I'm a rookie at portraits (this image was my second portrait attempt) with a limited budget for equipment. Currently I have 2 softboxes and 2 umbrellas that have CFL bulbs. I see that most folks are using strobes. What are the advantages of strobes vs. bulbs? How would they have changed this image taken with 2 softboxes? I appreciate the help.
These photos were taken just outside of a small town in central Portugal.
I really enjoy creating something different with drones. I've had the Mavic now for about four weeks and I absolutely love it.
Client came and needed headshots immediately. Set up a single Broncolor Para 133 in the dining room. Delivered 20 pics. Setup, Shoot, Edit and delivered within 30 minutes.
This is a water reservoir for the city of Curitiba, Brazil
Here are a couple long exposure shots using my original 50 year old Minolta SR-T201 and kit lens shooting Fujifilm Neopan Acros 100 II. Both images were taken just at the end of blue hour.
2 Comments
First and foremost: Love the picture.
I use continuous lighting in my studio because the studio work I do is headshots and portraits. Continuous lighting creates a rather bright environment, so the pupil tends to go small, leaving a big part of the iris exposed (great for portraits and headshots - especially for models with blue, grey, green, hazel eyes). Whereas with strobes, in my experience, because the ambien light is scarce, the pupil tends to become big, leaving a small part of the iris exposed. Once the strobe(s) go off, they work faster than the pupil does in retracting. I don´t know if I explained myself correctly. Basically, what I am trying to say is that for me, continuous lighting for portraits and headshots is better than strobes.
Thank you for your response Cristian. I do get what you are saying about the eyes and the constant light is helping me quickly learn the effects of positioning the lights nearer and further away.