gear. Buying used 5D2 cameras because they're cheap, and, well, enough seems like a very clever thing to do. A 5D2 body in good condition is less than the latest Micro Four Thirds. And less that a GH5s even when combined with a fine Sigma "Art" lens... it was a good camera yesteryear, and as the examples show, it's still a good one. When you get that lighting right...

[MikeR]

Let me guess that this Sean Tucker is not the aerobatic pilot Sean Tucker?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sean_D._Tucker

As a former Wisconsin-ite, have you ever gone to the annual EAA Convention in Oshkosh. Sean Tucker (the pilot) is a regular at that week-long event.

So, how's the book coming? Or going?

[Tim Bradshaw]

Is a watt-second a unit used by photographers who use flash? Because a watt-second is a joule, so it's a mad unit. At least the other common unit like this, the kilowatt-hour, has the advantage of being some inconvenient number (3600,000) of joules.

[Michael Perini]

If you run or work in a studio where people pay handsomely to have concepts brought to photographic life you quickly learn that you have to be attentive to every detail and anticipate every possible glitch. Lots of money in props stylists , art directors time all rely on getting it right.
Do overs are not only expensive but sometimes impossible.
In essence you are being paid to make all those things happen, but also to ‘press the button ‘
But that doesn’t mean that when you are not in the studio you don’t enjoy a much more relaxed approach. You quickly learn that both methods can produce good work or bad work. Knowing how to work with love lights actually helps your ability to see good natural light — or position yourself appropriately
It’s a big tent

[Yiorgos]

Thank you, Mike, for recommending Sean Tucker's video. It was so compelling to be hearing about photographic technique that was being put to use in expressing a part of the photographer's life story. I'd never seen anything like it before.

[JOHN GILLOOLY]

I enjoyed that Sean Tucker video as well. I really enjoying listening to the mindset with which various photographers approach their work. I loved his honesty and empathy and how it is so genuine. (As opposed to how we can often see that someone is TRYING to sound honest and empathetic!) This is so much better than watching the mechanics of setting up lights for a certain look.

[marcin wuu]

I am a total control freak when it comes to my lighting. But the most I learned was from mistakes I made. That's irony of life for ya.
In the words of master Yoda, "the greatest teacher, failure is."

[Andrei]

Could someone please tell me what is the use of multiple channels on the triggers? Thank you

[Tom Kaszuba]

While not simple, his technique editing the photos mentioned in the above article produce superb results. Here is the link to Sean Tucker (whom I have admired for some time now) editing the photo. https://youtu.be/MvwFIZX3y_k

[fiberstrobe]

In macro photography I prefer the full control of light, even in the nature. For holiday photos I hate dull overcast grey sky, but it's my friend for macrophotography (wind is the enemy). In such weather the whole sky is a big soft box, but with flash I can control the light, which can result in dramatic effects or just "freeze" the subject. My favorite lighting is extreme side-lighting surrounding the subject, which brings out more details. Forget the lens test focusing on the extreme corner sharpness at fully opened aperture (which you never use for macro). The proper light is hundred times more important. Some examples if you're interested, what I mean (mainly taken with a cheap, according to most of the tests mediocre macro lens):
https://www.flickr.com/photos/fiberstrobe/sets/72157628084740325
https://www.flickr.com/photos/fiberstrobe/sets/72157635762731334/with/9875993104/
https://www.flickr.com/photos/fiberstrobe/sets/72157677998488823