Magic of Books

Having explored all the mm’s from 18mm to 55mm, I finally decided it was time to venture out into the unknown and buy myself a new lens; a kit lens can only get you through, like, 10 blog posts. So, off I went to the nearest Canon showroom. And promptly came back. Empty handed. Depressed. Sulking. Confused. Suicidal (well, not quite – but you get my drift).

Investing in a DSLR is a big decision. It’s expensive, and unless one is very serious about photography, it doesn’t make much sense either – having a 10MP of your pet licking her tummy simply doesn’t have as much of universal appeal as you might hope for. But let’s say you are serious about it. A decent DSLR costs anywhere upwards of INR 30K. But that’s just the beginning of your spiral into bankruptcy. Before the DSLR, your images used to look amateurish, grainy, plain, stupid and lacking a single strand of creativity. Post purchase, you’ll realize that you now have the power to create images that are still amateurish, grainy, plain, stupid and lacking any strand of creativity, albeit in super-high resolution. For a moment, you’ll start questioning yourself, and play around with the idea of taking your day-job a little seriously. But soon, your efficient survival system will kick in and you’ll decide your "equipment is to blame; if I could just get my hands on a decent lens…" From then on, there’s no looking back.

I’m awesomely proud of this image. I’ve wanted to take this image since quite sometime, but the bokeh just wasn’t possible with my kit lens. So, I decided to make this my first image with the refreshingly cheap canon 50mm 1.8 prime lens. The setup is fairly simple. The books have been lit with a bare Vivitar 285HV at 1/4th power about 3 ft away. Another Vivitar to camera right lights the army of drinking glasses placed at a distance of around 2.5 ft behind the stack of books. This flash is gelled a shade of blue, that is reflected by the glasses. Since the 50mm lens allows for a wider aperture, the depth of field (the range of the image that remains in focus) is limited, reducing the reflections from the glass into a beautiful blur. Voila!

©2012 rollon. All Rights Reserved.

Emboldened by my Liquor Therapy Session, I thought I’d try and generate some more ‘intoxicating’ photographs. The unsuspecting victims were a couple of wine glasses that the missus had bought back in the early 19th century when she still cherished visions of introducing a little more sophistication into her husband’s life. So, the other day as I scratching my back and groping around the fridge for the next can of beer, there they were at the corner of the kitchen, gathering dust and calling out to me in a mocking tone, as expensive, unused ‘am too good for you’ kind of wine glasses are prone to do.

Anyways, here’s the image I got. There are three things that you must notice about the image (If you can figure all three without reading further, give yourself a pat on your back and have a sip of that wine):

1. 1. The background is white,
2. 2. The glass itself is defined by black edges,
3. 3. There are no reflections on the surface of the glass

This is what is uncommonly known as Bright Field Lighting. Bright, because it is predominantly a bright image, with the subject defined by dark lines. It is one of two standard ways of photographing glass, the other being Dark Field lighting (but that’s for another day).

So, what’s this oh-so-secret method? Here goes. Surfaces that reflect light (like glass, mirrors and other shiny surfaces like my ever-increasing forehead), do so only when the light is located within a particular range. This range is determined by the angle of incidence of the light rays on the surface and the location of your camera. I know, I know – that doesn’t help much. So, here’s a simpler way. Assume you are standing in front of a mirror. There’s a light somewhere in the room. How would you know if the light is within the ‘range’ that we described earlier? If you see the light, it is. If you don’t, it isn’t. Great, but how does this help? It helps to know this because if we can ensure that the light source is not within this range, we will be able to eliminate all unwanted reflections, as in the image above. Hmm, nice!

Now, how about the dark edges, and stuff. For that, we again resort to the same idea described above. In the image, the effective light source is not so much the flash itself, as the bright background that it bounces off. And in order to keep the edges of the glass dark, all we need to do is to ensure that the part of the background that is reflected off the edges of the glass is dark (or black, or beyond the light source), and does not reflect back any light. In the above photograph, this, is achieved by inserting two rather wide strips of black chart paper on either side of the white reflecting background. Black, besides being Batman’s favorite color, has the added advantage of being able to suck in all light. It, effectively, doesn’t send back any light (That’s why the name Black hole, got it? Bingo! Otherwise it could very well have been called a Magenta hole or something). But that’s not the trick. If you were to try and identify the exact spot on the background from where the light is being reflected off the edges, it would take you around…err…half a day. Assuming you don’t have that kind of time, there’s a simpler way.

All you need to ensure is that the white background is just big enough for it to fill the full frame of your camera, so that the edges of the background will line up almost perfectly with the edges of the frame. Once you’ve done this, all you need to do is insert some black material beyond either side of the edges (since we are talking about photographing a wine glass, the top edge is not so important, else we’d have to insert some black at the top as well). That’s it. Click away!

Oh, and if you have an assistant who can help you out by gently pouring down some liquid while you click, you can capture some really nice images like the one you see here. It’s ridiculously easy, and looks so darned sophisticated that you’re almost certain to spot a discernible respectful pause before your boss starts abusing you tomorrow. Water behaves exactly like glass, and hence goes very well with this lighting scheme. However, if you fancy, you can also try and add any colored liquid to introduce that zing into your images. But as the liquid becomes less and less transparent, it will appear progressively darker (because the light source is at the back, right?). So, how do you light it properly while still ensuring that you avoid all reflections?! Hmmm…give it a thought.

Also, if you do decide to try something of this sort, be sure to clean the glasses thoroughly beforehand. The almost invisible fingerprint, or that tiny speck of dust around the rim tends to get a little exaggerated in these photographs. And correcting all that in Photoshop is possible, but takes half the fun away. I haven’t touched up the above photographs at all, save for some cropping, etc. (you can tell by looking at the base on which the wine glass stands – the books on which the glass was placed are visible on the far side; I’m sort of a perfectionist that way).

All the best!

©2012 rollon. All Rights Reserved.

So, the Boot Camp 2, Assignment 1 is over and the results are out. And despite all my efforts, I didn’t even figure among the top ten. There are lots of people who are still commenting out there, saying things like ‘not disappointed’, ‘was in it for the learning,’ etc. Yeah, right. All of a sudden, everyone’s disgusted of winning. Had David Hobby picked up their images as the winner, they would have been totally ashamed, and felt compelled to abandon everything and spend the rest of their lives as wandering hermits on the foothills of the Himalayas, their off-camera flash in tow. What’s with admitting that you were disappointed? Doesn’t that show that you will try harder next time? You don’t have to go on a killing spree or anything, but feeling a little blue is fine, no?

Anyway, by pure coincidence, just as the winners were announced and I saw that my images didn’t figure amongst them, I decided to get drunk. So, off I went and got myself some beer from the fridge. But photography as a hobby can be quite merciless. There was a time when I could sit in front of the TV, sipping beer, and watching Seinfeld reruns for hours, putting all the muscles in my body to sleep save for the ones required to maneuver the beer can. ‘This is the life,’ I’d tell myself, as I groped around for the bowl of chips lying somewhere within my arm span. But then, everything changed. It was as if I’d taken the red pill (or was it the blue?). The TV became a light source, the beer can was ideal for specular highlights, and the popcorn gave out diffused reflections. So, you can imagine how the rest of the Liquor therapy session went.

Camera at 1/200, f18. A moderately large DIY softbox at around 4 ‘O clock, and another 285 HV shining on the back wall, creating that nice big halo. Oh, and the can is on a piece of glass to add the reflection. Also, I remember putting at least 2 GOBOs between the camera and the softbox and and the softbox and the background to better control the light from spilling over like the beer.

Am pretty pleased with the results, et al. The shot is nicely exposed, the choice of the gel complements the color of the can, and the beer I’m guzzling down is exactly the right temperature to make me forget the humid weather.

Do you notice the long, white patch of light on the right side of the can? That’s my softbox. And that is just about right to give the can some depth/ shape, right? Well, kind of. While I would want that to be there, wouldn’t it be great if it didn’t get in the way of us being able to read the text on the can? I mean, imagine showing this to Mr. Mallya. Despite all his appreciation for all things beautiful, et. al., I can’t really imagine him changing his brand of beer to ‘Kingfis’ just so that my image looks right. Hmm. So, what do you do? You cover the reflection. As I said, the white patch on the can is nothing but a reflection of the softbox. So, wherever I don’t want that reflection, I cover that part of the softbox. Easy, right? Not quite. Takes a bit of doing. Particularly, burp, after about 5 cans of beer. So, I squinted my eyes and pretended everything was fine. Works every time.

Then, an extraordinary thing happened; something that rarely happens in my life. By mistake, I did something right. I replaced the can of beer with one from the fridge. By virtue of being full and chilled, the can of beer had droplets of water all over it. The photographic possibilities were immense – after all, how is the image of beer going to work unless it’s chilled, right? But, there was something else as well. The tiny droplets of water on the surface of the can apparently diffuses the reflection of the softbox. So, the intrusive patch of white that was there in the earlier image was now replaced by a much more bearable and pleasing patch of white, sophisticated suggestion of a highlight. Neat, huh? The rest of the lighting setup was same as far as I can remember. In post-process, I decided that the crop should be a little less severe, in order to bring in a bit more of the background Anyways, nice result. I was pretty happy with the final image. I rewarded myself with another can. The Boot Camp Assignment was a distant memory now. 

Next, I tried a different lighting setup. I brought the light previously shining on the background to camera left, and bounced it off a white piece of chart paper (still gelled). I put black chart paper under the glass on which the can stood and on to the background, creating a seamless background that killed all the reflections. Next, I pushed the softbox to 1 ‘O clock to add a nice rim-light to the right edge of the beer can. This, I thought, would also help me highlight some of the drops of water on the surface of the can. Had I not been completely and utterly drunk by that time, I would have tried out the following with this:

1. 1. I would have tried a smaller softbox on the right,

• 2. I would have gelled that rim light too,
• 3. I would have cleaned up the base of the image (the glass),
• 4. I would have stopped after beer no. 5.

But I WAS drunk; so, I just picked up the next can of beer, and squinted my eyes; And everything was alright again, and the image was perfect, and I had won the Boot Camp 2, Assignment 1, and I had become…burp! Sigh!

Want to try it? Kind of fun! Here are light setups 1 and 2.

©2012 rollon. All Rights Reserved.

After the overwhelming response to my earlier post on tabletop photography (despite the lack of comments, I know all you shy guys are literally haunting my blog 24 x 7…one doesn’t get a ranking of 8,78,949 on Technorati for nothing!), I thought I would give it one more go.

Unfortunately, it seems I’ve a very poor idea of what SHOULD and SHOULDN’T be put on a table. Take, for example, just the other day, when I was almost sure that I’d this ‘masterpiece’ shot of my shoes on the dining table, lit from inside the shoe. Alas, my wife completely overlooked the creative breakthrough, and started shouting about how some stupid fruit-bowl lying beside the shoe would have to be thrown. We artists lead a tough life, I tell you.

Anyway, I finally did figure out a good subject to shoot. There was this unopened bottle of Jack Daniels lying somewhere in the kitchen. I thought a nice moody image could be made around it. Surprisingly, even my wife seemed relieved as I placed the bottle of Jack Daniels in front of the camera, and let go of my first choice for a subject (a bottle of Domestos).

The image in my mind was perfectly laid out. The bottle would be placed in front of a dark seamless background, and lit with two light sources on either side of the camera. The one on the right would be the main light, while the other would act as a sort of fill-light, giving some definition to the bottle. Also, the background would be lit on another plane altogether using a third light source. This would be a key element in the image, as the light would be gelled and hence would lend the image it’s mood. Awesome. Just a few problems:

1. Seamless what?

2. Third Light-source: ‘Another stupid flash? You promised me the 2nd one would be the last! Why don’t you just use a candle or something?’

3. Errr…Gels?

So, as you can see, despite my mental agility, I was kind of restricted in terms of resources. But give up? No! Let me give it a try anyway.

Here’s what I did:

I got myself a sheet of black chart paper from a stationery store, and stuck the top edges to the wall (to my wife’s horror) with a double-sided tape, while the bottom half lay on the dining table. I had the main light and background light figured out as well. One Vivitar 285HV shot through an umbrella would light the subject from the right. The background would be lit by another Vivitar 285HV from the left, through a DIY snoot made out of a box of Kellogg’s Chocos (hehehe…when I bought it, my wife actually thought I was going to eat that crap). In the absence of any gels, I decided to put a blue water bottle in front of the flash to color the background. I do not HAVE a third flash, so I placed a white piece of card board to the left of the subject to reflect back a bit of the main light back onto the subject. Above, you see the entire setup (it’s actually the setup for a follow-up shot – hence, the white background).

This is the final result. I’m kind of kicked about this image. I love the highlights on the bottle’s right-edge from the main light. The left edges are also pretty visible, thanks to the reflector. But the winner is the background. The soft, uneven light through the water bottle came out much better than I’d hoped.

Of course, I could have held the camera a little steadier. But give me a break. The bottle was full when I started…

Looking back, it could have played out better had I mounted the background light on a separate stand – would have given me much more control over the light, and enabled me to play around with the pattern on the background (Honey, along with the third flash, do you think I can buy a light stand as well). Of course, I could have asked someone to hold the flash, but no one was around

Still, I really do like the result. More than anything else, what thrills me is when I can replicate, to a fair degree of accuracy, whatever idea of an image I have in mind.

The following is another shot of a perfume bottle with more or less the same setup except for the background paper. Would have been an almost perfect day, had I not dropped the darned bottle (and with it, my chances for a third flash and lighting stand any time soon).

See ya! And no, you do not have to leave a comment. I only login every 15 minutes to check…

©2012 rollon. All Rights Reserved.

One of the hazards of having photography as a hobby is that sooner or later, you will run out of family and friends who are prepared to humor your endeavors at taking character portraits of them. Considering you only require them to sit at a designated spot, in front of a couple of strobes, holding that half-smile/ half-stare look for just over an hour while you fumble about your aperture and shutter speed, it confuses many a new photography as to what the big deal is, really.

For the first couple of months, there is the novelty factor of having one’s photograph being taken. And the look of the new DSLR and the hi-tech strobes guarantees full cooperation for a few more weeks. In fact, once you’ve put up some of your really good images around the house, your work occasionally even finds mention at home gatherings – ‘never knew you had such a keen eye, Rishi!’

But after the first month or so, the novelty rubs off. The camera becomes an annoying toy, and the strobes are the ‘crap’ that the wife doesn’t know where to shelve. Still, you’re put up with, thinking the entire thing is just a phase that you’ll grow out of – ‘perhaps, next, he’ll take up gardening’. Gradually, though, realization dawns that the obsession runs deeper than earlier diagnosed. Finally, there comes a juncture when the entire thing just becomes a bit too much for all around.

——————————————————————————————————————-

Example:

Thud!

Wife: ‘Darling, I fell down!’

You: ‘Whoa! Hold that pose darling! That would look awesome as an environmental portrait on flickr! It’s sure to win the Nuclear Rose Award– Post 1 Comment 7!’

——————————————————————————————————————-

I will not detail out the ramifications of such an incident. Suffice to say that apart from photography, if you have some cooking skills as well, it will make the next few days a lot less uncomfortable. There’s something to be said about sleeping in the bathroom in an empty stomach.

Enter Tabletop Photography!

Shunned by humanity (and wildlife being a few kilometers away), the next usual suspects for your fixation are of course whatever else is lying around the house. The lamp, the flower pot, the fruit-bowl…things can only get better from here. Apart from incidents similar to the one detailed above, the only thing that can force you to divert your photographic skills to things like these is sheer laziness. Still, smart people in photography have devised a name for this kind of thing, to take away some of the taboo out of being a lazy bum. It’s called tabletop photography!

I took this image at a similar crest in my photographic career. It is not original. In fact, it is so cliché that even calling it a cliché is a cliché (forgive me if I sound delirious; I’m not much of a cook). It is an image that you’d see in most stock photography sites. But it is one that any person learning photography would like to have an own version of. It is the standard kitchen-equipment shot.

The background is a black piece of cloth; think it was the wife’s scarf (she was away, of course). The knife is standard kitchen issue. And the tomato has been specially imported for this session from the star-system Lycopersicon esculentum.

The camera was set at ISO 100, 1/200s and f/14. I wanted a dark background, so it was important that I minimize the amount of light that would spill over to the background. Hence, the shutter speed of 1/200s (anything more than this, and my camera would have stopped being friends with the external light-source (read: sync speed). With this setting, the maximum aperture that I could afford was around f/11, else the photograph would have been underexposed, eve with the light source.

Ideally, the light should have been bogo’ed to strictly control the lit area; but since I did not have access to any such fancy equipment (and anyway, photographers have this annoying habit of calling the simplest of things the most complicated names – as if in an attempt to chase off new aspirants like you and me from their field of expertise), I made use of a high-tech ‘light-limiting device (LLD)’ (the unenlightened call it a towel) to cover part of the light such that it only light the area I wanted lit.

The real learning in this session for me, however, was in the angle of the lighting. Look at the image. The coolest bit is the knife, right? Look at the reflection on the upper half of the blade. It’s actually reflecting back the light-source into the camera; this is called the specular highlight. If the light source had been bare, this specular highlight would have been a lot sharper and intense, possibly blowing out that region of the image. But since I’d actually placed another high-tech LLD (an A4 sheet) in front of the flash, what gets reflected back is a clean, lit surface. So, in a way, you are not just lighting the subject, but also giving it something bright and uniform to reflect back to the camera. This would be true for any other object that is highly reflecting (read: glass, watches, etc.).

Now, say for instance, you did NOT want a dark background. You want the overall ambient light to be higher, or have something else in the scene that you want lit. In that case, you always have the option of introducing another light-source into your tabletop universe. So, in a way, you’d be lighting the entire scene on two levels: one for the ambient and one for the earth-shatteringly cool reflection off your knife.

Once we have the basics of controlling specular highlights in place, the potential is unending (that is, until your wife is back, anyway). For inspiration, take a look at Mingthein’s gallery of watch photography. In this image, for instance, the photographer has used specular highlight to light the edge of the wrist-watch, introducing a rather cool effect!

Photography Hobbyists of the world (particularly those whose friends & family are acting pricey) Unite!

©2012 rollon. All Rights Reserved.