so much talk about lighting lately learn now

[Hoogle]

Well as it almost appears to come up in every thread I jump in there is always someone who has the only method how lighting should be achieved lol followed on with a long 5 pages of debate.

Well here is a live course on studio lighting which even if your not interested in photography side you may learn some pro tips on lighting by proven people in the industry.

http://www.creativelive.com/live1

 

[Tom Mann]

Thanks, Hoogle, but we obviously have very different likes and dislikes when it comes to teaching a subject like this.

When I tuned into that broadcast, she was in the middle of a long repetitive schtick to the effect, "if it looks good, it's fine", and was discussing 30 degree gridded beauty dishes like everyone has a few just laying around. Hopefully, there was an earlier part where she discussed the basics of lighting, but I couldn't see any way to immediately get back to the beginning.

IMHO, the "if it looks good, it's ok" approach is great for photographers who have already developed their ability to "see" the various aspects of a real-world lighting situation, and already know how to change things around to get what they want.

However, <IMHO>, if a noob doesn't at least know the basics, they will flail around much longer than if they at least know the names and functions of the usual lights, know a bit about light modifiers, know how light falls off with distance at different rates depending on the source/modifier, and at least know the most common looks one can achieve (eg, butterfly, short, Hollywood, etc.).

To me, a very close analogy to her approach might be telling a Photoshop noob who dropped by PSG asking about a logo that they like, and someone tells them to just try the different tools and play around with them until they reproduce the effect they like. And, we then find out they don't even know how to crop a picture and the only program they ever used was Microsoft Paint. :-(

Of course, there is no one way to light a portrait, or light a scene, and your technique must always be a servant to your goals, but one has to walk before they can run in all things in life.

When I get some time, I'll poke around and find some tutorials more in the style I suggest.

Best regards,

Tom

 

[Hoogle]

Say what now ??

I have not actually watched it I finally fell asleep after being up for several days working lol so I am not actually sure what your referring to or can throw in a counter discussion on this particular matter.

I have no idea of what context she said it in.

 

[sprucemagoo1]

I don't suppose we can all just assume that everything somebody says on this forum is an honest opinion, as this way, we don't have to put IMHO with everything we type, as the over use of IMHO can seem very condescending.

 

[Paul]

It's all subjective and down to personal taste in my opinion:mrgreen:

 

[Tom Mann]

The final look one wants to achieve certainly is subjective, but once you decide on a particular lighting "look", there are only a limited number of (reasonable) ways to achieve it, and a student of lighting needs to know which tools will allow them to get there. The problem I had with the 10 min or so of that video that I watched was that she never said "use this tool, not that for this look". Instead, she just said, "let's put modifiers D and E on this strobe" without discussion or comparison to alternatives that beginning lighting students might likely own or have access to.

To me, her approach would be like us on PSG refusing to suggest to a photoshop noob what we think are the best tools to try to achieve a particular effect.

However, it's actually much worse than that. In PS, trying a new tool costs the beginner nothing. In lighting, trying a new new softbox can set him back hundreds of $$$, a new light thousands, a new modifier - a hundred or so. As teachers of this material we are obliged to help the student avoid unnecessary costs, and what pushed my buttons the most about her video was that she didn't seem to make any attempt to do this - "Everything is cool ... try this try that" works when you are using someone else's well-equipped studio, but not when you are on your own.

Maybe if I had watched that video longer than 10 minutes, or maybe there are other installments that would cover the basics, but, as you can tell, her approach more than annoyed me.

T

 

[Hoogle]

Note to self never suggest an inproper lighting technique without fully explaining the theory of the chosen method in front of tom, or I will make an enemy for life.

You say teach what is it you teach? The science behind light or similar or photography I havent quite worked it out because lets face it your explanations and arguments go way beyond the scope of hey this lighting setup looks good you go all scientific on everything. Just interested in what you actually do and I understand you may see this as a dig or something but it really isnt I am just trying to find out what makes you put your opinion through so passionately and if you answer what I think you may be answering then maybe there is some extra curricular activities for you which needs discussing I think you will see what we are working on at some point this week, I have only just found out you dont have access to the current discussions.

 

[Tom Mann]

H -

Check your private message inbox.

T

PS - We are within an hour of a really big storm passing through this area, so there's a chance I'll be off the air for a while.

 

[iDad]

Batten down the hatches Tom good luck!