View Full Version : How important is lighting for photography?
dookie
06-09-2008, 1:53 PM
People always ask me what kind of camera do you use? I always tell them it's not so much the camera or the lens but it's actually the lighting. Here are some examples of this same watch with different lighting. As you can see the one with natural daylight is completely lifeless and drab. The 2nd set was taken with a flash. This is taken with the same camera and lens btw. Isn't it amazing how a simple flash can transform the subject? To make this a fish post, I dipped the watch in my fishtank prior to taking the pic :naughty:
http://pages.sbcglobal.net/dinan3/Watches/current/heritage/DSC_0950.JPG
http://pages.sbcglobal.net/dinan3/Watches/current/heritage/DSC_0952.JPG
Without flash
http://pages.sbcglobal.net/dinan3/Watches/current/heritage/DSC_1101.JPG
http://pages.sbcglobal.net/dinan3/Watches/current/heritage/DSC_1097.JPG
http://pages.sbcglobal.net/dinan3/Watches/current/heritage/DSC_1102.jpg
haynchinook334
06-09-2008, 2:00 PM
i like the no flash pictures better. to me, it looks more natural and the shadowing bring a certain surreal feeling.
dookie
06-09-2008, 2:05 PM
Really? You like the no flash better? The no flash is the top two pics.
haynchinook334
06-09-2008, 2:07 PM
i like the bottom two...thought those were no flash.
arkmann
06-09-2008, 2:07 PM
I agree with dookie though. The flash did make the difference plus the dramatic effect of water is something to mention as well. The first two were boring compared to the latter photos.
Lighting makes all the difference. So does a tripod. Are those taken in macro?
dookie
06-09-2008, 2:11 PM
Yes, I only own one lens a 60mm micro and I agree a tripod is very important along with a remote trigger.
neoprodigy
06-09-2008, 2:16 PM
i agree lighting make alot of difference... but better equipments such as lens and body helps out also...
---XR---
06-09-2008, 2:19 PM
lighting, len's, bodies, flash's, tripods...meh-
nothing matter more than user knowledge or photography
and the equipment your useing. anybody can shoot a $10,000 and shoot complete ****.
You have to understand all principals of photography first, then drop the doe.
arkmann
06-09-2008, 2:27 PM
You have to understand all principals of photography first, then drop the doe.
Definitely agree with this. I know squat about photography but I still bought a used DSLR though. Now I feel overwhelmed but that will pass.
L Aquatics
06-09-2008, 2:32 PM
what kind of camera is it anyways? I need a new camera. any suggestions guys?
is300zx
06-09-2008, 2:36 PM
the photographer makes the difference everything else are just tools.
Freeze_Dried_Bloodworm
06-09-2008, 2:38 PM
I hate flash, I use studio lights for pretty much everything.
and the camera body and lens make as much difference!
dookie
06-09-2008, 3:19 PM
what kind of camera is it anyways? I need a new camera. any suggestions guys?
I suggest a used Nikon D70. You can probably pick one up rather cheap. It has a built in flash commander so you don't need to buy one if you want to go with some remote guns.
i noticed lighting plays a key in it.... i just can never get my good pix of my watch though
cichlaguapote
06-09-2008, 4:15 PM
Depends on the subject. Something as detailed as a watch is hard to get a good pic of. But overall lighting can make a world of difference between crap and quality..
unknownuza13
06-09-2008, 4:28 PM
It definately makes a huge difference. Cool watch.
rallysman
06-09-2008, 6:50 PM
I suggest a used Nikon D70. You can probably pick one up rather cheap. It has a built in flash commander so you don't need to buy one if you want to go with some remote guns.
70s are noisier than the others for some reason. Go with a D80 or above.
I might add I like the non flash pictures better as well. They show more depth and contrast. I like contrasty shots.
DarthV
06-09-2008, 7:03 PM
If you're going to do comparisons, at least try to use the same background and framing with each A/B example! The photos with flash seem to be more organic and pleasing to the eye than the ones without. Is it because of the use of flash? I don't think so. I'd try again without flash and get rid of the distracting background. And maybe open up the lens a little more (f/11 on those 2 shots).
Just look at the first flash photo, the center of the watch is pretty close to fitting the 1/3 rule perfectly. They are just much better photographs.
Cichlas
06-09-2008, 7:28 PM
If you're going to do comparisons, at least try to use the same background and framing with each A/B example! The photos with flash seem to be more organic and pleasing to the eye than the ones without. Is it because of the use of flash? I don't think so. I'd try again without flash and get rid of the distracting background. And maybe open up the lens a little more (f/11 on those 2 shots).
Just look at the first flash photo, the center of the watch is pretty close to fitting the 1/3 rule perfectly. They are just much better photographs.
Couldn't agree more, the composition can make a huge difference, as in this case.
Chaitika
06-09-2008, 7:50 PM
what kind of camera is it anyways?
It's a Nikon D80.
Also, note the water drops in the "with flash" pics that aren't there in the pics without flash. They really add to the image.
rallysman
06-09-2008, 7:51 PM
It's a Nikon D80.
Also, note the water drops in the "with flash" pics that aren't there in the pics without flash. They really add to the image.
I must be seeing them backwards. Edit, I was. Second set with flash (indirect I assume) is much better.
johnson5585
06-10-2008, 4:56 AM
I like my Canon Digital Rebel XT. Great buy for the money. Sure it isn't like one of the top end cameras but unless that is your profession you don't need much more than this. If you want to keep it under a 1k this is my opinion. Then again you will get argument from the Nikon folks. They have a comp that in my opinion is almost as good. But that's just because I prefer canon product. All my photos on this site were with that camera. Shot with either a 18-55 (stock lens) or my sigma 70-300 with macro option. Does not do it full justice because I just started shooting my fish. Water adds a whole new element to taking photos. I have some great shots of other stuff if you are interested in seeing. I don't consider myself a pro but I am not a beginner either.
SteveR
08-04-2008, 9:09 AM
Photography is light, to state the obvious, without light the camera would pick up nothing, just like in total darkness, either do our eyes!
It's all the skill in using the ISO, shutter speed, flash on or off, F stop number and angle as to how good our photos are isn't it?
clubtastic
09-10-2008, 1:31 AM
Flash ruins every picture I take