How to Control the Light on Your Backdrop

[@malonecustomdesigns]

The image at 5:14 is the winner. It’s much better than the final image in my opinion.

[@joshbottams8707]

Agreed, much more polished

[@bmefilms6879]

yupp, except for the blown out face.

[@khondakaralsabah4328]

Agreed

[@seanville88]

but he already mentioned, it's depend on "what we want"

[@MichaelJones-yx4zv]

Correct

[@pleasedrivefaster873]

I think the image at 5:08 is much more pleasing to look at than the final version. Great, straightforward tutorial regardless.

[@indykurt]

I was wondering if anyone else thought this also. The final photo has too dark/light extremes but could be changed in post but the broad lighting shot compared to the more pleasing, to my eye, split lighting.

[@gdamanis]

I agree. This is my favorite as well.

[@abelsjca]

I agree. I am not happy with the shiny forehead and the spotlight on the right eye. Maybe lowering the intensity of the spot light by a stop and moving it back to make it a little wider, and rotate it to the left eye a bit. But this is a Great tutorial no matter what... Thanks

[@Chanslam]

Eh I get it though. It’s a more dramatic, niche photo. Both are nice for different results

[@jorgensen8]

Ditto here on 5:08

[@rzorrilla52]

Generally a good video. However the explanation of the 'Inverse Square Law" (at 1:08) is not correct... Doubling the distance between the light an subject decreases the light to 1/4 (2 Stops), and not 1/2 (one stop) as stated in this video. This is also explained incorrectly (at 1:30)... If subject is at 4 feet from light and backdrop is 4 feet from subject (background at 8 feet from light), the background will be 2 stops (not one stop) lower than the subject. One technique that I have used for some time now (and I have never seen explained in any KZbin Video, and requires no math) is to use the 'standard F-Stops', 1, 1.4, 2, 2.8, 4, 5.6, 8, 11, 16, 22... and 'convert this to feet' when using a single light source like a strobe. For example, if subject is at 4 feet from light and background is at 8 feet from light, then background will be 2 stops underexposed (4ft -> 5,6ft -> 8ft). If you really want background to be 1 stop less, then place subject at 4 feet from light and background at 5.6 feet from light (1.6 feet back of subject). Practical examples: If you have space limitations and want 2 stops background underexposed, then place subject at 2 feet and background at 4 feet (2ft -> ft2.8 -> 4ft). Of course, this brings other types of issues like fast light fall off in subject is illuminated from above). If you want to reduce the light falloff between subjects (for example in a group photo), then place the subjects as far away from light as practical. For example, in a group photo with a single light... Placing subjects between 11 and 16 feet (11-16=5 feet distance front-back between subjects) then all subjects will be within 1 stop (f11->f16). If same group was placed at 8 feet then to maintain the same one stop drop, then the back subjects cannot be more than 11 feet from light source (allows for only 3 feet of separation 11-8=3 (f8->f11) between front-back as compared to 16-11=5 feet in the previous example). If a group is standing 'in-line' that has a lot of depth distance, place the light away from camera. For example to the right of camera so light between light source and subjects are basically at the same distance then all subjects will be exposed about the same.

[@brapperdan]

Thanks, I thought I was crazy for a sec. lol

[@crollinsphoto]

Mercy..no wonder I buy different shades of a background. All that is too much to wrap my head around. Peter Hurley explained and showed it more simply.

[@FStoppers]

Charles Rollins yes, the formula shows it should be 75% less light every time you double the distance. We were the ones who created that Peter Hurley video but David did get it wrong here. -P

[@FStoppers]

Andrew Miller we cant Re edit a video once it’s on KZbin but I did pin a post that correctly explains it. -P

[@anthonyc1883]

Or simply re-uploaded it with a simple couple words on the screen when the host says the wrong thing. Saves reshooting it. Lots of you tubers correct errors that way.

[@marcusamancio8302]

There has been a confusion with the explanation of the distance/light rule: Physics has explained that the intensity of the light fades in a square factor In relation to the distance between the source and the measured point. Therefore, if you multiply your distance by 2 you will divide the light you get by 4. (Not 2 as it was said) Great content. Sorry for any English mistakes.

[@FStoppers]

Yes you are correct. We have pinned an updated explanation of the law. -P

[@pictures4urears]

Indeed, no need to mention a physics law - no photographer will use this calculation.

[@Glitch_The_Fox]

I have watched dozens of tutorials on lighting and this is the first one that really explained how light works. Just telling where lights go gives other's no lesson or knowledge, but this taught me so much about how to use light in a studio. Thank you for your work in making this video

[@FerrumFerrarius]

Wow. This video is great. I've learned so much. Thanks.

[@dealbat]

For an education brand as popular as Fstoppers, I’m surprised they got the inverse square law wrong at the beginning. Go back and fix it so you don’t mess up newbies who are learning.

[@agentred8732]

Allen Deal wrong, how?

[@charlie2640]

Double the distance 1/4 the intensity. Not half the intensity.

[@atalazs]

In Addition: the law can only be applied if the distance is large compared to the size of the source. With this big Softbox, intensity goes down much slower than inverse square.

[@lanceevans1689]

@@atalazs Wrong. That isn't true.

[@aerozg]

Wish i had a huge indoor space to practice lighting, that would be so much fun.

[@reyscottm9]

This is next level education for us beginners. I don't do a lot of portrait photography, but this is gold.

[@nickalexander770]

No it’s wrong……inverse square law states when you double the distance you lose 75% of the light not 50%……you also get four times the spread……hence inverse SQUARE law.

[@Dvlx1]

It's not next level it's filling beginners heads with crap making them think they need all this gear that they absolutely do not need.

[@henryanton2605]

Almost everyone gets these inverse square law tutorials wrong almost all the time. While there are issues with the math this time, the (most common) mistake is changing multiple variables and attributing the resulting changes to "light falloff." At 2:29, the backdrop exposure is what it is...if Matt were to move forward towards the light, and NO OTHER CHANGES were made, the backdrop would expose exactly the same as the previous photo. The error here was at 2:49 when Matt walks closer to the light AND "we drop our exposure to compensate." The resulting photo has a darker backdrop because "we drop our exposure to compensate" which is changing an exposure variable that has nothing to do with the placement of the model or the inverse square law. If, following the initial photo of Matt just in front of the backdrop, you "dropped the exposure" the background and model would both be darker...argh! I promise, if you put the camera on a tripod and took a single picture as a baseline, then moved the model closer and farther to the light then did not change strobe power, exposure or any other variables the backdrop would expose the same every single time. The model's look would change, but that's just because he's moving closer or farther from the light. The inverse square law applies to more than just photography...it applies to all manner of energy like light, sound, radiation etc. But, you can't change multiple variables. The important and informative elements of this tutorial regarding light placement, changing light positions and all the good stuff is lost because of the basic errors at the beginning.

[@rsg440]

1:18 hmmm..🤔 but as fas as I know, the intensity that you lose when you double the distance from the sobject to the light source is a 75% less, and not "by a half" (50%), so there you have to deal with the fall off of the light, that happens when the light is too close tto the subjetc... or am I wrong? 🤔

[@henri.witteveen]

Yes you are right, double the distance means ¼ of the power

[@rzorrilla52]

See my explanation about the inverse square law. in the comments section.. Has practical examples and requires no math as long as you know the standard f-stops...

[@maslowcnc8555]

@@rzorrilla52 yep I have to explain it this way to beginners as well, most people know their 5th grade times tables. too bad most don't remember any highschool math.

[@nickalexander770]

Exactly!!

[@thebrovaloffice1365]

Well that tutorial escalated quickly

[@lifewithoutborders1348]

yup.. 0-100 in 4sec

[@PapaOrlando]

Im confused what you mean

[@paulopereira1317]

@@PapaOrlando gay joke @4sec "...behind the scene..." 🤦🏼‍♂️🤦🏼‍♂️🤦🏼‍♂️

[@Horatio-Monroe]

For real though.

[@JeremiahTrue]

Yeah, this went from single light to full pro setup in one scene change

[@je-mg2fx]

this is a great video and great explanations with examples. well done!!!

[@Owenwithee]

Great, concise, simple tutorial.

[@nanao5269]

I've been doing outdoor photography for over fifty years. Going indoors ! thank you

[@manoharmgr8235]

வீடியோ மிகவும் பயனுள்ளதாக இருந்தது மிக்க நன்றி இரா.மனோகர் சென்னை . Very useful This video sir, , big thank you sir R.MANOHAR ,Chennai.India

[@thonymazzello]

My fav image at 5:12 . Thanks for the nice video.

[@micsteethanklemonitor]

This video might be 4 years old but it is a tremendous help for us

[@Teyliaj]

Thank you. This was a great step by step video. Learn so much

[@darrengeorge1396]

Awesome Tip 🙌🏾

[@ellejames2946]

Does this work with colored light on the back drop? 🤔 I want to buy a colored light to use in my back drop with a halo light on me for filming videos? I don't know anything about this or the language used lol so hope that made sense

[@KngsPwn4]

This is a great lighting tutorial...bravo!!

[@Thomas.Steinborn]

Awesome video, very helpful. Thank you.

[@kevb7451]

This was a fantastic tutorial!

[@manoharmgr8235]

வீடியோ மிகவும் பயனுள்ளதாக இருந்தது மிக்க நன்றி Very useful This video , big thank you (R.MANOHAR ,Chennai.India)

[@monztermovies]

Great tutorial!

[@dj-7154]

where you buy the grid from you placed on light/. thanks

[@starryj63]

Fantastic video. Easy to understand. Wish I had seen something like this years ago!

[@hurleygreen927]

Great video! Thanks for sharing

[@joelonsdale]

Great tutorial! You look and dress just like I did in the 90's - what a stunner!

[@david.shugar]

If am not not mistaken, the inverse square laws means that if you double the distance the power is one quarter as strong. (1/(2)^2=1/4)

[@lighthousephoto7143]

Love this guy

[@jettlifeweddings]

A GH5, was NOT expecting that. Awesome pictures man!

[@derryk1]

I shoot with a GH5 and a G85 both stills and video having done so for the past 3 years. Both cameras are very capable still cameras putting out great pictures. I would stack them up against many other offerings of still cameras out there except a Nikon D850 and a Hasselblad H6 of course.

[@rokah1391]

ahaha exactly my thought when i saw it

[@faraaze]

Best video ever

[@cooperreid5883]

Great video David. Nice and straight forward.

[@mattiecreates]

Thank you for this :)

[@fg1110]

Where did this guy come from? He is such a great teacher. Use him More please.

[@FStoppers]

F G David has been with us for many years! He’s helped us film so many of our tutorials and edit many of our videos. -P

[@Dartheomus]

Welll..... don't praise him too much. At 1:08, he literally taught you completely wrong. So... yeah

[@donbeamon9111]

Wowwwwwww that was freaking great

[@nunoandradebluesdrive]

cool tips. great job

[@YRChoudankar]

sir, please mention camera settings also in image

[@akrammaad7609]

Is it possible relight the 1:51 to the 5:14, just by using photoshop

[@mikefoster6018]

Surely the inverse square law means if you double the distance you quarter the power. (As in physics etc).

[@vikrantparihar5962]

how to use studios strobes ailon with camera settings

[@lover3308]

Amazing 😻 thank u

[@anthonyortiz4254]

The 2nd to last was the best

[@PawanKumar-bn7yt]

you have such a good subject 👍🏻

[@MichaelJones-yx4zv]

Thank you so much for making a video on back drop lighting they are so hard to find. Please make more. PS I like the Ponytail 😏

[@deonicadavis477]

This was sooo helpful! Thanks so much!

[@iam.602.photography6]

Nicely done and explained extremely well

[@asterchef]

Thank you excellent video!!; Could you tell me which lens you used for the photos and what camera did you record the video?, greetings from Mexico

[@lesterandrewjonson]

What is the size of the backdrop used here?

[@itsMido2]

Both the model and the photographer are hot 🔥 Great video

[@Chrisdgallego]

David, or somebody... a question about the diffusion fabric we put in softboxes, please. And I'm sorry my English. I'll try my best. A friend of mine has a broncolor kit system with some stripboxes, reflectors and square soft boxes. The diffuser fabric has fold marks and I really hate those marks because I use that equipment for product photography. Specially when I shot wine bottles. If you store your softboxes, how do you fold this diffusion part? I mean, the white fabric part. I just want to know it because I hope in a near future I could buy my own equipment. Thanks guys

[@FStoppers]

Hmmm I don't know what the answer to that is. You could buy a steamer and steam your softboxes every time you use them. A lot of pros use rolls of paper in product photography to guarantee the most perfect transitions in their highlights. Obviously it takes a lot more effort to setup the paper but it will give you more control than the front baffle of a softbox especially if you start using grids and shooting through the paper to get white to grey transitions. -P

[@Chrisdgallego]

@@FStoppers thanks

[@MichalOlender]

When watching it stoned and he throws technical stuff at you...come on man, I thought we were friends!

[@jpelevated4694]

😂😂😂

[@remingtonpenaranda7762]

Exactly!!

[@Dartheomus]

Nah man, don't worry. He got the deets wrong anyway. It's like when you and your bro's are a bit tweaked, and the one dude starts getting philosophical. It sounds great until you hear it sober.

[@FStoppers]

WE MADE A MISTAKE!!! The inverse square law states that you lose 75% of your light as distance doubles (not 50%). To better understand the inverse square law, check out this video we created with Peter Hurley: kzbin.info/www/bejne/roCQe2doi7Jnapo

[@petr7856]

An excellent article! Thanking you so much!

[@bonniegarrett1251]

does the light that is on the backdrop stay on constant or is it flash? If its flash is it possible to get the same look if its constant?

[@whateverphoto]

That was flash, but you can achieve a similar look with constants if you have some diffusion and light modifiers.

[@fgrecki]

Is the forehead overblown or is it just my screen...?

[@intensitymediaJm]

It is

[@NathanShirley]

I think that's an intentional Illuminati triangle, hence the president joke.

[@myxsys]

It is but can be adjusted easily in raw. I believe the logic is, that by exposing for shadows you have more flexibility when editing. If you expose for highlights, shadows may become too dark and could introduce noise if you try to lift them up.

[@dionyang3684]

Michael Wanyoike that sounds reasonable

[@fabiofieri854]

sorry it was in TTL right?

[@gettheshotcreations6782]

Good content 👍learned a few things thanks

[@ShubhamKumar-tj8ss]

Great Explanation

[@matthewiles6835]

Work in triples. If you triple the distance, you get 1/9th the amount of light. eg. Instead of 2ft from the subject you move the lightsource to 6ft from the subject (3x as far), you'll have only 1/9th the light falling on the subject. Should give you an idea of just how big and bright the sun is given that it's a long way away! And how much stronger your light has to be dialed up to expect the same exposure.

[@natestevens7764]

Such a great refresher

[@agustintajch]

Hope the first of many! I was, ok, ok, ok and then ending 🤩🤩🤩 the photo looks epic!

[@PinoyinKSA]

Handsome model❤️

[@BigBoss-gb4cx]

What if I use white background and I switch it in PS in post?

[@4NWHIP]

Great video. That last image was awesome.

[@ABEAST187]

The ending went from zero to 100 real quick 😂

[@yuliamardirossian6740]

What are the settings used on camera?

[@nickalexander770]

settings dont matter, shutter speed is determines by the flash duration so you just need to stay in sync (most go 1/125th), your aperture you can basically choose your depth of field and then use your lights and meter them to whatever stop you want to shoot at and your good. :)

[@BlogloveKari]

Thank you

[@AhmedElnosany]

this is amazing

[@jolebole-yt]

Came here to learn how to do things with two lights.. now I realized I need six..😔

[@reikox44]

😂

[@lifewithoutborders1348]

FStoppers mostly gives complicated tutorials which kind of encourages you to purchase more equipments

[@EBrown-cr1gr]

A little secret, you take incredibly beautiful portraits with one light

[@rappercentral703]

You don’t need everything they have

[@Amarnath2k2]

More lights for more creative lighting effects 😅.

[@thomaswindfeld728]

Great! Thanx

[@animeworld7339]

This is so perfect love this thank you for this

[@drakewilliams10dw]

Excellent tutorial. Thank you

[@shenr0n_]

Double the distance, half the intensity makes it an inverse law, as opposed to stated "inverse square law". Am I missing anything here?

[@jimdavies]

Double the distance is 1/4 the light (2 stops difference)

[@bexmiro774]

Easy shoot RAW 😁

[@crollinsphoto]

Cool. Except a white or dark gray background would have been a better comparison on making the white more gray or the gray more white in the adjustments.

[@ogidith3088]

Thanks

[@seezoos]

So helpful ❤

[@MdJahid-ik7uw]

Nice video

[@davidcarpenter8229]

Could someone tell me where I could buy the stand used to hold the backdrop?

[@matiasfaundez649]

David Carpenter idk about that one in specific but you can get a decent starter backdrop stand at Amazon for less than $40

[@FStoppers]

The stand we are using is two avenger 11’ stands from BH Photo. -P

[@jimdavies]

Double the distance light to subject = 1/4 the light. A 2 stop reduction.

[@KevinDemsky]

Started out with a big mistake explaining the inverse square law. He said when you double the distance you get half the light which is a full stop less. This is incorrect. When you double the distance you only get 25% of light hitting the back drop (75% reduction). Have to do the math….the inverse of 2x is 1/2…..then you square it, which is 1/4. He also doesn’t understand that moving the camera closer or further away from the subject has zero effect on exposure or the amount of light falling on the subject or background. Not a good tutorial for beginners to watch.

[@modellawns2603]

I didn’t hear him mention moving the camera at all just the subject, lighting, or backdrop. Further more wheather he was wrong or not the point still stands that when you move things closer or farther the contrast and lighting effect will change. Not a terrible video for beginners

[@Alexander47048]

Wow what a video man! Best explanation about lighting so far.

[@RagingBubuli]

We need these kind of content!

[@fengwang3389]

Nice video! The result with the modifier is stunning. I searched for the profoto backlight. It's over 2000$ 😅

[@fabiangomez357]

what lens was used here?

[@balboa0621]

Panasonic 35-100 f2.8

[@glynparry6598]

Good to see David in front after seeing him for many years assisting 😊👌🏻

[@Jojo71Williams]

Excellent teaching. Thank you. Never would I have placed the light on the backdrop like that. I appreciate the details.

[@CeriousProductions]

Great video. Very easy to understand. Thank you for the tips!

[@compaticher7932]

thanks

[@studiolut]

Just what I was in need! Thaks guys

[@NextScamdemic]

How would you light the background to create a gradient effect going from darker to lighter from the top to the bottom of the frame? Anyone know? Thanks!

[@FStoppers]

Flary Fox softbox feathered up so the light hits the top more than the bottom? -P

[@LonzosStudios]

dam, I've owned 2 GH5 for like 3years now and may have accidentally took a picture once or twice but never even thought of doing an actually portrait shoot with them...huh, who knew

[@toronadoxp]

Great Job!

[@FrostyTheBeerMan]

Good love David using the GH5. Oldish camera, that still mind blowing in terms of video. ✅ Well, off to watch the video... popcorn is ready !

[@LuisFelipeBustilloVelasquez]

Oldish? what

[@RawAutos]

@@LuisFelipeBustilloVelasquez He's saying the GH5 is an old camera at this point, but that it's still amazing. For reference, the GH5 debuted March of 2017, so almost 3 years ago now.

[@tomimuwuh]

good for practice

[@tonyvf]

What is the model’s social media?

[@stalkev]

Great video. Love the details...