[a / b / c / d / e / f / g / gif / h / hr / k / m / o / p / r / s / t / u / v / vg / vm / vmg / vr / vrpg / vst / w / wg] [i / ic] [r9k / s4s / vip / qa] [cm / hm / lgbt / y] [3 / aco / adv / an / bant / biz / cgl / ck / co / diy / fa / fit / gd / hc / his / int / jp / lit / mlp / mu / n / news / out / po / pol / pw / qst / sci / soc / sp / tg / toy / trv / tv / vp / vt / wsg / wsr / x / xs] [Settings] [Search] [Mobile] [Home]
Board
Settings Mobile Home
/p/ - Photography


Thread archived.
You cannot reply anymore.


[Advertise on 4chan]


Anyone has any experiences with shooting photos or videos using only candle lights as light sources?

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera SoftwareGoogle
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width375
Image Height562
>>
Yeah me. I shot a whole movie once using only candles as a light-source for dimly-lit scenes.
>>
>>4283031
Tell us about it please
>>
>>4283032
Well, it all started after a smash hit film about the first moon landing, where we put a really bright light up as high as we could and found out it was a bit dark on set for the cameras, especially since we were filming at a higher framerate to make the low gravity thing believable, and after it turned out so well I thought "hey, why light sets at all? what if we just used candles?"

It was just as hard to focus the f0.7 lenses (we asked zeiss for a few in case we ran into too many exposure issues "on the moon" and still had one laying around - shit man, we had that shoot scheduled with a promo rocket launch and had to nail it LIVE with only a short rehearsal) and keep everything from turning into a blur especially since it was softer and darker than "earthlight" turned out to be, but we pulled it off with a lot of pushing in development. I won a few awards, but it wasn't anywhere near the success of my moon flick. People liked it so much some of them think it actually happened, and everyone keeps forgetting the candlelight film. Even I forgot the candelight film. What was it called? Fuck if I know. I think it was overrated. I like my other film way better

it was called Apollo 11.
>>
>>4283034
Meds, now
>>
File: 1137-6508.jpg (490 KB, 1400x954)
490 KB
490 KB JPG
Some stuff I've done with candle light.

Nikon Df/50.14 ART

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment MakeNIKON CORPORATION
Camera ModelNIKON Df
Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop Lightroom Classic 8.2.1 (Windows)
Maximum Lens Aperturef/1.4
Sensing MethodOne-Chip Color Area
Color Filter Array Pattern822
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)50 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution72 dpi
Vertical Resolution72 dpi
Image Created2021:02:19 21:01:22
Exposure Time1/250 sec
F-Numberf/2.8
Exposure ProgramManual
ISO Speed Rating1600
Lens Aperturef/2.8
Exposure Bias0 EV
Metering ModePattern
Light SourceUnknown
FlashNo Flash
Focal Length50.00 mm
Color Space InformationsRGB
RenderingNormal
Exposure ModeManual
White BalanceAuto
Scene Capture TypeStandard
Gain ControlHigh Gain Up
ContrastNormal
SaturationNormal
SharpnessNormal
Subject Distance RangeUnknown
>>
File: 1137-6492-2.jpg (410 KB, 932x1400)
410 KB
410 KB JPG


[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment MakeNIKON CORPORATION
Camera ModelNIKON Df
Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop Lightroom Classic 8.2.1 (Windows)
Maximum Lens Aperturef/1.4
Sensing MethodOne-Chip Color Area
Color Filter Array Pattern822
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)50 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution72 dpi
Vertical Resolution72 dpi
Image Created2021:02:19 21:02:06
Exposure Time1/125 sec
F-Numberf/2.8
Exposure ProgramManual
ISO Speed Rating1600
Lens Aperturef/2.8
Exposure Bias0 EV
Metering ModePattern
Light SourceUnknown
FlashNo Flash
Focal Length50.00 mm
Color Space InformationsRGB
RenderingNormal
Exposure ModeManual
White BalanceAuto
Scene Capture TypeStandard
Gain ControlHigh Gain Up
ContrastNormal
SaturationNormal
SharpnessNormal
Subject Distance RangeUnknown
>>
>>4283037
>>4283043
Do you notice that the candle in the op has a much bigger flame than your candles? I wonder what makes that candle burn like that.
>>
File: 1137-6499.jpg (496 KB, 1400x966)
496 KB
496 KB JPG
>>4283048

Larger wick probably, part of the reason I used multiple candles. I was also trying to light up both sides of her body.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment MakeNIKON CORPORATION
Camera ModelNIKON Df
Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop Lightroom Classic 8.2.1 (Windows)
Maximum Lens Aperturef/1.4
Sensing MethodOne-Chip Color Area
Color Filter Array Pattern822
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)50 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution72 dpi
Vertical Resolution72 dpi
Image Created2021:02:19 21:01:47
Exposure Time1/250 sec
F-Numberf/2.8
Exposure ProgramManual
ISO Speed Rating1600
Lens Aperturef/2.8
Exposure Bias0 EV
Metering ModePattern
Light SourceUnknown
FlashNo Flash
Focal Length50.00 mm
Color Space InformationsRGB
RenderingNormal
Exposure ModeManual
White BalanceAuto
Scene Capture TypeStandard
Gain ControlHigh Gain Up
ContrastNormal
SaturationNormal
SharpnessNormal
Subject Distance RangeUnknown
>>
>>4283037
>>4283043
>>4283049
Why did you shoot at f2.8 and not wide open?
>>
>>4283065

I wanted some depth of field and some of the candles in focus. Had I shot her wide open only a very small part of her would have been in focus, also she had some good texture with the water on the area between her breasts and I wanted to get that too.

I knew the distance to subject was going to fight me regarding getting as much of her in focus as possible, and also with the angle on the shot only a portion of her would be in focus even at f5.6 or f8, and a tripod was too bulky for the small area I was working in.



[Advertise on 4chan]

Delete Post: [File Only] Style:
[Disable Mobile View / Use Desktop Site]

[Enable Mobile View / Use Mobile Site]

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.