12-09-09 – Low Key

Elsinore, I have a question about acceptable content with one of my potential images. There’s nothing outwardly against the rules (nudity, blood, etc.), but it is rather graphic and portraying a grusome act, so….

http://www.flickr.com/photos/orionid/4168651832/

If the scene is illuminated by one flash, but that flash is sent through a 4’x8′ diffuser, does that count, or it more “It looks like it was illuminated by one point” that matters?

If the scene is illuminated by one flash, but that flash is sent through a 4’x8′ diffuser, does that count, or it more “It looks like it was illuminated by one point” that matters?

What Elsinore said. I went with the one light requirement to try to get people to focus on contrast and shadows as part of the subject, rather than overcomplicated lighting.

And thanks for the greenlight, Els. I’m not sure if I’m going to use that one or not, but wanted to make sure it was okay before I did. And if anyone else gets a wild hair and wants to try something crazy for farktography, I highly reccomend NOT putting battery clamps on your nipples.

I’m a little confused about this theme. When I looked up Low Key it showed photos that were deep in shadow. Like a face where one half was visable and the other half almost black. Or do we want to show the light sorce?

Traditionally, photography has three types of lighting: Key, fill, and back. Key lighting is generally at an angle, and provides depth to the image. Fill lighting evens out the exposure across the image, and back lighting exposes the background. When all three are used extensively for even exposure (think I love lucy reruns where lucy, ricky and the kitchen in the background are all exposed evenly), that’s called high-key (because the key light is typically above the subject).

Low-key, by defintion, eliminates the back lighting and uses minimal or no fill to allow a maximum of contrast between areas in the exposure (lit and not lit). To get any amount of exposure at all, the key light is typically level with or slightly below the subject, hence low-key.

Rather than trying to get all of fark to wrap their collective minds around this, I went with the one-light requirement, which would effectively force low-key lighting and high contrast photos without having to teach the definition. Whether or not the light itself is in the photo has no bearing on the definition. It typically isn’t, but if you can still pull off a shot where it is, that’s bonus. The one I linked to earlier flirts with not quite being contrast-y enough, which is why I was considering not using it.

I have a working definition of low key. For this theme, are we using super strict rules? I mean, If a shot embraces the concept of low key, but also has an element of the pic that is backlit – would that be allowed?

Here is one that I’d love to use, but I don’t know if it meets the criteria. Maybe with the new description, it does. What do you think?

http://www.ullepics.com/d/364-4/Ally_7415-bw-a.jpg

Or how about this one? It has more obvious single-point lighting of the subject. But it also has the backlit element.

http://www.ullepics.com/d/265-4/Lily_6988-bw.jpg

If they don’t work, I have some I did with a single off-camera flash in a dark room with black background for that poke-you-in-the-eye garish low-key lighting. (does ‘garish’ work there?)

hm. some of my stuff is heavy on the backlighting, but my understanding that was still low-key by design. It’s all definitely single light source work though, so I guess I’ll let them stand