"Wayne's Teapot with Factory Pattern" Photograph © Harold Ross

 I frequently give talks and lectures on my work, and invariably, someone asks the question, “How many captures do you usually shoot to make one image?” This question is quite insightful, and when I answer it (and my answer is “Usually, from 10 to 40 captures”), an interesting phenomenon occurs! Without fail, I hear quiet murmurs and maybe even grumbles from the audience. This always brings a smile to my face!

It brings a smile to my face because I’m delighted that for me, there’s no limit to the time I’m willing to invest in crafting a great image. It doesn’t matter to me whether I spend an hour, a day, or even a week on an image. For me, it’s not about the quantity (how many images I capture in a day, week, month, or year) but rather, the quality of the image. This can mean different things to different people. For instance, a “good” image could be anything from captivating, entertaining, beautiful, thought-provoking, and so on.

Some photographers embark on global journeys to capture extraordinary images. Others may rise at the crack of dawn to achieve greatness. Still others may endure extreme weather conditions to make a remarkable image. Isn’t this a significant amount of time and effort? Additionally, there are photographers who capture hundreds of images in a day only to spend countless hours meticulously editing them down.

In my opinion, it does take time and effort to create exceptional photographs. Sure, we’ve all experienced the unexpected thrill of capturing an amazing image with minimal effort, but this isn’t the norm. Hard work, preparation, learning the craft, and developing one’s vision all contribute to the creation of better images.

It’s important to note that purchasing a specific camera brand is not a prerequisite for success! 

 "Finials and Brass" Photograph © Harold Ross

Yes, I make multiple captures to create an image. The reason behind this is control. While there are individuals who create light-painted images in a single capture, I could choose to do the same if I desired (of course, back in the days of film, there was no other way!). However, I prefer absolute control over depth, dimension, texture, and detail that a multiple-capture workflow offers. In my opinion, making a light-painted image in a single capture is always a compromise. The light used to illuminate one element of an object often bounces around, reducing the texture, shape, and dimension of other objects in the image. This reason is straightforward, but it’s actually the least significant one! 

 Breaking an image down into smaller pieces also makes it easier and better, in my opinion. As in life, most problems are easier to overcome when we break them down into smaller, manageable pieces. For instance, lighting a single aspect of an object beautifully is significantly simpler than attempting to capture, let's say, four or six distinct aspects simultaneously in a single image. Moreover, and this is quite counterintuitive; surprisingly, the editing process also becomes easier! It becomes more straightforward to concentrate and produce a beautiful sculptural mask for a single object or shape rather than a complex object that may contain a dozen or more shapes.

"Still Life with Copper Vessel" Photograph © Harold Ross 

Remember, the main advantages of light painting are:

1. We can light from a close distance to soften the light) often less than an inch!) 
2. We can (and should!) use movement (this softens the light further) 
3. We can light any element in an image from the best angle for that element (this allows us to "render" the most meaningful aspects of a subject)

 Light painting, in essence, allows us to utilize a "harder" (smaller) light source for its advantages, such as surgical precision in lighting, “painterly” modeling of the subject, exceptional color rendition, and remarkable texture. Moreover, we can transform this intense light source into a softer one (in my opinion, a more aesthetically pleasing one) by placing it close to the subject and moving it. This unique and powerful aspect of light painting is further enhanced by the incredible ability to create even more sculptural shapes, depth, and dimension through masking in Photoshop. Consequently, we are presented with a very powerful set of tools!

I have been light painting for welll over 30 years. This means that I light painted before Photoshop and with film. Transparency film! Here's an example of an advertising image I made over 20 years ago:

 Advertising Image (Transparency Film) by Harold Ross

 Even then, I added light to the image a bit at a time, opening the view camera dozens or even, in a few cases, hundreds of times to expose one piece of film. Digital technology has now made this so much easier! Why not take advantage of the digital tools we have available to us? Of course, a multiple-capture workflow is one of the most important tools, especially when it comes to light painting.

Advertising Image (Digital) by Harold Ross

So, I ask the question: why would you want to relinquish control over the texture, depth, and painterly aspects of light painting by simply lighting the entire image in a single capture? Simply to say that you did so?

As for me, I’ll continue to take fewer images than I would if I took them all in one capture. Instead, I’ll spend that time making those few images better, not just making more images. Meanwhile, I’ll smile when I hear the audience mumbling and grumbling!

Happy Light Painting... and always remember... Skim The Light.

- Harold

*****

Creating light painted still life images is extremely rewarding, and something which I teach in great detail throughout my comprehensive Light Painting Online Video Course.

See what students are saying about my Online Course Here: Student Testimonials.