Secrets of Good Lighting in Guitar Photography

[jps]

Remember that it's not as much about the light that you see as it is about the light that hits the sensor - the ways to increase that are to add a flash, softboxes, sunlight OR to increase the exposure time. To that point - get a tripod and try longer exposures.

Proper exposure is key, not just more exposure.

[bge66]

Remember that it's not as much about the light that you see as it is about the light that hits the sensor - the ways to increase that are to add a flash, softboxes, sunlight OR to increase the exposure time. To that point - get a tripod and try longer exposures.

Proper exposure is key, not just more exposure.

Of course correct exposure - the point I was trying to make is that there is more than one way to get there, and to try experimenting with longer exposures (or more correctly, if you have a shutter, shutter speed) rather than just adding light to the subject.

[jps]

I don't understand your comment of "(or more correctly, if you have a shutter, shutter speed)". Opening up the aperture is a correct method of adding more exposure, also. Of course, this affects depth (DOF) of field but it does add more light to the film/sensor. I rarely use flash, mostly ambient or hot lights so I can see what I am getting, as even with studio strobes that have modeling lights it is difficult to accurately know what the final outcome may be. Most people these days use digital cameras, however, when using film one has to consider reciprocity failure when using long shutter times, primarily over 1 second. This affects the exposure on the film; when using color film, the colors can shift due to color crossover as the different emulsion layers do not have matching sensitivity at long exposure times except for tungsten balanced films, which unfortunately, are no longer made, with the exception of one transparency film, IIRC.

I tend to prefer good DOF which requires a small aperture opening, therefore a long shutter speed, so I always use a good sturdy tripod and a cable release/remote control to fire the camera, and most times I will use mirror lockup to further prevent camera movement.

[cjj]

Jeff, as you say, most people these days are using digital cameras. I'm one of them, coming from a film camera background where I understood fairly well how to manage things to get good pictures, but this digital thing just doesn't work right for me (yet).

So, perhaps you can shed some light (pun intended) on the usage of digital cameras and how it relates to the terminology, etc. of film cameras for us dinosaurs who haven't yet figured out the evolution...

[jps]

Sorry to say, CJ, but you are targeted for extinction!

[cjj]

Perhaps it's fitting that The Great Plains Dinosaur Museum is right here in my town...

[jps]

Whether the camera uses film or has a sensor in it, the basics of photography are the same, with the exception of reciprocity failure, something digital imaging has "cured". Getting proper exposure with a digital camera should be easy but it seems that many cameras seem to either under or overexpose somewhat relative to the meter's indication of correct exposure. Digital is like transparency film in that overexposure will cause loss of highlight detail, exacerbated by digital's tendency to also be like transparency film in "exposure latitude" with a short exposure scale of around 4 to 5 stops or so that show detail. Outside of that range you end up with little to no detail in either the shadows or the highlights. This is what has spurred the development (no pun intended) of High Dynamic Range (HDR) photography, combining multiple different exposures to create a good looking full range image with excellent detail at both ends of the exposure scale. Here is more info on HDR:

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/hdr.shtml

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/essays/hdr-plea.shtml



Learning how to evaluate proper exposure with a digital camera is important; learn how to read a histogram as the image on the LCD screen on the back of the camera is not a good way to determine if the exposure is correct as most LCD screens are not accurate in that regard. Here are some good tutorials on the subject:

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tutor ... rams.shtml

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tutor ... ista.shtml

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tutor ... ight.shtml

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tutor ... -exp.shtml

I am not affiliated in any way with LL, it just happens to be an excellent website with a lot of useful articles and reviews of photography gear, etc.

[bge66]

I don't understand your comment of "(or more correctly, if you have a shutter, shutter speed)". Opening up the aperture is a correct method of adding more exposure, also. Of course, this affects depth (DOF) of field but it does add more light to the film/sensor. I rarely use flash, mostly ambient or hot lights so I can see what I am getting, as even with studio strobes that have modeling lights it is difficult to accurately know what the final outcome may be. Most people these days use digital cameras, however, when using film one has to consider reciprocity failure when using long shutter times, primarily over 1 second. This affects the exposure on the film; when using color film, the colors can shift due to color crossover as the different emulsion layers do not have matching sensitivity at long exposure times except for tungsten balanced films, which unfortunately, are no longer made, with the exception of one transparency film, IIRC.

I tend to prefer good DOF which requires a small aperture opening, therefore a long shutter speed, so I always use a good sturdy tripod and a cable release/remote control to fire the camera, and most times I will use mirror lockup to further prevent camera movement.

Wow - what I was trying to do here is remember to 10 years back, when I got my first point and shoot, and what helped me get to the point that I was taking pictures that I actually liked.

From the limited sampling of digital point and shoots that I've used, adjusting the shutter speed usually is less buried in a slew of menu options than aperture and ISO speed is - which is why a suggested that route. Maybe that's not the case these days. Of course you could use a wider aperture. Or a higher ISO. With loss of depth of field or increased noise, respectively. Reciprocity Failure - do you really think that anyone shooting with a $200 point and shoot is going to care? Or for that matter, anyone using a DSLR? Perhaps over on FM forums, but probably not here.

"If you have a shutter" - correct me if I'm wrong, but there isn't a shutter on any camera that offers a 'live view' through the rear LCD or an Electronic view finder. So, semantically, if you don't have a shutter, you don't really have a shutter speed. Granted the terminology is still used (as is ISO and others) - but you seemed like the type of person that might call people out on semantics.

Again - my point was - 'experiment'. Don't always stand 6 feet from the subject at eye level shooting on auto. My point wasn't - 'I know more about photography than you.' I don't care about that - I care about learning + trying to become a better photographer. Will I ever be good? Probably not, but I'm at the point that I enjoy the results of what I do, and that's what matters to me. Can I offer any good advice to a non-photographer? Maybe. Maybe not. Do you know more about photography than me? Sure. Absolutely. 100%.

[jps]

I just use conventional terms like shutter speed, ISO, etc. as those are long held accepted terms that do carry over to other technologies as they ease the transition from one format to another.

We are all learning here, that is what the RRF is about, and we all have our own ways of disseminating that information to others. I have a long history with photography and try to help others any way I can. If you are ever in the Cleveland area we can go out "shooting" and I would love to help you be as best as you can. It is kind of like playing a musical instrument, study and practice makes us better. There are lots of darkroom techniques I would like to get to know, especially in the, so called alternative processes, such as wet collodion, platinum/palladium, selective bleaching, etc., but I am happy with where I am at the moment.

[bge66]

If you are ever in the Cleveland area we can go out "shooting" and I would love to help you be as best as you can. It is kind of like playing a musical instrument, study and practice makes us better.

Absolutely true - and I will look you up if I get around to a visit to the Rock and Roll hall of fame - and extend the same invite if you are ever in coastal Massachusetts. Absolute the best way to learn is to see somebody else take on a subject under the same lighting conditions. And from the couple shots I saw on your website, you have a damn good eye.

Now. Every go take pictures of your guitars. Especially if you have a 360v64. Then post the picture on Ebay for me with a buy it now price of, say $999.

[jps]

You missed the 360V64 I sold for $998 a couple months ago.

Here are some pics I made of it while I owned it.

[bge66]

You missed the 360V64 I sold for $998 a couple months ago.

Here are some pics I made of it while I owned it.

Damn!!! That's one pretty guitar.

[bge66]

And well done photos

[jps]

Thanks. The guitar is now doing spending time with Rob Jones in the UK.

[Peacefrog35]

Wonderful photos!