Coloured Gels Exposed

Shot taken using both a pink and a purple gel, both under-exposed relative to the key light. Model: Sarah Arnold — *Shot taken using both a pink and a purple gel, both under-exposed relative to the key light. Model: Sarah Arnold*

We've all done it; grabbed a fresh pack of gels and opened them up to see those vibrant and saturated colours that match the brightly coloured swatches on the back of the packet. We throw them on our lights and take some shots, only to find that the actual colours appear nothing like we first thought. But why?

In this article I’ll take a look at a couple of reasons why our first attempts into gelled lighting can be a little frustrating and sadly, disappointing. Hopefully with some of the tips I outline here, you'll be well on your way to richly saturated coloured gel shots in no time.

Gel Exposure

First and foremost, the biggest reason for insipid looking colours when using gels, is exposure. I am of course referring to how bright or dark you have your gelled light in relation to the camera.

Correctly exposing coloured gels is arbitrary at best and the sooner you come to terms with that fact, the easier your gel work will be. There simply is no ‘correct’ exposure for gels.

Take a look at the two shots above. Imagine we have our camera and key-light on our model correctly exposed at f4. We then light meter our orange gelled backlight to f4 and take a shot. The colour, like we see above, is insipid and washed out, but how can that be? We've 'correctly’ exposed it to our camera setting, why is it looking so washed out? Unfortunately, gels can't be light metered like normal lights, so what we have to do is reduce the light on the gelled light or like in the image above shoot at a smaller aperture, to reduce the amount of light entering the lens. By simply reducing the gel light by two stops of power, we get an intense, rich colour instead of a washed out one.

To those wondering why you can’t simply light-meter a gel; it’s due to the fact that the meter only sees in grey. It can’t see the colour you’re trying to achieve so it’ll often trick you into over-exposing your colours as a result.

This image is made up of 13 different gels and it documents what they all look like at different exposures when shone onto a plain white wall. They are metered at the central point in the image to maintain consistency. The f numbers at the side represent the f-number the camera was set too, the power of the light stayed the same but I just let more or less light into the camera respectively. -Click to Enlarge- — This image is made up of 13 different gels and it documents what they all look like at different exposures when shone onto a plain white wall. They are metered at the central point in the image to maintain consistency. The f numbers at the side represent the f-number the camera was set too, the power of the light stayed the same but I just let more or less light into the camera respectively. -*Click to Enlarge-*

The diagram above illustrates this point by showing you that the colour and tone of the gels changes drastically with exposure and although this might seem obvious enough, it's easy to fall into the trap of trying to 'correctly' expose something. All 13 of the gels used here were all shot with the gel relatively close to the wall as I wanted to include the hotspot and its falloff of light within the image. As a result you will probably witness many stops of exposure difference within any single frame but it helps to illustrate just how many different tones can be achieved with gel exposure alone.

Technique Tuesday Creating the Perfect Gelled Backgroundnew.jpg

If you’d like to learn even more about using gels on backgrounds and how to maintain a more uniform tone throughout the frame (no hot-spot or vignetting), then you will either need to move your gelled light further away from the wall or make the gelled light source larger. More information can be seen on this in this article Creating the Perfect Gelled Background

As I mentioned earlier, I tend to always under-expose my gels and as you can see from the gel diagram above, the colours of the gels exposed at f11 or f16 are a lot more saturated and deeper in colour.

Remember these stops are just numbers, try to just think of it as two or three stops darker than your models key light or camera setting.

With the gels appearing darker like this, you tend to have a more consistent colour throughout your frame and they appear to have a more even exposure too.

Colour Contamination

Another major factor to bear in mind is how other lights in the shot will affect the exposure and the colour of your gels.

Trying to minimise the spill of light from other light sources onto your gelled colours will certainly help to maintain and hold their saturation. For example, if your models key-light is spilling onto your gelled background, no matter how much you under-expose your gels to maximise saturation, they will always look washed out.

There are a few ways to combat this. You could flag all of the lights that might be spilling onto your background or increase the inverse square law theory (essentially move your key light closer to the model thereby increasing the falloff rate of light to the background). This is a last resort though, as this will of course change the properties of light i.e hardness of light falling onto the model. Alternatively the easiest and usually the most overlooked solution is to move your model and all other lighting away from the gelled background. Try to treat it like you are lighting two completely separate sets; your model, and your background. No light from either set should affect one another.

Technique Tuesday KEEPING Perfectly Lit Gelled Backgrounds.jpg

When your background was a white wall, it obviously matters very little if your models key light is spilling onto the background. With gels however, this additional light falling onto the colour will 'contaminate' it and drastically change its appearance. Colour contamination is literally a whole other article in its own right, so if you'd like to learn more on the finer details of avoiding it you can see everything explained further here KEEPING Perfectly Lit Gelled Backgrounds

Gel Density

One other key point when exposing for gels, is to remember that not all gels were created equal. As you can see from the gel exposure diagram at the top of this article, even though they were all shot at the same time and with the same settings, some gels are blown out completely and some are very dark at the same exposure. This is because some highly saturated gels like reds and blues, need to be physically quite dense or thick, this in turn reduces the amount of light that passes through them which gives them the impression of being darker and more saturated. Conversely, some gels like yellows are very thin and let a lot of light through them. This may seem obvious, but the point I'm trying to make is that there isn't a strict rule of every time you use a gel you need to underexposure it by 2 stops. Some gels will need a lot more or less power than others and over time you'll get used to which ones require more light.

It may even be a good idea to do a similar test to the one I did, with your own gels and see what colours can be obtained. Using your specific gels will enable you to get a feel for what they look like over and under exposed (lighter and darker relative to the cameras exposure).

Of course, if you want to buy my gels that I use, you can find all the details about them here JHP Colour Gel Packs. More details below.

Key points to Remember:

There is no ‘correct’ exposure for your gels. Only lighter resulting colours and darker resulting colours relative to your cameras exposure setting.
Your gels will appear more saturated the darker they are in the image.
Darker gels appear to give a more even tone throughout the frame.
Moving your gelled light further away from your background will give you a more even exposure from edge to edge and a more even colour throughout.
Minimise the contamination (light spill) of other light sources on set. This is especially important on some of the thinner gels like yellow.
Not all gels were created equal, some of them are very thick and will need a lot more light to create certain looks. These are usually the very saturated colours like the reds and blues.

Of course, if you don't already own some gels and you're looking to get some, please feel free to take a look a the collections of gels I've put together. These collections are what I use day to day to create some of the most highly saturated colours around. If you're looking at getting into gelled lighting or need to get stronger and richer colours in your coloured gel work, why not check out my Jake Hicks Photography Gel Packs

If you guys have any questions about any of the topics I've mentioned or if you have anything to add, please do so in the comments below as I'd love to here your thoughts too :)

Thanks for reading :)

:WARNING: Yet more opportunities to spend money on cool stuff below :D

If you're interested in any of my work and would like to know more about how I created some of my shots then why not check out my workshops. Here you can find out everything there is to know about Gelled Lighting, Long Exposure Flash Photography and my entire Post-Pro Workflow. Jake Hicks Photography - Workshops

I have also just released a brand new 22 hour complete Gelled Lighting Tutorial video. I go over everything from studio lighting setups with gels to being on location with gels plus I also go through my complete retouching and post pro workflow. For more details and complete breakdown of everything that's include check out my Coloured Gel Portraits Tutorial

I also offer comprehensive coloured gel packs. These collections of gels are what I use day to day to create some of the most highly saturated colours around. If you're looking at getting into gelled lighting or need to get stronger and richer colours in your coloured gel work why not check out my Jake Hicks Photography Gel Packs

Hidden Gems from The Photography Show 2014

I have previously been to the UK's big annual trade show called 'Focus on Imaging' but they stopped running it last year. Whether it died a death due to the vice like grip of the Internets instant news updates or through poor management is unclear but what was clear is that Focus left a gaping hole for another annual photographic event here in the UK. After all, without Focus you had to go all the way to Germanys biannual Photokina for your fix of whats going on in the industry and to get the much needed face to face that the Internet can never replace.

Jen Brook on stage sharing her creative vision and inspiration for her incredibly popular Dreamcatcher project.

So when I heard the UK was gearing up to host a replacement was certainly intrigued to see whether a trade show of this size was really needed in our 24/7 connected world. I am pleased to say though that I felt The Photography Show (TPS) was a big success. Granted I was only there for the Monday, the first trade day, but to say it was incredibly busy is an understatement. TPS seemed to be occupying the same space as focus, but I could be mistaken and they had everything there from the big names like Hasselblad, Nikon, Canon, Olympus and so on right down to the independent suppliers and framers. There really was every niche catered for and on top of all the wallet murdering trade stands there were some big name speakers like Rankin and Joe McNally as well as a full compliment of others including Jen brook who really helped bring the content full circle so that there really was something for all tastes and skill levels.

It would seem that the Overreaching impression from everybody, public, professionals and the exhibitors that I spoke too was that the whole event was a lot 'more' organised than focus. TPS seemed a far cry from the old mentality of 'turn up pitch your tent and get on with it'. This time you get the impression that there is an overall agenda and 'global' schedule where speakers and demos aren't competing for attention as much as they were before because they are on at different times, giving us the audience the opportunity to see as much as possible without having to choose between one or another.

This is just before Nikon announced that they had made the decision as a company to change the font in the menus of the new D4s. I can't believe I didn't catch it on camera!

So enough waffling about the event itself I want to just take a few paragraphs to highlight a couple of cool items I saw and that I personally thought was interesting. There are hundreds of other places online you can see what's big and 'trending' from the event but I just wanted to take a few moments to show what caught my eye. For example I won't be commenting on how Nikon spent several minutes showing the audience how the new D4s has changed its menu font! And no I am unfortunately not joking (for the record I am a Nikon shooter so I sheepishly left their talk at this stage)

LED's and continuous lighting in general is massive these days and its only growing more and more popular. LEDs are very cheap to make and they sell them for a lot less than speed lights, strobes and other flash units so they are definitely growing momentum for not only cost but for ease of use. What you see is what you get, job done. Couple that with the outrageous urge to shoot absolutely everything at f1.2 these days and you have your perfect lighting tools.

Andrew Appleton and Zara Watson showcasing the Ice Lights

There were literally dozens of different options available on the day but there were a couple that caught my eye over others. Firstly I had the pleasure of seeing the renowned Andrew Appleton and the lovely Zara Watson. They were diligently showcasing some of their work together using the infamous Ice lights manufactured by Westcott. A very versatile piece of kit, and having a couple of these in your bag would certainly not be daft. They are tubes of daylight balanced light that run on an hours charge and seem very bright indeed. I think this is achieved by having the lights spread along a tube rather the traditional panel which in my opinion is very cumbersome and awkward to keep handy. This strip like shape gives the overall impression of a much lager light source than it actually is. Andrew showed how this product was ideal for lighting particularly tricky areas like piano keys or emulating the glow of a laptop. If you're in the market for a continuous light that is super slim to pop in your bag then definitely check them out, you can even attach two end to end for an even bigger light source.

The Rotolight, a powerful and versatile LED continuous lighting attachment that was used to light the 'Captain Phillips' movie.

Another little LED light that caught my eye was a smaller and circular LED ring light called Rotolight. Now although its not intended as a 'ring light' I can't see any reason why not if you had a micro 4/3 camera with a physically smaller lens. Their big claim to fame though was that they used these little things when filming 'Captain Phillips' with Tom Hank and as with all the continuos lights they are great for video, something that more and more photographers are having to offer as part of their repertoire. These little guys also have a clever way of adding some colour with optional gels that can be inserted between the case and the bulb meaning that with two of them you could actually make the obligatory 'bride getting ready' shots look relatively interesting.

Gadget wise this little fella grabbed me, its a loupe/viewfinder from RK Photographic. The Hoodman custom Finder kits major difference is that you don't fully attach it to the back of your camera, it actually attaches to the tripod mount on the base of your camera meaning that no mucky or scary adhesives get stuck to your screen and you don't have to have the loupe smashing into everything if you have it dangling around your neck. It really was a fantastically engineered piece, it had lugs to keep it rigid without spinning from side-to-side, it had allowances for nearly all tripod plates in the known universe and a simple quarter turn on the screw to the side allows for the whole loupe to slide effortlessly off. Of course because of the nature of it attaching to the tripod screw mount it fits every camera and even allows for added battery grips with a vertical slider too. Had it not of been £230 or something I would of gotten one. I think if I shot more video and used Liveview a lot more I would of succumbed to the temptation, as it is I just had to sing its praises here. I didn't really get any good shots of it as the salesman was swamped for it so a link will have to suffice.

The ever increasing popularity of the UAVs was apparent with a substantial stand from Droneflight Limited.

Another thing I noticed this time around along with the influx of continuos lighting and LEDs etc was the big push on Drones/UAVs or the remote controlled camera platforms. Droneflight Limited had a money burning stand their with prices ranging from £1500 for a GoPro mobile all the way up to the whopping £11,500 for what looked like people carrying dropship! I am not clear on the law here in the UK but I know that in the US currently it is illegal for a photographer to offer it as a paid service. I find it hard to believe that with our strict privacy laws and public indemnity insurance here that we will be far behind.

HighSpeedFlash.com were demonstrating their 1/100000 of second flash duration with some Matrix leaps.

A little niche product for you was a ridiculously high speed flash unit from the very helpful people at High Speed Flash. They were showcasing the flash durations by catching 'Matrix' style panning shots of people jumping about ridiculously. Their flash boasts a 'slow' version at 1/28000 of a second and a faster 1/100000 of a second. The slow version would be ideal for most circumstances that involve gravity based movement like water droplets, dancers, jumping spiders and…..toddlers. I was intrigued as I have had trouble catching very crisp water droplets in shoots before but the £1800 plus VAT for the 'slow' flash and £2500 plus VAT for the fast one was to rich for my blood. The faster version is for your ballistic photos, catching perfect images of bullets exiting apples and other explosions. They are not cheap so you need a big project to soak it up but its definitely worth looking into if you're about embark on a project with dancers in baby powder or similar.

The Royal Shakespeare Company opening up their warehouse of some 10,000 costumes for photographers and other artists to hire.

Strangely the Royal Shakespeare Company (RSC) had a booth there, but upon further investigation they are very cleverly trying to make use of the some 10,000 outfits they have stored over 6 floors at their warehouse in Stratford. What they offer is a very reasonable renting service of their incredibly extensive range of costumes and outfits that they have accumulated over their many years and countless productions. Basically they rent you the outfits for your shoot or video, all you have to do is provide them with as much information as you can and they will put something together for you based on your concept. They will even put the outfit together on a mannequin photograph it and send it over to you for your approval before they ship it out. Better still your stylist could go down there to pick and choose and get a feel for what works best seeing as it may well be almost impossible to guess what a 'ruffled collar and half-plate' might actually look like. Although if your stylist is anything like the ones I've worked with, sending them to a 6 floor warehouse of over 10,000 costumes could prove costly.

The 'Instant' Lomo range include backs for current toy cameras.

Build your own camera or just buy a plastic lens for your current one, Lomo has your Lo-Fi needs covered.

Finally and for me the the stand that brought out my inner child and more 'arty farty' side was the Lomography stand. Not only did they have an area for people to build their own cameras from their Konstruktor kits but they showcased some of their new products too. Top for me was this cool 're-imagined' land camera the Belair Instant Cmaera that takes the common Fuji landscape Instax film. This little rangefinder and retro style bellows camera has pretty basic functionality but it certainly looked fun to play with (although ridiculously expensive at just shy of £300). Lomo also had a few of the 'polaroid back' style cameras including an instant back for the legendary Diana camera. Again these would surely be a lot of fun to play around with especially with their already established line of other accessories. Plus just to make sure they cornered every angle in the retro market they have also released the retro style 'Lomography Experimental Lens Kit' for the micro 4/3 cameras.

The gorgeous lovechild of Zenit and Lomography, the solid brass 85mm f2.2 portrait lens.

For me, I have saved the best until last and this was surely the jewel in the crown of Lomographys stand, it was their gorgeous solid brass re-imagining of a bygone era. They have somehow managed to collaborate with the infamous Russian company Zenit to produce this gorgeous 85mm f2.2 Petzval portrait lens. But this product is not just for looks, this lens has been faithfully recreated with the so-called 'imperfections' of years gone by. The slightly misshapen lens creates gorgeous bokeh and although it works on Nikon and Canon APSC size sensors the real charm of the lens is shown properly when attached to a full frame body. It utilises a drop and shoot aperture ( including 2.2, 4, 5.6, 8, 11, 16 ) and is manual focus via a thumbscrew below the lens. I had a play with it whilst I was there and the thing feels amazing, very solidly built and although this appears to be a purists wet-dream it's not all for show and nostalgia the results speak for themselves. As I mentioned before the bokeh on this lens is phenomenal and as many others before me have failed to articulate this in words I will just ask for you to look at the sample images on the site and decide for yourself.

So how much is it? Well at £460 it's nots cheap for a 'novelty' lens but its popularity has already secured its appeal. It was originally a Kickstarter campaign that secured its goal of $100,000 in a mere 4 hours, and finally ending on a massive $1,396,149! Understandably this has made it one of the most successful Kickstarter projects ever run.

The lens currently has a 6 week backlog of orders as it desperately try's to fill its Kickstrarter funders but whatever you make of it I guarantee you have not heard the last of this lens.

So all in all a pretty good day, I rounded it off nicely with a few complimentary drinks in the Bowens pro lounge to discus some future projects which I look forward to sharing with you soon so many thanks to those good people at Bowens for that.

So if next year you get the chance to go to The photography Show 2015 definitely take it, I'll see you there, and if you went this year then please feel free to let me know what you thought or what products stood out to you.

Interview with Photographer Magic Owen

I have a been a big fan of UK based editorial photographer Magic Owen for a while, her work has gone from strength to strength in an incredibly short space of time and that is certainly not by chance. Magic's relentless dedication to her craft has been justly rewarded by being published in countless magazines and blogs because she has a unique way of selling her artistic vision. Magic explains in this interview that she has previously had the rare the opportunity to take part in many other roles on the opposite side of the camera, that for me is what makes her style stand out, a style that is the work of somebody that can see the bigger picture not just whats in her viewfinder.

Magic, please give us your elevator speech to begin with

I am a self taught photographer, born in France.
I first layed my hand on a camera when I was 15, but was interested in too many things like psychology, art, and languages to listen to my calling.
I am now based in Oxfordshire, UK. I shoot a lot of different things but my first love is fashion/Beauty. That is where my heart is and where my future is.
I have have started to take photography seriously at 35, 3 years ago and went part time (I have 2 jobs! we all need a regular income!) to let myself express myself artistically

Lets get some of the geeky stuff out of the way, whats in your camera bag? Is there anything in there you can't live without when you're shooting?

I have an OM-D and a 12-50 Olympus lens + a Leica 1:2.8/45 macro lens, and for fun an SLR Magic Toy lens. I use a use a Linux workstation running Gimp/Darktable (no photoshop!).
In my studio i have Bowens lighings, and lots of different coloured gels which I like to play with. I am all about experimenting and I don't have any particular habits which i must follow.

In your portfolio you have a mix of studio lighting and natural light images, do you have a preference as to how you light your images?

I like all lights, natural and studio, and use them to express the mood I am in at the time of the shoot depending on the concept/vision I have.

I understand that you started off playing a different role in the creative process of photography. Can you elaborate on this and perhaps tell us how this may of influenced your vision now that you're behind the camera?

I used to model back when I lived in France, which I got into because of low selfesteem! Weird I know! Not all models are up themselves and we all have different reasons for getting into modelling.
I am not ashamed to say that I have had eating disorders, and Body Dismorphia disorders which is very hard to deal with as a teen and an adult. I have always been artistic and used to draw in my spare time. My camera is simply an extension of my pencil if that makes sense. Previously I would borrow my best friend's camera or buy disposable cameras to experiment. Then I got into proper photography and used the darkroom for hours until I discovered digital. Having been a model I understand angles and I am able to guide models into getting the best shapes/poses/facial expressions, depending on if we are going for commercial/fashion....
I also know how important hair and makeup is in getting the best image. As I have worked with muas/hair stylist as a model/photographer I know to look at details a lot of photographers tend not to notice.

To have this many great shots in your portfolio already you must be a very self driven person, what would you consider to be the key elements in your development in photography?

I am very self driven but not out of choice, I have tried to give up photography on a few occasions having lost my mojo.
I have artistic visions which won't let me rest! My brain is always creating, shooting and investing in new concepts. Once I have achieved my vision through an image, my brain moves on to the next idea, it never shuts up and it gets particular active when I should be asleep!

The vast majority of your work is conceptual styling and extreme fashion but I notice you also occasionally shoot some very serene and intimate nature shots. Do you find the stark contrast between these two genres helps feed one another?

I see beauty in many places, which could be a face, a fashion piece, a leaf in the forest, textures.....it all comes from the same urge to capture something special. Anything and everything can awaken my senses and inspire me

Going through your portfolio it's clear to see that you use some post production in your imagery, is this something you have a clear vision for from the start and shoot with that in mind or is post production influenced by your photographs?

Every picture I take and load into the Gimp is sometime like an unfinished painting. Sometimes I just tweak somthing little and I am satisfied, and sometimes I feel the need to be more creative with my image.

There are so many steps to creating great images like yours but what is your favourite part of the photographic process?

My favourite part is the chemical reaction that runs through my body once I have my shot :p they are like orgasms lol I listen to my body which tells me when I have achieved my goal.

Do you love planning the shots or are you somebody who loves shooting and hates post production or somebody who loves watching the image transform in post?

I am a control freak and impulsive all at once! I love planning, looking at inspiration, making moodboards....but I also like to be impuslive and feed of my model's personality

A lot of your photographs seem quite conceptual, where do you get your inspiration from for your images? Are you inspired by other photographers and their work or are your images inspired and driven by a mood or theme?

I am always looking at fashion/beauty....websites. Trendhunter is one of them, Fashionography is another.
I admire photographers like Miguel Reveriego, Andrew Robert Fox, Mario Testino, Steven Klein and Mikael Jansson.

How would you describe your particular style in photography and do you think its important for a photographer to have a defining style to stand out in todays sea of image makers?

I think you have to be true to yourself and develop your own style. To be honest I don't even know what my style is, I would call myself an industrial photographer (like industrial music).
I am always evolving, always experimenting and I am sure my style will change over the years. A camera is just a tool for me, I don't even like calling myself a photographer.

In your opinion what makes a 'great' image, what separates a good photo from an average photo for you?

In my opinion the "eye" is everything. If you don't see potential images when you look at the world, it doesn't matter how much technical knowlege you have or how expensive your camera is, you will never take a great image.

What's your favourite image that you've ever taken and why?

My favorite image changes depending on my mood. One of my all time favourites though is a beauty shot of Leanne James who is wearing a a few headdresses (on her head and around her neck) made of silk roses. I wanted to take Leanne out of the Alternative scene and capture what I see in her. To me she is a beauty girl, she has the most amazing features and skin and I had to experiment with that to see if it would work.

Can you tell us what you're currently working on?

I am catching up on editing before flying off to Texas in a few days for 2 editorials.

If you could work alongside one photographer for a day who would it be and why?

I would love to shoot alongside An Lee, I love the emotion, tension and darkness of his images. I would love to learn from him to take my work to another level.

What would your dream shoot be?

I can't talk about it as i am going to realise it in a few months!
This is something I dreamt to do a year or so ago and I am in the process or organising it! Eeeeeeee I am very excited!
My other dream shoot would be a Mise en Cage campain shooting Tessa Kuragi! She is pure perfection! One day! ;)

You have already seen amazing success with your photography and you have so many images published and won numerous awards for your work but what's next for Magic Owen, what are your goals with regards to your photographic career?

Take over the world mwuhhaaahhhaahahaah lol lets just say I dream biiiiig!

I must just say a really big thank you to Magic for taking the time to do this interview and for being so candid and honest in her responses, I for one found her to be an inspiration and I look forward to seeing more of her work in the future and her 'big dream project' in a couple of months!

To connect with Magic Owen you can do so at any of her online hubs below, definitely stop by to say hi and to check out more of her fantastic work.

www.magicowen.co.uk

Magic Owen Facebook Page

Magic Owen on Twitter

Magic Owen on Tumblr

Magic Owen on Model Mayhem

All the images contained within this article are the sole property of Magic Owen. Any copying or reproduction of these images without the prior consent of the copyright holder is strictly prohibited.

Stay Focused - Selecting the best focusing method for each shoot

The longer you shoot, the larger your repertoire of subjects and assignments you photograph becomes. You start off photographing flowers in the garden, your neighbours dog, your sisters kids, your friends wedding and then before you know it, you're doing product shots for your friends new company. All this happens over time and there is one pretty fundamental skill that must remain paramount throughout this process; properly focused images.

Sure we've all been there, we've all taken that shot once in while which is slightly ‘soft’ (a polite photographers term to describe out-of-focus images), but it's a great shot so we keep it anyway. Even so, we would still of preferred it to be 'tack sharp'.

In focus images has been one of the most fundamental rules of photography right from the dawn of the craft. In the early 1900’s it was a craft in its own right but in the 1960's Leica introduced a rudimentary auto-focus system that changed everything. Since then of course auto-focus has developed dramatically and it's no longer a feature on cameras, its a given.

Modern Auto Focus

So bringing auto-foucs up to date we have a few options to choose from in our modern DSLR's and those are some of the features I just wanted to cover and when to use them. Both Canon and Nikon have very similar settings albeit incorporating different technologies the results are very similar. There are other brands like Sony and Olympus etc. that also follow suit but here I will be discussing the four main focus modes in Canon and Nikon.

This image was shot utilising the 'AF-S/One Shot' auto-focus mode on the camera. Here I focused on the models eyes and then recomposed my image so that she was over to the left of frame allowing for more space in the image where she is looking.

One Shot / AF-S

First off, you have the mode that’s probably been around the longest, Canon's 'One Shot' and Nikon's 'AF-S'. Both of these will do pretty much the same thing and they are predominantly used for stationary objects like model shoots (most of the time, more on when not to use 'AF-S/One Shot on model shoots later) and anything that doesn't require your subject to move around too much in frame. You half press the shutter in this mode and then you can recompose the image, for example you focus on the models eyes then recompose her to be on the left hand side of the image. This auto focus mode is the most common one and will get you through most situations.

Al Servo / AF-C

Next we have the step up from the single focus to Canon's 'AI Servo' and Nikon's 'AF-C'. Essentially what these settings do is continuously track your initial focus point and readjusts the focus accordingly. This setting is ideal for moving subjects like active children and pets that are constantly on the move within your frame.

AI Focus / AF-A

Finally out of the auto focus settings we have Canons 'AI Focus' and Nikons 'AF-A'. Both of these settings actually leave it up to the camera to decide which is best out of the other two focusing modes to use and will choose to continuously track your chosen subject should it decide to move or focus lock if you would like to recompose.

In theory then I needn't have bothered explaining the other two settings as surely this is the best of both worlds? Not quite, I personally have tested this mode a fair amount with stop-start subjects and although the camera does a good job of keeping up with them, it’s always more accurate to use continuous focus mode. The same also goes for its ability to determine when a subject has stopped and when to focus lock for recomposing. Personally I never use this mode as although it has the best of both it also has the worst of both.

So although I have just covered the three basic settings here very briefly, there is of course a whole host of other technological advancements in auto-focus I haven't covered. I know Nikon has extensive, matrix and 3D auto focusing features as well as most modern DSLR also incorporating the 'back button auto focus' which also helps with focus locking, but going over all of that is not the purpose of this article.

Manual Focus

The last focus mode I wanted to cover and one that is rarely used is the Manual focus mode. Now this mode strikes fear into the heart of nearly all modern photographers and that’s simply because they've probably never used it. Do you ever need to use it? That is something that only you can decide and is probably based on the type of photographs you take. If you only ever take portraits of energetic kids or fast paced sports then auto-focus is probably aways your go-to focus mode. If however, you shoot still life, architecture, landscapes and other detailed and relatively motionless subjects then manual focus is probably a good way to go. There's a few reasons for this; landscape photographers will want to find the hyper-focal distance of their scene to maximise the amount of 'in-focus' points in the scene, this is based on an equation so auto-focusing on a specific object is not always a good place to start. Still life photographers will usually have their camera 'locked off' on a tripod so they will not want to focus and recompose once they've set up the shot, its just far easier to focus manually.

There is however another reason to want to use manual mode on some cameras and in certain situations, and this is the catalyst for this article.

This version of the image was shot using the auto-focus mode 'AF-S/One Shot' and meant that after I had focused and recomposed the shot, the models eyes were left 'out' of focus.

The ‘Focus-Recompose’ Issue

I recently purchased a 85mm f1.8 prime lens and I wanted to test the lens out to see what the sharpness was like at f1.8. I predominately only photograph models so I set up my test and went about taking some shots at f1.8 using my usual AF-S/One Shot auto-focusing mode. When I got my shots back to the computer to take a look I was surprised to see that most of them were very 'soft'. It took a few minutes to realise my error and since then, I've adjusted how I shoot with these parameters.

Here you can see that the selected focal node is still situated in the middle of the viewfinder even though I have elected the outer most one when shooting in the portrait format.

I haven't done a lot of very shallow depth of field shots up until this point so I hadn't seen the now exaggerated results of my poor focusing technique previously.

At f1.8 you have a very, very shallow amount 'in-focus', so for example a head shot with the eyes in-focus the tip of the subjects nose is 'out' of focus. For the test I was photographing the model at 3/4 length and shooting up at her so my camera height was probably at her waist height. I was about 6ft/2m away from her and I was focusing on her eyes with my focal point in camera then recomposing my shot to capture the 3/4 length crop. The problem with most (DSLR) cameras is that although they have a lot of focusing points, they're all clustered in the centre of the viewfinder so even though I chose the outer most focal point I still have a dramatic amount of recomposing to do.

This diagram clearly illustrates whats actually going on when you recompose an image after focusing in 'AF-S/One Shot' auto-focusing mode. The actual part of the image that was in focus is now out of focus.

This isn't normally a noticeable problem when recomposing at f8, f11 and f16 but at f1.8 that dramatic shift in the focal plane means the resulting image is very soft around the models eyes. As I recomposed the shot it actually repositioned my focal point further back behind the model, meaning the back of her head and hair were in focus but not her eyes.

There is not too many ways around this pesky little issue, especially as you might not notice it on the back of the cameras little screen. One thing that did resolve it though was by switching to 'manual' focus. I could then compose my shot and manually focus on the models eyes resulting in a fantastically sharp image where I wanted it to be.

Granted there was a few things conspiring together here to really exaggerate the issue. Firstly I was shooting at f1.8; that’s always going to rely on critical sharpness. Secondly I was down low shooting up, this always exaggerates the focal plane shift when recomposing and lastly I was stuck with limited focal nodes. There are many technical reasons why modern DSLR's don't allow focal nodes towards the edges, a lot of smaller frame cameras like the mirrorless, APS-C and micro 4/3 cameras all have selectable focal nodes covering the entire viewfinder, but alas DSLR technology still isn't there yet. Until it does, it’s a good idea to be aware of what’s going on in auto focus modes on your camera and be prepared and ready to switch to manual focus when required. Manual focusing is a skill and as such will take a little practice, but with a little patience you should notice an increase in the hit rate of 'tack sharp' shots. Good Luck!

Your 'basic' 6 light set-up

Canon 1Ds Mk II - CAMERA

70 mm - LENS

F 11- F-STOP

1/250 sec - SHUTTER SPEED

100 - FILM SPEED

Flash - LIGHT SOURCE

This lighting technique is probably best referred to as beauty lighting and suits portraits and head-shots.

Granted the slightly tongue-in-cheek title to this technique teases that there might actually be a 'basic' 6 light set-up but truth be told this is one of the easier ones to get right.

This is a shoot that I did many years ago, way back in 2009. Back then I was looking very closely at other photographers lighting and reverse engineering their set-ups. This lighting is very famously used by Jill Greenberg in her crying baby project and then later with several of her animal projects. In fact looking at her work over the years you can actually see that nearly all of her shots are a variation of this lighting technique in one form or another.

Truth be told I'm not completely happy with my finished shots for this shoot and in hindsight and with more experience under my belt I can certainly see things that I would change. Firstly let me go over the lighting technique itself and then I'll come back and talk about a few tweaks I would make if I was shooting this again. I say 'tweaks' because it's not the set-up and light placement I take issue with but more to do with the power settings for each light that could be adjusted slightly.

The 6 light set-up: 1 hair light above, 2 side lights, 2 fill lights and 1 ring-flash.

The set-up itself obviously requires 6 separate heads: one ring-flash, one overhead hair light, two side hair lights and two fill umbrellas. In my set-up here I was using a beauty dish above as a hair light but this could be substituted by a honeycomb or snoot (space permitting), also I'm using two fill umbrellas but again these could be substituted for soft boxes. Something to note from my diagram here is that I didn't have a boom on the day so my beauty dish hair-light is just on a stand behind the black backdrop. This isn't ideal as it would of been nice to get more light on top of the models head, something that a boom would of enabled, also I was constantly fighting the threat of flare into the lens because that light was so far back and virtually pointed straight into camera.

This technique is probably better suited to portraits, head-shots or half body shots, the reasons for this is that its a very beatifying light, it wraps the model in light and it can be tricky to define structure with so much light. When you're shooting full body or even 3/4 length some of the lighting definition gets lost and in my opinion loses impact. Also this is a major pain to light evenly when showing the full body, the side lights would either have to be large strip-boxes or the sidelights would have to be set quite far back to provide even light. On top of this I dread to think of the 'spaghetti junction' of shadows being cast on the floor at her feet, that would not be pretty to retouch.

One of the most interesting points to note about this setup is obviously the use of a ring-flash. Anybody who has used a ring-flash will know that its 'drop off' of light is crucial to creating its tell-tale look. The light should appear to 'drop off' enough so as to allow for a slightly darker edge all the way around the body, its seen here in these images around the face and skin. Cleverly though this lighting technique counters that shadow nicely by transitioning to highlights thanks to the edge-lighting. This works particularly well here as the model has volume to her hair allowing for the lighting to remain separated. Something to be mindful of though is that when using a ring-flash your lighting can appear very flat and it takes some tweaking to ensure you still create shape and structure with your subject. Its for this reason that I'm not completely satisfied with the final images and I believe that by dropping the power of the ring-flash a little would of really helped to avoid the current slightly 'washed-out' look I have here.

The two sidelights and the hair-light above are metered a stop above (camera set to f11, edge-lights and hair-light metered to f16) and the two fill lights are metered a stop below (camera set to f11 two fill-lights set to f8) and finally the ring-flash was metered to the camera (f11). The tweaks I mentioned earlier are that I would probably dial down the ring-flash a little. There is so much light in this set-up that it is hard to tell whats doing what. The edge and hair-lights are easy its just getting the right combination of light from the ring-flash and the fill-lights that is down to personal preference.

Granted this lighting technique is not for everybody, firstly you need six studio lights which is not always an option but if you're renting a studio for the day and you have those facilities to play with then it might be worth playing around with it, especially if you're shooting beauty work. In Jill Greenberg's original set-up I think she actually used 7 lights, she had an extra one lighting the background of her subject. For me, I only had 6 lights and I wanted a much darker background to contrast the edge lighting and make the model really stand out in the image.

So if you're feeling brave enough and you've got plenty of time to set-up before the model is ready then give it a go.