Any suggestions on a reasonably priced set-up/kit for lighting objects (flowers, etc); something that has a box/tent and a couple of lights suitable for macro photography?
Can it be done well for less than $300?
Printable View
Any suggestions on a reasonably priced set-up/kit for lighting objects (flowers, etc); something that has a box/tent and a couple of lights suitable for macro photography?
Can it be done well for less than $300?
I just saw this on ebay and thought of you....it's a lighting tent. All you need to do is supply the light. You could use some work lights from Home Depot, or else some off-camera strobes.
Where will you be shooting? There are all sorts of light tents for shooting indoors on a table. Check eBay for a wide range of sizes and styles. (Be sure to get one that's big enough.)
For lights, you can use two desk lamps--just be sure that they have the SAME bulbs--same size (wattage), same brand, same type (and even the same age--start with two new bulbs). If they're different, the color can be different. The actual color doesn't matter a lot, as you can adjust white balance (better called "neutral balance") in the camera or afterwards, especially if you shoot RAW (or RAW + JPEG). Even better, you can get a kit that has everything. I paid $74 + shipping for a 24" light tent, 4 cloth backgrounds, 2 lights and 2 stands. I also bought 2 extra bulbs--they last a long time but they're hard to get locally--and diffuser covers for the lamps for cases where I can't use the tent. All told, it was $106 including shipping--but, that was in October, 2007. The same seller now sells the same basic kit for $106 with free shipping. What I bought would now be $127. He has other kits, as well, including one with two tents and three lights. His lights are daylight-balanced, which should make setting the white balance easier.
I would NOT use strobes for this, for many reasons:
- You can't easily see what you're setting up unless the strobes have modeling lights.
- Strobes are more expensive--MUCH more expensive--than simple continuous lights.
- Strobes' color depends upon their output, so you'll be tinkering with the white balance more.
- Exposure is more difficult to set correctly with strobes than continuous lights.
- You don't need a lot of light--you can use longer exposures with subjects that don't move. (Thus, you can use a smaller aperture--down to f/8, maybe f/11, for greater depth of field. Try not to use an aperture smaller than f/11, as you'll run into diffraction problems--the image will be less sharp.)
- You don't need the action-stopping ability that comes with the very short strobe flash.
You'll have two settings to worry about: exposure and white balance. If you use autoexposure, the results will depend upon the background, because the camera wants to make every shot look "grey." (The film standard was 18% grey, but digital cameras vary in the standard they use.) If the scene is overall very light-colored/bright--e.g., snow, beach, white background, the camera will try to make it less bright (underexpose) and you'll end up with a muddy, dark-ish photo. If the overall tone is dark, the camera will overexpose, making colors look washed out and possibly "blowing out" highlights.
There are two ways to deal with this: use manual exposure or autoexposure with exposure compensation. Manual exposure is better for this situation. One good way would be to get a cheap gray card (lots available on eBay), put it in the scene, and meter off it. (See your camera manual for how to do this.) That should get you in the ballpark. You can then experiment with the exposure (e.g., take a series of shots at slightly different exposures and compare them) and record what looks best. If you want to use autoexposure, take a series of shots with different exposure compensation settings. This can be less satisfactory, as the exposure compensation range is limited. In either case, experiment. You CAN "adjust" exposure a bit in post-processing, but it's better to get it pretty close to right in the camera, as the range of adjustments in software is limited.
White (or neutral) balance can be very important for this sort of photography, as you'll probably want fairly accurate color. There are four ways you can try to get it right:
- Guess. (E.g., set the camera's white balance to daylight, if you're using daylight fluorescent bulbs, like the kit I have, or tungsten if you're using regular incandescent lamps, or let the camera guess by using auto white balance.) This is the worst way, by far.
- Guess and tweak it by eye in post-processing (best if done using RAW).
- Set a custom white balance in the camera. (See your camera manual for how to do this, as it varies.)
- Take a reference shot for post-processing.
3 & 4 both require a reference of some kind. Don't use a sheet of white paper as a reference--it's too bright and most likely is far from neutral. (Most white paper has a blue cast that makes it look "whiter" to our eyes, but not to a camera.) Grey exposure reference cards are almost as bad, as they can also be far from neutral and are too dark. If you're going to be doing a lot of this, I'd recommend a WhiBal card. They're cheap, durable, easily carried, and very useful. If you get the "studio" version, you can easily use it to set a custom white balance in the camera. While I normally wouldn't bother doing that, it would make great sense for a series of set-up shots where the lighting is exactly the same. Otherwise, you can do a "click" white balance in Digital Photo Professional (and other software) or use the free plug-in from the WhiBal site on a shot with the WhiBal card, then apply that "recipe" to the shots with the same lighting.
Especially for this sort of photography, I would NOT recommend any of the "lens cap" systems like the ExpoDisc or its cheap Chinese imitations. Technically, the ExpoDisc is supposed to be used by placing the camera at the subject position and pointing the camera back to where the photographer will be to measure the incident light falling on the subject. That would be next to impossible in your macro situation. A lot of people use these devices for reflected light, but that ASSUMES that the scene has an overall neutral (grey) color. That can work OK outdoors and even in some indoor situations, but it's NOT good for macro work, especially where you may have a colored background that pretty much fills the frame. (It would try to make a red cloth look grey.)
Oh, and definitely put the camera on a steady support, like a tripod. (If the camera isn't too heavy, you can get other devices, like arms that clamp onto a tabletop or small tripods.) Use a remote shutter release or the camera's self-timer. If you use long shutter speeds, try "mirror lockup" (again, check your camera's manual) to see if that will help, though, with a short focal-length lens at a close distance, it may not make much difference. You might also want to get an angle finder, as it can be awkward to get behind the camera to look through the viewfinder, but see how it works for you