Friday, August 08, 2008

Mixing Window Light and Artificial Light

Often, while shooting in interior locations, I find myself needing to mix natural light, coming through windows, with artificial light. Everyone from editorial shooters to photo-journalists to wedding photographers (and more) often find themselves in the same situations.

Photographically, window-light can be a wondrous and beautiful thing! Often though, there's not enough of that window-light filling the model unless she's posed quite near to the light-producing window and in such ways that the natural light fills, uhhh.... wonderfully and naturally. This can be tricky and sometimes limiting. (In terms of posing and blocking the model.) Many photographers, of course, use reflectors to bounce back the light coming through the window, thus providing appropriate fill. But when you're in a hurry, using reflectors can be time consuming and require assistance. For those reasons, i.e., since I'm usually in a hurry and I rarely have an assistant, I turn to my strobes for the easiest and quickest solutions.

First, I need to know what exposure the background--the light outside the window--is reading. To accomplish this, I take an ambient light reading and that becomes my starting point for lighting the model. (Note: Since I'll be using flash-sync, I'll need to shoot using an appropriate shutter speed: That means a shutter speed of less than 200th with my Canon 5D.) Generally, I shoot at low ISOs. This means I need to find an exposure that balances ISO, shutter speed, and an aperture that makes sense for the image. If you don't have a light meter and you're serious about photography, shame on you. But, if you don't, you can still determine the outside light's exposure by bracketing with a few shots, reading the histograms, and adjusting as needed. I'm not going to write about that technique, i.e., finding your exposure without the help of a light meter, because... well, because I always use a light meter.

Once I know what I need to know about the light outside the window, I know I'm going to be artificially lighting the model at least to that exposure. Otherwise, she's going to silhouette to some degree against the background. Yeah, there are times when silhouetting is the photographer's intent but my clients usually want to see the model in all her glory; naked glory and otherwise.

I set my mainlight in position and, by taking a few meter readings, I adjust the strobe's output until I match that of the natural-light reading I took at the windows. Since I almost always want to "pop" the model off the BG, I'll usually set my mainlight a bit hotter than the BG's reading. In other words, I flash more light on the model to capture her with a slight over-exposure. Of course, that's not the only thing I'll be doing to "pop" the model off the BG, but it's one of the techniques I generally use.

Okay, let's say I'm going to expose my images to the reading I obtained off the natural light coming through the window. To get some subtle "pop," I adjust my mainlight to slightly over-expose. (With aperture, that is.) There are times, of course, when I want to under-expose the BG for dramatic and/or aesthetic effect. When that's the goal, I expose with more artificial light than the BG is providing. In other words, I use strobes to overcome daylight.

Adjusting the recorded ambient in your exposure, BTW, is easily accomplished by changing the shutter speed. The aperture (in your exposure) remains the same since the strobe is firing bursts of light at shorter durations than the shutter remains open. Changing the shutter speed, therefore, has no real effect on the level of exposure provided by the strobe. Man, I hope I'm not wandering all over the place here. I tend to ramble. I don't think I could ever be effective as a technical writer. (Note to Self: Cross technical writing off list of potential, future, career-changes.)

The easiest way to understand this, I suppose, is by remembering that, when shooting with strobes, aperture is dictated by the strobe's output but shutter speed, which is not really controlled by the strobe's output unless you exceed maximum sync speed, can be adjusted to limit or increase the amount of ambient captured on the sensor. Does that make sense?

Where was I? Oh yeah. Once I've determined my exposure by reading both the natural and the artificial light and adjusting to taste. I make some decisions about highlights to further "pop" my model from the BG and the environment. (My clients love it when the model's "pop," especially since they're not so big on moody, shadowy, dark images... and the clients, of course, are always right.) Anyway, since I'm often slightly overexposing the model (due to my clients' preferences) from the BG, the natural light isn't going to provide much in the way of back-lit highlights. No problem. I'll simply use another strobe and set it in such a way that I get those highlights and, hopefully, get them in ways that don't look like they're too-obviously and too-magically coming from some too-mysterious of an unknown source. Often, the strobe providing the highlights doesn't need to be set much, if any, hotter than the mainlight as the physical laws of angle-of-reflectance will insure the highlights "read."

In the image at the top--not a particularly great image but one that adequately serves the subject of this post--I posed Sascha in the middle of the room. Duh, Jim. Like they can't see that for themselves. (Note: In the spirit of stating the obvious and my self-critique aside, Sascha looks great in almost any image.) That room, BTW, was the only place in the house available to me to shoot in. (Someday, they'll set me free to shoot anywhere I choose!) I set my mainlight, modified with a 3'x3' scrim, slightly "hotter" than the reading I took through the windows. It was mid-day on a hazy, overcast, smoggy(?) day. Since there was neither blue sky nor puffy white clouds available, I figured I'd expose merely to get some read on the landscape outside the window. I didn't want to completely blow out the windows and I sure as heck didn't want Sascha silhouetted against them. I set a strobe modified with a small, shoot-thru umbrella, camera-left and behind her, to provide some highlights: Easily-digestible highlights that don't require too much suspension of disbelief for viewers to accept.

Sascha captured with a Canon 5D and a 28-135 IS USM Canon lens zoomed out to 56mm. ISO 100, f/5.6 @ 160th, color temp set to "flash" default. MUA Melissa. If I was paying more attention to detail, I would've noticed that shopping bag on the floor in the BG. Oh well. My bad.

9 comments:

ddcstudios said...

Technical Writer? Who wants that crap?
Bore Bore Bore! Thanks for teaching us dunderheads in your own entertaining ways! Keeps our attention!!

Don

Anonymous said...

Hi Jimmy,

This is a great post for all of us home-gamers.

I know you enjoy the Strobist, so I thought I would share some url links that emphasize some of the points you made in your artcle. Listed in no particular order are the following posts:

1) Balancing Flash and Ambient Part I

2) Balancing Flash and Ambient Part II

3) Balancing Light: Twilight

4) Balance | Sun/Flash Crosslighting

5) More on the Crosslight Thing

6) Balancing Flash/Ambient Indoors (I found this article especially helpful)

7) Assignment - Balance (I found this article extremely helpful. This article and the prior one are excellent primers for homegamers.)

8) Easy, One-Flash Glamour Light

I will preface the rest of my commentary with the fact that I am nearly a complete newbie at lighting. So please feel free to correct, expand, elaborate or clarify what I write below.

Article 6 on balancing flash and ambient is similar to your article in that both articles discuss how flash controls the aperture setting and how ambient light controls the time setting. If you want more ambient, use more time.

I use a Sekonic DualMaster L-558. As I write this post to you, I am sitting near a window with some light bouncing in. I have a Canon 580 EX II sitting on the table set at 1/32nd power. Using Pocket Wizards, I fire a test flash. I notice that I can increase or decrease the time. When the time is short, the flash provides the majority of the lighting (exceeding 60%) and the ƒ-stop remains relatively constant.

Now, if I increase the time to where the flash is providing only 40% or less of the light, then I notice that the required ƒ-stop increases by 1 ƒ-stop.

The point that I am attempting to make is that the ƒ-stop is not entirely independent time and solely dependent upon flash. Rather, it is largely (or mostly dependent) upon flash with some influence from time. If you look at article 6, you'll note that the camera does show more exposure with increased time. That is, both the camera and background get lighter with time. That said, the camera gets marginally lighter and the background gets substantially lighter.

In a hypothetical example, let's say that when you walked into a room, you found the ambient exposure as follows:

ISO: 100 (low setting to reduce noise)
ƒ-stop: 5.6 (your preferred aperture for depth of field)
time: 1/30 second

My *guess* in this situation, you would increase the ISO to 200 to reduce the time to 1/60 sec.

Then you would set your strobes for adequate power for ƒ5.6? and use 1/60 sec?

Switching to your photograph of Sascha, the windows to the outdoors appear much brighter than the indoors, yet the windows are not blown out. I noticed that your time is 1/160 of a second. Was the room that bright? Or is that time a compromise between the room and the windows in an attempt to show both well lit? In other words, how did you take your ambient reading to arrive at that setting? More specifically, can you please comment on where you stood when taking the reading, and did you take an incident or reflective reading for your ambient?

Thanks Jimmy!

ks

Anonymous said...

Great post Jimmy!

But I do have a question regarding your metering technique. When you say you get a reading from the window: are you standing at the camera and use the spot meter to get a reflective reading over the window or do you stand at the model and get an incident reading by pointing the dome toward the window?

Thanks again for a great blog

Anonymous said...

Jimmy,

I usually make the background just a little lower than my main light exposure. It gives good saturation and doesn't pull the eye.

Your EIXF data is turned off, so could you let us know the ASA, shutter speed and aperture this capture was made at?

Anonymous didn't quite understand your comment re flash vs shutter speed. It isn't that f:stop isn't affected by shutter speed, it is that flash contribution is controlled by aperture, not shutter speed.

Another week and no breakfast. Sigh. :-)

jimmyd said...

To answer a few questions:

Kirk-- Tech data is in the very last paragraph of the post. Besides my life usually being in some sort of turmoil, doing breakfast or lunch would be so much more easily accomplished if we didn't live so damn far apart. We'll get there, tho.

Anon-- Your question is answered in my response to Kevin's ?s (below)

Kevin-- Dude! You're making me have to think!

First, I'm almost always shooting at shutter speeds between 1/60th and 1/160th. Slower than that and I'd be having sharpness/focus issues due to camera shake and/or model movement. Faster and I'm having synch issues. At the shutter speeds I'm using, the shutter's effect on aperture--when using off-camera, non-TTL strobes--is nearly non-existent in terms of exposure, i.e., exposure value of the strobe. Ambient is another story. Ambient is CONTINUOUS light. The longer my shutter remains open, the more of that CONTINUOUS ambient light reaches my sensor. This works the same if you're capturing on emulsions.

Second, for the most part, I'd rather shoot at a pre-determined, preferable ISO. That usually means ISO 100, considered the sweet-spot ISO for my camera. (Someone told me ISO 200 is the sweet-spot ISO for Nikon... don't know if that's true as I don't shoot Nikons.) So, in your hypothetical, I'd avoid changing the ISO in favor of adjusting the lights. Also, as mentioned, I'd rarely if ever shoot models at 1/30th.

I (incident) metered the window from a few feet in front of it with the meter's dome pointing outside. The room was fairly bright. That's a big window plus there was another, similar window, camera-left, not seen in the shot. Obviously, I flash-metered the strobes. I did enhance the room's ambient just a bit in post with the Shadow/Highlight tool, but there's plenty of luma and detail in the room without the processing.

I don't take reflective readings because, well, because I don't have the reflective attachments for my Minolta Auto Meter IV F. Yeah, I could always remove the dome and take a reflective reading but I usually just take incident readings. Hope that helps.

Anonymous said...

Hi Jimmy,

Thank you for answering our questions.

A clarification if I could. I am probably misreading/misunderstanding your words. The first sentence in the paragraph below is throwing me. My impression is that the exposure value of the strobe is very important to obtaining the proper aperture setting.

At the shutter speeds I'm using, the shutter's effect on aperture--when using off-camera, non-TTL strobes--is nearly non-existent in terms of exposure, i.e., exposure value of the strobe. Ambient is another story. Ambient is CONTINUOUS light. The longer my shutter remains open, the more of that CONTINUOUS ambient light reaches my sensor. This works the same if you're capturing on emulsions.

Given that you are limiting your exposure to between 1/60 and 1/160 of a second, I would think your ambient light is not a big deal to your exposure of the Subject. Even though it is continuous, it is a comparatively lose dose of light over a maximum of 1/60 of a second. It's importance is minor compared to that of your strobe for exposure of the subject. My understanding is that your light exposure from your strobe(s) determines your ƒ-stop? More accurately stated, knowing your desired ƒ-stop, you set the strobe at the proper power setting.

Your background exposure is a different matter.

For example, say you dial in iso 100, ƒ 5.6, time 1/120 seconds.

> Strobe 1/16 power: Result - subject underexposed.
> Strobe full power: Result - subject overexposed.

And perhaps, at some other setting, say Strobe at 1/2 power, the subject is properly exposed.

Does that make sense?

Assuming that it does, let's carry on with the example and again say you have iso 100, Strobe at 1/2 power, ƒ 5.6. Now we will alter time.

> Time at 1/60 - background too bright and subject is somewhat brighter (hardly noticeable)
> Time at 1/200 - background a bit dark and subject exposure is somewhat darker (again, hardly noticeable).

Time at 1/160 is about right with proper subject and background exposure.

Is my understanding correct?

ks

jimmyd said...

Kevin--

The exposure value of the strobe is everything in terms of lighting the model. As earlier stated, shutter speeds (at least, the range of shutter speeds I'm using) have little or no effect on my subjects being properly exposed.

The environment surrounding the subject is being lit (or not lit) by a combination of the strobes (which fall off quite rapidly beyond their target) and the ambient filling that environment.

Kev, you're thinking this through too hard. Don't get caught up in the science. Paralysis through analysis and all that. It'll take away from where your attention should be mostly focused, that is, on the subject. (Assuming it's a live subject.)

An almost autopilot-like understanding of the (basic) science, which you should be striving to achieve, will become a great strength. Getting bogged down in exposure minutiae is not always a good thing, especially when your subjects are live subjects. Also, remember you always have a certain amount of room for error, tolerances if you will, when dealing with exposure.

jimmyd said...

P.S. Anyone who wants a better understanding of how shutter speeds, apertures, and ISOs individually and collectively contribute to exposure--and how they work in the creative process--might consider purchasing the book, "Understanding Exposure," by Bryan Peterson. If you're so inclined, you can purchase this helpful book through my Amazon link. It's on my recommended reading list under the Amazon link. I reviewed the book in an update a week or so ago.

Anonymous said...

Hi Jimmy,

The exposure value of the strobe is everything in terms of lighting the model. As earlier stated, shutter speeds (at least, the range of shutter speeds I'm using) have little or no effect on my subjects being properly exposed.

We're saying the same thing. I had incorrectly interpreted "shutter" as being aperture, not speed. See, I told you that I was likely misreading your comments. We in complete agreement--or rather, I am agreeing with you--that time is not the big driver here.

Thank you for indulging me.

ks