DPChallenge: A Digital Photography Contest You are not logged in. (log in or register
 

DPChallenge Forums >> Photography Discussion >> Can we discuss High Key?
Pages:  
Showing posts 1 - 25 of 37, (reverse)
AuthorThread
04/13/2022 08:01:56 AM · #1
This is a great challenge from which to learn post voting.

I've always thought we could learn more by post challenge discussions, but we seem to avoid those on the off chance that someone might take offense by having their photo discussed.

I don't think we're really all that sensitive. So I'm opening this thread up for the discussion of what is and what isn't high key. So here it goes. Let's try to keep it constructive thoughts/criticisms.

I'll start of with my entry:



I wasn't sure if this was high key or simply over exposed. Or can they be one in the same? The bird was majorly backlit. In order to get any definition in the bird, I'd have to overexpose by a couple of stops. My thoughts were it was high key because it made it very light, but still kept the definition in the body/wings, etc. But I think the beak is just overexposed. I did the editing on the last day, so I ran out of time to figure out how to fix it.

This shot, which was an outtake, I think fit high key a bit better.



The winner of the challenge fit my idea of high key perfectly. I would have tried to lighten it significantly had I been working on it. But I think the editing is brilliant and fits what I think of as high key. Yet it received two 1s.



Does high key have to be white? or just light?

I thought that this was great fun



but I only gave it a 5, because I thought they subject needed to be a lot lighter in high key. This seemed to depend more on the background being light?

SR Lounge describes high key as "High Key is a term to describe images that are bright and contain little to no shadow. " Which is a much more simplistic definition than I had thought. If so, then my son's entry would definitely fit high key.



I gave his a 5, because it didn't fit my definition which was more similiar to a masterclass definition that says "High key photography is a style of photography that uses unusually bright lighting to reduce or completely blow out dark shadows in the image. High key shots usually lack dark tones and the high key look is generally thought of as positive and upbeat." I always thought high key didn't have dark tones. But if the subject has dark tones light jcar's, can it be high key?

So let's discuss the challenge. Were the entries high key? What makes high key? What are perfect examples of high key? I thought that Sandy's and Mary Ann's were perfect examples

04/13/2022 09:23:45 AM · #2
Originally posted by vawendy:

I've always thought we could learn more by post challenge discussions, but we seem to avoid those on the off chance that someone might take offense by having their photo discussed.

I don't think we're really all that sensitive. So I'm opening this thread up for the discussion of what is and what isn't high key. So here it goes. Let's try to keep it constructive thoughts/criticisms.

Thanks for this -- I've always thought it odd how often there's a discussion when a topic is posted, but rarely once the there are actual pictures to discuss. You (everyone) are welcome to criticize my entry if you want ...
04/13/2022 09:35:44 AM · #3
Strictly speaking, "high key" refers to flat lighting on the subject, with little or no shadow area. It's a style of lighting that uses a single, main light source with strong fill lights to reduce or eliminate shadows. The term denotes the RATIO of fill (key) light to main light. It derives from early broadcast television days, when televisions couldn't cope well with lots of contrast.

By that definition, this ill-fated entry is, indeed, rendered in high key. That it filed to score well is understandable on aesthetic grounds alone, but it IS high key :-)



Message edited by author 2022-04-13 09:38:11.
04/13/2022 09:46:54 AM · #4
Originally posted by Bear_Music:

Strictly speaking, "high key" refers to flat lighting on the subject, with little or no shadow area. It's a style of lighting that uses a single, main light source with strong fill lights to reduce or eliminate shadows. The term denotes the RATIO of fill (key) light to main light. It derives from early broadcast television days, when televisions couldn't cope well with lots of contrast.

By that definition, this ill-fated entry is, indeed, rendered in high key. That it filed to score well is understandable on aesthetic grounds alone, but it IS high key :-)



Your definition sounds nearly straight out of Wikipedia. :-)

I like this from SLR Lounge ...

"In photography today, a high-key image is one that is almost entirely very bright with very little or no dark shadows present. This is usually a creative decision made by the photographer, in order to create a certain mood in the image."

04/13/2022 11:21:32 AM · #5
I don't understand the attempt to say "overexposed" is not "high key." They are two separate concepts. "Over" is a judgment, "high" is a description. Something is "overexposed" because you have an assumption about how exposed it should be. Something can be high key and overexposed. Something can be high key and underexposed. There is no connection between the two terms, except that statistically most things that you think are overexposed are more likely to be high key.

So if you were to say "high key is not supposed to be overexposed" that is just you saying that nothing should be overexposed, and technically, since "over" means "too much," then you are correct. Nothing should ever be overexposed. Everything should be exposed as much as it should be exposed.

Message edited by author 2022-04-13 11:22:04.
04/13/2022 11:42:28 AM · #6
when we get high we overexpose ourself.
04/13/2022 01:00:23 PM · #7
Originally posted by tnun:

when we get high we overexpose ourself.

That's absolutely key :-)
04/13/2022 01:02:02 PM · #8
Originally posted by glad2badad:

Your definition sounds nearly straight out of Wikipedia. :-)

I like this from SLR Lounge ...

"In photography today, a high-key image is one that is almost entirely very bright with very little or no dark shadows present. This is usually a creative decision made by the photographer, in order to create a certain mood in the image."

Actually, my source was SLR Lounge :-)
04/13/2022 02:07:28 PM · #9
Originally posted by tnun:

when we get high we overexpose ourself.
I get high in reverse proportion to my score.
04/13/2022 02:54:02 PM · #10
It seemed like light on white was a shortcut to high key.
04/13/2022 06:36:02 PM · #11
Over ten years ago I was a children's portrait photographer and was kitted out with a huge white softbox for a background to which attached a roll of plastic which looked white until you compared it to the softbox, then it looked blueish white. Into the softbox went one flash with two others set to the front of the subject, either side of me. I was told this was high key photography.

I used a photo I took back then, from a private session in which I still used my work gear. I got 34th in the challenge.

Has the definition changed in that time?
04/14/2022 09:01:15 AM · #12
Originally posted by posthumous:

I don't understand the attempt to say "overexposed" is not "high key." They are two separate concepts. "Over" is a judgment, "high" is a description. Something is "overexposed" because you have an assumption about how exposed it should be. Something can be high key and overexposed. Something can be high key and underexposed. There is no connection between the two terms, except that statistically most things that you think are overexposed are more likely to be high key.

So if you were to say "high key is not supposed to be overexposed" that is just you saying that nothing should be overexposed, and technically, since "over" means "too much," then you are correct. Nothing should ever be overexposed. Everything should be exposed as much as it should be exposed.


in6teresting points. I forget that I'm allowed artistic license. And that it's not overexposed if that's what I want it to be. So it boils down to, it's overexposed, because I really didn't want the beak and the feet to be that bright.
04/14/2022 09:09:24 AM · #13
Originally posted by Delta_6:

Over ten years ago I was a children's portrait photographer and was kitted out with a huge white softbox for a background to which attached a roll of plastic which looked white until you compared it to the softbox, then it looked blueish white. Into the softbox went one flash with two others set to the front of the subject, either side of me. I was told this was high key photography.

I used a photo I took back then, from a private session in which I still used my work gear. I got 34th in the challenge.

Has the definition changed in that time?


I was going off a different definition. And I'm not sure from where I got that definition. I'm thinking that, long ago when I researched it, I was finding more like the wikipedia definition of high key art "A high-key image consists primarily of light tones, without dark shadows. A photograph or painting so composed features a diminished tonal range of primarily whites and light grays."

So I gave your photo a 5. It didn't strike me as primarily light tones. It seemed more like a regular portrait. I also think of high key as more "flat". There's a lot of contrast in the shadows of the shirt, at the neck, the lines going down from the nose to the mouth, etc. I also thought the hands were fighting with the face for my attention. The child has such a great expression, but with the hands being a little blurred, my eye kept being drawn there, but unsatisfactorily. If the hands and the face were both nice a sharp, then it would have felt like a more cohesive story. Or if the crop had ignored the hands and just gone for the great expression, it would have worked better for me. It had great possibilties, but everything seemed just a little off, which brought it down to an average entry for me.
04/14/2022 09:10:04 AM · #14
Originally posted by skewsme:

It seemed like light on white was a shortcut to high key.


DPC is my only experience with high key. So light on white was probably what I had in my mind.
04/14/2022 09:40:28 AM · #15
Originally posted by vawendy:

I was going off a different definition. And I'm not sure from where I got that definition. I'm thinking that, long ago when I researched it, I was finding more like the wikipedia definition of high key art "A high-key image consists primarily of light tones, without dark shadows. A photograph or painting so composed features a diminished tonal range of primarily whites and light grays."

So I gave your photo a 5. It didn't strike me as primarily light tones. It seemed more like a regular portrait. I also think of high key as more "flat". There's a lot of contrast in the shadows of the shirt, at the neck, the lines going down from the nose to the mouth, etc. I also thought the hands were fighting with the face for my attention. The child has such a great expression, but with the hands being a little blurred, my eye kept being drawn there, but unsatisfactorily. If the hands and the face were both nice a sharp, then it would have felt like a more cohesive story. Or if the crop had ignored the hands and just gone for the great expression, it would have worked better for me. It had great possibilties, but everything seemed just a little off, which brought it down to an average entry for me.


Thank you very much for the feedback.
04/14/2022 01:12:35 PM · #16
Originally posted by Delta_6:

Originally posted by vawendy:

I was going off a different definition. And I'm not sure from where I got that definition. I'm thinking that, long ago when I researched it, I was finding more like the wikipedia definition of high key art "A high-key image consists primarily of light tones, without dark shadows. A photograph or painting so composed features a diminished tonal range of primarily whites and light grays."

So I gave your photo a 5. It didn't strike me as primarily light tones. It seemed more like a regular portrait. I also think of high key as more "flat". There's a lot of contrast in the shadows of the shirt, at the neck, the lines going down from the nose to the mouth, etc. I also thought the hands were fighting with the face for my attention. The child has such a great expression, but with the hands being a little blurred, my eye kept being drawn there, but unsatisfactorily. If the hands and the face were both nice a sharp, then it would have felt like a more cohesive story. Or if the crop had ignored the hands and just gone for the great expression, it would have worked better for me. It had great possibilties, but everything seemed just a little off, which brought it down to an average entry for me.


Thank you very much for the feedback.


I'm thankful for your post and it's background. I honestly didn't know that definition of high key and the placement of the lights, etc. I always appreciate this type of give and take after a challenge. You can learn as much/more than trying to figure it out by yourself before hand.
04/14/2022 03:45:20 PM · #17
Originally posted by glad2badad:

"In photography today, a high-key image is one that is almost entirely very bright with very little or no dark shadows present. This is usually a creative decision made by the photographer, in order to create a certain mood in the image."


This is my idea of high key.
04/14/2022 11:02:55 PM · #18
Originally posted by Elaine:

Originally posted by glad2badad:

"In photography today, a high-key image is one that is almost entirely very bright with very little or no dark shadows present. This is usually a creative decision made by the photographer, in order to create a certain mood in the image."


This is my idea of high key.


+1
04/18/2022 11:39:08 AM · #19
After we finish discussing High Key, it looks like we need to discuss the definition of Incandescence.

Ha!
04/18/2022 11:42:57 AM · #20
Originally posted by Lydia:

After we finish discussing High Key, it looks like we need to discuss the definition of Incandescence.

Ha!


This was a tough one for me. I would love to read you guys' opinions.
04/18/2022 02:37:19 PM · #21
Originally posted by Lydia:

After we finish discussing High Key, it looks like we need to discuss the definition of Incandescence.

Ha!


Amen
04/18/2022 02:51:33 PM · #22
Originally posted by Lydia:

After we finish discussing High Key, it looks like we need to discuss the definition of Incandescence.

I think we should have a post-challenge discussion every time ...
04/18/2022 05:36:01 PM · #23
So here is my entry - which I felt fit high key, in my opinion, but not well received as I would have hoped by voters (judging by the low scores/not final placement).

One commenter even noted it was washed out and lacking tone - which to me, is the definition of high key - as far as lacking deep contrast/tone:

04/18/2022 09:10:20 PM · #24
Originally posted by ErinKirsten:

So here is my entry - which I felt fit high key, in my opinion, but not well received as I would have hoped by voters (judging by the low scores/not final placement).

One commenter even noted it was washed out and lacking tone - which to me, is the definition of high key - as far as lacking deep contrast/tone:



It was a 7 from me. The problem that I had with it was the fact that it was inconsistent in its contrast. High key, to me, seems to be even in its lighting — the first place winner I thought was an excellent example. This was much more washed out on the left hand side, and more contrast on the face, etc. it the lighting was a lot more even and then “washed out’, I would have thought it was great.

The photo that placed a couple of places above you, I didn’t think was high key.

I gave this one a 5



Because I always thought high key was primarily light. That was a wonderful photo, but it almost seemed like an 18% grey card.

For the photographers on here that really know about which they speak, how do you see those two photos?
04/18/2022 10:02:07 PM · #25
Originally posted by vawendy:

Originally posted by ErinKirsten:

So here is my entry - which I felt fit high key, in my opinion, but not well received as I would have hoped by voters (judging by the low scores/not final placement).

One commenter even noted it was washed out and lacking tone - which to me, is the definition of high key - as far as lacking deep contrast/tone:



It was a 7 from me. The problem that I had with it was the fact that it was inconsistent in its contrast. High key, to me, seems to be even in its lighting — the first place winner I thought was an excellent example. This was much more washed out on the left hand side, and more contrast on the face, etc. it the lighting was a lot more even and then “washed out’, I would have thought it was great.

The photo that placed a couple of places above you, I didn’t think was high key.

I gave this one a 5



Because I always thought high key was primarily light. That was a wonderful photo, but it almost seemed like an 18% grey card.

For the photographers on here that really know about which they speak, how do you see those two photos?


Great point on the lighting being heavy on the left. . .. . For the record - by NO means do I think this was ribbon worthy - I really enjoyed the ones that ribboned, much more than my own. I just don’t understand the lower end votes (or the super high votes to be honest). I looked at my histogram and felt like it met the requirement of high key (occupying the whites side of the scale).
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 03/28/2024 05:16:49 AM

Please log in or register to post to the forums.


Home - Challenges - Community - League - Photos - Cameras - Lenses - Learn - Prints! - Help - Terms of Use - Privacy - Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2024 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 03/28/2024 05:16:49 AM EDT.