Natural light

Aardvark🎯VonEssfolk said

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 as fill: "for goodness sake put your phone down we're trying to shoot"

Photography has its fair share of consistently undefined definition words and phrases... 

'Natural Light' can mean light from a natural source, ie sun or moon. But for some people it can can also mean from a non-photographic source, ie ambient interior light bulbs, office ceiling strip lights, neon signage, etc. It cannot mean photographer controlled/placed strobe or continuous light.

'Editing' can mean the process of rating, removing and selecting frames from a photoshoot (traditional use). It can also mean colour grading, beautification, composite work, etc., which are more correctly termed as treatment, retouching and compositing, but these have all been bundled into 'editing' since the Interweb got busy on photography.

'Photographer' can mean somebody who earns their living via photography. It can also mean somebody on PP with a photographer account, or a camera club member.

Dwelling on / discussing this at any length will not arrive at a universal agreement, so it's probably best not worry about it.

My basic interpretation

Natural light = no flash.

That's it, just done

ANDY00 said

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 :-)

I see where you are coming from but I don't really agree in essence. Obviously changing the whole image using photoshop by adding or changing significant light sources is somewhat cheating on the natural light definition. However, a bit of dodging and burning in Photoshop to what is essentially a natural light image is OK. That said, your more purist view seems to me to be putting too great an emphasis on the word 'natural'. I always thought it was a reference to sunlight or moonlight and not to whether it had been tinkered with digitally. Wholesale compositing being a wholly different proposition.

TerryGeePhoto said

ANDY00 said

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 :-)

I see where you are coming from but I don't really agree in essence. Obviously changing the whole image using photoshop by adding or changing significant light sources is somewhat cheating on the natural light definition. However, a bit of dodging and burning in Photoshop to what is essentially a natural light image is OK. That said, your more purist view seems to me to be putting too great an emphasis on the word 'natural'. I always thought it was a reference to sunlight or moonlight and not to whether it had been tinkered with digitally. Wholesale compositing being a wholly different proposition.

Oh no sorry that may be my fault, as I said, light Photoshop adjustments that do not change the ambiance, direction, or strength of the light would not change a natural light declaration in my mind, Terry. I said that, but maybe I worded it badly.

However, if the light is created artificially, then it’s not natural light—that’s the essence of my belief. All this talk about "available light" just seems to be an excuse to keep the banner of "natural light shot" when, in fact, it’s not. If you’re using a studio, the "available lights" are professional studio lights, so would that be considered natural or available light? No, sorry.

If the light is created artificially, then it’s not natural light—that’s the essence of my belief :-) 

Its the sun :-D

Edited by ANDY00

Edited by ANDY00

ANDY00 said

However, if the light is created artificially, then it’s not natural light—that’s the essence of my belief. All this talk about "available light" just seems to be an excuse to keep the banner of "natural light shot" when, in fact, it’s not. If you’re using a studio, the "available lights" are professional studio lights, so would that be considered natural or available light? No, sorry.

 

Not at all -- I am just saying that some people blur the definitions of these things in their mind.

And there are situations where natural light becomes progressively more unnatural. For example if you do a natural light shoot walking through a town at 8pm on an early summer evening, the degree of natural-ness of the light is going to vary from moment to moment as you encounter artificial lighting, hard shiny surfaces, specular reflections, pure white walls, unnaturally coloured walls, etc.; where does "natural" end, really? 

The technical/philosophical/semantic boundaries between the concepts of natural light, ambient light and available light are not that obvious, as Aardvark🎯VonEssfolk and Stanmore are saying.

I don't really care anyway because I think "natural light photographer" is often just a self-chosen identity. Sometimes out of ignorance.

Edited by Unfocussed Mike

Photography 101: What Is Natural Light? Learn About Natural Light in Photography and 4 Tips for Using Natural Light in Your Photography - 2024 - MasterClass

Natural light is light that is not created artificially. It can be modified and altered through reflectors (which are essentially walls where you control the angle and colours) or scrim (where you soften it) or even natural gobos, like trees (where you get dappled light) for example. 

If you don't consider natural light can be modified and still remain natural, what do you call sunlight when the clouds come out? 

Kirk Schwarz is that what I said? Are you sure ? You maybe want to read what I’ve said again 🙂

ANDY00 said

Kirk Schwarz is that what I said? Are you sure ? You maybe want to read what I’ve said again 🙂

You asked: 

"My question is, if studio flash, Photoshop, Lightroom, etc., can all fall under the "natural light" umbrella, what meaning does the term actually have?"

The answer is that natural light is not created artificially, which I answered, and what meaning does the term 'natural light' have? I answered that one as well.

Maybe you need to remember what you said. ;) 

Edited by Kirk Schwarz

ANDY00 good idea for a discussion, and for a separate post!

SOOC is pretty straightforward. Take the JPG from the camera, maybe resize it for PP (or use Canon DPP or other camera software to make the JPG from a Raw file with the same settings as the camera). Many sports photographers shoot that way to hit publishing deadlines.

I’m going to do pictures, because that’s how my brain works, not words…

This is SOOC, because it was a lens test (Vintage 1975 Nikkor 105/2.5). 

This post has been filtered based on your content filter settings because it is NSFW. View reply

@Kirk Schwarz I also said above

If the light is created artificially, then it’s not natural light and reflectors I would still class as natural lights as they just redirect the natural light

You agreed with me and wrote it like that was the opposite of what I had said lol

Edited by ANDY00

Edited by ANDY00

This post has been filtered based on your content filter settings because it is NSFW. View reply

Available light, Prague Christmas market