nephew at the beach

ElaineElaine Registered Users Posts: 3,532 Major grins
edited July 30, 2010 in People
I loved the moment caught here. I did use a bit of fill flash (not gelled though), but I don't think it was quite enough. This edited version makes it look like I used more than I did. Any suggestions??

Canon 40D, 17-55 2.8 IS at f/4, 1/1600, ISO 100
951867954_amAE9-XL.jpg
Elaine

Comments and constructive critique always welcome!

Elaine Heasley Photography

Comments

  • Darren Troy CDarren Troy C Registered Users Posts: 1,927 Major grins
    edited July 29, 2010
    I like it!
    http://DarrenTroyCphotography.com/
  • IcebearIcebear Registered Users Posts: 4,015 Major grins
    edited July 29, 2010
    I'm not a flash expert by any means, but at ISO 100, in that kind of bright light, I'd think you'd need pretty much everything your flash could put out to have any fill effect. With your shutter speed at 1/1600, I'll bet your shutter had closed before your flash duration was over. Sure, you had your lens almost wide open, but at full power, your flash duration is, what 1/400th or so? We're so used to thinking that the f stop controls the flash and the shutter speed the ambient, that we sometimes ignore the fact that at high power the flash can actually be slower than the shutter.

    I think you were asking a lot of your flash for anything more than catchlights. ne_nau.gif
    John :
    Natural selection is responsible for every living thing that exists.
    D3s, D500, D5300, and way more glass than the wife knows about.
  • ElaineElaine Registered Users Posts: 3,532 Major grins
    edited July 29, 2010
    Darren Troy C wrote: »
    I like it!

    Thanks, Darren!
    Elaine

    Comments and constructive critique always welcome!

    Elaine Heasley Photography
  • ElaineElaine Registered Users Posts: 3,532 Major grins
    edited July 30, 2010
    Icebear wrote: »
    I'm not a flash expert by any means, but at ISO 100, in that kind of bright light, I'd think you'd need pretty much everything your flash could put out to have any fill effect. With your shutter speed at 1/1600, I'll bet your shutter had closed before your flash duration was over. Sure, you had your lens almost wide open, but at full power, your flash duration is, what 1/400th or so? We're so used to thinking that the f stop controls the flash and the shutter speed the ambient, that we sometimes ignore the fact that at high power the flash can actually be slower than the shutter.

    I think you were asking a lot of your flash for anything more than catchlights. ne_nau.gif

    Flash expert, I am not! :D My external flash was on high speed sync and -2/3 FEC (just because that's my default starting position) and I was just wanting it to lift the shadows and provide a touch of catchlights, so he wouldn't be in near silhouette. I don't use a flash in this sort of situation enough to really know what I am doing, and I'm always afraid of an over-flashed look. I was pleased to see that it did actually do something. I know this because I took a second shot right after this one and the flash didn't fire, and there was a difference between the two shots.

    SOOC
    952180879_p9uyC-XL.jpg

    I should have been more specific in my original post as I meant to inquire more about the processing and final product of this shot. I keep looking at it wondering if there is something else it needs that I can do after the fact, or if I've made it look like too much of a rescued shot.

    Thanks for the input! I can seriously use all the help I can get!
    Elaine

    Comments and constructive critique always welcome!

    Elaine Heasley Photography
  • metmet Registered Users Posts: 405 Major grins
    edited July 30, 2010
    I like his expression and the water and everything. I think it still seems a smidge hazy because of the brightness. I wonder what it would look like with the black point pushed a little more. Or maybe a bit more contrast?
    My website
  • ElaineElaine Registered Users Posts: 3,532 Major grins
    edited July 30, 2010
    met wrote: »
    I like his expression and the water and everything. I think it still seems a smidge hazy because of the brightness. I wonder what it would look like with the black point pushed a little more. Or maybe a bit more contrast?

    Good points. How 'bout this version?

    952216446_LqvuA-XL.jpg
    Elaine

    Comments and constructive critique always welcome!

    Elaine Heasley Photography
  • metmet Registered Users Posts: 405 Major grins
    edited July 30, 2010
    I like that better. Definitely moving in the right direction I think.
    My website
  • ElaineElaine Registered Users Posts: 3,532 Major grins
    edited July 30, 2010
    met wrote: »
    I like that better. Definitely moving in the right direction I think.

    Thank you!!!
    Elaine

    Comments and constructive critique always welcome!

    Elaine Heasley Photography
  • CdorothyCdorothy Registered Users Posts: 89 Big grins
    edited July 30, 2010
    I really like your new version! Did he bowled over by the wave?
  • IcebearIcebear Registered Users Posts: 4,015 Major grins
    edited July 30, 2010
    Now yer talkin! I like it.
    And I am amazed you got even that much fill in such bright light.
    John :
    Natural selection is responsible for every living thing that exists.
    D3s, D500, D5300, and way more glass than the wife knows about.
  • ElaineElaine Registered Users Posts: 3,532 Major grins
    edited July 30, 2010
    Cdorothy wrote: »
    I really like your new version! Did he bowled over by the wave?

    Thank you! Nope, he managed to stay upright that time. I didn't catch the time he did go down. :D
    Elaine

    Comments and constructive critique always welcome!

    Elaine Heasley Photography
  • ElaineElaine Registered Users Posts: 3,532 Major grins
    edited July 30, 2010
    Icebear wrote: »
    Now yer talkin! I like it.
    And I am amazed you got even that much fill in such bright light.

    Great! And I don't know enough to be amazed, so I'll take your word for it! :D

    Can anyone comment on his skin tones? Do they look a little off/cool to anyone else? I'm wondering if that's partially because I didn't gel my flash? Even thought it didn't provide much light, did it provide enough to mismatch light colors? Hmmm...I think if I could warm him up a bit I might like it better, although...this is the Oregon coast, so that water was cold!!
    Elaine

    Comments and constructive critique always welcome!

    Elaine Heasley Photography
  • IcebearIcebear Registered Users Posts: 4,015 Major grins
    edited July 30, 2010
    Not to keep harping, but when you gel you flash, you cut the light output.
    John :
    Natural selection is responsible for every living thing that exists.
    D3s, D500, D5300, and way more glass than the wife knows about.
  • ElaineElaine Registered Users Posts: 3,532 Major grins
    edited July 30, 2010
    Icebear wrote: »
    Not to keep harping, but when you gel you flash, you cut the light output.

    OK...so crank up the light and gel! :D Seriously though, isn't it more important to match the light (gel) and turn it up if necessary than to worry about the fact that gelling cuts some output? Trying to fix mixed light colors is more painful than trying to fix some underexposure...I think? ne_nau.gif
    Elaine

    Comments and constructive critique always welcome!

    Elaine Heasley Photography
  • IcebearIcebear Registered Users Posts: 4,015 Major grins
    edited July 30, 2010
    Ahhh . . . I take back everything I said. You were using your 17-55, so weren't all that far from your subject anyway. Gel and high-speed synch away!
    John :
    Natural selection is responsible for every living thing that exists.
    D3s, D500, D5300, and way more glass than the wife knows about.
Sign In or Register to comment.