here’s why I love off-camera lighting .. « Neil vN

here’s why I love off-camera lighting ..

October 18, 2009

There are a few reasons why I love off-camera lighting, and I want to show some images from a recent photo session with one of my couples, Jill & Mike, as an example.

The main reason for me, is that you can have perfect lighting on your subject’s face with much more freedom than if you just relied on the available light. I am usually quite particular about the backgrounds to my photos, where it is in my control. The backgrounds need to be complementary, or add something to the image. I have a preference for an out-of-focus background. The defocused backgrounds create separation that helps my subjects pop out.

When I only use available light with a photo session, I am reliant on finding both a good background, AND great light on my subjects’ features. However, when using supplementary lighting, (such as flash with a softbox), the pressure is off. I pretty much just have to find a nice background, add my subject, and then use off-camera lighting to light them properly. Dead easy.

Here’s a straight-forward portrait of the couple against a background which I knew would work – the sun-soaked leaves in the back would create a golden glow behind them.

However, where I wanted to position them in this wooden archway overgrown with plants, the light on them wouldn’t have been flattering. The light would’ve been top-heavy and given dark shadows under their eyes. Therefore I needed additional lighting. In my opinion, that intersection between “best light” and “simplicity” is around the point where you use an off-camera flash in a softbox.

camera settings: 1/250th @ f4 @ 400 ISO

My flash (Quantum T5D-R), was in TTL mode, and in a softbox. My settings were chosen for the background. I wanted it to appear exactly like that. I then positioned the couple, and added light from the softbox to camera left, with the softbox held up by my assistant, about 2 or 3 feet higher than the couple. You nearly always want the light to come from a higher point with simple portrait lighting.

The key here for me would be the simplicity of using the flash like this with a softbox.

Another image, where I moved so that I was viewing my couple through some leaves. This creates a more intimate look, and the leaves create a kind of border as well, highlighting her expression.

Now, you have to realize that with this kind of image, if I had used flash on my camera, the leaves in front of the camera would’ve been over-exposed. The only way to get light on my subjects without lighting my foreground, is with off-camera lighting.

.
Another image, where I was in love with the way the background appeared. I wanted to photograph the couple in front of it, but shaded by trees, they would’ve been completely under-exposed without flash. Or else, if I had decided not to use flash, but set my camera’s exposure settings for them … I would’ve lost the background entirely.

Therefore the only way to use *that* background, and get great light on them .. is with off-camera lighting. This time my assistant walked with them, holding the softbox up to camera right.

camera settings: 1/250th @ f4 @ 400 ISO

.
In short, the benefits of using off-camera flash:
- you can have perfect lighting nearly anywhere,
- on a grey day, you can make colours pop, and bring in some necessary contrast,
- you can control your background exposure, and therefore the way you position the background.

And as an extra, one of the images where I didn’t use (or need) additional lighting:

37 Comments »

Great examples, You have me hooked to this method which has made a huge impact on my photography. The downside is now I have to pay an assistant, the upside my sales are up because my images are better!

Comment by Sandy Edelsein — October 18, 2009 @ 2:03 pm
I’m so with ya Neil. I did a portrait shoot for a friend at a local garden that she really wanted to shoot at, and it’s not exactly legit without approval. I wanted to be stealthy, so I didn’t want to bring my standard off camera setup. I took it as a challenge, to get great natural light shots. I found that it was just so limiting! I only found a couple places with good subtractive lighting overhead, and then I was just stuck with whatever background happened to be there. No where in the open looked good. Well, that’s the last time I try that experiment!

Comment by Steve Z — October 18, 2009 @ 2:21 pm
Neil- Excellent post with great examples. I’ve for the most part been a natural light shooter – which means I look for light AND backgrounds that work. But I’ve come to realize the value of making a good background work with some off camera light as in your example. Excellent!
Jonathan

Comment by Jonathan Payne — October 18, 2009 @ 2:27 pm
Neil, Thanks for the article. In cases were you’re on location and need to get the assignment done there is no better choice than to use an assistant, there is diversity in using someone to hand hold the lighting. Annie Liebovits uses a lighting assistant constantly to get the suttleties that makes the perfect image. But I have when there was time, set up the light on a stand and was successful without an assistant.

Comment by Nico van Allen — October 18, 2009 @ 2:37 pm
Neil, lovely images as usual. Thanks for the detail. I have a question about “mixed lighting”. If this were an indoor shoot where the lights were florescent I would not be surprised to hear comments to use green gel on the flash to balance the flash with ambient and to set the white balance to florescent to avoid “mixed lighting”.

Now in this case the predominant ambient light is also green and yet you are using flash and don’t mention the white balance and I assume no gelling. Which makes this mixed lighting. It works – you expect the greenness of the leaves and the white light on the faces works too.

Could you comment on the difference, please and tell me what you did for white balance? I am assuming that because we expect to see green leaves it works and that you used a flash white balance setting (or custom wb).

Thank you.

Comment by Mark Cornwell — October 18, 2009 @ 2:57 pm
Mark, so far with fluorescent lighting where I have used flash, I just used flash to drown out the fluorescent light (by dropping my ambient exposure). Simpler to deal with.

With this session, the images where I used flash in a softbox, the ambient exposure on their faces would’ve been at least 2 stops lower than the flash exposure. This means that I didn’t have to deal with a green colour cast where I used flash. It would’ve been different had the flash been mere fill-flash.

In the last image shown here that is all available light, there was a strong yellow-green colour cast, and this I fixed as part of my usual raw workflow. I drag the sliders in ACR / Lightroom, until I visually have something that I like. A simple approach.

Neil vN

Comment by Neil — October 18, 2009 @ 6:28 pm
Hi Neil,

Beautiful photos. And actually more aware of the importance of the background since following your blog.

I’m also keeping a shopping list of things to buy and my list keeps growing!

From you recent “wedding formals” post, I added two umbrella’s to cover indoor formals. Now I’ve added the softbox! So I have to ask;

1.) is there a particular reason why you use the umbrella’s indoors (for wedding formals) and the soft box outdoors?

2.) could I just buy, say, one medium to large softbox for both the indoor and outdoor shots?

Many thanks
Ernst

Comment by Ernst — October 18, 2009 @ 10:48 pm
Ernst, as I mentioned in a reply in another thread:

Similar results can be achieved with an umbrella. A softbox gives you more control though. It gives a more focused swathe of light, and depending on how your softbox is baffled, the softbox can give you more light than an umbrella. You also have more control in how the light spills onto the backgruond .. which is not usually a problem when working outdoors.

Where it makes a difference, is that softbox is easier to handle outdoors where you have wind. An umbrella tends to scoop the wind, and leave you at the mercy of how the wind blows.

An umbrella is easier and faster to set up, which is why I prefer to use umbrellas with wedding portraits and formals.

You could work with a large softbox indoors when you have a small group. But because the spread of light is better contained with a softbox, you might be better off with two umbrellas when you’re dealing with a large group. Umbrellas aren’t expensive though. Get two 60″ umbrellas as a start.

Neil vN

Comment by Neil — October 18, 2009 @ 11:42 pm
Great examples, Neil, and also some great questions from folks above. My question is about your use of the Quantum vs. an SB-800/800 os similar speedlight. Did you do this for the extra power needed to deal with the bright backgrounds? Also, does the Quantum TTL work just as well as the native flashes? Lastly, does the Quantum fit in the same softbox rig you’ve shown with the Nikon flash? Thanks.

Comment by Alan B. — October 19, 2009 @ 7:58 am
Alan, the Q-flash does give more power, but not by as much as you’d expect – barely a stop without the diffuser disc that is supplied with the Q-flash. But I usually use the diffuser disc, so the output drops close to that of a speedlight.

But other factors kick in … the spread of light with the Q-flash is wider, giving me more even light. (Which isn’t a consideration when using a softbox such as with this session.)

More importantly, the Q-flash is a workhorse. You can fire it continually without it over-heating. You would’ve cooked a speedlight already, but the Q-flash just chugs along.

Check the post on the Q-flash system, where I have some links with examples where I’ve used the Q-flash with weddings.

And yes, I use the same softbox rig with the Q-flash as with the speedlights. I have two rigs set up for use with speedlights, specifically for the workshops .. and another rig set up for the T5D-R for photo sessions.

Neil vN

Comment by Neil — October 19, 2009 @ 8:30 am
Killer photos! I love the backgrounds you used here. Did you have the ambient underexposed by 2 stops? Also, what speed-ring do you use for your medium Photoflex Litedome Q39 (24×32) softbox? Would I be able to use a Manfrotto Nano lightstand with this softbox? Right now I use shoot through umbrellas and I am wondering if this will help me get better light.

Comment by Rob — October 19, 2009 @ 8:45 am
Rob .. thanks! I didn’t specifically under-expose my ambient by two stops. My main consideration was the exposure for the background.

I don’t have a test shot without the flash, and neither did I take exposure metering details for the couple where they were shaded as in the first image .. so I can’t give you specific details as to how much they were under-exposed without flash. I am guessing around 2 stops, but it could be quite different from that. As I said, I based my exposure on how I wanted the background to appear in this instance.

Here is the link to the speed-ring I have been using up until now, but for this shoot, I was trying out the new Collapsible Ring that Bruce Dorn had kindly sent to me to check out. (It’s an improvement over the speedring I have been using.)

You could use the Manfrotto Nano, although it might be too light-weight for such a top-heavy setup.

If you’re shooting outdoors, then a shoot-through umbrella is reflecting too much light away. It isn’t as efficient as a softbox.

Neil vN

Comment by Neil — October 19, 2009 @ 9:06 am
Is there any reason why you chose TTL over manual flash in this situation? Great work.

Comment by Dan — October 19, 2009 @ 11:33 am
Dan, with TTL I can fluidly change my aperture and ISO while shooting. With manual flash I would have to change my power setting on my flash if I wanted to change my aperture or ISO independently.

Since the photo session wasn’t a static one, but we were walking around the grounds of the venue looking for suitable spots .. it was just quicker to shoot in TTL, and then adjust the FEC if necessary after an initial shot or two.

Neil vN

Comment by Neil — October 19, 2009 @ 12:01 pm
Neil

Am I correct to say that when your lighting is correct, in TTL mode, if you zoom with a lens or move you position the lighting changes the subjects brightness. How do you shoot with a lets say 24-105 lens?
thanks
M

Comment by Mark S — October 19, 2009 @ 12:15 pm
Mark, with TTL flash (in theory) your exposure should remain the same regardless of your choice of aperture (within reason of course.)

I think what you’re asking is whether a change in composition won’t affect your TTL flash exposure? Yes, if you change your composition (by moving your own position or by zooming), then the relative balance in tonal values in the scene could very well change, and that could affect your TTL exposure.

This is the price you pay with using TTL flash. You usually gain speed of working when you use TTL flash, but you lose the consistency of manual flash.

Sometimes I’ll happily trade working fast over getting perfect and consistent exposures .. especially if the more methodical way of using manual flash slows down the flow of the shoot.

But in the end, I could’ve made either work for me here (manual flash or TTL flash), and it becomes more a matter of preference at any point. “I feel like doing it this way … ”

Neil vN

Comment by Neil — October 19, 2009 @ 1:38 pm
I’d be interested in knowing what lens and FL are used on the shots you post (not just this one but all posts). I love your style and thanks for providing such a great site to learn. Love your book too – still reading it.

-Mike

Comment by mike — October 21, 2009 @ 5:32 pm
Mike, with these photo sessions, I shoot with two bodies. One camera has a 24-70mm f2.8 and the other the 70-200mm f2.8

The longer zoom is my preferred lens, since it becomes easier to isolate my subject against a specific background. All 4 images posted here were taken with the 70-200mm lens at various focal lengths, although I usually do try to zoom to a tighter focal length.

Neil vN

Comment by Neil — October 21, 2009 @ 6:23 pm
I also live off flash shooting. My only problem is that I have 2 cameras on me all the time with prime lenses….it is hard to manage the flash sometimes… :)

Comment by Otto Haring — October 21, 2009 @ 10:51 pm
Awesome shots Neil. I’m experimenting with the same set-up. I have my Sb800 off camera to left or right triggered by my pocket wizard in manual in a softbox. Im not a big fan of the commander mode its a bit difficult to adjust quickly. Does TTL off camera work when your firing it with pocket wizard instead of commander mode? I usually meter with my sekonic and try to get the ambient/flash ratio around 50% flash. Also when u use a flash off camera to the side, you dont use another 1 on camera for some fill??
Thanks for all u do to help us!!
BILL

Comment by Bill — October 22, 2009 @ 1:30 pm
Forgot to ask you Neil, what white balance do you use for a sitiuation like this?

Thanks again!

BILL

Comment by Bill — October 22, 2009 @ 2:57 pm
Bill .. my WB is usually set to Daylight+2 which makes it a touch warmer than Daylight. But I do change my WB as I feel I need to when I edit the RAW files.

When I shoot on location like this with a simple lighting set-up. I don’t use reflectors. I like to work in a less static setup, and a single softbox still works fine .. but the moment I have to add reflectors, it becomes slower to work.

I do feel that by allowing enough available light in (and depending on the available light), there isn’t that much contrast to contend with, and you can get away without using a reflector.

The older PocketWizards have no intelligence between the flash and the camera, so manual flash is the inevitable way to use it with a softbox. In this case however, I used TLL .. but Quantum’s version as they have it with the T5D-R Q-flash.

Neil vN

Comment by Neil — October 22, 2009 @ 8:30 pm
Amazing set of examples like always….and you make it sound too easy. For photographers like me who work alone what would you suggest?
I have tried light stand and flash, but its too slow to work that way. Is there any other smart to get “good” results with on-camera flash for outdoor shots esp. when i get only 15 to 20 mins to shoot bridal portraits, bride and groom and also with the bridal party…whew…i dont know why they allocate such short time for such important photos. BTW i am based in Sydney Australia.

I have been using your back wall bounce technique with good effect and works like a dream.Thank you for that!

Comment by Ujwal — October 23, 2009 @ 10:28 pm
When I am on my own, I change my approach. I use on-camera fill-flash, but take great care in how I position my subjects now. I just added an entry on this – shooting under the mid-day sun.

Neil vN

Comment by Neil — October 25, 2009 @ 4:16 am
Your site is incredible! After some searching, I have found little information on umbrellas, but may have (or probably have) overlooked some. I found the pages on “wedding formals,” this info here, and the equipment you use. I am wondering if you have any pages on using umbrellas for smaller groups (indoor or outdoor), or information on bouncing vs shooting through umbrellas and which you prefer for certain situations, etc.? Thanks MUCH!!

Comment by Claybrook — October 30, 2009 @ 3:40 pm
Hi there Claybrook ..

Re the umbrellas, I mostly use bounce umbrellas when I work indoors or outdoors. The main reason is the extra efficiency of the bounce umbrellas (with the black backing). since it contains the light better. The other main advantage is that it minimizes the risk of getting lens flare when I stand further back than my lights. With a shoot-through umbrella, I then have the risk of getting flare.

Generally, the only time I use shoot-through umbrellas, is when I am photographing indoors and need to disperse a lot of light around. For example, I might do this when using the flashes as additional lighting at a venue.

My first and main choice would always be the bounce umbrella over the shoot-through type.

Neil vN

Comment by Neil — October 31, 2009 @ 6:27 pm
Thanks for all of the wonderful tutorials and keep up the great work!

Comment by Geoff Poitras — October 31, 2009 @ 11:32 pm
Hi Neil

I was wondering what specific softbox you use with your Q flashes because the 12″x12″ quantum softbox you mention in your gearpage looks a bit small for such even lighting. In case you used one of your Photoflex softboxes is it a similar set-up as with a Speedlite?

Greets!

Comment by Jonas — November 3, 2009 @ 11:38 am
Hi there Jonas ..

I used the Photoflex Litedome Q39 – 24×32 (medium) here.
The 12″x12″ Quantum softbox is just too small.

Neil vN

Comment by Neil — November 8, 2009 @ 3:03 am
Thank you so much for sharing your wisdom :)

Comment by Claybrook — November 10, 2009 @ 12:57 pm
Yay! Your information is always so helpful! Neil, I am perplexed by the lighting on your last image posted here, if you did not use any flash or fill. The scene looks backlit, and fairly bright so I think you couldn’t use a slow shutter speed to light their faces. But their faces are so nicely lit. Did you use a reflector? Thanks for your time. ~Nancy

Comment by Nancy — December 13, 2009 @ 1:18 pm
Hi there Nancy .. no fill-flash, and no off-camera lighting. Neither did I hold up a reflector.

However, they were standing in the middle of an opening in the trees, so with the sun hitting the leaves all around them, the place was flooded with natural fill light.

So this is very much about specifically placing the couple in a scenario where the light is great.

Neil vN

Comment by Neil — December 13, 2009 @ 4:17 pm
Hi Neil

In the comment posted by Rob, he questioned the ambient being under exp by 2 stops and your reply was …

12. Rob .. thanks! I didn’t specifically under-expose my ambient by two stops. My main consideration was the exposure for the background… I based my exposure on how I wanted the background to appear in this instance.
.
My questions are -
.
Did you exp for the ambient perse by physically taking a reading from this
.
OR
.
Exp for the subj without flash first and then look at how the background appears. Then added flash to lift the subject. To me this would blow out the background if you exp for subject.
.
Cheers

Ange..

Comment by Ange — July 31, 2010 @ 12:25 am
Ange .. it wouldn’t make sense for me to expose correctly for the couple using the ambient exposure. The light on them is to uneven, and they are shaded relative to the background.

So I would have had to take a exposure reading from the background.

Neil vN

Comment by Neil vN — July 31, 2010 @ 12:29 am
Hi Neil

Thanks for the speedy reply.
When will you visit our shores here in Australia.
Perhaps a side link to see what sort of numbers you would expect to see, if you were to get some sort of respone.
Im sure your visit would be well represented by your loyal followers down under.

Cheers

Ange

Comment by Ange — July 31, 2010 @ 12:35 am
Ange .. I’ve had a number of Ozzies ask about the workshops. We’ll have to see. :)

Neil vN

Comment by Neil vN — July 31, 2010 @ 12:43 am
First i would like to say, im very impressed with your descriptions and pictures on this page, very informative and excellent you have replied to everyone on here… I really hope you reply to me! :)

I having been photographing properly for about 6months since i bought a d90 with a 18-55mm kit lens and a 50mm prime 1.8 which hasn’t left my camera since i bought it. I like portrait/people photography by far and i have been offered a 17-55mm 2.8 which i have been told is a good lens for family parties/weddings etc, at a very reduced price, any reccomendations?

Also regarding lighting, you mentioned the softbox and assistant on this page, but i doubt im going to be able to have an assistant to hold the box up for me on my shoots, i’ve recently got hold of a sb 600 cheap and would love to get either an umbrella or softbox for multi use to start to understand lighting and get more proffesional results. What would you reccomend?

Thankyou so much! starting out in photography especially all the settings is a mind field, im slowly taking it in, but in bite size chunks, i love it.

Nick !

Comment by Nick — August 11, 2010 @ 5:11 pm