Evvan - if I am understanding correctly what raking light is, then I think your shell demonstrates it well. So Robt.....tell us if we're wrong or right on this.
I'm thinking that the outside of the right half of the shell demonstrates raking light as some of it is in shadow and some is lit, while the inside is the lit/flat side. Good or bad example?
Excellent example of raking light, referring to the actual quality of light on the shell. leaves a bit to be desired compositionally but I'm sure you know that already :-) As an exercise, spot-on. Gold Star.
I had an e-mail exchange with a non-group member, and I thought it might be of interest to show my response here:
> I have a question
> about Raking Light.
> To my understanding it is lighting the subject being
> photographed from an
> angle. My question is if this angle is specific,
> or can it be lighting
> from any angle?
Response:
The short answer to your question is that the terms (raking light, flat light, strong light, back light) are of necessity arbitrary; we "define" them so we have a common vocabulary with which to communicate. So I might say to you, "This would work better if the light was more raking," or "This would work better if the light was stronger," and you know what I'm referring to.
As a matter of "definition", as I explained in the thread, "raking light" is light that is at more or less right angles to the shooting axis and is approximately parallel to the surface being illuminated, so that it "rakes" the surface and reveals texture. Since the element of rake can have both a horizontal and a vertical component (noontime sun can rake a vertical wall, for example), the definition is flexible.
In the end, what we're after is that you develop an awareness of the interaction between light and subject, and use the light lovingly to reveal the essence you are seeking to capture in your image, whatever that may be; complexity, solidity, simplicity, transparency, speed, state-of-rest, whatever.
Today has been a GOOD picture day.
I trusted the camera, and came out with pictures that amaze me, even if they don't everyone else :)
As I was looking through them, trying to consider the different types of light, I think this one shows raking (or what I understood it to be) It's more vertical than horizontal. The sun was hgsigh and just behind him which made the shadows show off the fluff of his neck and lay of his wings.
I did have a couple that were better, but they made it into a challenge and I don't THINK anyone will be able to recognize them as mine. My daughter is no where in site! :)
Yes, that's a soft, muted sort of vertically raking light. The exture of the feathers everywhere except on the bird's back is very sweetly revealed. You have a problem, of course, with blown-out white feathers on the bird's back. Without seeing an original, unaltered image I don't know if this can be corrected, but it's worth a try, because that's a very nice shot indeed. Gold star for the soft, gentle raking light.
Excellent example of raking light, referring to the actual quality of light on the shell. leaves a bit to be desired compositionally but I'm sure you know that already :-) As an exercise, spot-on. Gold Star.
PS go easy on me this is with my new camera and I have to figure all of this stuff out =).
You got it pretty good, dude. That's got a strong relationship to the earlier flower shot; it's a combination of raking light and backlight. Gold star for the light.
Not the most exciting shot, but shows raking light bringing out the textures and defining the subject.
Yes, absolutely. Do us a favor, if this is close by and convenient, and shoot it in flat light, exact same framing, will ya? For comparison? Gold star for raking light. You could make the image more luminous and it would be a very nice shot indeed.
Do us a favor, if this is close by and convenient, and shoot it in flat light, exact same framing, will ya? For comparison? Gold star for raking light. You could make the image more luminous and it would be a very nice shot indeed.
Robt.
That might be tough. The wall is very convenient. You look out my front door at work and there it is. However, it runs due East/West and with the sun so far north this time of year it will be textured most of the time unless I can catch it on a totally overcast day. I can however use it to show raking light coming from many different angles.
Or I can cheat and shoot it after dark with flash...
Edit: Starting to think lighting... High noon should make the wall appear much flatter because even though the light is raking, it's falling evenly on both of the slanted brick faces. Classmates, am I right?
Do us a favor, if this is close by and convenient, and shoot it in flat light, exact same framing, will ya? For comparison? Gold star for raking light. You could make the image more luminous and it would be a very nice shot indeed.
Robt.
That might be tough. The wall is very convenient. You look out my front door at work and there it is. However, it runs due East/West and with the sun so far north this time of year it will be textured most of the time unless I can catch it on a totally overcast day. I can however use it to show raking light coming from many different angles.
Or I can cheat and shoot it after dark with flash...
Edit: Starting to think lighting... High noon should make the wall appear much flatter because even though the light is raking, it's falling evenly on both of the slanted brick faces. Classmates, am I right?
Grasshopper, you are correct. Also, you can shoot it on an overcast day (as you mentioned), or even consider shooting it with your flash filling the shadows. Anything to iron out the texture and make it flat.
I took this last evening from a friend frount garden.
They have this view every evening....
It's a cross between strong and flat light as the sun is 45 degrees over my left shoulder.
45 degrees left shoulder = strong light. Nothing flat about the light itself, it's even low enough to throw some relief. Not much detail to "reveal" on the ground at this broad a view. The lower the light gets, the more textured will appear the ground.
In other words, Let the light drop way down, still keeping it off left shoulder, and you'll have a stronger raking element, but from a "strong" light direction.
45 degrees left shoulder = strong light. Nothing flat about the light itself, it's even low enough to throw some relief. Not much detail to "reveal" on the ground at this broad a view. The lower the light gets, the more textured will appear the ground.
In other words, Let the light drop way down, still keeping it off left shoulder, and you'll have a stronger raking element, but from a "strong" light direction.
Nice shot.
I agree with Robert. A later in the evening shooting time will bring out more detail in the ground and give a little more depth in the foreground trees by throwing a longer shadow. A pleasant by product will be warmer tones. Also I would try and move in a little closer to the trees and (is it a) wheat (?) field and you will get more detail in the tree's. Lovely Scene!
Notice how the texture of the indian stands out and also there is texturing in the trees!
Technically there's no such thing as "raking light" on a curved surface, as by definition it is light that nearly parallels the plane of the subject, and there IS no planar surface on (in this case) a cylinder. So that's just "strong light", and it's well-chosen to boot. The texture of the carving is completely expressed throughout. Very descriptive lighting.
Robert, in this thread and in the landscape thread, you keep using the term luminous and luminance in the context of increasing the luminance to improve the shot. I'm not sure exactly what you mean by this. Would it be too much to ask that you show examples of a shot that you have worked on both before and after in regards to this terminology?
Robert used the terms when describing one of my images. Here's a before and after of the image he was talking about...
Yes I saw those in the other thread. I guess I don't understand if by luminous he means brighter or is there more to it than that... A definition in Roberts words would help me out considerably...
Robert used the terms when describing one of my images. Here's a before and after of the image he was talking about...
Yes I saw those in the other thread. I guess I don't understand if by luminous he means brighter or is there more to it than that... A definition in Roberts words would help me out considerably...
This was just a tie over until Robert could answer....
I don't usualy cross post, but I don't know how this split class thing works. I posted this originaly on Landscapes, but the photo pertained more to this side of the classroom. This was my raking light attempt.
