Why is it or is it?

[Dave Wooten]

Often one hears that "round catch lights are more natural and therefore more acceptable". Is that because the sun is round? Some prefer the look of window light as catch lights, why is that. Which is more primal, the catch light of the open sun or the "window light" of the open cave?

 

[John Koehrer]

Opinion, opinion, opinion!
The ones I find odd are from ringlights. Or from multiple lights.

 

[JBrunner]

I think that round catchlights are more natural looking because it is a geometry that is repeated in the pupil and iris, as oppossed to two circles and a sqaure. Hard right angles are not the most common human feature. (try to restrain yourself)

 

[Ole]

I find this rather odd - the sun is essentially a point source, and the reflection of the sun in an eye would certainly be a point!

The most common large-but-bounded diffuse light source is rectangular: A window.

Illustrators and cartoonists often put in a reflection of a window to show "roundness", so why is it wrong to do it in a photograph?

I asked a local portrait photographer (a good one, won lost of international prices and stuff) about this, and he couldn't answer...

 

[smieglitz]

Why is it or is it?

It is what it is.

Or as Bill Clinton would say:
"It depends on what the meaning of the words 'is' is."

Joe