# Best Light Box for Watch / Jewelry Photography in 2020?



## dpn

Hello everyone,

I'm interested in upping my watch photography. To date, I've shot a lot with filtered/softened natural light. I've also used very inexpensive light boxes for jewelry and watches.

I'd like to up my lighting game to better share my collection and take better photos of watches I'm planning on selling.

There are a _ton_ of options available, in a lot of price ranges. I'm curious what other folks are using, and what anyone would recommend.

The Ortery PhotoSimile 50 looks great, but it's 35 pounds and $2,450. That's a pass, to be sure.

I've used this $20 folding kit and, well, I got what I paid for. I'm looking for something better.

The FotodioX LED Studio-in-a-Box has a good price ($70) and seems like it might do the trick.

(I know that I could put something together with white poster boards, but I'm looking for something that will be quick to set up and take down. I'm already doing a lot of the standard things to improve my photography: I shoot with a tripod, diffuse the sun with a scrim when I'm outdoors, have a good macro lens and manually set my white balance with a grey card before I'm shooting, etc. I don't have nice off-camera strobes, and am not looking to buy those now. I _do_ have smaller off-camera flashes, but I find that they're a pain to set up, position, and sync with my camera.)

For what they're worth, here are some of my better photographs of watches to date:


----------



## grafiz

First off, love your pics... really creative.

I'm only just getting started on trying to learn how to use an actual camera, having only ever used my cell phone or a point and shoot. Part of my "just getting started" setup is one of the $20 folding kits you link above. The only difference is I payed a bit extra for the option with the circular LED light strip instead of the straight one. It casts so much more light, it's worth the extra. Outside of the rather low grade construction of it all, I've been really pleased with the results. I get a lot of light and it seems to bounce around well inside.

Even if you end up going with a more expensive box later, for the money it wouldn't be a bad idea to have one as a secondary setup.

Here's a picture I took of my CW last night, using nothing more than the LED's in the light box.


----------



## Zhanming057

My recommendation is to skip the softbox since you'll inevitably make photos that end up looking like they came out of a product catalog. There's two ways you could meaningfully improve your shooting quality if you don't want to go all the way on strobes.

1. You can get an LED panel or 2 and diffuse them. This is more controllable than flash work and you can hold the panels by hand for quicker work. There might not be enough light for watches with major amounts of dial movements, though (freezing a balance wheel is out of the question for the most part). The benefit is being able to pre visualize your shot and add relatively controlled amounts of light.

2. Just light the scene with your phone/tablet and exposure stack. The main downside to this is that it's incredibly hard to simultaneously exposure stack and focus stack, and focus stacking is kind of the bread and butter of macro photography. The upside is you have perfect control over light and you can fix just about anything in post as needed. Also this won't work on watches that do not hack. It can be done (see picture 2 for an example of a focus+exposure stack, although I could have stacked a lot more shots if I didn't need to control light) but getting quick at it takes practice and a good bit of experience with Photoshop.

The first shot is with a single light source (my computer monitor) and two reflectors at 1/8s, and already the second subdial is getting a little blurry. Anything faster and I would have to pull out strobes. Extra nominations are a tripod head with precise angle adjustments, and a camera that tethers so you can view the results on a high resolution display while shooting.


----------



## fourthirteen

Following with interest as I’ve had the same thoughts about getting a light box.


----------



## dpn

Thanks all for the feedback and @Zhanming057 for the specific suggestions. I've done quite a bit of studio work with strobes, and was hoping to do something easy and turnkey instead. I think that your point is dead on, though: If I want my photos to look better or different than typical product photography shots produced in a lightbox, I'm going to have to bust out the off-camera lighting and modifiers, and possibly focus-stack.

I actually do quite a lot of macro photography, but of living things. Consequently, focus stacking is one of those techniques that I understand in principle but have never actually practiced. I guess it's time to start. The only thing that is currently stopping me is that I use a nice old manual focus macro lens on my Fujifilm X-T2 via an adapter. I know that my body has automated focus stacking capabilities, but only with factory autofocus lenses. (It's a side conversation, but I still consider myself much more of a large format and 35mm film photographer than a digital photographer. I have absolutely _loved_ how well vintage lenses work on my X-T2 -- the manual focus aides and real-time DOF previews were worth the price of admission alone. And given the cost savings that I was able to achieve by using my favorite vintage lenses, I've been reluctant to purchase modern factory lenses in the same focal lengths.) As a result, I'm going to be playing with lighting before I start playing with focus stacking.

If anyone is curious, my (NSFW) photography portfolio is at Zenfolio | Iggybug.

BTW, @Zhanming057, both your watch collection and your photography of it are admirable! I'll be following you on Instagram (as "ignatiusbug").


----------



## Guasch

cuckoowasp said:


> Thanks all for the feedback and @Zhanming057 for the specific suggestions. I've done quite a bit of studio work with strobes, and was hoping to do something easy and turnkey instead. I think that your point is dead on, though: If I want my photos to look better or different than typical product photography shots produced in a lightbox, I'm going to have to bust out the off-camera lighting and modifiers, and possibly focus-stack.
> 
> I actually do quite a lot of macro photography, but of living things. Consequently, focus stacking is one of those techniques that I understand in principle but have never actually practiced. I guess it's time to start. The only thing that is currently stopping me is that I use a nice old manual focus macro lens on my Fujifilm X-T2 via an adapter. I know that my body has automated focus stacking capabilities, but only with factory autofocus lenses. (It's a side conversation, but I still consider myself much more of a large format and 35mm film photographer than a digital photographer. I have absolutely _loved_ how well vintage lenses work on my X-T2 -- the manual focus aides and real-time DOF previews were worth the price of admission alone. And given the cost savings that I was able to achieve by using my favorite vintage lenses, I've been reluctant to purchase modern factory lenses in the same focal lengths.) As a result, I'm going to be playing with lighting before I start playing with focus stacking.
> 
> If anyone is curious, my (NSFW) photography portfolio is at Zenfolio | Iggybug.
> 
> BTW, @Zhanming057, both your watch collection and your photography of it are admirable! I'll be following you on Instagram (as "ignatiusbug").


Hi, just thought i add some ideas. Since I read you're using a mirrorless camera, you might want to look into tilt shift lenses or adapters for larger format lenses rather than doing focus stacking, there's alot of work involved with focus stacking than you might anticipate. Ive used both focus stacking and TS lenses for work and you just cant beat the immediacy of a tilt shift lens.

The main reason Focus stacking can be a pain is, in contrary to popular thought, you shouldnt change the focus of the lens, instead move the camera itself forward or backward. More so with macro work like watches. because if you do change focus, you'll be changing the reproduction ratio and making it harder for the software to do focus stacking.

Lastly, focus stack, its a hassle for non hacking watches. youll have to drain the mainspring first before you can proceed shooting the tens or hundred of images for the stack.

Unless you're really into trying it out, which can be useful to like photographing something as small as a grain of rice and have it in absolute focus. Otherwise, get older medium format lenses and buy a tilt shift adapter if Fuji hasnt come up with their own yet.


----------



## stlwatchlvr

cuckoowasp said:


> Hello everyone,
> 
> I'm interested in upping my watch photography. To date, I've shot a lot with filtered/softened natural light. I've also used very inexpensive light boxes for jewelry and watches.
> 
> I'd like to up my lighting game to better share my collection and take better photos of watches I'm planning on selling.
> 
> There are a _ton_ of options available, in a lot of price ranges. I'm curious what other folks are using, and what anyone would recommend.
> 
> The Ortery PhotoSimile 50 looks great, but it's 35 pounds and $2,450. That's a pass, to be sure.
> 
> I've used this $20 folding kit and, well, I got what I paid for. I'm looking for something better.
> 
> The FotodioX LED Studio-in-a-Box has a good price ($70) and seems like it might do the trick.
> 
> (I know that I could put something together with white poster boards, but I'm looking for something that will be quick to set up and take down. I'm already doing a lot of the standard things to improve my photography: I shoot with a tripod, diffuse the sun with a scrim when I'm outdoors, have a good macro lens and manually set my white balance with a grey card before I'm shooting, etc. I don't have nice off-camera strobes, and am not looking to buy those now. I _do_ have smaller off-camera flashes, but I find that they're a pain to set up, position, and sync with my camera.)
> 
> For what they're worth, here are some of my better photographs of watches to date:
> View attachment 15428300
> View attachment 15428304
> View attachment 15428305
> View attachment 15428306
> View attachment 15428307
> View attachment 15428308
> View attachment 15428309


First, great pics!

Second, I have gotten away from light boxes in favor of big diffusion panels and studio strobes. I got the idea from a YouTube video where he had these 5x5 foot diffusion squares above and below his watch. really created a light box if you think about it, but allowed some directional light from his strobes (he used 4! and I only have 2).

Light boxes are kind of limiting, so seriously consider just getting some strobes and soft boxes/diffusion panels. Then your options are pretty much limitless.

p.s. Attached are a couple of recent examples.


----------



## jbholsters

The few guys I know that get paid to do watch pics, don't use soft boxes. They use a diffusion material (kind of like a plastic) they they made big frames for. They shoot the strobes into the diffusion. This allows for more placement choices and more flexibility to make the light do what you want. They almost always hang the watches from fishing line too, so they are suspended. Allowing for the light to wrap around the case better. You will also want to probably do photostackings, which is taking lots of shots getting the focus tac sharp over the entire watch, then use photo shop to blend and merge. You can also do this with moving the strobes around and take multiple shots and paint in areas that you want to have more light or shadow. I'll look up what that material is and post it. I know Amazon and B&H carry it. Also, with most product photography you want to start with your main light opposite the lens and on the same angle (so if the camera is angled down 45 degrees, angle the light source at that same angle towards the product. Then, start to see where you need more/less light and either use white posterboard to bouce it, black to get a gradient, or add more light sources as needed.


----------



## jbholsters

This guy on Youtube is worth a look I think he has some watch photog tutorials on his channel. He is pretty funny as well. The channel is botvidsson


----------



## jbholsters

That material to make diffusion panels is made my Savage and is called Translum. I use the medium weight for stuff. The heavy weight soaks up another stop of light. It comes in rolls, so you can cut what you need. It's strong enough to reuse, and as i mentioned above you can make frames out of wood or foam core and glue this stuff to it. Added bonus, its great for backgrounds too. Being white you can make it look as dark as you want depending on how you set your lights up or shoot a strobe with a jell through from the back.


----------



## dpn

More great information. I hadn't thought about a tilt/shift adapter for my mirrorless -- hadn't even known they exist, to be honest. I love movements when I'm shooting large format, but there's no way in heck I'm going to do LF film macro work with my watches. There's a limit to my masochism!

I'm going to play with off-camera lighting while I look into a tilt/shift adapter. I was already going to buy another strobe, some light stands, and some light modifiers.

Again, great tips from some truly impressive photographers here! Thank you!


----------



## gogoboy0511

cool


----------



## dpn

So, I have an update on my specific setup and a request for additional advice/help on how to improve my photography.

I bit the bullet and bought a "real" Fujinon macro lens. I've also purchased a couple of inexpensive strobes and a wireless transmitter (Godox TT600 x 2 & a Godox X2TF). I still don't have lens movements, and I'm waiting to receive a couple of "large" (but still small -- 11" x 8" ) softboxes to use on my strobes.

I'm much happier with the quality of the light that I'm getting, and I think that I'll see additional (if incremental) improvement when I get my soft boxes.

What should I be working on to improve my photography further? I've got my strobes shooting at the same power at 45 degree angles from the watch for even, shadow-free lighting. I'd like to continue to get a better look, which will involve experimenting with positioning so that I've got a highlight light source and background fill.

Any advice the talented photographers who have contributed to this thread might share is greatly appreciated!

Cheers,

Dan

Here are a couple of example shots with my new setup. (Thumbnails, click to enlarge.)


----------



## Bluebirdwatch1

cuckoowasp said:


> So, I have an update on my specific setup and a request for additional advice/help on how to improve my photography.
> 
> I bit the bullet and bought a "real" Fujinon macro lens. I've also purchased a couple of inexpensive strobes and a wireless transmitter (Godox TT600 x 2 & a Godox X2TF). I still don't have lens movements, and I'm waiting to receive a couple of "large" (but still small -- 11" x 8" ) softboxes to use on my strobes.
> 
> I'm much happier with the quality of the light that I'm getting, and I think that I'll see additional (if incremental) improvement when I get my soft boxes.
> 
> What should I be working on to improve my photography further? I've got my strobes shooting at the same power at 45 degree angles from the watch for even, shadow-free lighting. I'd like to continue to get a better look, which will involve experimenting with positioning so that I've got a highlight light source and background fill.
> 
> Any advice the talented photographers who have contributed to this thread might share is greatly appreciated!
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Dan
> 
> Here are a couple of example shots with my new setup. (Thumbnails, click to enlarge.)
> 
> View attachment 15545593
> 
> 
> View attachment 15545594


Can't help on the ideas but the pictures look great

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## dpn

I've made a lot of progress taking shots with soft / even / slightly-boring light, but I'm still working on getting my photos to a more dramatic level.

































I'd still appreciate any advice the real gurus might be willing to share. I've gotten much better results with the two off-camera flashes -- I can't believe how good the $60 Godox TT600s are -- and I'm seriously considering investing in some real studio strobes.


----------



## dpn

*Can anyone recommend a good product photography or jewelry photography lighting book or video series? I've ordered this book from Amazon, but I suspect it's focused more on big product photography than small stuff.*

Couple more of my shots. Here's what I've learned:















1) Zero noticeable benefit switching away from my ancient Minolta 100mm f/4 Macro Lens (~$100) to either of the current Fuji X-series lenses. I tested both the XF 60mm f/2.4 R Macro and XF 80mm f/2.8 R LM OIS WR Macro. In theory the modern Fuji options are better because my X-T2 and On1 Capture software know how to correct them ... but my old Minolta lens (and I suspect most other quality 100mm macro lenses) are already very well corrected. I do need to use an extension tube if I'm shooting 1:1, but I rarely do so. I am considering getting a macro rail so that I can focus-stack.

2) I bought and have been using a $49 product shooting table. I wish I had saved my money. I've switched back to just using a desk.

3) I bought and returned a $200 Minolta MD -> Fuji XF tilt/shift adapter. It didn't allow me to stop down by ancient MD lenses, which sucked. Maybe that's the difference between the $200 adapter I tried and the $500 adapters I passed on. Maybe this adapter works well with other lens mounts. If I try to get tilt/shift again, I'll likely buy the Nikon F -> Fuji XF version and also use a Minolta MD -> Nikon F adapter.

4) Switching from just shooting in-camera RAW to shooting tethered to my laptop and using On1 Capture software has been revelatory. I wish I had tried this earlier!

5) I tried shooting with a pair of $60 LED light panels. They were well reviewed enough, and probably work great for video. They didn't put out enough light for macro still photography though.

6) For backdrops, I've been using fordite slabs (which I make custom watch dials out of) and swatches of fabric. I just bought quite a few types of slate and neutral tiles from Lowe's. They're heavy, but they seem great especially for the price!


----------



## Sassi

For indoor shooting I have used NanLite Halo 14 ring light for some time now. Outdoors I try to get sunlight filtered through a tree etc. also use some mirrors sometimes. Here are a few examples. In the first picture you can see the light I am talking about. I also like to add some background lights to get some bokeh balls sometimes. I usually use Canon EF 70-200mm F/4L IS USM lens to get nice DOF.


----------



## dpn

You're the man @Sassi -- Thanks a ton for sharing those (fantastic) images and insights. I'm realizing that my current lighting efforts are basically trying to replicate a ring light, so I'm going to snag a Halo ring light.

I really love how you set up the white Alpinist and DressKX shots. Any advice on propping / elevating / holding watches in place? I can probably make something work with Lego / Rodico / Tacky Wax ...

Thanks again for putting the effort into this shots and sharing them here. Your stuff is really inspiring!


----------



## mbarmbar

Zhanming057 said:


> My recommendation is to skip the softbox since you'll inevitably make photos that end up looking like they came out of a product catalog. There's two ways you could meaningfully improve your shooting quality if you don't want to go all the way on strobes.
> 
> 1. You can get an LED panel or 2 and diffuse them. This is more controllable than flash work and you can hold the panels by hand for quicker work. There might not be enough light for watches with major amounts of dial movements, though (freezing a balance wheel is out of the question for the most part). The benefit is being able to pre visualize your shot and add relatively controlled amounts of light.
> 
> 2. Just light the scene with your phone/tablet and exposure stack. The main downside to this is that it's incredibly hard to simultaneously exposure stack and focus stack, and focus stacking is kind of the bread and butter of macro photography. The upside is you have perfect control over light and you can fix just about anything in post as needed. Also this won't work on watches that do not hack. It can be done (see picture 2 for an example of a focus+exposure stack, although I could have stacked a lot more shots if I didn't need to control light) but getting quick at it takes practice and a good bit of experience with Photoshop.
> 
> The first shot is with a single light source (my computer monitor) and two reflectors at 1/8s, and already the second subdial is getting a little blurry. Anything faster and I would have to pull out strobes. Extra nominations are a tripod head with precise angle adjustments, and a camera that tethers so you can view the results on a high resolution display while shooting.


Excellent advice!


----------



## dpn

@Zhanming057 Hey, thanks for posting a really great watch photography write up on Reddit too -- you've got an incredible collection of Ressence watches, and your photography is fantastic as well. In his Reddit post, he refers folks to this dated-but-still-great How To article from Fratello.

I was absolutely blown away by the behind-the-scenes / instructional videos from Botvidsson on YouTube. This video, in particular, was revelatory.

///

For anyone playing along at home, I've ordered some more lighting goodies to help me take better photos. Specially, I'm going to be trying out a 14" diameter LED Ring light to help me with standard (shadow-free, soft) shots.

I've also ordered a real strobe, a softbox, and some Savage Translum paper to see if I can recreate the main lighting Botvidsson uses.


----------



## dpn

I've still got a long ways to go, but I'm pretty happy with this shot. This is with one powerful off-camera strobe diffused through a big translucent plastic panel, with some highlight lighting from a naked speedlight. Again, it's not perfect but it's a quantum improvement for me.


----------



## ArchiMark

Smaller lights for use with cellphones, but has anyone tried either the UBeezie or Gloue light rings shown in article here:






Best Selfie Lights


The cameras on smartphones these days are capable of taking high-quality photos, but so many of us are still guilty of taking terrible selfies because of bad lighting. Instead of your phone’s harsh, over-saturated flash, opt for the fully customizable, soft lighting from a selfie ring light that...



www.amazon.com


----------



## dpn

ArchiMark said:


> Smaller lights for use with cellphones, but has anyone tried either the UBeezie or Gloue light rings shown in article here:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Best Selfie Lights
> 
> 
> The cameras on smartphones these days are capable of taking high-quality photos, but so many of us are still guilty of taking terrible selfies because of bad lighting. Instead of your phone’s harsh, over-saturated flash, opt for the fully customizable, soft lighting from a selfie ring light that...
> 
> 
> 
> www.amazon.com


Some watch photographers have recommended ring lights to me as a means to obtain punchy, shadow-free lighting. They certainly do that ... but I found the ring-shaped light reflection on the crystals to be a deal breaker for me. They take a different set of skills to learn to use effectively, and they're probably great for the money. FWIW, I played with a $99 14" light ring on Amazon mounted on a very inexpensive lighting stand. It would be a pretty nice combination, provided one took the time to learn how to work with the ring light's unique strengths and weaknesses.

If I've learned anything from working with Chinese Alibaba sellers, etc., it's that the "brand" of a specific piece of equipment is often irrelevant as a single factory will sell the stuff it makes to many smaller "brands". I've also learned that the quality of a lot of the cheap Chinese lighting stuff I've bought is ... pretty good!

My advice would be to buy a ring light, play with it and see if you like its look. If it meets your needs -- Yahtzee! If not, well, you're not out much money. Amazon has a great return policy. _grin_


----------



## ArchiMark

dpn said:


> Some watch photographers have recommended ring lights to me as a means to obtain punchy, shadow-free lighting. They certainly do that ... but I found the ring-shaped light reflection on the crystals to be a deal breaker for me. They take a different set of skills to learn to use effectively, and they're probably great for the money. FWIW, I played with a $99 14" light ring on Amazon mounted on a very inexpensive lighting stand. It would be a pretty nice combination, provided one took the time to learn how to work with the ring light's unique strengths and weaknesses.
> 
> If I've learned anything from working with Chinese Alibaba sellers, etc., it's that the "brand" of a specific piece of equipment is often irrelevant as a single factory will sell the stuff it makes to many smaller "brands". I've also learned that the quality of a lot of the cheap Chinese lighting stuff I've bought is ... pretty good!
> 
> My advice would be to buy a ring light, play with it and see if you like its look. If it meets your needs -- Yahtzee! If not, well, you're not out much money. Amazon has a great return policy. _grin_


Thanks for the info and sound advice!


----------



## watchguy07

What's the purpose of the strobe vs constant light?


----------



## dpn

watchguy07 said:


> What's the purpose of the strobe vs constant light?


They both have plusses and minuses. Constant light is easier to visualize results with, but it's not as _bright_ as strobes and there aren't a lot of light modifiers available for constant light sources. Very bright constant lights tend to be very, very hot. Costs ... well, everything is cheaper now, but constant "hot" lights used to be a lot cheaper than strobes. Not only have strobes gotten cheaper, but "hot" lights are now LED panels or big racks of CFL tubes.

(Oh, and many strobes have an incandescent "modeling light" to help one visualize.)

If I were starting from zero and didn't want to invest a lot of money in high end cameras and lighting, I'd use my iPhone and a couple of inexpensive LED panels.


----------



## AEK

dpn said:


> Thanks all for the feedback and @Zhanming057 for the specific suggestions. I've done quite a bit of studio work with strobes, and was hoping to do something easy and turnkey instead. I think that your point is dead on, though: If I want my photos to look better or different than typical product photography shots produced in a lightbox, I'm going to have to bust out the off-camera lighting and modifiers, and possibly focus-stack.
> 
> I actually do quite a lot of macro photography, but of living things. Consequently, focus stacking is one of those techniques that I understand in principle but have never actually practiced. I guess it's time to start. The only thing that is currently stopping me is that I use a nice old manual focus macro lens on my Fujifilm X-T2 via an adapter. I know that my body has automated focus stacking capabilities, but only with factory autofocus lenses. (It's a side conversation, but I still consider myself much more of a large format and 35mm film photographer than a digital photographer. I have absolutely _loved_ how well vintage lenses work on my X-T2 -- the manual focus aides and real-time DOF previews were worth the price of admission alone. And given the cost savings that I was able to achieve by using my favorite vintage lenses, I've been reluctant to purchase modern factory lenses in the same focal lengths.) As a result, I'm going to be playing with lighting before I start playing with focus stacking.
> 
> If anyone is curious, my (NSFW) photography portfolio is at Zenfolio | Iggybug.
> 
> BTW, @Zhanming057, both your watch collection and your photography of it are admirable! I'll be following you on Instagram (as "ignatiusbug").


Why can't you just use software to photostack. Adobe has this function, I believe. Using sharp glass on digital bodies is where I am going as well. Minolta MD on Sony mirrorless.


----------



## AEK

AEK said:


> Why can't you just use software to photostack. Adobe has this function, I believe. Using sharp glass on digital bodies is where I am going as well. Minolta MD on Sony mirrorless.


Although it is amazing what you can do with a cellphone camera these days...


dpn said:


> You're the man @Sassi -- Thanks a ton for sharing those (fantastic) images and insights. I'm realizing that my current lighting efforts are basically trying to replicate a ring light, so I'm going to snag a Halo ring light.
> 
> I really love how you set up the white Alpinist and DressKX shots. Any advice on propping / elevating / holding watches in place? I can probably make something work with Lego / Rodico / Tacky Wax ...
> 
> Thanks again for putting the effort into this shots and sharing them here. Your stuff is really inspiring!


BB - Beautiful Bokeh on these shots!


----------



## blacksby

mbarmbar said:


> Excellent advice!


agreed.


----------

