# Struggling with LED lamps and DOF...



## Mr_Chris

Hi all, looking for some help getting better product shots at work please - I am a keen amateur photography and made the mistake of volunteering to help out in my new job getting their catalog and web presence up to speed!
I am use a Nikon D5300 with 18-55 kit lens  and two 500w GODOX LED Panels (white LEDS) and a large light tent....








Basically I need the product in focus from front to back - I am sticking to 35mm length,  f22 and 1/40 to get the most DOF and brightest image without being burnt out...and i end up with:






The boxes are there to help me focus on something - this shot was focused on the closest part of the pipe and you can see the focus dropping off by halfway up. I do have some experience shooting products and i know DOF only stretches a foot approx in front of - and behind - the center of the image. I would usually use my trusty 50mm lens to improve the situation but for now i need to get it to work with the kit lens before my bosses give up on me!

This is how the images need to look - they were taken by a pro studio and i noticed from the file data that they used a 90mm lens - is this usual practice?

*Please don't post images to which you do not hold rights.  You may post a link. *

I have achieved some OK results with the help of photoshop but its hit and miss with the focusing - even at f29 the above image would be slightly out of focus towards the back for example - i cant figure out if its the lamps (my first time using LED panels) the lens or the settings. I had better results at home using Tungsten bulbs/lightboxes but i dont think thats the key.
Where am i going wrong? my only other option is focus stacking software at this stage it seems...

Lastly - i have linked my images from photobucket but i have grown sick of its adverts etc - can anyone suggest a good free alternative? preferably with some kind of quick resizing options too? thanks
Chris


----------



## weepete

First of all that's two entirely different products you are comparing. Second depth of field is not only down to aperture and focal length but the distance to your subject as well, often the distance to subject is a critical factor. If you want to get it all in acceptable focus use a depth of field calculator and work out how far away you need to be to get depth of field deep enough to cover the whole subject and allow a bit exta for margin of error.

This may be worth a read for you.
https://www.amazon.co.uk/Light-Science-Magic-Introduction-Photographic/dp/0240812255


----------



## tirediron

Something like that is going to be a very awkward object to photograph simply because of how close you are to it (the nearer to the subject the less DoF you have) and how long it is.  Assuming you need to shoot a 3/4 profile to showcase it, my suggestion would be to use focus stacking, because otherwise you're battling the laws of physics, and unless you know someone the rest of us don't, that's a battle you can't win.  

The 90mm lens that was used was probably a macro lens allowing for closer than normal focusing, and it's entirely likely that focus stacking was used to achieve the resultant images.  Shooting at f29-32 can actually adversely affect the images due to softness induced by diffraction.


----------



## Mr_Chris

weepete said:


> First of all that's two entirely different products you are comparing. Second depth of field is not only down to aperture and focal length but the distance to your subject as well, often the distance to subject is a critical factor. If you want to get it all in acceptable focus use a depth of field calculator and work out how far away you need to be to get depth of field deep enough to cover the whole subject and allow a bit exta for margin of error.
> 
> This may be worth a read for you.
> https://www.amazon.co.uk/Light-Science-Magic-Introduction-Photographic/dp/0240812255


LOL - I was waiting for someone to recommend that book to me - already on order from amazon after reading several posts on here....shipping from States so will have to wait a while unfortunately. Tried the DOF calculators but we are talking a change of focus over a few centimeters and those calcs are set up for much larger subjects it seems....thanks though!


----------



## Mr_Chris

So to avoid confusion i have included a smaller part to highlight my struggle - the image that i am aiming for IS ALSO OUR PROPERTY SO PLEASE DONT REMOVE IT AGAIN(!)

The setup:





The problem (not sharp from front to back) can you see the focus fall-off on the left hand side?





What i am aiming for:

*IMAGE DELETED BY A MODERATOR.* 


I beginning to think its not enough light and that the LED panels are acting like torch beams instead of a blanket coverage like im used to with softboxes.....help!


----------



## fmw

As another bit of information, depth of field extends in front of the plane of focus as well as behind it.  About 1/3 is in front and 2/3 behind.  If you focus 1/3 of the way from front to back you can improve things.  The pipe should be placed at a less severe angle from the lens.  Your light tent is limiting this.  If I were shooting this subject I would use a white paper background outside the light tent lit by a couple of lights.  I would back up and shoot the subject which had been turned to a less severe angle.  I agree that out of focus areas have no place in product catalog photography.

Another option would be to photograph the two ends of the pipe and forget most of it since most of it looks the same.  You need something that lets the prospective customer see what he needs to see to make a buying decision.  Sometimes that takes less than you think.


----------



## fmw

Mr_Chris said:


> What i am aiming for:
> 
> 
> I beginning to think its not enough light and that the LED panels are acting like torch beams instead of a blanket coverage like im used to with softboxes.....help!



This one is easy to reproduce.  I would shoot it in the light tent (this one was) against a black background.  Then it is trivial to remove the background or change its color in post process.   This image may not have been made against a blue background.  If it was, then it was cleaned up in post process.


----------



## tirediron

Mr_Chris said:


> So to avoid confusion i have included a smaller part to highlight my struggle - the image that i am aiming for IS ALSO OUR PROPERTY SO PLEASE DONT REMOVE IT AGAIN(!)


When a moderator edits a post, or removes something, please leave it removed until you have discussed that with a moderator.  You stated that the image I removed was taken by a "pro studio".  Just because you or your company paid for the right to use them, that does not guarantee that they are your property or that you have the right to post them here.  Let's make everyone happy and just post a link, okay?

Thanks!


----------



## weepete

Mr_Chris said:


> LOL - I was waiting for someone to recommend that book to me - already on order from amazon after reading several posts on here....shipping from States so will have to wait a while unfortunately. Tried the DOF calculators but we are talking a change of focus over a few centimeters and those calcs are set up for much larger subjects it seems....thanks though!



Just change the units to cm. Most of them will go down to increments of 1cm or so.  Here is an example showing that even at f29 with your camera and focal length you'll only have 15mm in front and 17mm behind the focal point if you are 200mm away from your subject.




Depth of field calculator by wee_pete, on Flickr


----------



## Mr_Chris

fmw said:


> Mr_Chris said:
> 
> 
> 
> What i am aiming for:
> 
> 
> I beginning to think its not enough light and that the LED panels are acting like torch beams instead of a blanket coverage like im used to with softboxes.....help!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This one is easy to reproduce.  I would shoot it in the light tent (this one was) against a black background.  Then it is trivial to remove the background or change its color in post process.   This image may not have been made against a blue background.  If it was, then it was cleaned up in post process.
Click to expand...

It was shot against white and we add in the blue afterwards as its our company colour....thanks


----------



## Mr_Chris

weepete said:


> Mr_Chris said:
> 
> 
> 
> LOL - I was waiting for someone to recommend that book to me - already on order from amazon after reading several posts on here....shipping from States so will have to wait a while unfortunately. Tried the DOF calculators but we are talking a change of focus over a few centimeters and those calcs are set up for much larger subjects it seems....thanks though!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Just change the units to cm. Most of them will go down to increments of 1cm or so.  Here is an example showing that even at f29 with your camera and focal length you'll only have 15mm in front and 17mm behind the focal point if you are 200mm away from your subject.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Depth of field calculator by wee_pete, on Flickr
Click to expand...

Oh this is just a link to an image - can you send me a link to the actual calculator please? its the best one ive seen so far...


----------



## Mr_Chris

tirediron said:


> Mr_Chris said:
> 
> 
> 
> So to avoid confusion i have included a smaller part to highlight my struggle - the image that i am aiming for IS ALSO OUR PROPERTY SO PLEASE DONT REMOVE IT AGAIN(!)
> 
> 
> 
> When a moderator edits a post, or removes something, please leave it removed until you have discussed that with a moderator.  You stated that the image I removed was taken by a "pro studio".  Just because you or your company paid for the right to use them, that does not guarantee that they are your property or that you have the right to post them here.  Let's make everyone happy and just post a link, okay?
> 
> Thanks!
Click to expand...

Sorry my bad - i didnt want to link to an image on our own company website as i felt this wouldn't look very professional


----------



## Mr_Chris

Soooooo......i decided to rip the whole setup down and start again from scratch - i moved the cube to one side as i have never had much joy with them myself on previous projects and set up the basic paper backdrop with the two LED panels and tried to block as much surrounding light as possible (im in the back corner of open mezzanine floor with huge ceiling lights nearby) and the photos have definitely improved. 





Gives this: (35mm - ISO 100 - 1/25 sec - F18)




BUT(!) i am not happy with how 'grubby' the white fittings look...im obviously talking about the shadows - while this helps give some contrast and realism this is not what the company wants. In order to make the product 'whiter' i find im just over-exposing the WHOLE image....a real head scratcher this one!  can anyone spare any more advice please?!


----------



## fmw

Mr_Chris said:


> Soooooo......i decided to rip the whole setup down and start again from scratch - i moved the cube to one side as i have never had much joy with them myself on previous projects and set up the basic paper backdrop with the two LED panels and tried to block as much surrounding light as possible (im in the back corner of open mezzanine floor with huge ceiling lights nearby) and the photos have definitely improved.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Gives this: (35mm - ISO 100 - 1/25 sec - F18)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BUT(!) i am not happy with how 'grubby' the white fittings look...im obviously talking about the shadows - while this helps give some contrast and realism this is not what the company wants. In order to make the product 'whiter' i find im just over-exposing the WHOLE image....a real head scratcher this one!  can anyone spare any more advice please?!


----------



## fmw

I explained it earlier.  Shoot the product against a dark background and then remove the background in post process.


----------



## Mr_Chris

fmw said:


> I explained it earlier.  Shoot the product against a dark background and then remove the background in post process.


Ouch!  ok i will try that as well


----------



## tirediron

fmw said:


> I explained it earlier.  Shoot the product against a dark background and then remove the background in post process.


Why add extra steps?  Why not shoot it against the correct background to begin with?  I don't dispute that it's easy to swap out a monochrome background, but if you can save yourself the step, why not?

OP:  Since it seems you essentially want a 'high-key' (Bright, even, shadowless) look to these, then here's how I would approach it.  First, you're going to need different gear.  Two LED panels won't cut it except for the smallest items.  Start by getting the right colour blue sweep and set it up essentially the way you have above, but increase the separation between the item and the background.  I would probably also use a clear, Lucite stand to elevate the item as well.  Use two lights to cross-light (left light illuminates the right side, and vice-versa) the background.  Place those lights so that they are about even with the item, and then use two lights close in with large-ish modifiers to evenly light the product; 45 degrees either side of lens axis and angled down at about 45 degrees.  Some small bits of card in white and black will serve as flags and reflectors to fill in or remove light from small areas as needed.


----------



## Mr_Chris

tirediron said:


> fmw said:
> 
> 
> 
> I explained it earlier.  Shoot the product against a dark background and then remove the background in post process.
> 
> 
> 
> Why add extra steps?  Why not shoot it against the correct background to begin with?  I don't dispute that it's easy to swap out a monochrome background, but if you can save yourself the step, why not?
> 
> OP:  Since it seems you essentially want a 'high-key' (Bright, even, shadowless) look to these, then here's how I would approach it.  First, you're going to need different gear.  Two LED panels won't cut it except for the smallest items.  Start by getting the right colour blue sweep and set it up essentially the way you have above, but increase the separation between the item and the background.  I would probably also use a clear, Lucite stand to elevate the item as well.  Use two lights to cross-light (left light illuminates the right side, and vice-versa) the background.  Place those lights so that they are about even with the item, and then use two lights close in with large-ish modifiers to evenly light the product; 45 degrees either side of lens axis and angled down at about 45 degrees.  Some small bits of card in white and black will serve as flags and reflectors to fill in or remove light from small areas as needed.
Click to expand...

Thanks John, interesting reading - i will skip the blue backdrop as im not convinced it would remain a consistent colour, plus we sometimes need the background cut out for other markets outside the UK. Are you saying the LED's are a waste of time? this is my first time using them and im not impressed at all - as you say they are better for smaller items or video work im guessing...my managers were keen on them as there is much less fire risk if left on over the weekend / someone knocks them over by accident etc. Can you suggest what kind of lighting would suit these products better? I will also have to shoot black rubber parts plus stainless steel and chrome plated pieces up to 1 metre in length at times. So two lights on the backdrop and another two lights on the subject? I was considering an extra lamp to hang overhead to throw light across the top of the parts to catch rims etc......


----------



## tirediron

I would go for inexpensive strobes such as Godox, Neewer, etc.  These aren't high-end units, but as long you're careful and aren't shooting 500 full-power pops a day, they should be fine.  While it seems counter-intuitive to many, using strobed light makes everything much, much easier, and once you get over the initial learning curve (one day of practice and you will be fine), you'll wonder how you did anything without them.

Shooting reflective metal such as chrome, nickel or polished SS can be very challenging however due to the highly reflective nature of the surface (especially round).


----------



## Mr_Chris

tirediron said:


> I would go for inexpensive strobes such as Godox, Neewer, etc.  These aren't high-end units, but as long you're careful and aren't shooting 500 full-power pops a day, they should be fine.  While it seems counter-intuitive to many, using strobed light makes everything much, much easier, and once you get over the initial learning curve (one day of practice and you will be fine), you'll wonder how you did anything without them.
> 
> Shooting reflective metal such as chrome, nickel or polished SS can be very challenging however due to the highly reflective nature of the surface (especially round).


Yes i was considering strobes - i have battery powered off camera flashes at home but wasnt convinced this would be workable due to unreliable power source.
I found these for example:
GODOX 250DI Photo Studio Strobe Flash Light 250W 220V Lighting Lamp Head 【IE】

would i need some kind of soft boxes / diffusion to go with these? or can i shoot with them straight like a flashgun? you discussed 4 lights - im guessing that means 4 strobes? Would have been nice to make SOME kind of use of the LED as i dont think we can return them now...

I am not sure the flash would be allowed as the mezzanine is above the area where a 100 people are assembling parts and i think it could prove too distracting...i guess if that is the best solution i could ask the powers that be to put some black-out curtains up in the corner to help for example...hmm food for thought - thankyou!


----------



## tirediron

You will definitely want modifiers; shooting bare-tube is not appropriate.  I would look for something in the area of a 30" softobx, and ideally one that has double diffusion (an extra, internal diffusion layer as well as the main face).  It's unlikely that people will be bothered by the strobes once you have the modifiers on.


----------



## unpopular

tirediron said:


> otherwise you're battling the laws of physics, and unless you know someone the rest of us don't, that's a battle you can't win.



Scheimpflug.

While in the digital age of tilt means making things blurry, the true advantage, at least in my opinion, is making things sharp by "reversing" the 'make everything look like a blurry miniatures' gimmick. Perhaps this is beyond the budget or skill level of the OP; though this is the "correct" way to handle this situation.

There are, of course, a few tilt/shift lenses, some of which can be found for under $1000, such as the Samyang and Russian-made options, or pre-owned older T/S Nikkor lenses. Because you're in studio, compatibility shouldn't be a issue provided that it can physically mount. The Samyang is probably your best option and provides ample tilt.

There are other options, such as t/s bellows systems from Nikon, Minolta or Contax, as well as a number of chinese-built SLR adapters for view cameras. Though these would exclude the use of anything wider than 135mm at the shortest.

Stay away from toys like Lens Baby or weird "plunger" type adapters. If it's made out of plastic, it will get only in your way.


----------



## unpopular

tirediron said:


> You will definitely want modifiers; shooting bare-tube is not appropriate.  I would look for something in the area of a 30" softobx, and ideally one that has double diffusion (an extra, internal diffusion layer as well as the main face).  It's unlikely that people will be bothered by the strobes once you have the modifiers on.



Or get a 30" panel.


----------



## weepete

Mr_Chris said:


> Oh this is just a link to an image - can you send me a link to the actual calculator please? its the best one ive seen so far...



Sure, sorry I just took a screen shot with my phone. That one is the RG depth of field calculator, I don't think it's the best out there right now being a bit clunky and others have a better interface with no ads. But here you go

DOF Calculator – Android Apps on Google Play

That new setup looks better as you've got a larger camera to subject distance.


----------



## Mr_Chris

tirediron said:


> You will definitely want modifiers; shooting bare-tube is not appropriate.  I would look for something in the area of a 30" softobx, and ideally one that has double diffusion (an extra, internal diffusion layer as well as the main face).  It's unlikely that people will be bothered by the strobes once you have the modifiers on.


Would you mind giving your opinion on this setup please? seems to good to be true - the price isnt the most important thing for the company but i was also considering this one for my own use at home for ebay photos etc....
https://www.amazon.co.uk/Neewer-Pro...1_3?ie=UTF8&psc=1&refRID=YRXZJQR2TSFNXFVCXX4V


----------



## tirediron

Those will be fine for light use; they're cheap, consumer units, but as long as you don't run them at full power, all day, every day, and are careful when moving them, tightening clamps, etc, they should do the job.


----------



## Mr_Chris

tirediron said:


> Those will be fine for light use; they're cheap, consumer units, but as long as you don't run them at full power, all day, every day, and are careful when moving them, tightening clamps, etc, they should do the job.


Thankyou! - how about the 250W output of each light? is that good? medium? poor? I'm a complete beginner when it comes to strobes...


----------



## astroNikon

Mr_Chris said:


> Would you mind giving your opinion on this setup please? seems to good to be true - the price isnt the most important thing for the company but i was also considering this one for my own use at home for ebay photos etc....
> https://www.amazon.co.uk/Neewer-Pro...1_3?ie=UTF8&psc=1&refRID=YRXZJQR2TSFNXFVCXX4V


Just be aware I think those give a blueish color so you'll have to deal with customizing your white balance.


----------



## tirediron

astroNikon said:


> Mr_Chris said:
> 
> 
> 
> Would you mind giving your opinion on this setup please? seems to good to be true - the price isnt the most important thing for the company but i was also considering this one for my own use at home for ebay photos etc....
> https://www.amazon.co.uk/Neewer-Pro...1_3?ie=UTF8&psc=1&refRID=YRXZJQR2TSFNXFVCXX4V
> 
> 
> 
> Just be aware I think those give a blueish color so you'll have to deal with customizing your white balance.
Click to expand...

Good to know; colour-casting is a definite problem with lower-end gear, but it's generally easily fixed in post.  As for the output, 250w/s is plenty for the work you're doing.  I often do 2-3 light full-body portraits using only a single 200 w/s power pack.


----------



## Mr_Chris

Brilliant - thanks again guys - hope to come back with something better shot with flashguns or strobes sometime soon


----------



## epatsellis

tirediron said:


> astroNikon said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mr_Chris said:
> 
> 
> 
> Would you mind giving your opinion on this setup please? seems to good to be true - the price isnt the most important thing for the company but i was also considering this one for my own use at home for ebay photos etc....
> https://www.amazon.co.uk/Neewer-Pro...1_3?ie=UTF8&psc=1&refRID=YRXZJQR2TSFNXFVCXX4V
> 
> 
> 
> Just be aware I think those give a blueish color so you'll have to deal with customizing your white balance.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Good to know; colour-casting is a definite problem with lower-end gear, but it's generally easily fixed in post.  As for the output, 250w/s is plenty for the work you're doing.  I often do 2-3 light full-body portraits using only a single 200 w/s power pack.
Click to expand...


Maybe, maybe not...

As a point of reference, for product work I start with 1600 w/s pack and a single head in a large softbox, it's not unusual for me to have to use a double head and two packs to get enough light on set at times.  Target aperture for a small camera (e.g. 35mm and smaller) is ~f11 to f16. One of the best lenses that is inexpensive for this would be a 55 f2.8 or f3.5 Micro-Nikkor. I prefer a much longer lens for product work, on 4x5 I use a 210-300mm lens (480-600mm on 8x10), so on 35mm, that's be close to 90-100mm, there is less geometric distortion, more working room for flags, etc. Ditch the zoom lens, use a fixed focus lens, good tripod (or camera stand which is preferable, I use a fully kitted Cambo UST personally, Bogen makes a small stand as well) While you don't need a shooting table, they can help immensely when shooting many items. 

Long objects aren't impossible to shoot and keep in focus, this is a 3 1/2 foot wide hydrostatic lawn mower transmission:



In this case, I shot with a Sinar view camera, lots of swing and a scan back with continuous HMI lighting, but the same basic concepts can be used with a small camera if you're willing to learn. (this was a test shot to determine scale and exposure, hence the marks on the left axle that haven't been cleaned off yet, and the final image is quite a bit brighter)

In my studio, high key shooting requires lots of light, high DOF requires small apertures which will require lots of light. A softbox 2-3x the size of the object you're shooting should result in a shadowless background if propped up 1/2 to 1" off the table. Best bet for a background is matte white Formica or any similar laminate. Fill cards and flags as needed to model the shape of the object. Cleanliness is essential, when it looks absolutely spotless, clean it once more. For plastic items, dryer sheets work well for dissipating static charges. I'd ditch the "tent" or "cube" or whatever they're called these days. If you want to control light and image values, throwing light everywhere isn't the way to do it.

What is the purpose of the DOF calculator, exactly? In my experience it's one more thing that you'll spend way too much time on and never have it "click". Put the phone down and spend some time learning, it will serve you better in the long run.

Each image on the computer should be obvious what your DOF is, and if there is an adjustment to be made. (you are shooting tethered and proofing on a larger monitor, right????)

There's a simple way to fix color cast in shadows, btw, eliminate all other sources of light. Stray light will impact color balance in the shadows first.


----------



## Mr_Chris

Thanks epatsellis! thats a lot of helpful info!! Your setup/equipment is mind-boggling....i hope i can get to a stage one day where i can justify/afford all that lovely kit! 
As it turns out my management changed their minds again and now we've ended up with a green-screen setup - which im finding quite challenging!
Heres the setup with 4 x 500W LED Lamps - 2 have been sent back and we are 'upgrading' to a set of 4 x 1000W LED's - turns out LED's dont throw much light out so they need to be powerful - and a few of them!






We are finding that the green screen is throwing a lot of light back onto the subject and giving us extra work in Photoshop to remove green 'halos' and colour spill - even after moving the subject further away from the screen and turning the lights down....anyone have any suggestions please? (no swearing please, i know most photogs hate green screens!)


----------



## cnoevl21

I'd try moving the camera back and zoom in. also, if your end result is a blue background, why not just use a blue background? White on white is such a major pain in the ass


----------



## Mr_Chris

So the move to 1000w made quite a big difference - so did moving the green screen further back and also moving the camera back and zooming in at 45mm. We are fairly happy with the final outcome now but have found that white card scrims still need to be held in the right position to create necessary fill light at times - or give reflections to chrome parts. Personally i wouldnt go down the road of LED lighting for Product Photography again (this was a company decision due to fear of fire risk) as i found the light being produced too limited and too much of a torch beam effect as opposed to a nice blanket of light. Some people recommend LED's for close-up work such as jewellery but using them close up causes other problems such as the LED bulbs themselves being reflected in the product - and diffusing the light can be tricky with a flat panel!

I would like to thank you all for your help and guidance in this matter and it would great if the mods could leave this post up in case it could help others - searching for help with Green Screens or LED's dosnt seem to yield many results - on this forum especially


----------

