+Anthony Struth yeah I wondered how ignorant those guys must be holding the camera in such angle with that hobo in the background.

LLLLL MMMMM FFFFF AAAAA OOOOO That killed me hahahahaha!

Lol, even i thought the same and moved to the comments to see it and here was yours! :P

It's just a guy photographing his dog in the background

I think he was attempting fill light, not key light. Merely, he was heavy-handed with it.

You point them up to remove harsh shadows from under the chin and nose and to remove any shadows falling onto the eyes....its just clamshell lighting using the sun.

Not when the subject has their back to the sun like they do in this video... you effectively uplight the subject... If the keylight is in front of the subject, yes this method applies.. but not when the only key light ( in this case the sun ) is BEHIND the subject...

+tommyspongefinger No, you almost never point it upwards with natural light. You will always get that uplighting horror effect, even if it is to a lesser extent, even if the sun provides the key light from above. The reflector should almost always be lifted eye level or higher and feathered for desired coverage. It's way more natural and flattering than the uplighting people erroneously learn when starting out with reflectors.

+Jason Bodden Nope, you're very much wrong about fill lighting. A reflector used as a fill light can be below with no ill effect, as the main light strength is coming from above and the job of fill lights are to gently fill in shadows where the key light was obscured by geometry (and a key light from high above is going to leave the most shadows on downward sides.) It is only nebulous if the low direction reflector was used to overpower the key light. In direct sunlight, that white reflector is not reflecting 100% of the light towards her face, so the key light (the sun) will dominate from above even if the fill is below.

+HotnessTim Lol. Very much wrong eh? Well, bud, I use reflectors all the time. I'm quite versed as to how each side of a 5-in-1 works. I know what looks good to me. In most cases the horror lighting is not a good look in my opinion, and that's what a lot of people end up doing. Even a few other people noticed that here. It's not just me (not that that makes any difference to me). I'll just keep doing what I'm doing. And what you said isn't totally right. If I were to go by that I'd have horror lighting on my subjects constantly, even if the fill doesn't overpower. It would just be less stark but it'd be horror lighting all the same. When using reflectors, there's a certain amount of angling upwards. 99% of the time to get a beautiful look, it's my personal taste that I won't generally uplight from below but I'd have the reflector at generally around face height or higher. Then I'd angle it to "scoop" up the natural light and feather it across my subject until I get what I want. The only times I'd ever use total uplighting is when something is blocking off the light from above or when the horror lighting is done on purpose for effect (which I pretty much hardly ever do, if at all). Very few instances apart from those I'd use that uplighting. Other than that, no. But thanks, though lol.