# Novice requesting helpful advice for product photography :)



## Ninjab

Hi there, I bought a 60D not long ago and am trying to do product photos. Unfortunately for me was I silly enough to think it was going to be that easy just because I bought a decent camera. I have been studying over the last few days lighting with product photography and the videos on profoto life were quite informative.

So my first step was to try and get crisp clear pictures coming from my 60D and then work on the lighting but cannot seem to get crisp sharp clear pictures. I am a novice on SLR but am working in manual mode but still struggling for crisp pictures so I can then work on lighting (as I need to buy equipment).

The settings I was using last night was in manual mode 100 ISO, 250 shutter, f/30 but no luck. I had fiddled with the ISO and aperture but results didnt vary so much. Also using the inbuilt flash, two fluro lights but the photos seem over contrasted, but as expected due to improper lighting setup but as mentioned above I am trying to get them to look sharp and detailed first.

So I am trying to work out what exactly I am doing wrong, or am I thinking that maybe they should be sharper than I think they should be? I figured if using a high aperture like f/30 most of the focused image should not be blurred at all but the prodict I am practicing on (a mouse) seems to have some blurr on the outer end of the mouse.

As I said I am a novice so feel free to have a crack at me 

I know to get my product photos looking good I need to have good lighting setup, so any recommendations on what i should buy would be great. I see those softbox kits but am a bit weary on them.

Thanks a lot ​


----------



## Ninjab

I am very interested in product photography not for a business perspective but because it generally interests me. I dont know why exactly but I just have a general interest in products of all types and the artform of design and manufacturing to start to final product.

I bought the twin lens kit but the lens I am using is the one that comes with it which is the 18-55mm.

The reason why I set it at F30 because I was using this video as inspiration at YouTube - &#x202a;Photograph a Rolex watch, product photography lighting techniques&#x202c;&rlm; . Although this guy is a pro photographer, even if I got the same result as his first pic of the watch I would be happy enough. He was using a high aperture (or is it low, I get it mixed up). I am not learning that I need to have a much slower shutter speed to be able to capture the light, the way I capture the light in the pics was as I had the flash on, hence mixing with the fluoro lights made it over composed...especially since it was like 50cm away from the mouse. (computer mouse, yes you are correct haha).

My other type of inspiration came from Jim's video at prophotolife dot com Andrew Gibson: creating a career and pursuing goals in photography | pro photo life the images he took in steps are here: vid episode 17 product photography - a set on Flickr which he makes it seem simple taking these great shots. But there is no detail on what kind of settings he used. Though most of the products I intend to picture will need white backgrounds but I think when I improve and want to market the products better taking them fake environments would be nice as I appreciate the artform that pro photograpghers achieve and would feel good about myself being able to do the artwork they do, at least even half as good.

If my images looked like this in white background I would be happy enough (the image at the bottom) LightStudio photography and studio lighting blog: Product Photo: White Background for Eshop


Putting it on timer when I get a tripod is ok for me.


----------



## Kerbouchard

At f/30, lens diffraction will start to rob your image of sharpness.  In general, your lens is sharpest about two stops down from it's max aperture.  f/8 to f/16 is generally the sweet spot.


----------



## Bitter Jeweler

Get the book "Light, Science, Magic" for product photography.


----------



## Kerbouchard

Bitter Jeweler said:


> Get the book "Light, Science, Magic" for product photography.


I will second that.  For photos where you have complete control of the lighting and subject, the book is worth it's weight in gold.


----------



## Ninjab

Thanks I will check the book out.

However I think I also need to know how to get sharp images first and then work on lighting so the advice on aperture F stops was good info above too.

However I think lens I may be using is not good enough for sharpness maybe? Should I post my images here from Flickr?


----------



## tyler_h

If you post a couple of images we can comment more specifically.

On pixel packed sensors like the 550D the diffraction limit is ~f/11.3. If you have looked at MTF charts you'll see that lenses tend to get sharper as you stop down, but drop off from ~f/8 onwards.


----------



## Ninjab

Thanks will get on to that soon as I was uploading some others I took today. I think I need to work on getting the sharpness and focus right (or get another lens suited for product photos as I do want very high quality sharp images) and then work on lighting. Some of products I am trying to take pictures of are white and they are quite hard to get right for a novice like me anyway.


----------



## Railphotog

Your shutter speed of 1/250 at f/30 seems to be high, how much light are you using?

While I don't do product photography,  do photograph my model railroad creations all the time.  I do have incandescent and halogen lights, but for convenience and speed I often just use my desk lamp with a built in magnifying lens and circular fluorescent bulb.  I've been using a Sigma 17-70mm lens on my Canon XSi for a while now, and usually shoot at f/22.  Here's one of my HO scale (1/87th scale) models I shot using this setup:








The model is about 10-11" long (28cm).  I lighten up the shadows with reflectors too.


----------



## Ninjab

Flickr: Ninja_B's Photostream


----------



## Ninjab

Railphotog said:


> Your shutter speed of 1/250 at f/30 seems to be high, how much light are you using?
> 
> While I don't do product photography, do photograph my model railroad creations all the time. I do have incandescent and halogen lights, but for convenience and speed I often just use my desk lamp with a built in magnifying lens and circular fluorescent bulb. I've been using a Sigma 17-70mm lens on my Canon XSi for a while now, and usually shoot at f/22. Here's one of my HO scale (1/87th scale) models I shot using this setup:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The model is about 10-11" long (28cm). I lighten up the shadows with reflectors too.



Your image looks sharp all over from left to right. As to how I cannot do this with my cam I dont know. if I focus in on the mouse on one point the left or right side is not in focus, or the rear curve of the mouse is not in focus.

Maybe my 18-55 is not good for this purpose or a combo of that and my cam skills/setup.


----------



## tyler_h

I'd get rid of the onboard flash.

The 18-55 is ok for it. Sharpest around f/5.6 - 8 from memory. Consider the technique called "Focus Stacking". It counters the shallower DoF you get when focused closer.




2011_03_05_5532-5549 by tyler_s_hamilton, on Flickr
This shot is actually 18 shots with focus stacking (it is 1:1 magnification).

For smaller products you can create a DIY light tent. All you'll need is a cardboard box, some rice paper, large sheets of white paper and some tap/glue. The shot above was in one I made; don't have it anymore though or I'd give you a shot of the setup.


----------



## Ninjab

tyler_h said:


> I'd get rid of the onboard flash.
> 
> The 18-55 is ok for it. Sharpest around f/5.6 - 8 from memory. Consider the technique called "Focus Stacking". It counters the shallower DoF you get when focused closer.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2011_03_05_5532-5549 by tyler_s_hamilton, on Flickr
> This shot is actually 18 shots with focus stacking (it is 1:1 magnification).
> 
> For smaller products you can create a DIY light tent. All you'll need is a cardboard box, some rice paper, large sheets of white paper and some tap/glue. The shot above was in one I made; don't have it anymore though or I'd give you a shot of the setup.



What is this 1:1 magnification exactly? I have seen it in the Macro lens flyer that came with the cam on some of the lenses. Excuse my knowledge, I havent got that far yet but have been watching videos on youtube reading extensively online and started reading ebooks so that when asking for help I dont expect amateurs or pros to explain everything to me.

I was recommended a tamron lens Tamron 90mm Macro.

I also do not know this focus stacking?

i was going to invest in one of those softbox lighting kits (I think I can do without the muslin and stand and create my own environment so rather spend the momney on decent lighting) but yeh as I said I need to get the sharpness right yet and then work on the lighting.

Thanks to all for advice thus far


----------



## Ninjab

In relation to aperture and F30 not being appropriate for sharpness and detail, if you watch YouTube - &#x202a;Photograph a Rolex watch, product photography lighting techniques&#x202c;&rlm; he is using f/30 for photographing that Rolex watch. For something so detailed like a watch, is there a reason why he uses f/30?


----------



## tyler_h

For the 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS:
Canon EF-S 18-55 mm f/3.5-5.6 IS review - Image resolution - Lenstip.com

f/30 will give a larger DoF to have the entire product sharp (for example the cross in the pic I posted has 8 shots to get it all in focus). Overall sharpness will take a large hit, as the graphs in the link above shows.


----------



## Ninjab

tyler_h said:


> For the 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS:
> Canon EF-S 18-55 mm f/3.5-5.6 IS review - Image resolution - Lenstip.com
> 
> f/30 will give a larger DoF to have the entire product sharp (for example the cross in the pic I posted has 8 shots to get it all in focus). Overall sharpness will take a large hit, as the graphs in the link above shows.



So if the whole image is more sharp then the disadvantage of him using F/30 is that he will lose some detail since using a higher aperture, correct? So if he used a f/18 for example he would not have the whole imahe sharp but the part in focus would be sharper than his full image at f/30? Is this correct?


I think investing in a lens more suited for Macro would be ideal. I now regret buying the camera as a kit, especially double lens more so as the 55-250mm is in its box unused and cost me an extra $400 when I could of spent that $$ on a macro len model. Now my budget for a macro lens is limited.

getting to the review you posted, basically it says the lens I have is at its sharpest at 35mm and f/8 to f/11?


----------



## Ninjab

And how does one do focus stacking?


----------



## Railphotog

Where are you focusing on?  In my shot,  I focused about one third along the model to allow a greater depth of focus.  If I had focused on the very front of the model, the image would not have been in focus all the way to the back.   There is an area in focus in front of and behind the focus point, so focusing one third the way in allows you to use more of the area in focus.


----------



## Ninjab

Railphotog said:


> Where are you focusing on? In my shot, I focused about one third along the model to allow a greater depth of focus. If I had focused on the very front of the model, the image would not have been in focus all the way to the back. There is an area in focus in front of and behind the focus point, so focusing one third the way in allows you to use more of the area in focus.



I think it was around 40-50cm only and at 55mm for some of those shots. the one which is more of a higher angle of me shooting I am further out there as I was standing. The ones close is the cam rested on the table since I dont have a tripod.

Thanks for the tip on focusing too, however some of my shots were a side shot of a product, so I guess I would need to shoot a 3rd of the way to the rear of the mouse?


----------



## tyler_h

Yeah, your best sharpness across the frame is at ~35mm f/8-11 for the  kit lens. The cross is the 100mm f/2.8 Macro starting at 1:1 (decreases  slightly focusing further away).

Set up was a halogen light on  each side of a DIY light tent (cardboard box; sides cut out with rice  paper for lights to shine through; inside lined with paper), and camera  on tripod. I started closest to have the closest point in focus. Use  manual focus. I took the first shot, then adjusted the focus slightly  over and over to progress to the rear of the object. Feel free to  overlap the focus by a reasonable amount; it just means more shots in  total when you are processing.

One  thing to watch out for in this; for a lot of lenses there is a small  shift in field of view as as you change the focus so don't frame too  tightly.


----------



## Ninjab

Thanks I thought thats what you meant but its the post processing I am not sure as to how to blend all of those 8 images together. I prob should google it since most likely there is a guide somewhere (if not on here) to do it.

I was contemplating buying this lens: Tamron SP AF 90mm f/2.8 Di Macro Lens for Canon AS NEW (eBay item 270764480240 end time 22-Jun-11 20:55:02 AEST) : Cameras if can get it cheap enough.


----------



## tyler_h

Ninjab said:


> Thanks I thought thats what you meant but its the post processing I am not sure as to how to blend all of those 8 images together. I prob should google it since most likely there is a guide somewhere (if not on here) to do it.
> 
> I was contemplating buying this lens: Tamron SP AF 90mm f/2.8 Di Macro Lens for Canon AS NEW (eBay item 270764480240 end time 22-Jun-11 20:55:02 AEST) : Cameras if can get it cheap enough.



YouTube - &#x202a;Focus Stacking in Photoshop CS5&#x202c;&rlm; is the video I watched for focus stacking.

Most of the macro lenses are all very sharp across the frame with minimal distortion. Not sure on the Tamron but I think the Sigma's change length when focusing. When working at close distances it can be a bit of an issue if you don't stay aware of it as you might bump your lens on the subject.


----------



## Ninjab

So I think I should of not bought the camera as a kit and bought the lenses separately, or at least one of the lenses as I can use one lens for every day life. No doubt id need it on a holiday or something . Sisters wedding is next year so maybe that 50-250mm might come in handy.

So I might buy one of those macro lenses. If anyone has a recommendation over the one above please let me know


----------



## tyler_h

400mm eq reach isn't bad. The kit is good for giving a cheap option to dabble in a wider range of photograph; you have 28.8-400 covered albeit without be particularly fast.

Comparison between the one you're looking at and the one I have:
Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 Macro USM vs Tamron SP Autofocus 90mm f/2.8 DI Macro Lens - photo.net
I'm sure you can find plenty more reviews; but that seems to have a lot of comparison images to have a look at.


----------



## Ninjab

Thanks for that. the price difference on these two now is HUGE....I am not going for Rolex of Mercedes jobs so I think the tamron since it isnt not much different is better to save as its nearly half the price looking online heh.

I think when you put products in a catalogue and online you are going to lose what the slight advantage the Canon lens would have over it anyway. Or I am assuming that anyway.


----------



## Ninjab

Off topic here but this shot here: 2010_12_26_4574 | Flickr - Photo Sharing! is a fantastic shot of yours


----------



## Ninjab

This is my best one so far detail wise, not lighting of course. But I seem to have the exposure of the shot correct (edit: not correct, a lot better than before...at least now there is consistency). Still some blurry'ness in the picture, mostly of the rear of the mouse since the focus is mostly at the front lower end of the mouse due to the camera being on the table. But definitely a lot more of the picture is in focus, I think with a more appropriate lens and if I get some better lighting I will be able to play aroundf with it more. This was taken around 50-60cm from the mouse on 35mm, flash on (took one with flash off). f/15, iso 400, shutter at 1/60 and the white paper is close to the colour of the white mouse. Also using AWB but I am still getting to learn custom white balance.

Please check my flickr account though for all the info and larger version and let me know what you think. Flickr: Ninja_B's Photostream


----------



## Ninjab

I was looking at buying one of these: 80cm 3 Light Soft Lighting Studio Kit 

Would make things a lot easier for lighting. However I did want to venture into doing other things with my products...meaning specific environments.


----------



## tyler_h

I always use AWB - but I always shoot in RAW and adjust in processing as needed.

In your shot you'd need to be closer. Consider extension tubes to give you the ability to focus closer.

Instead of a white background you could go with black instead so the mouse stands out more.


And for 400 bucks I'd go with the DIY job for like, 10 bucks (plus you're current ownership of desk lamps etc)


----------



## Ninjab

ive been trying with them but the lighting is crap....desk lamps with clamps etc are not that cheap also and I would need 2-3 of them and getting the right bulbs. I cant get foam core down here either for reflection of light.

But if you have instrucvtions on how your built your box I could try doing that first and see how I go


----------



## mickmac

One thing to bear in mind is that for a lot of product photography, the background is not required. This is normally the case if you are shooting for packaging or for the web. Get used to lighting your product with this in mind. An even light across the whole product is normally required. With this in mind, a black background would not be acceptable as it will create to many dark reflections in the product. This can look really nice if the background is included in the shot, but looks horrible if the background is taken away. All of a sudden the image makes no sense. Another technique can be to use smaller black cards to help define an edge of a product without filling the whole product with a black reflection.

Get used to creating clipping paths if you want to do product photography.

My advice would be to practice as much as you can on all types of products. Different colored products, reflective products. I have been doing product photography for 8 years now and I still learn something new every day. Also, invest in a cheap set of studio monoblocks to start with so you can start lighting the products evenly. Your products are definitely not lit correctly. You will notice this as soon as you take the background away. What you think is white will all of a sudden be a dull grey.


----------



## tyler_h

Mine was a cardboard box. The top was tapped up. The 'front' was created by cutting the entire side down the centre and along the edges to make two doors. On the 'sides' all but ~1 inch was cut out to leave a large rectangular hole on each side. I used one of these pieces to give a better surface on the bottom cutting it to size. I then lined the inside of the box with white paper for all surfaces. The holes on each side was covered with and thin paper like rice paper. I then used a large sheet of paper to have a continual curved sheet of paper from the base curved up the back of the box to give a backgroudn without a paper join etc which would show in the photo.

I lit it with a halogen workshop lamp from each side through the rice paper. Brighter would be better but this was ok for static like products. Proper (daylight balance I assume you are refering to) globes are not needed. The main bit is that all your light sources are the same temperature. As you have a white background, you can set up the box and lights and take a photo without a product. Then tell your camera to use that to create a custom white balance. You should manually expose your shots because otherwise you will get that grey (18%) background unless your subject fills enough of the frame or you use spot metering.

So it wouldn't be as good as a professional setup but it should give you something pretty cheap to play around with.


----------



## Ninjab

mickmac said:


> One thing to bear in mind is that for a lot of product photography, the background is not required. This is normally the case if you are shooting for packaging or for the web. Get used to lighting your product with this in mind. An even light across the whole product is normally required. With this in mind, a black background would not be acceptable as it will create to many dark reflections in the product. This can look really nice if the background is included in the shot, but looks horrible if the background is taken away. All of a sudden the image makes no sense. Another technique can be to use smaller black cards to help define an edge of a product without filling the whole product with a black reflection.
> 
> Get used to creating clipping paths if you want to do product photography.
> 
> My advice would be to practice as much as you can on all types of products. Different colored products, reflective products. I have been doing product photography for 8 years now and I still learn something new every day. Also, invest in a cheap set of studio monoblocks to start with so you can start lighting the products evenly. Your products are definitely not lit correctly. You will notice this as soon as you take the background away. What you think is white will all of a sudden be a dull grey.



Seems only the good Aus people want to help here!

I am fairly used to using the pen tool for creating clipping paths, very painful but the most accurate way of cutting something out and have been doing it for years on other peoples photos, just not my own.

My main issue is lighting. As you said it is the main thing to do and I guess I am trying to get around that by buying the right equipment, although is more expensive but time is also a factor for me as I have a deadline to make a catalogue for soon and if I try and do DIY jobs with lighting I think it might drag on 

I had watched a whole series of videos on prophotolife.com and he is a master at all of this but actually finding the right gear is hard here in Aus. Tylers setup above I think is more achievable and I guess I could use tracing paper as opposed to rice paper but I need to buy the right globes. The thing is softboxes are not hugely expensive these days either.

Only reason I was considering the tent as it was able to condense the lighting inside more easily but the flexibility to use other things like tiles, glass etc would not be there, hence why i was considering the soft boxes. Which I may just buy in the end instead of the tent as you said get used to doing clipping paths. I just need to get my hands on foam core to be able to reflect lights from angles so that the lighting is full on the product.

What are studio monoblocks and where can I get those?

Many thanks guys for your help and Tyler I might give that a shot as I have plenty of cardboard boxes, however some products are larger.


----------



## Ninjab

tyler_h said:


> . As you have a white background, you can set up the box and lights and take a photo without a product. Then tell your camera to use that to create a custom white balance. You should manually expose your shots because otherwise you will get that grey (18%) background unless your subject fills enough of the frame or you use spot metering.
> 
> So it wouldn't be as good as a professional setup but it should give you something pretty cheap to play around with.



Do I need to have the camera on a specific setting other than manual? I have read a bit about it but its a bit vague to me as to if you need flash etc or where u actually do it. I assume you may do it in the exactenvironment you are taking pic in but what if that doesnt look white etc?


----------



## mickmac

Ninjab said:


> mickmac said:
> 
> 
> 
> One thing to bear in mind is that for a lot of product photography, the background is not required. This is normally the case if you are shooting for packaging or for the web. Get used to lighting your product with this in mind. An even light across the whole product is normally required. With this in mind, a black background would not be acceptable as it will create to many dark reflections in the product. This can look really nice if the background is included in the shot, but looks horrible if the background is taken away. All of a sudden the image makes no sense. Another technique can be to use smaller black cards to help define an edge of a product without filling the whole product with a black reflection.
> 
> Get used to creating clipping paths if you want to do product photography.
> 
> My advice would be to practice as much as you can on all types of products. Different colored products, reflective products. I have been doing product photography for 8 years now and I still learn something new every day. Also, invest in a cheap set of studio monoblocks to start with so you can start lighting the products evenly. Your products are definitely not lit correctly. You will notice this as soon as you take the background away. What you think is white will all of a sudden be a dull grey.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Seems only the good Aus people want to help here!
> 
> I am fairly used to using the pen tool for creating clipping paths, very painful but the most accurate way of cutting something out and have been doing it for years on other peoples photos, just not my own.
> 
> My main issue is lighting. As you said it is the main thing to do and I guess I am trying to get around that by buying the right equipment, although is more expensive but time is also a factor for me as I have a deadline to make a catalogue for soon and if I try and do DIY jobs with lighting I think it might drag on
> 
> I had watched a whole series of videos on prophotolife.com and he is a master at all of this but actually finding the right gear is hard here in Aus. Tylers setup above I think is more achievable and I guess I could use tracing paper as opposed to rice paper but I need to buy the right globes. The thing is softboxes are not hugely expensive these days either.
> 
> Only reason I was considering the tent as it was able to condense the lighting inside more easily but the flexibility to use other things like tiles, glass etc would not be there, hence why i was considering the soft boxes. Which I may just buy in the end instead of the tent as you said get used to doing clipping paths. I just need to get my hands on foam core to be able to reflect lights from angles so that the lighting is full on the product.
> 
> What are studio monoblocks and where can I get those?
> 
> Many thanks guys for your help and Tyler I might give that a shot as I have plenty of cardboard boxes, however some products are larger.
Click to expand...


Dragon Image -

Some cheap and nasty alternatives in the bottom link. Bound to be something similar in your area.

TITLE


----------



## Ninjab

What makes Dragon Image gear better?


----------



## mickmac

On the other site, I was referring to the cheap light sets. I'm sure their dearer lighting kits are just as good.


----------



## Ninjab

Ah ok 

The ones at the site I was referring to at www.fotogenic.com.au seem to be better spec by the looks of it.


----------



## Ninjab

Hi Tyler, what other mods would I need to do to this box to make it how it should be? I want to try some things on the weekend for practice before investing in softbox yet. Or I could build a bigger one for notebook bags since they wont fit in there and could get some foam core to help with some of the light.

I cut two holes on the side and stuck tracing paper on the side. Tracing paper is so expensive now! It was $14 per 25 sheets and it was the biggest I could find. The top has no white paper, should I be putting white up there too? And do I need to put any more white paper anywhere else and you mentioned something about doors but didnt quite understand that part. Thanks


----------



## tyler_h

Ninjab said:


> Hi Tyler, what other mods would I need to do to this box to make it how it should be? I want to try some things on the weekend for practice before investing in softbox yet. Or I could build a bigger one for notebook bags since they wont fit in there and could get some foam core to help with some of the light.
> 
> I cut two holes on the side and stuck tracing paper on the side. Tracing paper is so expensive now! It was $14 per 25 sheets and it was the biggest I could find. The top has no white paper, should I be putting white up there too? And do I need to put any more white paper anywhere else and you mentioned something about doors but didnt quite understand that part. Thanks



Yeah, that's the main idea of it. By lining the rest of the interior with white paper it might help with evening out the lighting as it will reflect of the surfaces more. Bigger is better (fit larger things and being able to use a larger light source will give softer shadows).

On the opening; you can probably remove the top flap. The other two I would line with paper. That way you can close them in when you don't need them fully open and it will reflect more light back in.


----------



## Ninjab

Yeh I took some shots then. Although some improvement I dont have the equipment to match the same lights left and right. its still very dull and still dull even if I put on my flash. it looks kind of bright on the cam screen but on PC even with gamma/brightness all way up its still dull.

I havent even been able to use the $8 globes I bought cause I crushed one other day when I bought it when putting it in and the one today i was going to use with my LED desk light rolled off my benchpress and on to carpet and broke just like that. $16 globes down the drain. So the pics I took before was using a 150w globe, then trying it mixing with the led from the other side and flash on. Oh so bad but what do I expect without the right lights.

Think I will invest in the soft box and get myself some foam core when I am in Melb and then if still not good enough get one of those tent things.

So frustrated its not funny


----------



## Ninjab

I did start reading that light science magic book last night too.


----------



## tyler_h

Ninjab said:


> Yeh I took some shots then. Although some improvement I dont have the equipment to match the same lights left and right. its still very dull and still dull even if I put on my flash. it looks kind of bright on the cam screen but on PC even with gamma/brightness all way up its still dull.
> 
> I havent even been able to use the $8 globes I bought cause I crushed one other day when I bought it when putting it in and the one today i was going to use with my LED desk light rolled off my benchpress and on to carpet and broke just like that. $16 globes down the drain. So the pics I took before was using a 150w globe, then trying it mixing with the led from the other side and flash on. Oh so bad but what do I expect without the right lights.
> 
> Think I will invest in the soft box and get myself some foam core when I am in Melb and then if still not good enough get one of those tent things.
> 
> So frustrated its not funny



Shooting in manual? or Av?

Your shots should be 'overexposed' for a standard 18% grey.

If I remember correctly you don't have a tripod... but you should be able to set up something like a bean bag, rice bag etc to stabilise your camera to allow for long exposure times. I wouldn't use the onboard flash (going to be a different colour temp to the lamps). The lamps will be diffused through the sides but you'd get some hard light from the flash straight on and at least some of your products will be reflective which is probably going to combine to give blown highlights when you are trying to get a white background.


----------



## Ninjab

I dont care so much about the white background as I can cut them out, thats not an issue. I need to cut them out anyway to place them on a stock photo background I got.

I just cant get the proper lighting on them. Either look orange  or something else but never looks white all over like the one my customer did. I usually do over expose my shots. Cant even come close to the cross you took a pic of.


----------



## tyler_h

Canon/Nikon/Pentax?

With my 550D the second tab in the Menu, half way down there is an option "Custom White Balance" from which you get to select a shot. If you take one in your box without the product you should be able to get the WB correct so it's not orange. I'm sure Nikon/Pentax etc will have similar options.


----------



## Ninjab

Shooting in manual. But at the moment just trying to see what lighting I can get.


----------



## Ninjab

Canon 60D. 

But if I shoot in the box and use the white balance and then shoot my images are still going to look dull and orange though no matter what I do?


----------



## tyler_h

Ninjab said:


> Canon 60D.
> 
> But if I shoot in the box and use the white balance and then shoot my images are still going to look dull and orange though no matter what I do?



Might still be dull, but after you set the WB using the 'blank' shot, then you shouldn't get the orange any more. You have to set WB to Custom (setting the Custom WB doesn't automatically set the camera to use Custom).


----------



## Ninjab

I thinkI tried that last week but didnt have that much success by memory but I will have another shot at it (no pun intended )


----------



## Ninjab

If I do take a shot and supposedly the whites are white etc but still doesnt look right, do I need to do something in software on PC to make it look right?


----------



## tyler_h

Ninjab said:


> If I do take a shot and supposedly the whites are white etc but still doesnt look right, do I need to do something in software on PC to make it look right?



That's an incredibly broad question... hard to give an answer without more details on what you mean...


----------



## Ninjab

haha true....Sorry,

I meant if supposedly my white is correct and I take a pic and it doesnt look white on when I view the taken exposure and supposedly I did take a exposure correctly for this type of thing (since I know there isnt exactly any right exposure), and that the white in the background is supposed to be white. Would I adjust the white levels in software higher until they are in fact white, therefore the mouse would actually be how its supposed to be? I hope that makes sense.


----------



## tyler_h

You mean the background being grey instead of white?
That's when you probably need better lighting (more intense) so you can blow out the background. I don't know much on the most professional way to get it that way. In the shot I posted it was a light grey and I fixed it with curves in photoshop. This is, of course, going to be harder the lighter and more reflective your subject is and you will end up blowing out areas of your product as well. I think I had mine at around +1 2/3 EV and it was still grey.
If you spot meter on the product you can set it for 18% grey (but still not helpful for a white mouse).


----------



## Ninjab

Ok done some using customt white balance and adding some white paper inside. is better result but still pretty bad. I guess if I had better lights it would be better.

But now I am stuffed anyway as the lamp I was using for one side for some reason has stopped working. Was my dads, not going to be happy! See the EXIF direct at my flickr at Flickr: Ninja_B's Photostream


----------



## tyler_h

LED lamp is on the left?
Each light is a different colour temp haha.

Not sure how you can counter the reflections on the mouse; cloth in front of the lamps (in addition) to diffuse the light more?
Could try pointing them up towards the back and having reflected light only on the mouse. It would increase the shadows you have on the left side of the mouse though.

I prefer the angle on the first; the second is a little low I think unless you are doing a side on shot perfectly square.

On EXIF; I wouldn't aim to shoot past f/11 unless I really needed to (like to force shutter speed cause I didnt have an ND etc).


Might be worth trying some non-white products for a bit of practice to get some good shots with those before the adding the extra challenge of white on white...


----------



## Ninjab

Im just going to buy the softboxes and then go about it otherwise I am just wasting everyones time trying to do DIY. Way too much stuffing around that I wouild neglect other things. I mean so far I spent $24 on globes, $15 on tracing paper and other odds and ends. And then wrecked my dads lamp I will have to replace. So in the end trying to save money is just spending more money in the end.

But my worry is I will get the softboxes and I will still have the same issues.

And yeh thats all the globes I had since I broke the two ones that were white, and I didnt have another lamp to put another pearl type one in 

They are way off white. This is so hard


----------



## Ninjab

BTW the 2nd shot above is only angle I can get without needing to physically hold the cam since I dont have a tripod yet.


----------



## Ninjab

I thin the reflections on the actual product is fine just it is way too dark and nowhere near white. Just improperly lighten.

But throw in 1000w of lighting from both directions of softboxes and I am sure that mouse will soon turn white in pictures. I hope ROFL

I took this one of a micromachine with just the LED light on the side. Its weak as hell though. Kind of orangy but more hidden than in white products.


----------



## tyler_h

The one I shot is with really orange halogens, but they are consistent which is the bit that matters.

DIY can easy end up costing more than expected; miss out on economies of scale. Some of your expense is just a bit of bad luck breaking globes 

From mickmac's earlier post:
Dragon Image -
A little pricey but it would do it haha


----------



## tyler_h

you're "My Photos Are OK to Edit" status?
I could try playing with one and post it back - would have to stick it on my Flickr so would only place it temporarily for you to take a copy.
No guarentees on anything coming out better though (being jpeg too).

Disclaimer: not much of a photoshopper


----------



## Ninjab

Nah not going to dragon image. Way over priced and I reckon the gear would be the same from the image melbourne and fotogenics for half the price. I think I can spend $400-500 on decent softbox setup according to both of the owners of those two companies. 

AND I just realised too....those lamp with clamps on them I think they have a MAX amount of wattage they output too! So in the end it wasnt really worth buying the more expensive higher power globes that I bought heh. I think I value my frustration, time more than a few hundred dollars. Though I started out wanting to buy a cam for $700-800 and ended up getting a $2100 cam for $1500 and now was going to spend $300 on lighting etc and seems it will go to $700. Nearly $2500 worth when a pro photograpgher would do me each se of 5-6 products for $500. I am hoping my investment pays off. Oh and I also prob need to get the Tamron lens which is another $350 

That new light tent from fotogenics I am waiting for him to send me some pics he was going to do for me on a notebook bag. I think will do as mickmac said and go for softbox first and just clip the paths out, I need to do that anyway even in white background.

How do I put it as a my photos are ok to edit?


----------



## tyler_h

"Settings" (near the top)
"Edit Profile" (on the left) then scroll towards the bottom.

And certainly is an expensive hobby haha


----------



## Ninjab

Heh well it wasnt set out as a hobby but I like learning things...and creating things. 

No wonder why i couldnt find it, I was looking in Flickr


----------



## Ninjab

I cant seem to get white to look like white. It must be the way I am setting up the custom white balance or something else. I have basically finished reading that Light Science Magic book and it has given me more knowledge but hasnt helped me at all. Was up till 5am to finish reading it and even read the white on white part.

I think the goal at the moment is to get my white paper to look like white on PC first but I cant even do that!


----------



## mickmac

Ok Ninjab. You're probably not going to like this response, but I think it is the best option. You need to contact the customer while they still have time to organise something and be honest with them. Tell them that at the moment you are not set up to do the job for them. it may piss them off a little, but it is much better than having them pay you for a job that isnt up to standard. its nothing to be embarrassed about. You cant expect to be creating professional shots when you simply dont have enough experience. Practice a lot and when you are ready, find work.


EDIT: For some reason, I thought you were trying to do this for a customer. I just went back and read your original post so ignore me (o:


----------



## Ninjab

Heh well you are right in a sense that it is for a customer but the customer in the end is everyone....its for my own catalogue. So bad or good words I still value anyone who bothers to spend the time typing to me here when its contstructive, when you have been 

I am just concerned though if I do go out and buy a soft box setup for $500-700 and a macro lens that my results will still be average. But its hard to base it from the insufficient lighting setup that I have here and no use of a tripod (but I am not trying to go for detail at the moment but keep trying to improve the lighting in my shots, and/or exposure.) I think we my lighting is not strong enough I am overexposing some of the shots to try and make up for the lack of at this moment. Or at least I think so anyway.

I wanted to get my catalogue flyer done with nice shots to go out to print to help push my products but just getting a good camera I realised thereafter purchasing was only a small piece of the puzzle. So going from a $1500 budget is now expanding into a lot larger than antipicated. The pro photograpgher was going to charge me $550 to get the products that I do have now done, and now I am thinking maybe it was the better way to go since if I times that by 5 times if I ever need them done by the money I am spending (if you dont count what i will use the camera for personal use) then it was rather a silly idea since I dont need to take pictures of a lot of products. But I do have the flexibility to do more or if I get 1-3 new products I can do them more easily and wont get charged (since its not more about the amout of products he would be shooting but mroe the setting it up to take the shots as you would know I am sure).

I guess at this stage it is hard to determine if my investment is worth it since I dont have the proper setup, or am I simply blaming the improper setup due to the lack of experience. It is an art no doubt about that but I dont exactly call myself stupid and I do have a good eye for artistic design (I do my own packaging too which does get good feedback).

Just hard on a shoestrong budget!


----------



## Ninjab

Just looking at your white products in your flickr. If I got results like that i would be more than happy, you are very good!


----------



## Helen B

Continuous lights work well for most product shots as long as they are all the same CCT (Correlated Colour Temperature) and tint; and preferably very high CRI (Colou Rendering Index) fluorescents or, better, they are incandescents - even nomal household lamps.

I do almost all of my product shots with one softbox and some silver card reflectors. I use normal household incandescent lamps in the softbox (they are the modelling lights) for shots that do not need to be balanced with a continuous daylight colour balance source (eg when photographing LED flashlights) or when the exposure with the continuous lights would be too long. Only then do I use flash. I find that using continuous light suits the way we work now - tethered camera with live view on a computer screen for composing, focusing and lighting the shot.

Most or the work I do is on a small set, but occasionally we do secondary product shots on white as well, just for blogs etc that might prefer that look. I use a backdrop that is close to a true white (not all 'white' papers are white) which helps with getting correct colour and also hides most small errors if I mask out the background or blend the original shadow around the product back into the picture. (We sometimes leave the background light grey.)

Looftlighter-26F0103-W2 | Flickr - Photo Sharing!

Best,
Helen


----------



## Ninjab

Thanks for sharing your collection of pictures Helen and your advice. Good photos you have there!

I was quite disappointed that the only way to tether the 60d was to connect a mini HDMI cable to the camera to do this....but the disappointed comes because it was not included in the camera pack. You spend a couple of k on the camera and they cant provide a $5-10 cable yet provide a USB cable and a composite video cable (like who buys a 60d and would use that anyway????). I did have one somewhere that I had of a sample but seems I cant find it.

If the 60d does infact let me thether live view on my PC it will make my life a lot easier because having to take the SD card out and stick it in the PC and back again is very tiring especially when I cannot achieve or do what I am trying to do. It makes it hard to practice as micmack suggests above. What I see the pics on my camera LCD after taking the pics look like they might be alright only to put on PC and nothing like how I thought so thethering is going to help.


----------



## Ninjab

Ok I have bought a mini HDMI cable and a wireless remote trigger (interested to see how the cheapie ones work) and now to get the tripod, two softr boxes and going to go out and buy a acrylic opal colour sheet today.


----------



## mickmac

Do you have a light meter Ninjab?
This is an important piece of equipment that can help you to adjust each light to make sure you are getting even lighting across your product.
Thanks for the comments on my pics by the way. I am far from being an expert on product photography, but after 8 years I know the basics (o:


----------



## Ninjab

Hah nah very good work. All good detail and lighting in your shots. What kind of lens do you use for your pictures?

I nearly bought one (light meter) used off Ebay on the weekend but I missed out. brand new one from HK = $159 vs the 2nd hand one from Aus at $132...so I lost interest. I plan to get one though as I think for a novice like me it will be very helpful.

By the way this is the way I want my setup to look like. The guy at the photo light shop said I should add a boom light to it too, but not sure?


----------



## mickmac

I shoot with a Nikon D700
The two main lenses I use are Nikon 50mm f/1.8D and Nikon Micro 105mm f/2.8
I use a lighting setup very similar to the one you are showing. I also use a tripod. It is vital for product photography.


----------



## Ninjab

hah yes I am ordering a tripod too. Wont be able to do it without it.

macro lens will be on the cards if I cant get the DOF's and sharpness I need I guess. Or alternatively do what Tyler suggested and focus stack.


----------



## Ninjab

Should I be buying a 50 x 70cm soft box (2 of them) on the setup above or 1 60x90cm and 1 50x70cm? I worked out the distance to the subject if given the size of the 60x90cm soft box, will be around 70-80cm. Is this overkill, should I be buying the 50x70cm ones instead?

The kit I was going to buy comes with a overhead boom as well. Thanks.


----------



## mickmac

If the lighting is too intense, you can buy some diffusing material and put it across the front of your soft box.


----------



## Ninjab

Yes good idea!



mickmac said:


> If the lighting is too intense, you can buy some diffusing material and put it across the front of your soft box.


----------



## Helen B

For product photography I would go for the largest softbox you can manage rather than two smaller ones. You can always use reflectors - smooth silver-faced card will do very well. If the source is already soft you don't generally need a diffuse reflector.

I have always found that a boom is extremely useful. I use a 4 ft x 4 ft (1.2m x 1.2 m) softbox permanently mounted on a boom.

Regards,
Helen


----------



## Ninjab

Thanks Helen.

What kind of area are you lighting with that massive boom? Sounds like a scene as opposed to a singular product? I am guessing.

The studio that I visited today which was a massive one, he had a soft box which was HUGE. Maybe around the size you mentioned but he also had a larger area. Unbelievable the setup he had as was in a medium size warehouse.

I am ordering a 50 x 70cm and a 60 x 90cm soft boxes and a boom which is 50 x 70cm too. The 60 x 90 will struggle to fit in my room but will use this as the main light with the boom, with some directional light of the smaller one from the other side.



Helen B said:


> For product photography I would go for the largest softbox you can manage rather than two smaller ones. You can always use reflectors - smooth silver-faced card will do very well. If the source is already soft you don't generally need a diffuse reflector.
> 
> I have always found that a boom is extremely useful. I use a 4 ft x 4 ft (1.2m x 1.2 m) softbox permanently mounted on a boom.
> 
> Regards,
> Helen


----------



## Ninjab

Well I got my soft box kit...only setup one light. Will setup the 90x65cm and boom on the weekend. Just put the 70x50cm soft box on this one. My cam is on a tripod now and remote trigger.

Bad reflections from the metal badge and the nylon so far and the white and black are both off balance. Waiting for my HDMI cable to come so I can tether it on my notebook. Its quite over exposed too and too bright since the bag is definitely black but looks gray in the picture due to the lighting.


----------



## Ninjab

Seems I am not really getting any better. Hours and hours of stuffing around and cant seem to get my lighting right. Or more so my exposures.

If I try and get my backgrounds lit white then my pictures are overexposed and colours dont look right. I cannot get black to look properly black due to this and definitely cannot get white objects to look white either. Always a very off white or gray as when cut out and put on a white background looks very awful. These new pictures are running a softbox from the sides left and right.

Stressed to the max, very tired, confused and dont know where to go from here 














The EXIF's etc are on my flickr at Flickr: Ninja_B's Photostream


----------



## Ninjab

Dont know if I am getting any better but I took your advice and didnt shine those two soft boxes at the actual product. Just pointed them at the projector screen. Pointing them at the wall didnt really get any light to them as I think they might be a bit close.

I hooked up my boom and placed it a long way away near my door and stood that facing towards the corner of the room on the right in the direction of the larger soft box. 

But looks like there is not enough fill light from the front? And colours dont look right and it looks dull just like all my other pictures I take . the Blue n on the metal badge not bright and the blacks are looking gray and purple'y. Blacks seem to look gray when I get the backgrounds white but my intention wasnt to get backgrounds white, just trying to get the bag to look full and black like the studio picture below this post.


----------



## Ninjab

Still looks a bit orangy on one side and a little grayish still. I still suck at taking exposures, either things are dull or not proper colours. Not sure where I am going wrong as I am going by the exposure meter and I sometimes take a stop or two past what it recommends being the proper exposure and still is dull.

Disregard the focus on these pictures by the way.










Maybe I should of just left it all to a professional in the end!  Becoming very frustrated due to the money spent and I havent really gone forward at all.


----------



## Ninjab

Here are the originals of some exposures I made late last week. Please critique my exposures so I can try and improve. There was a lot of light on these products from all angles and it was still kind of dull, if I increased to allow more light in in the exposures they would be over exposed. At this lighting, the backgrounds were not so white but the colours of the products looked near correct, just needed some levels adjustments on the pictures below these 3.













Here are the edited images (white and black levels adjusted) in photoshop. Please let me know what you think?














You will notice there is some inconsitency in the black levels of the first two images, I think it needs some adjustment as the 2nd image black looks better in my opinion as it looks more true black and not too much light contrast in the lighting. Let me know what you think.

I also pen tooled and cut out the badge in the first image as I had another exposure which had a better reflection on it so I copy and pasted it over the top. Also in the 3rd image I pen tooled the papers in the pocket and had it in a top layer with no colour adjustment as the papers got lost with the sampling of the white adjustment level from the background. I also pen tooled some other parts where the background was still a bit gray (since my projector screen is further back than where the product sits making the lighting on white different for exposure).

I would like to be able to not do so much editing but in the end, if I get the results consistent of the levels. 

I have compared my pictures to companies like Belkin and targus with their pictures of their bags and I think my pictures are either as good or if not better, in my opinion. It is amazing now to see flaws in products since now having an eye on lighting in pictures and how they are supposed to be done, or at least my perception as to how should be done.

Thanks, will post more pictures later for critique. Let me know what you think! Thanks.


----------



## Ninjab

Anyone?


----------



## shinycard255

I want to chime in, but am about to head out for work.  If I find some free time, I'll respond, otherwise I will tonight.  I wanna help you out since I do product photography


----------



## The_Traveler

You may not have noticed but the OP's last post was 17 months ago.


----------



## Mully

Ninjab said:


> Well I got my soft box kit...only setup one light. Will setup the 90x65cm and boom on the weekend. Just put the 70x50cm soft box on this one. My cam is on a tripod now and remote trigger.
> 
> Bad reflections from the metal badge and the nylon so far and the white and black are both off balance. Waiting for my HDMI cable to come so I can tether it on my notebook. Its quite over exposed too and too bright since the bag is definitely black but looks gray in the picture due to the lighting.



You can shoot the badge separately, light for the bag and strip the badge in in pp.....much easier ans then you can get good lighting on the bag as that is your product


----------



## shinycard255

The_Traveler said:


> You may not have noticed but the OP's last post was 17 months ago.



Damn... missed that part...


----------

