My Daughter's Grade 8 Grad

Both lights same distance, so, really, yes, flat lighting, so is 2:1, I'll just say, flat lighting. haha, no shadows, just plain old boring flat lights.
Lights were metered at F4, I shot at 5.6

I did remove one set of lights from the eyes, that's an opinion, some do it, some don't.

Thanks for the compliments, Travis.

Hey Mike, I don't really mind the flat lighting in this image.  Like Susie said, when it works, it's a great way to go; just like any other lighting pattern it has its place.  You did a fine job of lighting your daughter and I don't mean to sound like I think anything else.  I am simply a little confused by your lighting ratio.  I don't think I understand them the way you are talking about it here, so I'm trying to understand what it is you did and how you determine your ratios.  I have been to several workshops with master photographers and, for some reason, many of them will determine their ratios a little differently.  It confuses me because I am supposed to be taking a Certification test this coming October and I know there are questions dealing with this.  So, here goes another question for you on your ratio and how you determined it, please don't take it wrong, I'm honestly just trying to figure this out.

You say you have a 2:1 ratio, which I agree is pretty low contrast, but some shadow should still be seen, right?  You also mentioned that the lights are in opposing positions, same distance apart and they meter at f/4.  Do they both meter at f/4?  If so, doesn't that make it a 1:1 ratio?  Both lights at the same power, providing the same amount of light?  Or do they meter at f/4 together and one is a 1 stop different from the other?  If you have two lights at f/4, you would have a combined light of f/5.6, so that would be your proper exposure, but the ratio of the light would still be considered 1:1, I thought.  This is why I'm a little confused and am asking for your thoughts.

Travis

I almost sprained my neck trying to watch that go over my head that fast.

Well, this is where there seems to be some confusion.  The ratio, as I understand it, is the difference between the exposure value (EV) of the highlight and shadow side of the subject.  This is a measurement of the resulting light.  This is important to understand because light adds to itself between the fill exposure and the main exposure.  The reason why Mike's exposure should be done at f/5.6 is because two lights at f/4 = f/5.6.  One stop is a value difference in light of '2'.  So 2 lights multiplied by f/4 will be f/5.6.  Hopefully you follow that so far.  The problem I see with the ratio being called 2:1 is that the lights are the same, meaning the value from the light side and the shadow side are the same, and therefore the resulting ratio is only 1:1, or flat lighting.  Even with a 2:1 ratio as I understand it, the light is not flat, although there would not be much contrast.

Honestly, I am going to post a whole new thread (later tonight I hope) showing some basic lighting techniques, ratios, and meaurements to try and clear all this up, as well as some other questions that seem to be getting confused about lighting on this forum recently.  I'm not Ed Shapiro, so I guess you'll just have to take it for what it's worth (unless you can get him on here to tell me I'm wrong), but I'm confident that the information I am going to provide is correct and will reflect the proper method for determining ratios and lighting for portraiture (or any other studio light setup for that matter).  I guess we'll just have to see how that discussion goes later...

Travis

Hey everyone, Travis left me a phone message, because apparently I don't ever turn my phone on anymore
He is having issues with his cable/telephone/internet stuff (he just built a brand new house).  So yeah, he'll be back later, in the meantime we can twiddle our thumbs and wait for him to enlighten us with some fab info on lighting ratios.