 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| PhotoKB HomeDiscussion Groups Digital Photography Digital PhotoDSLR CamerasZLR CamerasPoint & Shoot CamerasFilm Photography 35 mmLarge FormatMedium formatDarkroomFilm and LabsOther EquipmentPhoto Technique Nature PhotographyPeople PhotographyTechnique GeneralGeneral Photo Topics General TopicsAustralian PhotographyUK PhotographyDirectoryPhoto Clubs |
Photo Forum / Digital Photography / DSLR Cameras / December 2006lighing for objects
I'm looking for help deciding on a lighting rig for photographing objects such as vases, bowls and jewelry boxes. I'm trying to put together a portfolio of images I've priced a couple commercially available rigs but I'm not sure I want to spend several hundred dollars. I originally was thinking that I could use some of those cheap aluminum shop lights with maybe a frosted plastic cover but the price for the plastic covers would run nearly $100 for several lights ($25-$30 for each cover and then the lights themselves). thanks in advance Don't forget, the shop light is fluorescent. The rig would be specifically designed to take studio shots. Adding an external flash would give flash back, as would the built in flash. Harry > I'm looking for help deciding on a lighting rig for photographing > objects such as vases, bowls and jewelry boxes. [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > thanks in advance sorry but I'm not talking about that I was thinking of using those aluminum cone lights with the clips that will take any regular light bulb. The trick is to filter the light somehow. I've looked at some light tents but they are too small for some of the pieces. http://home.comcast.net/~wskossack/new_boxes.html I also don't have the room to leave something like a tent set up all the time but the cats would love sleeping in one. I'm looking for a rig that can be assembled and then taken down and put away I was looking at something like the Smith Victor KF3U 3-Light Thrifty Flash Kit > Don't forget, the shop light is fluorescent. The rig would be > specifically designed to take studio shots. Adding an external flash [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] >> >> thanks in advance Check this link for do it yourself light box instructions: http://www.pbase.com/wlhuber/light_box_light_tent > I'm looking for help deciding on a lighting rig for photographing objects > such as vases, bowls and jewelry boxes. [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > thanks in advance > Check this link for do it yourself light box instructions: > http://www.pbase.com/wlhuber/light_box_light_tent [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] >> run nearly $100 for several lights ($25-$30 for each cover and then >> the lights themselves). thanks in advance My sister went on holiday to Mazatlán, and will be there over Christmas. More impatient even than me, she gave me this last Friday: http://collectibles.about.com/library/articles/blebaylive2005b.htm I haven't used it yet, but there's no reason to believe it won't do what they say, given a stable camera platform. I'm looking forward to using it on our dining-room table: pull the ends apart as if inserting an additional leaf, cover the gap with a sheet of translucent plastic like for a fluorescent ceiling fixture, and viola! Lighting from below, as well.  SignatureFrank ess > I'm looking for help deciding on a lighting rig for photographing > objects such as vases, bowls and jewelry boxes. Light tent. For digital photography under a light tent, incandescent bulbs (with camera set to appropriate white balance or color temperature) and camera on tripod. A light tent fashioned of thin cotton or ripstop nylon sheets (white) and some PVC pipes could be made quickly and cheaply. Move lights around (3 - 5 lights [ 60 - 100 W ] ) should do the trick well. Just avoid any direct light on the lens. Above with two or three flashes will work quite well too. Cheers, Alan Signature-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm -- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm -- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin -- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch. >> I'm looking for help deciding on a lighting rig for photographing >> objects such as vases, bowls and jewelry boxes. [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > Move lights around (3 - 5 lights [ 60 - 100 W ] ) should do the trick > well. Just avoid any direct light on the lens. 60 watt lights are around 2000k, warm reddish. the digital sensor was designed to work best with closer to 5500k light, daylight. the incandescent light is deficient in cooler colors, like blue, and loses image quality because the color channels in the sensor are not all exposed properly. it works, but not as well. > Above with two or three flashes will work quite well too. > > Cheers, > Alan >> Move lights around (3 - 5 lights [ 60 - 100 W ] ) should do the trick >> well. Just avoid any direct light on the lens. > > 60 watt lights are around 2000k, warm reddish. 2700 - 2900K actually. The lowest incandescent color temp I've found (in AC home appliance lights) is 2700K and is not related to the power of the light. > the digital sensor was designed to work best > with closer to 5500k light, daylight. As the OP is budget sensitive, the proposed incandescent lighting is more than adequate to his needs. He can also buy more expensive incandescent photofloods that have a blue coating bringing the color temperature up to about 3200K. Or as suggested, flash for "daylight" temperatures. > the incandescent light is deficient in cooler colors, > like blue, and loses image quality > because the color channels in the sensor > are not all exposed properly. There is more dynamic range available than what is viewable on a monitor or print. So, if edited in 16 bit (cover 12 "real" bits in the image data), there is more than ample color data to adjust in camera with WB or color temp adjustments. >> Above with two or three flashes will work quite well too. >> >> Cheers, >> Alan Signature-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm -- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm -- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin -- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch. >>> Move lights around (3 - 5 lights [ 60 - 100 W ] ) should do the trick >>> well. Just avoid any direct light on the lens. [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > (in AC home appliance lights) is 2700K and is not related to the power > of the light. at 2500k correction, small lights are still very warm. 100 watt bulbs are better, 150-200 watt bulbs are pretty good. >> the digital sensor was designed to work best >> with closer to 5500k light, daylight. [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > data), there is more than ample color data to adjust in camera with WB > or color temp adjustments. of the 12 bits, at 2500 - 2000k, due to the deficiency in the blue light, you probably lose 2 bits in the blue channel. >>> Above with two or three flashes will work quite well too. >>> >>> Cheers, >>> Alan >>>> Move lights around (3 - 5 lights [ 60 - 100 W ] ) should do the >>>> trick well. Just avoid any direct light on the lens. [quoted text clipped - 31 lines] > due to the deficiency in the blue light, > you probably lose 2 bits in the blue channel. 2 bits in the blue channel (eg: 12 bit A/D) would not be perceptible in a print or on a monitor. I just took three shots. one under 60W, the other under 100W with no other light sources available (in my darkroom otherwise known as the crawlspace under the livingroom) and one with flash. Imported from RAW at 2750K with all controls set to 0 (except exposure to bring the worst saturated channel (red in this case) under control. (Flash shot was imported at 5500K). Exposure time was different for each one (obviously) and there was a difference in saturation due to inability to perfectly match the exposures. White area RGB (60W) : 221, 192, 174 White area RGB (100W) : 205, 179, 164 Ratio: 1.08, 1.07, 1.06 (Note that the 100W version was slightly less exposed than the 60W version and so less saturated. So, next we correct the saturation of the 100W image to match that of the 60W image: "correct" the 100W to match the 60W Red point: R G B ref: 221, 192, 174 : 221, 193, 177 diff: - , 1 , 3 Or "correct" using the green point: ref: 221, 192, 174 : 220, 192, 176 diff: 1 , - , 1 Or "correct" using the blue point: ref: 221, 192, 174 : 218, 190, 174 diff: 3 , 2 , - IOW, there is no significant difference between the 60W and 100W color temp. I maintain that a 60W bulb is no different in color temp than a 100 W bulb. Just less bright. Between the above and flash, then yes, the difference is more marked in the blue channel between flash and 60W (or 100W): Flash RGB: 221, 209, 198 ref: 221, 192, 174 (60W) Ratio: 1.00, 1.09, 1.14 Cheers, Alan Signature-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm -- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm -- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin -- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch. When using heat producing bulbs you have to have a material that is flame resistant. Rosco makes several forms of fire resistant diffusion material, check B&H. There are also light weight frames you can buy and the covering diffusion material is fire resistant. I have seem lights fall into the diffusers, have heard of fires caused by home made diffusers. The one time it happened to me I had a fire resistant material and just got a brown spot with a 1000 watt halogen. Also think about using halogen bulbs, incandesent bulb shift color temerature as they age, photofloods are the worst, a pro type halogen light (Lowell, Smith Victor etc) or even a shop lamp from Home Depot or Lowes will give you more light for longer, especially if your product is large. Small low wattage bulbs are frustrating with anything but small products. Tom > When using heat producing bulbs you have to have a material that is > flame resistant. Rosco makes several forms of fire resistant diffusion [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > diffusers. The one time it happened to me I had a fire resistant > material and just got a brown spot with a 1000 watt halogen. the worst part is that the fire starts where the light is so bright that you can barely see the flames. what you see is a growing dark spot turning to ash. > Also think about using halogen bulbs, incandesent bulb shift color > temerature as they age, photofloods are the worst, a pro type halogen [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > Tom to solve both heat and color temperature it is just much simpler to make use of Daylight Flourescent bulbs. These are available at either 5500 K or 6500K. I have been using these for 5 years now. There are also light tents that can be purchased. One recent one I obtained was $40 US. I have a few different ones and all are collapsible. Lights with Daylight flourescent also can be obtained with a more professional look from most camera stores now also. MW > > When using heat producing bulbs you have to have a material that is > > flame resistant. Rosco makes several forms of fire resistant diffusion [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > > > > Tom > to solve both heat and color temperature it is just much simpler to > make use of Daylight Flourescent bulbs. These are available at either [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > with Daylight flourescent also can be obtained with a more professional > look from most camera stores now also. The fluorescent lighting spectrum is far from flat so some color information will be distorted. This is important if color accuracy is needed in the image. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fluorescent_lamp#Phosphors_and_the_spectrum_of_emit ted_light or http://tinyurl.com/y6ave6 Whether that is important for the shooter depends on the use of the image. Cheers, Alan Signature-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm -- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm -- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin -- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch. >>>>> Move lights around (3 - 5 lights [ 60 - 100 W ] ) should do the >>>>> trick well. Just avoid any direct light on the lens. [quoted text clipped - 34 lines] > 2 bits in the blue channel (eg: 12 bit A/D) would not be perceptible in > a print or on a monitor. in the shadows, it might, and you might even see posterization in the shadows if you change the gamma. > I just took three shots. one under 60W, the other under 100W with no > other light sources available (in my darkroom otherwise known as the [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > White area RGB (60W) : 221, 192, 174 correctly balanced 'white' at any color temp would be 254 254 254 or bright gray. b/r = 1.0 in any neutral color the three channels should be equal. > White area RGB (100W) : 205, 179, 164 ratio=164/205= .8 this is not neutral, and the blue channel is low by 20% what follows seems to be irrelevant, since none of your whites are white. all it seems to show is that your color balance is consistently off, more so when the light is farther from white. why does your camera not correct and give neutral colors when you do that test. My D2X really shifts the color, and can neutralize incandescent lights. > Ratio: 1.08, 1.07, 1.06 > [quoted text clipped - 32 lines] > Cheers, > Alan >>>>>> Move lights around (3 - 5 lights [ 60 - 100 W ] ) should do the >>>>>> trick well. Just avoid any direct light on the lens. [quoted text clipped - 38 lines] > and you might even see posterization in the shadows > if you change the gamma. This whole post is about color temperature between a 60W and 100W bulb and the use in a light tent (where shaddows are typically and deliberately reduced as much as possible). >> I just took three shots. one under 60W, the other under 100W with no >> other light sources available (in my darkroom otherwise known as the [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > 254 254 254 or bright gray. b/r = 1.0 > in any neutral color the three channels should be equal. Certainly, but I measure at an area of a 3D object which was not giving specular reflection, and which was under exposed to avoid clipping. As this was under "warm" light, it's obvious that the red channel should be higher than the blue. And to get you back on track, the purpose of the test was to look at the color temp difference between 100W and 60W bulbs. And there is no difference. >> White area RGB (100W) : 205, 179, 164 > > ratio=164/205= .8 > this is not neutral, and the blue channel is low by 20% Did the "RAW" part slip you by. > what follows seems to be irrelevant, > since none of your whites are white. > all it seems to show > is that your color balance is consistently off, > more so when the light is farther from white. First of all, I measured the "white" in an area that was not near clipping and that was underexposed. Secondly, the shots used were slightly underexposed to ensure that each channel remained unclipped. The purpose of the measurement was to see if the color temperature was the same for the 60W and 100W bulbs. Conclusion: 1) There is no difference in color temp between a 60W and 100W bulb which was the purpose of the test. > why does your camera not correct > and give neutral colors when you do that test. Because, as clearly stated as I wanted to see if there was a color temperature change between the 60W and 100W bulb, I used the RAW image, not the in-camera color corrected JPG image. > My D2X really shifts the color, > and can neutralize incandescent lights. And so does mine, if I shoot that way. How "perfectly" it netralizes them is another matter. Signature-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm -- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm -- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin -- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch. >>> 60 watt lights are around 2000k, warm reddish. >> [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] >> >> <snip> Here's an interesting 'object lighting' example with windows in several directions and many halogen 12v ceiling lights giving a rather pleasing effect and showing how different those little halogen lights are from daylight. <http://www.edgehill.net/1/?SC=go.php&DIR=Misc/photography/2006-11-25-oly-om-1> doing some after Christmas shopping trying to solve this problem. I found a photographer selling off equipment and purchased a tent at a good price. It is kind of nice and fits into a bag quickly. One concern with the home made is that I really don't have the space to leave it set up. I had looked at those available in local stores but these were typically too small for my needs (about half what BH sells it for). Now I just need to solve the problem of what lights to get. Then maybe I need to shop for backgrounds though some old bed sheets cut up and colored would probably work > I'm looking for help deciding on a lighting rig for photographing > objects such as vases, bowls and jewelry boxes. [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > thanks in advance |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.