I'll see your tough guy and raise you a mandolin player... Sean, picker and James Joyce aficionado. I'd heard that close light is soft light, so I decided to try my Photogenic at about 2 feet, with just the reflector, powered way down. Not real soft but not xray either. Thought I'd try dark background, actually its one of those mottled earth tone painted things, just hanging around so i used it. Again, a plaroid negative. The corners result from the neg being too big for my enlarger, a larger one's in the works. Fire away....

-- Chris Yeager (cyeager@ix.netcom.com), April 08, 2001

Answers

Close is only soft if the source is large (all relative terms, of course). You should try it again with a softbox or a big pan reflector.

-- John Kantor (jkantor@mindspring.com), April 08, 2001.

Actually that had occurred to me, good to have it reinforced. I just thought I'd start with unmodified light close and powered way down to see how "soft" it gets...

-- Chris Yeager (cyeager@ix.netcom.com), April 08, 2001.

He reminds me of a guy I know (but without the piercings).

One thing to watch out for when your light source is very close to the subject is significant light fall off. Foreheads and noses can appear noticeably brighter than cheeks/necks. With b&w, a little burning can fix the problem, but with transparencies, it can ruin the photo. (Or it can give an interesting effect.)

-- Mike Dixon (mike@mikedixonphotography.com), April 10, 2001.

I like the light. It's uniform but directional. My only beef would be the slightly hazy blacks and poor seperation between his hair and the background.

He has a very renaissance look. If it were me I'd be tempted to turn this into a Holbein or Cranach portrait with lettering behind his head and small iconic objects in the foreground.

-- Struan Gray (struan.gray@sljus.lu.se), April 10, 2001.