Photographing Pipes in a Light Box.

[RustiePyles CPG]

Title edited. See rule 9.

So I picked up an actual light box a while ago. I’m having a little trouble getting what I think is good pictures. I try to edit them the best I can with my phone, but I feel like I’m missing something. My light box has two LED bars with an intensity control land a filter. It’s got several background color options, I’m using grey right now. Can any of you guys who use light boxes offer any advice.

 

[Bob the bear]

Try see if you can get 2 led strips to stick on the side of the box at the bottom , should eliminate any shadow . Otherwise it looks pretty good what you've done there

 

[cosmicfolklore]

Yes, don't just point the lights straight down. Better if they come in at an angle, from opposite sides.

 

[bullet08]

I usually use natural light as much as possible. Thought about light box, but seems limited. Pipe isn't exactly easiest subject. Angles representing them are more or less limited.

 

[cosmicfolklore]

 

[RustiePyles CPG]

Yes, don't just point the lights straight down. Better if they come in at an angle, from opposite sides.

The box uses two led strips roughly the same width as the box that attach using magnetic strips in the top of the box, so I'll have make up something to angle them inward.

Try see if you can get 2 led strips to stick on the side of the box at the bottom , should eliminate any shadow . Otherwise it looks pretty good what you've done there

I like the idea of another pair of light strips, I might see If I can get two more for the bottom.

 

[ashdigger]

View attachment 200556

Until I saw this set up I thought I could benefit from a light box. Nope. I was wrong.

That set up far surpasses my level of lazy.

 

[cosmicfolklore]

As Bullet said, using natural light by taking it outside may help also.

My biggest obstacle in photographing things for my work, are opals or stones. When I get the light correct for getting the metal photographed the opals go dead of color, but when adjusted for the opals or stones the metal looks bad. Lighting is always a fight for me.

 

[RustiePyles CPG]

Until I saw this set up I thought I could benefit from a light box. Nope. I was wrong.

That set up far surpasses my level of lazy.

FWIW, mine has the lights inside the collapsible box, it breaks down and fits a very small bag. Its not nearly that space consuming. I have a tripod but I don't ever use it.

 

[jpmcwjr]

You should do well with this, as you are wiling to experiment.
Editing photos on a phone is beyond my will! Have you a computer that's current?
[The first two photos are a bit underexposed.]

 

[vosBghos]

As Bullet said, using natural light by taking it outside may help also.

My biggest obstacle in photographing things for my work, are opals or stones. When I get the light correct for getting the metal photographed the opals go dead of color, but when adjusted for the opals or stones the metal looks bad. Lighting is always a fight for me.

about color and bringing it out, have you tried photography at twilight or "magic/hour" or would that create a distortion that you are not going for?

 

[cosmicfolklore]

There is a free shareware photo editor called GIMP. It works much like the older, better version of Photoshop works. It has a learning curve, but if you take some time to figure it out, you can really improve your photos.

 

[cosmicfolklore]

about color and bringing it out, have you tried photography at twilight or "magic/hour" or would that create a distortion that you are not going for?

I now take two pictures with different f-stops and merge them. I do this only with opals... not to fool anyone but to better give the potential customer the best understanding of when my work will look like when they get it.

When I do get the best picture of the opal, even at twilight, it always makes the metal look dead or flatter in dimension than it really is.

 

[Michigan_Bill]

Or two cheap slave flashes, one on each side would eliminate the shadows.

 

[AJL67]

Can you post which one you got, there seem to be a couple different ones on amazon even though they are all basically the same, more interested in the lighting comments here so would like to see if any of the different boxes have different lighting setups as i dont know if external lighting would work with the box set up.

 

[sablebrush52]

Your shots look pretty good to me. Having shadow is a good than, as it helps reveal the shape and volume of the subject. You can always use a bounce card to reduce shadow if that's your thing. If reflections or highlights from the lighting sources bother you, you can try adding a polarizer to the lens to control that. When I designed and set up the lighting to photograph our background paintings for TRON at Disney I incorporated polas on the light sources as well as the taking lens. The results were spectacular and shut up the screams of outrage from the Disney Photographic department that had been making a total mess of it.

Otherwise this is a very respectable result as is. I also disagree with completely avoiding top light. Sometimes it adds an extra kick that really makes a shot pop. You just need to know and when how to use it.

 

[kcghost]

I couldn't take a decent photo of anything if my life depended on it. It seems that taking a picture of a pipe is a skill that eluded me.

 

[jpmcwjr]

There is a free shareware photo editor called GIMP. It works much like the older, better version of Photoshop works. It has a learning curve, but if you take some time to figure it out, you can really improve your photos.

Unless one has a recent (within 2-3 years) Mac, desktop or laptop.
The app "Photos" has pretty full editing capabilities, far more than most of us need to just change the exposure or bring up dark objects, reduce light areas, etc.
I tried the GIMP at least 20 years ago. I suppose if I had stuck with it, or just learned it, I could maybe work with it now. But Photoshop is the king, 85% of its capabilities will never be used by most.

 

[RustiePyles CPG]

Can you post which one you got, there seem to be a couple different ones on amazon even though they are all basically the same, more interested in the lighting comments here so would like to see if any of the different boxes have different lighting setups as i dont know if external lighting would work with the box set up.

Here you go, external lighting will not work with this setup. I have a set of stand lights with filters, but they wouldn't do much good with this box.

https://www.amazon.com/dp/B06XXD5P2L?ref=ppx_yo2ov_dt_b_product_details&th=1

Your shots look pretty good to me. Having shadow is a good than, as it helps reveal the shape and volume of the subject. You can always use a bounce card to reduce shadow if that's your thing. If reflections or highlights from the lighting sources bother you, you can try adding a polarizer to the lens to control that. When I designed and set up the lighting to photograph our background paintings for TRON at Disney I incorporated polas on the light sources as well as the taking lens. The results were spectacular and shut up the screams of outrage from the Disney Photographic department that had been making a total mess of it.

Otherwise this is a very respectable result as is. I also disagree with completely avoiding top light. Sometimes it adds an extra kick that really makes a shot pop. You just need to know and when how to use it.

Thanks @sablebrush52 I agree about the shadow and thats not really my primary problem. I find that with some of my photos I'm having to turn up the brightness in editing so far that I'm getting washout. I would like to eliminate the double shadowing from having two light sources though. The interior of the light box is reflective and I think its supposed to act as a light bounce but its also textured to diffuse bounce, I'm not really sure exactly how effective it is though.

 

[RustiePyles CPG]

Unless one has a recent (within 2-3 years) Mac, desktop or laptop.
The app "Photos" has pretty full editing capabilities, far more than most of us need to just change the exposure or bring up dark objects, reduce light areas, etc.
I tried the GIMP at least 20 years ago. I suppose if I had stuck with it, or just learned it, I could maybe work with it now. But Photoshop is the king, 85% of its capabilities will never be used by most.

I'm using the Photos app on my phone now, I really need to learn to master my editing. it does seem to be a sufficient app though.