Lightboxes - Pirate style!

I've had a few guys ask about how I take my photos, so I thought I'd throw up some photos of my "lightboxes."

The first two pics show my old setup - a wall mounted cabinet in my bathroom. It worked pretty well except
a) the light source was the sun through a frosted window, which only worked when it was sunny... on that side of my apt
b) I store some of my shaving stuff there, so it required rearranging.

The second two photos show my current setup (the first from afar, the second is the shot set up in the first photo) - the bottom of a night table (elevated on a cabinet type thing) and a desktop lamp. Since the whole inside of the nightstand is white, it works quite well for providing diffuse light. I would like it a bit brighter, but I'm not complaining (I shoot at 1/30 and f5.6 - I don't mind hand holding at 1/30, but I would like a little more depth of field).

Great pics..either way u mix n match em!

PcDad

Thanks for posting this dylan, a great reference

good idea, thanks for sharing!

Do you use a standard light bulb in the lamp? Also what is the wattage??

I am using a standard bulb - IIRC it's 60 Watts. I don't think either of those will necessairly matter, though. Adjusting the white balance will correct for the bulb, and exposure settings will vary based on the wattage. These are both likely to vary from user to user anyway, because of different lamps/lamp shades, enclosures, etc

It's more the setup itself, not the specific light, that I think might be helpful.

This is really a great idea, Dylan. I've been trying to build a better light box, and I think I'll give 1/4" Melamine a try.

It's a coincidence that you brought this up... I just made a new lightbox the other day.

I like that you use cabinets and whatnot. That type of stuff never occurs to me... It looks quick and easy, and you always seem to get good pictures.

I've been having trouble with my pictures, particularly with reflections on the blades.
Here's what I came up with to try to solve that: I cut the bottom and three sides out of a Rubbermade tub, painted the remaining interior white, and glued a white sheet onto it.
I was having problems with reflections on the blades, and often found myself trying to hold a white sheet of paper in just the right spot while taking pictures. It finally occurred to me that if the razor is entirely surrounded in white, I wouldn't have that problem anymore.

Pic 1 - trying to give an idea of how it's constructed without having to tear the sheet off.
Pic 2 - the lighting setup. I just used the overhead light for the top, and construction lights on the sides.
Pic 3 - Set up for taking pics, with the front drape over the camera

Notes:
1. You could easily cover most any lightbox with a sheet to help with reflections. I wanted a new lightbox when the idea occurred to me, and I had a tote handy.
2. The sides of Rubbermade totes are about the perfect thickness for making really quick and easy scales.
3. If you use a colored base under the razor, reflections from that on the blade become a problem (especially with a full hollow). I've found it best to look through the lens of the camera and tweak the position of the blade to minimize those bottom reflections. I've had good luck putting white sheets of paper inside the box wherever they are needed to get the right reflection; it can be tricky to get the blade to look white but still keep the paper out of the picture.
4. I am still a long way off of getting really great pictures, but I keep looking for problems with them, and what I can do to make them better.
6. In the pic of the razor I adjusted the brightness, contrast, and white balance in addition to cropping and resizing.
5. My basement is messy... Try to ignore that in the pics. ;)

Nice going! You can also take a shot with a gray card in the pic to make sure that the colors are exactly correct but your looking very good already.


Take Care,
Richard

I used to photograph miniature items occasionally for publication. Time pressure was never a really a factor. I used to wait for a bright overcast day, which would give flat shadowless lighting and set up a table outdoors.
Lightboxes are normally used to mimic daylight, but using daylight itself is less complicated and of course, cheaper.
If you do it for a living, obviously you can't wait for the weather.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by welshwizard

I used to photograph miniature items occasionally for publication. Time pressure was never a really a factor. I used to wait for a bright overcast day, which would give flat shadowless lighting and set up a table outdoors.
Lightboxes are normally used to mimic daylight, but using daylight itself is less complicated and of course, cheaper.
If you do it for a living, obviously you can't wait for the weather.

---

For me, the diffuse lighting is only one factor. The other is getting a nice white surface reflected in the blade, so that whoever looks at the photos gets a clear idea of exactly what the blade looks like.

If direct light source is used, I have really good luck with parchment paper (for baking) or tracing (Vellum) paper placed infront of the light source. If one sheet is not enough, I will double-up or triple the paper.

With heavyly diffused light source, you can try to use the smallest aperature (i.e. pinhole) and long esposure time on your camera... sometime that helps.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hopper

With heavyly diffused light source, you can try to use the smallest aperature (i.e. pinhole) and long esposure time on your camera... sometime that helps.

---

I tried some experiments with different apertures vs exposure times. Other than depth of field I couldn't see any obvious differences... On a tripod I did exposures as long as eight seconds that weren't noticeably better than exposures of 1/250. In any case as long as the metering was equivalent, the lighting on the blade looked the same in the pictures.

Is there something else I should be noticing?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HNSB

I tried some experiments with different apertures vs exposure times. Other than depth of field I couldn't see any obvious differences... On a tripod I did exposures as long as eight seconds that weren't noticeably better than exposures of 1/250. In any case as long as the metering was equivalent, the lighting on the blade looked the same in the pictures.

Is there something else I should be noticing?

---

The key here is you have to diffuse the direct light source with 2-3 sheets of tracing paper or turn your light source around and bounce off the light with a piece of white peper (or you can make this with simple white construction paper.)
http://www.ppmag.com/web-exclusives/...tltcollage.jpg

I don't think anyone is really having trouble with the light source. The tricky part is what the blade is reflecting. No matter what you do with the lights, if your blade reflects non-uniform objects you will not get a clear photo of what the blade looks like. That is why I use the "white box."

You'll notice I have no fancy lighting. I don't even diffuse the light at all. It's just a cheap desk lamp in a white box. The key is the razor reflects a uniform white surface.