Club President strobe magic

[Mike McCarty]

Hey Garth,

My leaning would be toward the first. I'm sure you could make a wonderful portrait out of either, and we are just knitting around the edges here, but since you ask ...

I think I like the first for the very reason that you don't. The more dimly lit, less literal background in the first seems to advance the subject a little more. Also, the subjects skin has a little more color. Not that that's a big deal, you will make whatever adjustments you need.

The lighting style is a little more complex than the usual side lit that we often see. Your "above" lighting has given an accentuation to the shadows on either side of the nose, and an almost equal distribution of light on either side of the face. I wonder if you tried setting your lights on only one side? Or, maybe diminishing the off side even more?

It's a great composition and you will make a great painting I'm sure.

[Garth Herrick]

Hi Mike,

Thanks for your good thoughts. The color is supposed to be identical on the subject between the two versions. You are right that the subject advances more with the darker background. While the lighting is slightly complex, if you look at the highlight position on the forehead, he really is way more side lit rather than top lit. The lights were slightly above him at seven feet, and definitely obliquely from the side. It would have been nice to have been able to power down the secondary fill light even more, were it possible. Without it however, we would be in effect looking at a phase of the moon! The one time it did not fire, it was horrible looking with just the main light.

I can't shoot again, but if I could, perhaps I'd stop down the aperture even more and add more power to the principal light. As I said, the secondary light was at its lowest setting already.

Thanks again,

Garth