Why I HATE Umbrella Lighting...

Why I HATE Umbrella Lighting...

If you want to get me to fall a sleep, just show me some images shot with umbrella lighting. Now I am not talking Richard Avedon, because Richard Avedon did a lot more than capture images with a single umbrella, he captured a moment that is so his signature, that anyone else attempting to copy would be dwarfed by the sheer magnitude of what Avedon accomplished.

Umbrella lighting is the 'WalMart' or the 'Ford Pinto' of lighting for me. It is the horrible gig at the Holiday Inn, where some dried up ex alcoholic is attempting to make a come back singing 'I will Survive" to a bunch of totally miserable accountants congregating for their annual convention.

Umbrella light is that really bad hair do or dress that can only be seen in some totally kitsch boutique in Boise, Idaho. It is that Wedding photo that we have all grown to, ah, hmmm, Love?

It smacks of hey, I am now a photographer because I now own a couple of studio lights and have to have this because if I don't I won't be considered credible and it will impress anyone who doesn't know any better and the bigger the better types...

Ah, give me that umbrella to be very, very safe and to not upset the REAL serious photographers out there that believe that you have to have a reflector to kick in some light in to "THAT" shadow area, otherwise it is NOT a technically good image.

What is even worse is that those who MUST HAVE an umbrella, will almost certainly have a..."Da Da, a Soft-box!!!" Now THAT is really impressive. Every time I see a set up with a soft-box and the "UMBRELLA" I pop the proverbial CHUBBY and have to sit down, as to not expose by excitement.

Now, if somebody were to say to me, "Hey check out what I did with this umbrella!" that would totally blow me away, I would be so F'ing pleased. But at this point in time, I have seen nothing but flat, boring, pedestrian, predictable, unassuming, dull and flat out knock me out with a VALIUM the size of a HOCKEY PUCK images.

Hey, but who knows. Given that surprises do happen, I'm open to the possibilities.

Surprise me.

http://www.benjaminkanarekblog.com/?p=814

Read the comment but finished still not knowing the reason why the OP says why he hates umbrella lighting.

For a newbie like me in the field the moment I saw the title I thought "oh great, I am going to learn something new here and the cons of umbrella lighting". But excuse my ignorance and my limited ability to grasp the occasional tricky sublimal meanings of this beautiful language that is english I still fail to come out with a clear understanding of why the OP says he hates the Umbrella Lighting. Wasn't that the whole purpose of the title? To then explain in the comments section the reason behind the title?

Well, it could well be its just me falling short of understanding what could be the obvious and my good friend Mike-P might even come up with a niggling theory that my grey matter has been seriously affected since yesterday hence the reason I still didn't grasp what the above comment is trying to convey to the reader

Dont worry Amin, You are not alone.
Ime still none the wiser in this one either!

What exaclty was the point of that outburst Ben?

Sadly not everyone can afford a couple of good softboxes Ben, so umbrellas make a good starting point. Softboxes do give a nicer result no doubt but they cost so much money!

Amin and Andy, don't worry about Ben - he has these moments now and then

And is probably most recently hit by a dried up ex alcoholic with a umbrella, while singing: I will survive

Sorry Ben, I don't have or use them. I am a kind of natural light guy. But only on stills, no models for me.....

Martin.

From how I read it (and it was only quickly because I get bored easily) he's not over impressed with soft boxes either.

Pure snobbery from someone with beautiful models and fabulous locations at his disposal. I understood he meant both kinds of diffuser. His kind of work requires a rather more sophisticated approach with lots of pre-production planning and the sort of budgets that allow a shoot to take all day or all week. The rest of us get a model for 1 hour and have to make it count by pleasing the model so that we get paid.

I know what he means though, it is so easy to create really commercial images with big, flattering soft boxes, These images can be a bit boring if you are surrounded by high art and advertising luvies, but Joe public loves the glamour of posing in front of big lights and the results blow them away!
You don't have to fill every crevice with light, but when you do for reasons of flattery the humble umbrella is really handy

So Ben, I get that you have a tremendous amount of experience, talent, and expertise. I know the people you work for really do communicate on your level. I don't think many of the people I work for get the lingo... in fact I'm not sure I do either...
I understand you don't like umbrella light... but help me out here... if you were gonna use an umbrella, where when and how would you use one?
Also would you please share an image, that illustrates what you do like for lighting and share how you lit it, and why your clients (who appear to be much more sophisticated than mine) buy in?

yes Mike, you are right. I read it all and as I said even with my limited understanding of the english language that's the idea I was left with, that he is not overly impressed with soft boxes either.

But in the end I remained none the wiser as he didn't explain why.

And thanks for letting pass the joke , it must have been pretty hard, knowing how you can always pinpoint accurately moments to throw in an oportunistic joke

He does explain it Amin, well at least a bit.

The problem is that most studio shots all look the same so it's get boring.
The image looks flat because a soft box and umbrella are a form of floodlight, it fills the wrinkles and eliminates contrast so that's why it looks flat.

I'm no expert with this so please correct me if wrong.

Hey Ben

Don't you think you are in the wrong kind of business then? I think I know what you are saying, but then ... it's fashion photography not art. Ok, som fashion photographers blur the line but they are few and far between. At the bottom line: you are out there to sell dresses, lipsticks whatever. The images of yours I have seen and liked the most had very dramatic film noirish lighting definitely made without the aid of umbrellas.

To echo some of the comments before this one: I think it would be interesting to discuss the qualities a various means of lightning. And how to get there. But it's ok if you just want to draw attention to your blog (where I have found some usefull tips).

When I started reading that sentence I must have switched off, no wonder Mike-P got so bored half way. My way of reading boring stuff is making long jumps and switching off on parts of the sentences .

But even it what you just mentioned was the case and he thinks that have seen nothing but flat, boring, pedestrian, predictable, unassuming, dull and flat out knock me out with a VALIUM the size of a HOCKEY PUCK images shouldn't he at least explain why the lighting does that? and what would be the alternative, at least for the mortals like me who don't have access to state of the art studios like he has? All I have is a shed, although air-conditioned I must admit and with a mini bar now nicely positioned nicely stocked with drinks and mars bars

My intention in this post is not meant to be arrogant or insulting to any of you. All I am suggesting is a different approach that might give you your own mark that will enhance your identity.

Benjamin Kanarek - J'accuse

You heard it here first, next Pentax User meet in Amin's shed!