Lighting for a close up?

[K.I.A.]

Have a look at this:

http://www.deviantart.com/deviation/42096662/?qo=364&q=hand&qh=in%3Aphotography%2Fpeople%2Fcloseups+sort%3Atime

How would you get the shadowless background and the well lit hand? Foam core board as back drop with a light source coming from behind it and a few lights in front? :confused013

[Knawful]

Reckon it might be one of those x-ray viewing lightboxes.
I'm after one atm for some macro's of sliced fruit, just missed one on ebay for $90
Might make one instead, i have opaque perspex here.

[Ronbo]

I agree with Dowden on this or it could very well be a light box.

[arthurking83]

I'm thinking PS trickery?? :confused013

I dunno how (I'm a PS dunce!) ... the outline looks weird to me.... not very natural looking?

there doesn't appear to be any depth at all???

Something weird about it... I reckon PS!

[foonji]

looks very photoshopped to me aswell.

the cut is fairly sharp and dirty around the hand.

[arthurking83]

I wasn't thinking along the lines of cut(or whatever) .... more along the lines of, flood fill or something like that??

Although flood fill can give the illusion of a cut job....

the background looks too stark compared to the hand, and the shadows on the fingers seem to indicate lighting from the RHS(as viewed).

there are subtle shadows at the base of the fingers, and the thumb!

BUT! If you want shadowless flash photography, a couple of highend flashes, etc... ;)

There was a link to a comparison of what flashes are capable of ... looking...looking....looking

[K.I.A.]

...So would a home made light box and a couple of 100w light bulbs do the trick?

[Knawful]

...So would a home made light box and a couple of 100w light bulbs do the trick?

as long as heat build-up isnt an issue.
I reckon 2x40's would suffice.:confused013

I'm going to make one on my next 4-day break.:th3:

[thing]

I'm with AK & foonji. PS deep etch for sure.:th3:

[mpot]

as long as heat build-up isnt an issue.
I reckon 2x40's would suffice.:confused013
I don't think 2x40w globes would provide enough light.

I use three 25w compact flouros (125w equivalent). The added benefit is that they don't produce as much light, and it's a bit more diffused due to the shape of the globes.

Cheers,
Martin.

[arthurking83]

I was going to suggest fluoros too (on a hunch) mainly for the diffused output, and heat!

Mpot just confirmed it! :)

What are the light boxes to be used for?... (not really understanding studio photography much :confused013)

[Knawful]

I want a light box so i can try cross polarisation. (using 2 cp's, one on the len's, t'other "under" what you want to photograph.)
Look's trippy, and i want to be the first to try it here :p so that's all the info ya's need atm.:th3:

Plus, slices of fruit/veggies look good when shot macro style. (subject goes on light-box so light penetrates the subject matter.)
...or in my "mind" they do anyway. :):confused013

[thing]

Good info guys..... (and I must say that fella looks a hell of alot like me!) but getting back to the original question, here's a shot I posted some time ago:

http://www.ausphotography.net.au/staff/marcus/Jade.jpg

I would say the shot in question has been dealt with in the same fashion. Here's the original:

http://www.ausphotography.net.au/staff/marcus/Jade%20Orig.jpg



Once the original has been deep etched (new layer) you can edit/light it in PS any way you want leaving a pure white B/G. The image is a close up and mine is not, I have used a bigger feather than what has been used on the image in question, therefore the sharper edges. I'm sure this was the way it was done. Although I've been wrong before and will be again:th3: