hey everyone sharing here this profile on instagram - that @A_ilterish shared with me 
it shows really nicely how different lighting setups influence the final result, and the graphics used to show this are quite good
disclaimer: side effects include sudden urges to get more flashes, watch at your own risk 
My wife must have seen me with this page open on my computer because she surprised me with a photo box for our anniversary, and not just a cheap amazon one, but decent quality with good light, reflectors, backings, sturdy,
here’s some stuff just out of the phone, gonna test more with the DSLR this weekend
Ask your wife for the link. Then i can also leave it open here in a tab… just in case my wife comes sniffing around and, you know, want to surprise me too 
As a note before I start. It’s true I don’t have a MW account. Where I got may experience with photographing items was when I use to sell model train stuff on ebay. I always (not almost always) got higher than normal selling prices. It was a combination of the pictures and the description. Sometimes I was shocked by how high the bidding went. So yes, I’ve had experience doing this.
Now, on to my comment
One thing I’m seeing that you need to be careful with is a busy background. Busy isn’t just lots of colors, it can be textures too. If your eyes flick from the main subject to your background and back, it’s too busy. If you aren’t sure have someone else look at it. When the background is somewhat distracting for a reason. it’s ok. Look at the Latka photo as an example. In this case the extra stuff is there for you to look at in order to generate more interest or excitement about the product.
Here’s a couple listed here that I see issues with
The Sheikah tower- the abrupt color change from black to white bisects two of the objects. It takes your eyes off the subject and keeps pulling them to the line between the black and the white.
The LED screen. Fits the subjec,t but is so bright that the lines in it make it so your eyes don’t know where to settle as they are brighter than the subject.
The vases with the brick walls in the background. The textures are distracting and again, you have a hard division distracting the eyes. In those cases blurring the background and the line between what they are sitting on and the background would make a huge difference.
Besides the other techniques listed in this thread, another “trick” is to use “leading lines”. You can use backgrounds, tables, other objects, shadows, and many other things that lead the eyes to the subject. And every time your eyes try to jump to something else, the lines draw them back to the subject. Lot’s of times this technique keeps the eyes focused right where you want them looking.
I’d like to send you to a site for this, but of the several I checked, the professional photographers use examples that are amateurish. I think they don’t want to give away the real tricks of the trade that set them apart as professionals.
Another note. One of the reasons photoboxes are used is they force your eyes to the subject. As mentioned in the other thread, you can use a box with 2 sides and a bottom or 3 sides and a bottom and drape a cloth over it. This allows you to use different colors for the background and you can even arrange the folds so they draw the eye to the subject. Photoboxes make the process simple, but that doesn’t mean they are always the best method. Mood is really hard to set in a box, so using lighting and placement with other ways to draw the eyes to the subject can give better result.
Full agree here!
One thing to note regarding:
I swear couple years ago one could easily find decent “Product Photography” tutorials, but nowadays all I can see is either “how to do product photography on budget, all you need is a piece of string and $5000 worth of gear” or “ultimate product photography tutorial” where results look worse than if you shot the thing with 10y old smartphone in bad lighting 
And making a photo of 3d printed objects is no different than product photography, it’s just that the product we have is printed instead of [insert any other technique to get the product]
In the product photography can be used the background removal? I mean, of course it can be used, but is it really used irl? Crayion has a great free tool that removes perfectly the background, and then you can fill the removed area with a color, but somehow in my inexperienced eyes the result looks a bit artificial.
On the other hand, my results derived from this topic show shadows and background folds and they look still “improvable”…
many (if not most) professional product photographers work in such way, they light the background in a way that makes it the easiest to lift the subject and then use on composites, they only include background on the “lifestyle” shots, not on the pure product shots
edit/ and yes if not done properly you can clearly see it’s basically a sticker on top of a colour, the professionals are able to achieve much more seamless integrations
I don’t do it in this way personally, mainly because i don’t like to spend time editing most of the times the images are pretty much straight from camera, only thing that i change is crop to 4:3 (my camera shoots in 3:2) as it makes it fit the makerworld layout better
Hi bro thanks for mentioning me.
For anyone that is not likely to be presented with a nice photo box, a DIY version may be good enough. At least that’s what I cobbled together one evening years ago and have been using ever since.
You need
The result:
It is huge, easy to set up, easy to store, cheap and it simply works.
Are my pictures now perfect? - No, my phone camera annoys me and my lighting isn’t on par… I guess.
Ah yes homemade studios - this made me think of something I made in 2006.
Take a cardboard box (I used one of those boxes you use when you move from a place), an old stretchy bed sheet (preferably clean) and gaffa tape.
These results are straight from my old camera; Konica Minolta DYNAX 5D. Not processed other than in-camera. I also have the RAW files for far superior results, but I thought it’d be best if I showed what an old camera processing engine could deliver 18 years ago with this setup:
Oh yeah, and the flashes? They were very old flashes bought second hand for $20-40 each, then synced via pc sync cable (these were standard in photography before wireless became a thing). These flashes are dumb which means no through-the-lens measurements. You just set their output via a slider, and that’s pretty much it. Total cost of this DIY studio was very low back then, as we didn’t have all the Chinese websites to order from. Nice cheap stuff was introduced with eBay a few years later though.
Did you use paper as the actual background, as it looks too clean?
Yeah - it’s 300 gsm paper, so on the thicker side.
Oh, that makes more sense. I have been using super thin and crinkly paper.
I feel attacked!
I may have to try and make a bigger one though for some of my larger gundam photos
Whoops, I may have been a bit careless while wielding my cardboard sword…
I changed my wording twice and briefly considered replying to Square3D. But I did not want to risk stepping on his toes either… Despite my best efforts, I obviously failed to communicate diplomatically. I am sorry.
I’m happy for you and my intention was simply to mention a nearly free option for the guide.
I am hesitating and I don’t even know if it is applicable in your case, but as the toe-squeeze pro I am, I might add:
Do not let your wife get even the slightest whiff of her anniversary gift possibly having any shortcommings of any kind at all by making a bigger version soon after receiving it.
Oh I was only playing, I know you meant well
And don’t worry, I’ve let her know it was amazing because it was, I am genuinely impressed and have been slowly going through my thumbnails and taking new pictures
That’s just a quote from @Rossero, I didn’t edit that.
This bit up here denotes that it’s quote. The original is here.
Ok then. @Rossero, could you please send me the file or at least give me instructions on how to make it look like that?
The instructions are written directly next to the photo. Go to that website > levels, white eyedropper, click background, badabing badaboom
Great article! Well done. If you still can’t get great photos, I have become a huge fan of the iPhone app “PhotoRoom”. It is amazing.
