So, I was scrolling through some images the other day, you know, just looking at different styles, and some shots featuring Lauren DeCarlo popped up. It wasn’t really about her specifically, but more the mood in some of those photos. That soft, kinda hazy lighting, you know? It looks effortless, but it got me thinking.
Trying to get that look
I figured, hey, I dabble a bit with photography, maybe I could try and recreate that sort of vibe for a small project I was working on. Just trying to capture a similar feel. Sounded simple enough, right? Famous last words.
First, I gathered a bunch of reference images. Not just of her, but anything with that similar atmospheric lighting. I studied them, trying to figure out where the light was coming from, how soft it was, the color tones.
Then, I set up my little home studio space. Which is basically just a corner of my room. I messed around with the few lights I have, tried bouncing them off walls, using diffusers – pieces of white cloth, mostly. Nothing fancy.
- Tried using a main light source, heavily diffused.
- Added a very subtle fill light.
- Played with the camera settings – aperture wide open for shallow depth of field, tweaked the white balance.
Man, it was way harder than I thought. The light was either too harsh, or too flat. The shadows weren’t soft enough, or they were just non-existent. That “hazy” quality? Couldn’t get it right. It just looked… foggy. Or blurry. Not in a good way.
What went wrong
I spent hours tweaking and shooting. Moved the lights maybe a hundred times. Changed camera settings back and forth. Then I tried messing with it in editing software. Added some grain, played with curves, tried to soften the highlights. It just ended up looking like a cheap filter effect. It didn’t have that depth or natural feel I saw in the professional shots.
It reminded me of this time years ago when I tried to replicate a specific website design I really liked. It looked so clean and simple on the surface. Just some text, some boxes, nice spacing. I thought, “I can code that up in an afternoon.”
Yeah, right. Turns out, the “simple” look was achieved through tons of tiny, almost invisible details. Subtle gradients, precise typographic scales, clever use of negative space, stuff that required a really good eye and probably a lot more experience than I had. My version looked clunky, awkward. Like wearing a suit that doesn’t fit right. Same components, totally different result.
It’s kinda the same thing with this photo style. You see the final image and think it’s just good lighting. But behind it, there’s probably specific high-end gear, years of experience knowing exactly how light behaves, a professional retoucher, maybe even specific atmospheric effects used on set. It’s not just one thing you can copy; it’s a whole system working together.
So, my little project didn’t quite capture that Lauren DeCarlo photo mood. Not even close, really. But it was a good reminder. Things that look simple often aren’t. There’s usually a whole lot of skill, practice, and maybe even some specialized tools hiding beneath the surface. Makes you appreciate the craft a bit more, I guess. Or maybe just makes you realize you need better lights. Probably both.
