Need help ( urgent ) for bespoke suit photography.

[Colin Southern]

You are right insofar as the 600 EX RT is concerned, does not fire even in Slave mode which is surprising. I thought the Slave mode should work by triggering the strobes. I have the skyport on the camera hotshoe which triggers the strobes well and surprisingly, the Nissin Di 466 works perfectly in Slave mode. Cannot understand why a high spec flash such as Canon not fire in Slave mode.

It's not something any of the Canon flashes have ever done -- just not a "road that they want to go down" I suspect; possibly because they've got far better ways to do it (with far more control).

Although you can't trigger a Canon flash with a studio head, often, you can go the other way though - so long as you use manual flash mode to kill the pre-flash.

[HaseebM]

looking good for the first go especially. I did notice the left being darker than the right, for uniform lighting (albeit not clothing) I find lights either side slightly back pointed slightly forwards and pop up reflector (or foam core, card, sheet etc) in front to bounce back and fill gives you even light but with enough shadow to accentuate shapes. Sort of 5 bands of light dark light dark light from left to right across the subject if it makes sense.

When you get used to it you could start tweaking small things like use the edge of the light spill/feather it to give more control. I mainly use 300ws lencarta ultras monoblocks (occasionally 600) and find they are more than enough indoors in smaller spaces as you've found. Moving lights further out isn't possible like you say but if you ever get chance remember the falloff decreases since distance increases so you'll get more even light, but you'll need to turn it up to get same intensity as close in obviously.

edit: and for print on dark background for dark page (doubt it in this case but mention in case) you can pop the speedlights in the back to rim light and give separation from dark background. I sometimes use them on light backgrounds to brighten or gelled to colour it, always an option when you can't get the white bright enough behind to make cutout in post more time consuming to bring it up with your speedlights.

Thank Davey, your advice came in very handy. I have white canvas boards which I could use. I tried today with backlighting with Nissin 466 but light spread wasn't enough. Wish the 600 RT worked. I don't have a problem with white backgrounds, its trying to get a darker background which seems to be the problem. I tried reducing the aperture to f/22 at 1/200th, still couldn't get the background darker as in dark greyish black at least. Obviously I am not getting the placement of strobes correct. Any help would be appreciated.

[HaseebM]

It's not something any of the Canon flashes have ever done -- just not a "road that they want to go down" I suspect; possibly because they've got far better ways to do it (with far more control).

Although you can't trigger a Canon flash with a studio head, often, you can go the other way though - so long as you use manual flash mode to kill the pre-flash.

Thanks Colin, you have been a great help. If I understand correctly, you want me to use the flash on-camera to fire the strobes? I could try that and see if that adds to a bit of creativity.

[Colin Southern]

Thanks Colin, you have been a great help. If I understand correctly, you want me to use the flash on-camera to fire the strobes? I could try that and see if that adds to a bit of creativity.

Yes and no. I'm not saying it's what you should do, just saying it's something that can be done (I only do it in very rare circumstances).

In my studio I trigger the strobes with the (bulletproof) PocketWizard Plus III (camera) and Plus II (strobes), and use the Elinchrom SkyPorts for adjusting strobe power. Occasionally I'll need a little localised fill light and it's not practcal to setup a studio strobe for that, so I'll just use a 600EX RT and in turn have them trigger the studio strobes.

Just keep in mind that if you do do it that way then the output from the flash may enter the exposure.

[Davey]

depending on trigger types you can stack some, the wavesyncs for triggering built in receivers on my monoblocks don't have hotshoe connections on top but cheap YN rf603's I trigger speedlights with do so I can stack them an can run both triggers. I've mixed with sync cable trigger at times for various reasons which is always another option.

As for background darker if you try feathering the light so the middle of the softboxes are not aimed at the suit but instead aim the edge (furthest from camera edge I mean) of the light spill coming out the boxes at them. This should cut a lot of that light hitting background. Of course in small space there will be some bouncing around that may reach the back but stopped down you can cut a fair bit too and move lights in closer if you need more power without ramping up power (and hence spill on backdrop power up too).

Personally I love black velvet for that as it just sucks light up like a black hole and is sooo forgiving of spill I don't want so no messing with flags etc. Chances are you have some kind of dark material that there given the nature of the business. Paper seamless if pretty cheap though, especially small sizes if you ever find you do need a specific background

[HaseebM]

Hi Colin, yes I realize that the strobe may add too much to the exposure. I understand now there is a slave mode available. Thanks.

Hi Davey, I do have black velvet but may not be as large as 10'. I will try that suggestion of aiming the nearer edge of the box away from the suit. I tried stopping down but it darkened a bit. Anyway post processing on the suits are easy as I can cut a clean mask and lay a background or colour the background. Thanks for the suggestions and here's another image. Still learning.

[Sahil]

Wow.. Thoroughly enjoyed reading the posts in this thread. Got to learn so many new things. Been away from photography for long now.
I can't give any input here, Haseeb. You have experts guiding you.. Wish you all the best with your shoot.
One thing I would like to point out (based on this last pic), besides paying attention to lighting, sharpness, background etc. etc., don't forget to pay attention to the presentation of the product (Suits). The sleeves, a button missing, Collar not in place, a shirt & tie beneath the coat (First pic posted) etc.

[Adrian]

Sahil - I am sure that the unbuttoned coat and raised collar are deliberate: it is these things that add interest to the product picture. I think they look rather good

However, the line down the sleeve does look a little odd. Haseeb: you have done a great job on your first product shoot. Excellent thread.

[HaseebM]

Thanks Sahil and as Adrian rightly pointed out, it was deliberate. Yes I intend to add a tie as well as pocket squares and in some cases, scarves.

Thanks Adrian, good detection and noted regarding the sleeve. This is not going to be featured as these are all test shots. I am glad the response from the members here are encouraging. In the process, I learnt how to add backgrounds and also process the backdrop.

Now all I need is for Hugh Jackman to wear that.

[Lirum]

I'm also trying to shoot suits and found this thread and forum by googling for such. Is it possible to achieve this picture or close to this picture with only 2 softboxes? I'm having trouble navigating the jargon and can't figure out if Haseeb is using softboxes or strobes as well, which I don't have.

Thanks in advance!

edit: the picture in post #26

[Colin Southern]

I'm also trying to shoot suits and found this thread and forum by googling for such. Is it possible to achieve this picture or close to this picture with only 2 softboxes? I'm having trouble navigating the jargon and can't figure out if Haseeb is using softboxes or strobes as well, which I don't have.

Thanks in advance!

It really comes down to whether you want to light the background separately. If you do then you'll probably need more than 2 flashes; if you'll settle for a gray background that you make white in post production then 2 flashes should be OK.

Flashes will give a hard light though, which may or may not be the look you're after.

[Lirum]

It really comes down to whether you want to light the background separately. If you do then you'll probably need more than 2 flashes; if you'll settle for a gray background that you make white in post production then 2 flashes should be OK.

Flashes will give a hard light though, which may or may not be the look you're after.

White would be great, but I don't have the extra bulbs and it's not worth the time in post. I guess the issue is that I don't know what hard or soft light looks like. I want to emulate this guy's pictures. The rest of each listing's pics aren't very good, I just really want an opening image on his level.

This picture for instance:



How is he able to get good color in the jacket suit while not completely blowing out that shirt?

[Colin Southern]

White would be great, but I don't have the extra bulbs and it's not worth the time in post. I guess the issue is that I don't know what hard or soft light looks like. I want to emulate this guy's pictures. The rest of each listing's pics aren't very good, I just really want an opening image on his level.

This picture for instance:



How is he able to get good color in the jacket suit while not completely blowing out that shirt?

A small light source gives hard light, and vise-versa; best example is to think of the shadow you get on the road from cars on a sunny and cloudless day -v- on an overcast day.

If you want a white background and you don't want to do it in post then you need to light it separately, or it'll be a gray background due to it receiving less light. Doing clothing like this in post is trivial though - only takes a few seconds.

I'm not sure quite what you're getting at with the last part of your post - the darker jacket reflects less light than the white shirt, but the white shirt is what governs the exposure. Not sure why you'd think the the shirt would need to be blown to get good colour in the rest of the jacket; blown highlights come from over-exposure, which also washes out midtones (inc their colour)

[Lirum]

A small light source gives hard light, and vise-versa; best example is to think of the shadow you get on the road from cars on a sunny and cloudless day -v- on an overcast day.

Makes sense.

If you want a white background and you don't want to do it in post then you need to light it separately, or it'll be a gray background due to it receiving less light. Doing clothing like this in post is trivial though - only takes a few seconds.

Ah ok. While it would look good, I don't want my items to look too much like stock photos. Not worth the hassle of getting flagged for not using real photos.

I'm not sure quite what you're getting at with the last part of your post - the darker jacket reflects less light than the white shirt, but the white shirt is what governs the exposure. Not sure why you'd think the the shirt would need to be blown to get good colour in the rest of the jacket; blown highlights come from over-exposure, which also washes out midtones (inc their colour)

In the past I've often had pictures of navy or black clothing and their features were difficult to discern if I exposed (or just a tad above) for a white shirt. I guess I was conflating that issue with poor or insufficient lighting. How can I still get good definition in dark colors while having correctly exposed whites in the same picture?

[Colin Southern]

In the past I've often had pictures of navy or black clothing and their features were difficult to discern if I exposed (or just a tad above) for a white shirt. I guess I was conflating that issue with poor or insufficient lighting. How can I still get good definition in dark colors while having correctly exposed whites in the same picture?

With dark items like that it isn't a capture problem - it's a processing/display problem.

The short answer is that you need to raise the level of the dark areas using the fill light slider in post processing.

[Lirum]

With dark items like that it isn't a capture problem - it's a processing/display problem.

The short answer is that you need to raise the level of the dark areas using the fill light slider in post processing.

an I get around this by having less light/dark contrast in my composition? Now that I think about it, when I have less contrast I don't seem to have this problem. I'm doing everything I can to keep out of work in post.

[Colin Southern]

an I get around this by having less light/dark contrast in my composition? Now that I think about it, when I have less contrast I don't seem to have this problem. I'm doing everything I can to keep out of work in post.

It probably equates to less contrast, but what we're really aiming for is a shifting of the tone map so darker tones get "boosted" more than lighter tones. It equates to compressing the dynamic range, which can be somewhat challenged to display on monitors due to their limited dynamic range.

I can tell that you're trying to avoid post at all costs, but (a) it's can't be done, and (b) you'll create a LOT of work for yourself trying to do it that way. Bottom line is that cameras & monitors don't work the way our eyes do, and pretty much the ONLY way to compensate is in post-production. Not sure why you're trying to avoid it - fixes to things like tone curves take all of about 1 second.

[Lirum]

It probably equates to less contrast, but what we're really aiming for is a shifting of the tone map so darker tones get "boosted" more than lighter tones. It equates to compressing the dynamic range, which can be somewhat challenged to display on monitors due to their limited dynamic range.

I can tell that you're trying to avoid post at all costs, but (a) it's can't be done, and (b) you'll create a LOT of work for yourself trying to do it that way. Bottom line is that cameras & monitors don't work the way our eyes do, and pretty much the ONLY way to compensate is in post-production. Not sure why you're trying to avoid it - fixes to things like tone curves take all of about 1 second.

Ah. So that's what HDR is about?

Is there a program for doing batch tone mapping? If anything I can deal with only doing this for the leading/main listing photo.

[Colin Southern]

Ah. So that's what HDR is about?

Is there a program for doing batch tone mapping?

Um, no - it's not HDR. HDR is usually where you take a number of shots at different exposures and then blend them.

If I needed to make batch changes to shadow detail (eq 100 shots all taken under the same lighting) then if it were me I'd look at them in Adobe Bridge - select them all - Open them in ACR (Adobe Camera RAW) - select them all - add fill light - click "done". Job Done.

In practice though, when I get to the ACR stage I'll adjust the first one - ripple the changed through to the remaining images - then eyeball them one by one until another change is needed further down - adjust it - then ripple the new change through the remaining images - rinse and repeat etc.