Single light small product photography tutorial
- Thread starter johne
- Start date
Michael Kellough
Member
- Joined
- Jan 23, 2007
- Messages
- 7,096
nickao said:
I fixed it Nick. This often happens t0 me as I tend to hold down the v key too long. On Mac, "paste" is Command v.
Michael Kellough
Member
- Joined
- Jan 23, 2007
- Messages
- 7,096
nickao said:
With work this big you might want to rotate the whole affair 90 degrees forward so the medallion is on the wall and the camera is on an ordinary tripod. It would save a lot of space to.
Dave Ronyak
Member
- Joined
- Jan 23, 2007
- Messages
- 2,234
Ned Young said:
Ned, You're going to need to work those chattering teeth more, or verbose active FOGgers like me are going to claim them from you (just kidding, but reading and writing on FOG is nearly as addictive as those Festools). It's all Matthew's fault - that's my story and I am sticking to it. At least when I talk with my wife. (smiles)
Dave R.
John mentions (in his graphic above) tape marks for repeatability, which brings up an important point.
If you're doing a portfolio or a catalog, something with images of several products, consistency across images makes it look far more professional.
If I understand correctly Nick, you've got a number of items like what you showed us. If they're all flat, I submit that (photographically) they're all the same, much like photographing, say, book covers. Get the setup right and you should be able to knock out the shots bam, bam, bam. John's tape marks together with notes on camera settings and light heights should allow you to duplicate the shooting environment next time.
If your work differs in the glossiness of the finish, get your setup to work properly with the shiny stuff. It'll give you the most trouble. After that a satin-finished object of the same kind should be no problem at all.
One of the biggest problems to overcome is the point nature of most lighting. That single point will end up as an obvious spot on a shiny surface. What you want is as broad a source of light as possible, diffused and even. This is where those big "softboxes" the pros use come in. It helps if the softbox is bigger than the subject--I photograph jewelry and I'm seriously wanting a 36"x36" (~900x900 mm) box.
[attachthumb=1]
A Westcott Softbox
You can make large diffusion panels from practically nothing. I've got a roll of Drafting Vellum paper (36" x 5yds, 914x 4.6m, 19 USD) and use 1/2" (13mm) PVC to make the frame.
BTW, you might be interested in looking at this: MFT: Tabletop photography. It's got some pics that might be interesting here.
Ned
If you're doing a portfolio or a catalog, something with images of several products, consistency across images makes it look far more professional.
If I understand correctly Nick, you've got a number of items like what you showed us. If they're all flat, I submit that (photographically) they're all the same, much like photographing, say, book covers. Get the setup right and you should be able to knock out the shots bam, bam, bam. John's tape marks together with notes on camera settings and light heights should allow you to duplicate the shooting environment next time.
If your work differs in the glossiness of the finish, get your setup to work properly with the shiny stuff. It'll give you the most trouble. After that a satin-finished object of the same kind should be no problem at all.
One of the biggest problems to overcome is the point nature of most lighting. That single point will end up as an obvious spot on a shiny surface. What you want is as broad a source of light as possible, diffused and even. This is where those big "softboxes" the pros use come in. It helps if the softbox is bigger than the subject--I photograph jewelry and I'm seriously wanting a 36"x36" (~900x900 mm) box.
[attachthumb=1]
A Westcott Softbox
You can make large diffusion panels from practically nothing. I've got a roll of Drafting Vellum paper (36" x 5yds, 914x 4.6m, 19 USD) and use 1/2" (13mm) PVC to make the frame.
BTW, you might be interested in looking at this: MFT: Tabletop photography. It's got some pics that might be interesting here.
Ned
Johne and Ned,
Thanks. I really appreciate this thread. My wife has been selling sewing machine accessories (including a lot of feet, which are a challenge to photograph). I finally went out and bought a 3 piece light set with tripods (not terribly expensive by --you know what -- standards) -- I have two major incandescent floods and a "hair" lite in this kit. So far, it's been working quite well. But there are some great tips in this thread which will help enormously. (like styrofoam and diffusion, to name two).
Dave
Thanks. I really appreciate this thread. My wife has been selling sewing machine accessories (including a lot of feet, which are a challenge to photograph). I finally went out and bought a 3 piece light set with tripods (not terribly expensive by --you know what -- standards) -- I have two major incandescent floods and a "hair" lite in this kit. So far, it's been working quite well. But there are some great tips in this thread which will help enormously. (like styrofoam and diffusion, to name two).
Dave
Dave--
If you need web-quality shots rather than portfolio-grade shots, a tent or cube might be a good answer.
[attachimg=1]
[Left, garbage. Right, TableTop Studios EZ Cube]
The feet would be chromed, right? Not fun. A cube will make it easier to completely define the lighting. Think sewing machine feet are tough? Try sterling silver spoons!
Table Top Studio's cube is a good design. The current models have both a front and top opening. The top opening gives you a better chance of changing the product without messing up your setup. Available in a wide range of sizes. The 12" (300mm) cube costs 55 USD.
John's setup at the beginning of the thread can do everything a cube can do, if you keep adding and fiddling with it. A cube gives you a lot less flexibility, but sometimes flexibility isn't a good thing.
Cubes help beginners quickly get beyond the snapshot stage. From what I have seen, they also impede you when you're trying to get beyond the "pretty good" stage. I have 3 cubes. I'll use them when they're the right answer, but I'm not focused (sorry) on them.
I'm not very good at this yet, but my beginner's mistakes are still fresh in my mind.
Ned
If you need web-quality shots rather than portfolio-grade shots, a tent or cube might be a good answer.
[attachimg=1]
[Left, garbage. Right, TableTop Studios EZ Cube]
The feet would be chromed, right? Not fun. A cube will make it easier to completely define the lighting. Think sewing machine feet are tough? Try sterling silver spoons!
Table Top Studio's cube is a good design. The current models have both a front and top opening. The top opening gives you a better chance of changing the product without messing up your setup. Available in a wide range of sizes. The 12" (300mm) cube costs 55 USD.
John's setup at the beginning of the thread can do everything a cube can do, if you keep adding and fiddling with it. A cube gives you a lot less flexibility, but sometimes flexibility isn't a good thing.
Cubes help beginners quickly get beyond the snapshot stage. From what I have seen, they also impede you when you're trying to get beyond the "pretty good" stage. I have 3 cubes. I'll use them when they're the right answer, but I'm not focused (sorry) on them.
I'm not very good at this yet, but my beginner's mistakes are still fresh in my mind.
Ned
Michael Kellough
Member
- Joined
- Jan 23, 2007
- Messages
- 7,096
Ned Young said:
Ned, why don't you go ahead and bring that post over here?
Michael Kellough said:
I've been thinking about asking Matthew to move it over. The whole forum's about Festool, using the MFT for photography probably belongs here. Anyone searching FOG for MFT stuff will still find it. Yeah, I'm talking myself into it...
Ned
nickao
Member
- Joined
- Feb 24, 2008
- Messages
- 4,617
Ned I am intrigued by that cube. The 55" is 175.00.
The problem with taking pics Bam bam bam is that I do not make the projects that fast. I do have an entire room available just to set up a permanent photo area.
I want a simple and fast setup instead of cheap or inexpensive and time consuming.
Do you think it will help me?
Do you think that cube could improve my pics using the digital camera I have?
I know I will need lighting too.
Nickao
The problem with taking pics Bam bam bam is that I do not make the projects that fast. I do have an entire room available just to set up a permanent photo area.
I want a simple and fast setup instead of cheap or inexpensive and time consuming.
Do you think it will help me?
Do you think that cube could improve my pics using the digital camera I have?
I know I will need lighting too.
Nickao
nickao
Member
- Joined
- Feb 24, 2008
- Messages
- 4,617
Michael Kellough
Member
- Joined
- Jan 23, 2007
- Messages
- 7,096
nickao said:
Cubes are handy for small reflective 3D objects like those Ned mentioned and those pictured in hie post. A cube is designed for 3/4 views of objects so I don't think a cube would be of any use in shooting the medallions.
nickao said:
I'm inclined to think you should follow John's advice. After trying the cube approach, I'm now on the path John was talking about.
I mentioned a sterling silver spoon. The d***d thing's nothing but a funny-shaped mirror. If you're not careful, the entire room will be visible as a reflection in the spoon. The cube was helpful by completely surrounding the spoon and guaranteeing no hot spots. I even went so far as to take a piece of foamboard, cut a lens-sized hole and tape it to the front of the camera. Combination peep hole/reflector. Even more sophisticated would be a split-prism so that I could illuminate the subject completely, without seeing the lens at all. Haven't done that yet. The spoon, small and troublesome, was a good use for the cube.
What the cube does is diffuse the light. I don't think it would be comfortable for you to use, just plain awkward. For you, I think the ideal would be a large softbox, providing a lot of even light. I'm no pro, but that opinion is based on trying to do good shots of large book covers (glossy, flat) and being driven batty by reflections that were clearly the lights, even with their (small) diffusion covers on.
[attachimg=1]
Not bad for eBay, but not pro. Critiques welcome.
But back to Nick's problem. I think what you want is large, diffuse light source(s). You can create your own transluscent screens (vellum paper, plastic pipe). You can try building your own softboxes (try Google). You can buy a ready-made softbox. As always, good manufactured softboxes have a lot of engineering in their apparently simple construction--like the MFS.
BTW, the actual light generator is a separate question. A softbox or home-built screen is just a diffuser. Another choice you get to make is the source of the light--halogen worklights, incandescent photofloods, fluorescents, flash, and on into more exotic types. A softbox can be used with photofloods, fluorescents, or flash (assuming the box is rated for the heat of the photofloods). I think this whole light type subject needs to be a separate thread.
You're lucky, really. The subject won't be moving (won't even swing forever as earrings do when I hang them). It's flat, so depth of field isn't a problem. I think the only things you need to work on are lighting and repeatability.
Ned
Similar threads
