Need more contrast in studio portraits

Hello!
Hope you can give me some tips!?

I've took ages tweaking and getting my studio right for proms and events. I use a white cloth backround with one light on full shining behind it and two lights at 45 degrees, one main,one full,pretty basic really. The problem is every time I have to 'photoshop' the images to increase the contrast as they look pretty dull, they look fab after I've increaded the contrast!!!
I'm using an EOS 10D 28-80 lens.

Any ideas?


Cheers
ian

Hi Ian,,can you post some examples before and after??

Jurgen
Australia

You may be looking in the wrong place (lights). Unless you have your 10D's contrast and saturation settings cranked up, your image will look a little flat for the purpose of having a more manageable image to process with an editting software.

Unless you are doing fast, high-volume work where you give a printout while a customer waits, you will need to do some amount of work in front of a computer to bring out the details.

It's not like in the film days when the best it's ever gonna get is the moment the shutter is released.

Attachment 28200

Attachment 28201

thanks!
here's a sample to give you an idea

i didn't realise i could set the contrast and saturation on my eos 10d, i'll have to have a look in the instruction manual!!!!!
i think i must need more light on the background to get rid of the creases,got it on full power though!!!

thanks again for your time, much appreciated!
ian

Hi Ian,,thanks for posting an example...IMHO your image looks fine with the added contrast..It is punchy which suits this image well..You have clean whites and strong blacks,,skin tones are good too..

If you are worried about the creases in the backdrop try moving your models away from the backdrop or use a larger aperture or both to blur the backdrop more..You can also light the backdrop with a burst of flash but that can get tricky..There is a chance of light spilling onto your subject unless it is flagged..In reality when using digital I'd rather start with a flattish image then crank up the contrast via post processing than start with a contrasty one which is more difficult to correct..Excess contrast in digital is a pain in the butt..

I would tend to rely more on post processing in PS or similar to increase the contrast and "blow out" the backdrop..

Hope this helps..

Jurgen
Australia

Shoot in RAW mode as well, and then do the adjustments during RAW conversion as well. I actually don't like the first one it is blurry to me, where the second one isn't.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jaytid

The problem is every time I have to 'photoshop' the images to increase the contrast as they look pretty dull...

---

Welcome to the site, Ian...

First of all, you should try to get over the notion of creating a "perfect" image in your camera. While you certainly want the best original file you can get, most all digital shots (if exposed correctly) need a bump in contrast, a bit of color correction, and usually some basic sharpening after he fact.

Nature of the beast... :thumbsup:

In photography, IMO the end justify the means. You say your shots "look fab" after photoshopping them. Well, that's what you want, right? So, why would you think you'e doing something wrong? I've been doing this a long time, and I can assure the camera capture is (or should be) only the beginning.

Post-processing to get the best image possible is simply part of the standard digital workflow...

As for your lighting, I'm curious what kind of lights you use. Blowing out a white bg is more a factor of exposure than power. Overexpose the bg by at least one stop and you should be fine.

BTW, you could make life a lot easier if you'd steam the wrinkles out of the cloth before you shoot. That way, even if you don't get pure white, you'd at least still have a smooth bg.

Thanks for all your great advice and the complimentary comments, you're a really friendly lot! lol

I do all my photos on location as I don't have a studio so it would be a pain to take the iron on every job lol.I use 3 bowens flash heads, nothing fancy.

I found a useful thing in Photoshop after my last prom on friday. I changed the levels on one photo then went into actions and did the rest in batch! It's fab!!! Saved me a lot of time, at least I know now it's normal to do more after I've taken the photo!

Cheers guys
Ian

To disagree with everyone here, I would simply say that your camera lightmeter is exposing the white background as a neutral shade of grey resulting in a slightly under-exposed photo overall.

Overexpose by out a half to one stop and you will have better contrast but the image will be properly exposed.

Ronnoco

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ronnoco

To disagree with everyone here...overexpose by out a half to one stop.

---

Uh, except me, of course, as this is the same advice I gave... :cool:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Asylum Steve

Uh, except me, of course, as this is the same advice I gave... :cool:

---

Gee, in among the "post-processing and steaming wrinkles out of the cloth", I didn't see that.:D :D :D You will have to keep it simpler, Steve.:) :)

Ronnoco

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ronnoco

Gee, in among the "post-processing and steaming wrinkles out of the cloth", I didn't see that.:D :D :D You will have to keep it simpler, Steve.:) :)

Ronnoco

---

Perhaps. But like you (on occasion), I try to address as many points as possible in my posts.

Saves time later... :D :thumbsup:

Here is my two cents worth....

First..preparing the image for printing or display.

After looking at the histogram for this photo is seems to be properly exposed. If you look at the histogram and adjust the white point to 250 and the black point to about 10 the image snaps up enough to get IMHO a crisper image without looking the background.

Unrealistic expectations
Digital photographers sometime expect their out of camera images (their digital negative) will be perfect images and require no additional processing.

IMHO, the issue here has nothing to do with lighting or exposure...it is a characteristic of how digital sensors capture images. Although I agree that it would ideal to get a perfect image out of the camera.....just like film your images often need be processed for optimum results.

Chris

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ChrisWade

IMHO, the issue here has nothing to do with lighting or exposure...

---

I'm not going to say you can't argue that position to some extent, but when dealing with adjustable studio lighting, the ratio of your lights is almost always going to play a large role in the overall lighting effect you achieve (regardless of exposure or photoshop editing).

Also, your exposure, beit digital or film, will determine exactly how much detail is in the highlight and shadow areas of your image, and that information is often crucial in (again) determining what the final image looks like.

I think everything plays an important part in creating the best image you can: lighting setup and ratio, exposure, and careful post-processing.

Anyone can get lucky being weak or negligent in any of these areas, and still come up with a good print. The point is this: the odds increase dramatically in your favor when you can master all of them...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jaytid

I do all my photos on location as I don't have a studio so it would be a pain to take the iron on every job lol.I use 3 bowens flash heads, nothing fancy.


Cheers guys
Ian

---

If that's the case, you might want to look into paper. You can get a roll of seamless into the backseat. Mind you, it's the smaller one, but for something like this, it should be okay.