Puzzled by preference for frontal lighting

[DGehman]

As an artist who likes to include orchids in paintings, I'm puzzled by the seemingly widespread convention for frontal lighting for photographs of these incredible plants.

Of course, there's no other option if your only lighting is on-camera flash, but I'm wondering about the more sophisticated approaches.

Many of these 'pro' methods recommend diffused light sources that flank the camera, rather than directing light down on the bloom (or obliquely).

Downlight or oblique light would reveal the blossom contours and shapes far better than frontal lighting, which tends to flatten the image.

The flat-image effect is furthered by another current convention: feature one bloom only, oriented square to the camera.

This all came to my attention -- big time -- the day I saw my first Cattleyas in the flesh (sorry, I'm too old to remember any prom corsage that might have gone through my hands). All the photos I had seen up to that point made me think the blossoms were nearly flat!

[Anisa]

I think it is mostly a preference of some photographers. Also having it a little flat features color more accurately. I actually like to take pics of my flowers in a sunlight using shade and highlights to create depth.

[DGehman]

Anisa -
color - of course... like the saturated colors and soft shadows of a rainy day.

That gives me a lot to think about, believe it or not -- a push-pull -- emphasize form or emphasize color?

[ChasWG]

The photos on this site, in particular, are more for showing the blooms in their true colors and shapes. While shadow do create depth in photographs, they also hide details and most here are more interested in showing the details rather than the art.

Orchids, more so than other flowers have more curves and bends. Therefore more shadowy areas.

[DGehman]

Thanks, Chas. Great flickr flower albums!

Dave

[ChasWG]

Thanks Dave!