Okay Elaine.....lets forget the first set.....and move right on to the second.
Aside from the slight nits mentioned already you are making this look quite easy. Are you sure you havent done this before? (j/k!)
Seriously, they look great so far. A bit more experimentation and Ill bet you will be ready to teach me how to do this when I get my umbrella next week!
Are you up for it"?
Thanks a bunch, Jeff! I get another chance to try things out with my friend today, which should be fun. I seriously doubt you'll need any pointers from me. Thank you for the tips and encouragement.
Elaine
Comments and constructive critique always welcome!
Thanks a bunch, Jeff! I get another chance to try things out with my friend today, which should be fun. I seriously doubt you'll need any pointers from me. Thank you for the tips and encouragement.
I cant wait to see the results!
I have always enjoyed seeing your knack for composition and content in your photographs. You often include with the shots you share a comment about some technique or technical thing you are experimenting with but aren't quite comfortable with...yet it almost always appears to be a fluid part of your repetoire...and the taste, the style, the "something" of Elaine always is there.....and THAT is a treat Elaine!
I have always enjoyed seeing your knack for composition and content in your photographs. You often include with the shots you share a comment about some technique or technical thing you are experimenting with but aren't quite comfortable with...yet it almost always appears to be a fluid part of your repetoire...and the taste, the style, the "something" of Elaine always is there.....and THAT is a treat Elaine!
I must have worded it wrong. My umbrella has a removable back. I don't care if the light spills out of the back of it. What I'm interested in knowing is, if I don't have the back, will we loose the intensity of the flash power because more light is escaping and not being shot back?
The idea is to be able to use the brolly side as well as the umbrella side on the fly and switch between both on the fly without having to replace/remove the Black backing of the umbrella. I'll have to post a picture of my rig...
The light energy output by the flash will be the same in both cases, but where that energy goes to will differ.
I don't have a "brolly Box" setup, only a shoot-through/umbrella reflector, but I've not found myself switching around much at this point (pretty much stuck to the shoot-through).
Since the light energy per given area will decrease with the inverse square law, if you've got walls that don't mess with the colors, and an open umbrella back...
(ed: the following assumes the reflecting surface of the umbrella and the transmittance of the same surface is the same; I have no idea if this is true but it shouldn't _too_ far off. I think. Confidence is kinda low, but no way to check right now...)
Say you put the umbrella surface 3 feet from the subject and the (reflecting) back walls are 6 feet from the same surface.
Light from umbrella to subject direct is at whatever you want it at, call it "X".
Light from the reflecting back walls is at something much less. (I'm working this out here, and I've kinda shown my limits at the same time...)
1/4 of the energy gets to the reflecting walls. The walls will reflect something less than perfectly (say 1/2 power), which puts us at 1/8.
Then this has to travel 3x the distance (or 1/9th power of what came off the walls) making a total of 1/72nd the power from the umbrella directly.
Unless I've messed up the example (may have, I'm not claiming anything special!), does the added light of the back walls matter?
Of course, all of this hinges on the idea that the umbrella reflects the same as it transmits. I'm beginning to suspect that's not the case. Someone with a light meter (not me) wanna test it out? (meter the flash 3 feet from the umbrella surface on both sides and see what it comes out to?)
(Gotta run: Daddy Daughter Dance is coming soon and I have to get ready!)
If responding to a picture I've posted: please, provide constructive criticism. Destructive criticism can go take a flying leap.
If we don't know what could be improved or could have been done differently, we'll never know how to get better at what we're doing.
Okay, so I did a little shoot, in the night, next to the Big Pun mural in the Bronx. At first I was a little skeptical on using the camera's sync speed with the flash as the main.
Here are a couple of the highlights.
#1
#2
#3
So here is what I learned from this. As many of the more experienced photographers here said. The shutter speed controls the ambient light contribution, and the aperture controls the flash contribution. The guide of 1/250th @ f /5.6 flash @ 1/4 power works well. All of these shots were shot at 1/200th of a second with the main at 1/4 power and the fill at 1/8th power.
I didn't think that the flash was going to be powerful enough to illuminate the scene and my subject and I was happy to be proven wrong. A three or even 4 light setup would have made this look like broad daylight. (I only had 1 main and 1 fill light.)
Problems I encountered:
I did what was recommended and shot, without the flash on to see if I got a black frame. The D40 has a flash sync of 1/500th of a second, and I figured that wouldn't be necessary. That's a stop darker than 1/250, and come to think about it, all that did was control the fall off point. I could have shot the entire session at 1/500th using my aperture to control the intensity of the light.
The only issue is with mixed light. The damn eyes are like light mirrors. So the catch lights look all crazy instead of pure white. But none of the ambient light is being recorded, so why are the showing up on the eyes as catch lights? Because light is reflected indefinitely at the same intensity.
So I could have chosen to gel the flash to correct the catch light problem. Or spend an extra 20 seconds in photoshop. I decided to do the photoshop route since I knew there weren't going to be that many photos. But I'm sure in a 500 frame shoot, every second will count and you'll need to gel the flash to save you that time.
Here are some of the indoor shots. Lights on or off, didn't make a difference. Your flash is more powerful than you think!
#4
#5
#6
So to summarize, and thanks for starting this thread Elaine, set your camera at to your flash sync speed. Set the main at 1/4 power and aperture to f /5.6. If you need more/less light: Work the combination out with your flash power and aperture. Leave the shutter alone.
I hope this thread helps other people who don't understand flash photography. I don't totally understand it, but with the help of this thread, I was able to take satisfactory pictures. On the indoor shots, even with flash for fill, I would have been shooting like 1/60th or 1/30th. Out door probably like a 2 second exposure, to achieve the same exposure. I'd rather not deal with the blur. Thanks!
(Quick note on the main light. SB600 GN 90. The fill was the SB800 GN 120, would have loved to use it as the main light, but it was the commander and needed to stay on top of the camera. All the GN means is how far the light will go before it falls off.)
So here is what I learned from this. As many of the more experienced photographers here said. The shutter speed controls the ambient light contribution, and the aperture controls the flash contribution. The guide of 1/250th @ f /5.6 flash @ 1/4 power works well. All of these shots were shot at 1/200th of a second with the main at 1/4 power and the fill at 1/8th power.
The "rule" is that you can't control the flash with the shutter - you can only use the combination of ISO and aperture. Once you have those set for the flash, the only thing left with which to adjust the contribution from ambient is the shutter speed.
I didn't think that the flash was going to be powerful enough to illuminate the scene and my subject and I was happy to be proven wrong. A three or even 4 light setup would have made this look like broad daylight. (I only had 1 main and 1 fill light.)
And, I think that would have made these photos less than they are. Sometimes, less is more I think more light would have destroyed the very nice atmosphere you have going in your photos.
I did what was recommended and shot, without the flash on to see if I got a black frame. The D40 has a flash sync of 1/500th of a second, and I figured that wouldn't be necessary. That's a stop darker than 1/250, and come to think about it, all that did was control the fall off point. I could have shot the entire session at 1/500th using my aperture to control the intensity of the light.
Not sure what "control the fall off point" means. The faster shutter speed would have limited, even more, the contribution of ambient light to the exposure. If you got a dark frame at 1/250, there was nothing to be gained by going to 1/500 - nothing lost either
The only issue is with mixed light. The damn eyes are like light mirrors. So the catch lights look all crazy instead of pure white. But none of the ambient light is being recorded, so why are the showing up on the eyes as catch lights? Because light is reflected indefinitely at the same intensity.
Not sure this is correct. Reflected light (and maybe specular highlights) obeys the inverse-square law, just like "projected" light. Reason: because none of the light we use is columnated (all photos on a parallel path - like a laser).
So I could have chosen to gel the flash to correct the catch light problem. Or spend an extra 20 seconds in photoshop. I decided to do the photoshop route since I knew there weren't going to be that many photos. But I'm sure in a 500 frame shoot, every second will count and you'll need to gel the flash to save you that time.
Gelling the flash(es) would have made the catchlight from the flash a color similar to those created by ambient sources - if you used an appropriately colored gel.
So to summarize, and thanks for starting this thread Elaine, set your camera at to your flash sync speed. Set the main at 1/4 power and aperture to f /5.6. If you need more/less light: Work the combination out with your flash power and aperture. Leave the shutter alone.
If you open up the aperture too much, you will admit more ambient light to the exposure. The only question is whether or not that additional ambient makes a significant contribution to the exposure. See above for my re-statement of the "rule".
I hope this thread helps other people who don't understand flash photography. I don't totally understand it, but with the help of this thread, I was able to take satisfactory pictures. On the indoor shots, even with flash for fill, I would have been shooting like 1/60th or 1/30th. Out door probably like a 2 second exposure, to achieve the same exposure. I'd rather not deal with the blur. Thanks!
(Quick note on the main light. SB600 GN 90. The fill was the SB800 GN 120, would have loved to use it as the main light, but it was the commander and needed to stay on top of the camera. All the GN means is how far the light will go before it falls off.)
Nope - the GN is an expression of the power of the light - how much light you will have at a given distance from the light source. Light fall-off is consistant regardless of the GN - for all practical purposes it all obeys the inverse-square law (unless you are talking lasers ). There is no distant point where the light falls off - only a point in the distace from which the reflected light is not powerful enough to make a significant contribution to the exposure.
Well ... Sorry for the thread hi-jack but there were so many details that needed addressing and, as it turne dout, this was a lot more than I had intended but "the devil is in the details."
Well ... Sorry for the thread hi-jack but there were so many details that needed addressing and, as it turne dout, this was a lot more than I had intended but "the devil is in the details."
Please Scott, this is no hijack. This is a discussion, you are far more experienced than I am. Anything you can contribute will only make us better photographers. Thanks for taking the time.
Where is Eliane and her new photos with the flash as the main light? Doing a search now on the inverse square law.
Please Scott, this is no hijack. This is a discussion, you are far more experienced than I am. Anything you can contribute will only make us better photographers. Thanks for taking the time.
Where is Eliane and her new photos with the flash as the main light? Doing a search now on the inverse square law.
Let's just say I wasn't nearly as successful as you were with the shots you just shared! thumb Nice job!!
Elaine
Comments and constructive critique always welcome!
Just to add a simple concept Elaine.....when you want to eliminate the ambient light/temps from your shots, simply set your camera at sync speed (say 1/250th) and stop down to the aperture you want...let's pretend f/8..then simply take a shot at your subject...no flash....see if you get a black frame...if so, then you're good to go. Once you've accomplished this it's a matter of flash power for your key, positioning the reflector/key for a touch of shadowing but nothing harsh....then it won't matter if the curtains are open or not...but maybe that lamp can go bye bye
What a good idea...never thought of doing that...and yet so simple. Thanks for sharing.
Remember, no one may want you to take pictures, but they all want to see them. Educate yourself like you'll live forever and live like you'll die tomorrow.
Comments
Thanks a bunch, Jeff! I get another chance to try things out with my friend today, which should be fun. I seriously doubt you'll need any pointers from me. Thank you for the tips and encouragement.
Comments and constructive critique always welcome!
Elaine Heasley Photography
I cant wait to see the results!
I have always enjoyed seeing your knack for composition and content in your photographs. You often include with the shots you share a comment about some technique or technical thing you are experimenting with but aren't quite comfortable with...yet it almost always appears to be a fluid part of your repetoire...and the taste, the style, the "something" of Elaine always is there.....and THAT is a treat Elaine!
Jeff
-Need help with Dgrin?; Wedding Photography Resources
-My Website - Blog - Tips for Senior Portraiture
My Photos
Thoughts on photographing a wedding, How to post a picture, AF Microadjustments?, Light Scoop
Equipment List - Check my profile
The light energy output by the flash will be the same in both cases, but where that energy goes to will differ.
I don't have a "brolly Box" setup, only a shoot-through/umbrella reflector, but I've not found myself switching around much at this point (pretty much stuck to the shoot-through).
Since the light energy per given area will decrease with the inverse square law, if you've got walls that don't mess with the colors, and an open umbrella back...
(ed: the following assumes the reflecting surface of the umbrella and the transmittance of the same surface is the same; I have no idea if this is true but it shouldn't _too_ far off. I think. Confidence is kinda low, but no way to check right now...)
Say you put the umbrella surface 3 feet from the subject and the (reflecting) back walls are 6 feet from the same surface.
Light from umbrella to subject direct is at whatever you want it at, call it "X".
Light from the reflecting back walls is at something much less. (I'm working this out here, and I've kinda shown my limits at the same time...)
1/4 of the energy gets to the reflecting walls. The walls will reflect something less than perfectly (say 1/2 power), which puts us at 1/8.
Then this has to travel 3x the distance (or 1/9th power of what came off the walls) making a total of 1/72nd the power from the umbrella directly.
Unless I've messed up the example (may have, I'm not claiming anything special!), does the added light of the back walls matter?
Of course, all of this hinges on the idea that the umbrella reflects the same as it transmits. I'm beginning to suspect that's not the case. Someone with a light meter (not me) wanna test it out? (meter the flash 3 feet from the umbrella surface on both sides and see what it comes out to?)
(Gotta run: Daddy Daughter Dance is coming soon and I have to get ready!)
NTWPhotos.com
Member, Livingston County Photographers Group (http://livcophotographers.com)
If responding to a picture I've posted: please, provide constructive criticism. Destructive criticism can go take a flying leap.
If we don't know what could be improved or could have been done differently, we'll never know how to get better at what we're doing.
Here are a couple of the highlights.
#1
#2
#3
So here is what I learned from this. As many of the more experienced photographers here said. The shutter speed controls the ambient light contribution, and the aperture controls the flash contribution. The guide of 1/250th @ f /5.6 flash @ 1/4 power works well. All of these shots were shot at 1/200th of a second with the main at 1/4 power and the fill at 1/8th power.
I didn't think that the flash was going to be powerful enough to illuminate the scene and my subject and I was happy to be proven wrong. A three or even 4 light setup would have made this look like broad daylight. (I only had 1 main and 1 fill light.)
Problems I encountered:
I did what was recommended and shot, without the flash on to see if I got a black frame. The D40 has a flash sync of 1/500th of a second, and I figured that wouldn't be necessary. That's a stop darker than 1/250, and come to think about it, all that did was control the fall off point. I could have shot the entire session at 1/500th using my aperture to control the intensity of the light.
The only issue is with mixed light. The damn eyes are like light mirrors. So the catch lights look all crazy instead of pure white. But none of the ambient light is being recorded, so why are the showing up on the eyes as catch lights? Because light is reflected indefinitely at the same intensity.
So I could have chosen to gel the flash to correct the catch light problem. Or spend an extra 20 seconds in photoshop. I decided to do the photoshop route since I knew there weren't going to be that many photos. But I'm sure in a 500 frame shoot, every second will count and you'll need to gel the flash to save you that time.
Here are some of the indoor shots. Lights on or off, didn't make a difference. Your flash is more powerful than you think!
#4
#5
#6
So to summarize, and thanks for starting this thread Elaine, set your camera at to your flash sync speed. Set the main at 1/4 power and aperture to f /5.6. If you need more/less light: Work the combination out with your flash power and aperture. Leave the shutter alone.
I hope this thread helps other people who don't understand flash photography. I don't totally understand it, but with the help of this thread, I was able to take satisfactory pictures. On the indoor shots, even with flash for fill, I would have been shooting like 1/60th or 1/30th. Out door probably like a 2 second exposure, to achieve the same exposure. I'd rather not deal with the blur. Thanks!
(Quick note on the main light. SB600 GN 90. The fill was the SB800 GN 120, would have loved to use it as the main light, but it was the commander and needed to stay on top of the camera. All the GN means is how far the light will go before it falls off.)
Nikon Shooter
It's all about the moment...
Well ... Sorry for the thread hi-jack but there were so many details that needed addressing and, as it turne dout, this was a lot more than I had intended but "the devil is in the details."
My Photos
Thoughts on photographing a wedding, How to post a picture, AF Microadjustments?, Light Scoop
Equipment List - Check my profile
Please Scott, this is no hijack. This is a discussion, you are far more experienced than I am. Anything you can contribute will only make us better photographers. Thanks for taking the time.
Where is Eliane and her new photos with the flash as the main light? Doing a search now on the inverse square law.
Nikon Shooter
It's all about the moment...
Let's just say I wasn't nearly as successful as you were with the shots you just shared!
Comments and constructive critique always welcome!
Elaine Heasley Photography
What a good idea...never thought of doing that...and yet so simple. Thanks for sharing.
Educate yourself like you'll live forever and live like you'll die tomorrow.
Ed
I find that hard to belive. Thanks for the compliment. Can't wait to see your shots.
Nikon Shooter
It's all about the moment...