I am about to prove that I have no mind for details and that I have no interest whatsoever in how things work.
Recently, when I posted the pics of JJ's and my grade 7 projects, some of you were asking about Jonathan's contraption. This is because you are curious and like to know how things work. I metaphorically shrugged my shoulders at your questions with a disdainful, Who Cares, nonchalant attitude and carried on in my lost way.
Sue, however, is quite opposite me in wanting to know details — sometimes painfully so. If you start to recount something to her, she will be thinking of and asking for details before you can can finish your message.
All of this is a leadup to describing how Sue grabbed JJ's project, pulled it apart for lame-brained me and showed me that there are three sections and three candles.
So . . . I redid the photo . . . and here you are.
That ↑ image is a composite of two photos: one for the general lighting and a second for just the candles. This is because the candles were blown out (ie too bright to show detail) in the first photo but when I exposed for the candles in the second, very little else was visible because I had to underexpose by a lot.
The next↓ image is one photo, basically exposed for the candles but with a secondary light source to light the rest of it. I also cropped it differently although the setup, including the position of the camera, was exactly the same.
I didn't realize at first why I liked the first photo better than the second, and then I saw that the second lacks those interesting shadow of the first image. Specifically, my copper object at the back is completely lit from the ancillary light that I was using from the front, thus eliminating the shadows. This method would be good for showing the detail a specific object, but it makes the lighting less interesting.
So there you are. You now know how JJ's contraption really works and also how clueless I am.