Natural light

You’re wrong. Natural light refers to the source of light

Why would studio light fall under natural light?

I definitely wouldn't understand 'natural light' to involve a speedlight or strobe, but wouldn't have a problem with it involving a reflector or Photoshop.

You shoot Something, then you edit it. Two different things.

Something being shot in natural light is just that. It's shot in natural light.

I put every single image through post production before I consider it a final image, and mostly simple edits and corrections in lightroom. I'd still consider those images shot in natural light if they were.

If I've used any lighting equipment then I would consider it not natural light ...

I think the final image is all that matters too - everyone enjoys shooting and editing in different ways.

The way I see it....natural light is what it states, natural light only. However, adding a reflector is still natural light, adding flash is not. The natural light might come through a window, that's still natural light, it might be a street scene even at night, that would be night time available light. How an image is developed if film, or processed if digital has got nothing to do with how it was captured. My 2p.

Tabitha Boydell said

You’re wrong. Natural light refers to the source of light

Why would studio light fall under natural light?

Exactly. My point is that if the source of light is artificially created by means of a bulb or Photoshop, it’s not natural light by definition, even if the sun was primary aid in shot if its altered artifitially changing the light aspect its no longer natural light is it :-)

indemnity said

The way I see it....natural light is what it states, natural light only. However, adding a reflector is still natural light, adding flash is not. The natural light might come through a window, that's still natural light, it might be a street scene even at night, that would be night time available light. How an image is developed if film, or processed if digital has got nothing to do with how it was captured. My 2p.

totally agree, from what i believe a reflector is still using natural light source so still natural light in definition.

Natural light != available light, of course :-) There is an apocryphal interview dialogue attributed to David Bailey:

What’s your favorite light source Mr. Bailey?

-- I’m happy with available light

You mean natural light?

-- No I mean any f***ing light that's there

You are right I think that a lot of "natural light photographers" are doing quite unnatural things with re-lighting in Photoshop etc., but that's on their conscience, not mine.

Edited by Unfocussed Mike

Unfocussed Mike said

Natural light != available light, of course :-) There is an apocryphal interview dialogue attributed to David Bailey:

What’s your favorite light source Mr. Bailey?

-- I’m happy with available light

You mean natural light?

-- No I mean any f***ing light that's there

You are right I think that a lot of "natural light photographers" are doing quite unnatural things in post, but that's on their conscience, not mine.

I personally reckon there's a difference between natural light and available light, and this comes about when artificial light from whatever source interferes or becomes the primary source of or influential part of the lighting. I don't see Blackpool at night being natural light...it's called the 'Blackpool illuminations'.

Edited by indemnity

I know where you are coming from.

There is also a distinction between natural light and (normal indoor room, home or commercial space) ambient light.

Ambient light within an indoor environment might often mean a mix of natural light (from a window, glass filled door or skylight) AND some interior lights. Quite often I will actively enjoy the mix of colour temperatures that this creates, but decide at 'what end' I decide to set my in-camera WB setting.

It is fun to use both reflectors and strobes or LED lighting to supplement the above.

-

Please - don't even start on AI now, will you! ? 😂

Edited by Aardvark🎯VonEssfolk

Unfocussed Mike said

Natural light != available light, of course :-) There is an apocryphal interview dialogue attributed to David Bailey:

What’s your favorite light source Mr. Bailey?

-- I’m happy with available light

You mean natural light?

-- No I mean any f***ing light that's there

You are right I think that a lot of "natural light photographers" are doing quite unnatural things with re-lighting in Photoshop etc., but that's on their conscience, not mine.

 

^ This. 

What is there to discuss?

I'm no expert but surely natural light means sunlight (with or without reflectors). It doesn't mean candlelight, or incandescent light, or LED 'daylight', or flash, etc..

All of this pretty much applies to indoor shoots using window light.

However, I do have a question over where using fill-in flash on an outdoor shoot sits.

From the responses so far it would suggest that there's also a consideration for available light and ambient light as these two whilst might be considered the same by some, there's also the suggestion that they might mean different things to some folk.

TerryGeePhoto said

I'm no expert but surely natural light means sunlight (with or without reflectors). It doesn't mean candlelight, or incandescent light, or LED 'daylight', or flash, etc..

All of this pretty much applies to indoor shoots using window light.

However, I do have a question over where using fill-in flash on an outdoor shoot sits.

It sits about 1-2 metres from the subject usually, and isn't natural. ;) 

indemnity said

Unfocussed Mike said

Natural light != available light, of course :-) There is an apocryphal interview dialogue attributed to David Bailey:

What’s your favorite light source Mr. Bailey?

-- I’m happy with available light

You mean natural light?

-- No I mean any f***ing light that's there

You are right I think that a lot of "natural light photographers" are doing quite unnatural things in post, but that's on their conscience, not mine.

I personally reckon there's a difference between natural light and available light, and this comes about when artificial light from whatever source interferes or becomes the primary source of or influential part of the lighting. I don't see Blackpool at night being natural light...it's called the 'Blackpool illuminations'.

Edited by indemnity

Yeah -- sorry, != is not equals. I have done the thing I dislike, which is to use symbols where words belong... this one especially is bad because it's possible to entirely read past the exclamation mark, especially if one's monitor is really filthy. I mean clean your screen, jeez. ;-)

TerryGeePhoto said

I'm no expert but surely natural light means sunlight (with or without reflectors). It doesn't mean candlelight, or incandescent light, or LED 'daylight', or flash, etc..

All of this pretty much applies to indoor shoots using window light.

However, I do have a question over where using fill-in flash on an outdoor shoot sits.

To me personally, Terry, I would say that’s no longer natural light. But to many, I’m finding it’s still considered natural light, so I’m confused because it seems like everything is "natural light." I don’t see the point in the statement "natural light shot" anymore. :-)

Yes, people can retouch natural light shots, but if they change the light and ambiance, it’s no longer natural, is it? Because you’ve made it do unnatural things in your software.

I mean, it’s like those videos you see of a girl waking up and declaring, "I just woke up"—but the camera is already set up and running, and her makeup and hair are salon-ready. Or like Trump saying, "This is my natural skin color..."

Now theres absalutely nothing wrong with photoshop i use it constantly obviously and nothing wrong with any tool, im just trying to understand the point of the term natural light if its an un natural source creating it :-)