Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 41 to 60 of 67

Thread: GFSP II can improve this problems?

  1. #41

    Default Re: GFSP II can improve this problems?

    Quote Originally Posted by Cheesecake View Post
    its been done to death.
    there're old threads on this.
    oh great.save me the trouble then.thanks!

    cheese, share the link.cant find
    Last edited by jeanie; 9th November 2006 at 10:14 AM.

  2. #42
    Member modenaslim's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Yishun Broadway KopiDiam
    Posts
    656

    Default Re: GFSP II can improve this problems?

    Quote Originally Posted by jeanie View Post


    no offense but to me this is not the 'correct' kind of lighting.
    look at their faces.very deep shadows.

    imo, shot too near with bounce?

    Shoot less than 1m away with no bounce card no LS nothing... in very dark condition..
    The shadow also something which i dun want..

    KH

  3. #43

    Default Re: GFSP II can improve this problems?

    Quote Originally Posted by modenaslim View Post
    Shoot less than 1m away with no bounce card no LS nothing... in very dark condition..
    The shadow also something which i dun want..

    KH
    LS is ONE of the ways to solve the prob for sure.if u have a LS pointed upwards, ur facial shadows definitely wont be like pandas.
    u have to sit down and consider though, the portability of these flash diffusers.LS is bulky and HARD to keep in a camera bag.a flash bounce card, no problems at all.

  4. #44
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Planet Earth
    Posts
    1,191

    Default Re: GFSP II can improve this problems?

    Quote Originally Posted by modenaslim View Post
    Shoot less than 1m away with no bounce card no LS nothing... in very dark condition..
    The shadow also something which i dun want..

    KH
    Excuse me, did u get our advice? Just in case u missed the advice given.

    Option 1 : Dun Need LS. Just create a bounce card. What size also can.

    Option 2 : If dun want to create, then buy the LS. But 430EX is weak in flash power and LS may absorb more light than usual making it even weaker.

    Option 3 : Buy 580 EX. Got bounce card

    Option 4 : Buy Mertz but Mertz also must create own bounce card for those that have no fill in flash type

  5. #45

    Default Re: GFSP II can improve this problems?

    for metz, my 45 cl(?)(cant rem exact model) has 2 flashes.

    one big hammerhead for you to point upwards for bounce, another small one for fill flash to cover shadows in pretty faces.

    i definitely believe my metz model has been discontinued and they def have better ones.

  6. #46
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Planet Earth
    Posts
    1,191

    Default Re: GFSP II can improve this problems?

    Quote Originally Posted by jeanie View Post
    for metz, my 45 cl(?)(cant rem exact model) has 2 flashes.

    one big hammerhead for you to point upwards for bounce, another small one for fill flash to cover shadows in pretty faces.

    i definitely believe my metz model has been discontinued and they def have better ones.
    60 ct(?) or 54MZ4i.

  7. #47

    Default Re: GFSP II can improve this problems?

    Hi TS,

    With rgds to your lighting problem, you have to understand
    how light works in different environs..

    So much has been said about all the diffusers available in the
    market, etc...

    Allow me to share a photo which was taken in a function room
    with a high ceiling n showing a few tables n stage with speaker.

    Shot with a 550ex with a bounce cardboard with rubberband on
    a 10D with a 20-35non-L lens.


  8. #48

    Default Re: GFSP II can improve this problems?

    I guessed you sacrificed the highlight details to get the backgorund properly exposed?
    Furry Photos - Photography for the Modern Pet

  9. #49

    Default Re: GFSP II can improve this problems?

    Quote Originally Posted by raptor84 View Post
    I guessed you sacrificed the highlight details to get the backgorund properly exposed?

    To me every shot has to count n not waste my time being there at all right?

    Been using the bounce card technique for about 2 decades now.
    High ceilings never detered me.

    Shot at 1st WTO meet in Singapore about a decade ago n got the shots
    I wanted while others were lamenting about how bouncing cannot work
    on high ceiling n such. The proof is in the pudding, its never about
    the equipment you have but how u use them to your advantage
    like everything else.

  10. #50
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Planet Earth
    Posts
    1,191

    Default Re: GFSP II can improve this problems?

    Quote Originally Posted by raptor84 View Post
    I guessed you sacrificed the highlight details to get the backgorund properly exposed?
    I would do the same thing as him. In event shots like this, background is impt. See more pp, the better it is. Organisers like it to show that they have done a gd job. But of course, details must still be retain as much as possible.

  11. #51
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Planet Earth
    Posts
    1,191

    Default Re: GFSP II can improve this problems?

    Quote Originally Posted by newtoforums View Post
    To me every shot has to count n not waste my time being there at all right?

    Been using the bounce card technique for about 2 decades now.
    High ceilings never detered me.

    Shot at 1st WTO meet in Singapore about a decade ago n got the shots
    I wanted while others were lamenting about how bouncing cannot work
    on high ceiling n such. The proof is in the pudding, its never about
    the equipment you have but how u use them to your advantage
    like everything else.
    If u are using Canon's system, it is not an issue as ISO can be adjusted very high. Wait until u use my D70s under high ceiling and yellow light conditions. Can cry. If u can put your hands on a Metz with a Canon , even better.

  12. #52

    Default Re: GFSP II can improve this problems?

    sacrificing foreground details for backround exposure.i notice most event pics are like that.
    anyway, to the organisers, they dont really see the pics from a photography viewpoint right?as long as agaragar correctly exposed, alot of heads in the shots, background brightness acceptable can liao rite?

  13. #53

    Default Re: GFSP II can improve this problems?

    Quote Originally Posted by CreaXion View Post
    If u are using Canon's system, it is not an issue as ISO can be adjusted very high. Wait until u use my D70s under high ceiling and yellow light conditions. Can cry. If u can put your hands on a Metz with a Canon , even better.
    I understand wat you mean, hahaha...
    Btw, which Metz Model were you refering to?? The 60CT series?
    I used to use them for all my shoots.. nowadays it has become
    too heavy for me, hehe.. I still have them..

  14. #54

    Default Re: GFSP II can improve this problems?

    Quote Originally Posted by CreaXion View Post
    60 ct(?) or 54MZ4i.
    mine is this one.


  15. #55

    Default Re: GFSP II can improve this problems?

    Quote Originally Posted by jeanie View Post
    sacrificing foreground details for backround exposure.i notice most event pics are like that.
    anyway, to the organisers, they dont really see the pics from a photography viewpoint right?as long as agaragar correctly exposed, alot of heads in the shots, background brightness acceptable can liao rite?
    Hi Jeanie,

    When someone pays you to shoot, most times they would expect you
    to produce results which they want to see n not the other way around..
    clients always appreciate ambience in the photos..
    correct flash exposures are also very important..

  16. #56

    Default Re: GFSP II can improve this problems?

    Quote Originally Posted by newtoforums View Post
    Hi Jeanie,

    When someone pays you to shoot, most times they would expect you
    to produce results which they want to see n not the other way around..
    clients always appreciate ambience in the photos..
    correct flash exposures are also very important..
    i fully agree.

  17. #57
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Planet Earth
    Posts
    1,191

    Default Re: GFSP II can improve this problems?

    Quote Originally Posted by newtoforums View Post
    I understand wat you mean, hahaha...
    Btw, which Metz Model were you refering to?? The 60CT series?
    I used to use them for all my shoots.. nowadays it has become
    too heavy for me, hehe.. I still have them..
    That is why for such scenarios as high ceilings, I will turn to my 30D.

    Your 60 CT sure solid.

  18. #58

    Default Re: GFSP II can improve this problems?

    Quote Originally Posted by CreaXion View Post
    That is why for such scenarios as high ceilings, I will turn to my 30D.

    Your 60 CT sure solid.
    Yup, had them like over 20 years n still in working condition..

  19. #59

    Default Re: GFSP II can improve this problems?

    Quote Originally Posted by jeanie View Post
    mine is this one.


    45 CL-4.

    the problem with the secondary fill reflector is that the output ratio between the main and the secondary is fixed. when used together with the main reflector pointed up at the ceiling, and if the distance-to-subject is much closer than the distance-to-ceiling, most of the subject's illumination comes from the secondary instead of the bounce - not very much different from straight-on flash.

    bounce card is still more effective in most circumstances compared to using the secondary. at least, that usually holds true for my 54-series.
    eyes | head | feet | flickr | APAD: straight from camera

  20. #60

    Default Re: GFSP II can improve this problems?

    Quote Originally Posted by varf View Post
    45 CL-4.

    the problem with the secondary fill reflector is that the output ratio between the main and the secondary is fixed. when used together with the main reflector pointed up at the ceiling, and if the distance-to-subject is much closer than the distance-to-ceiling, most of the subject's illumination comes from the secondary instead of the bounce - not very much different from straight-on flash.

    bounce card is still more effective in most circumstances compared to using the secondary. at least, that usually holds true for my 54-series.
    if my memory serves me right donkey years ago, i would point the hammerhead 45-60 degrees.of course if my distance to subject is near, that's a no no no.and it's very very seldom i point straight pointblank 90 degrees unless i'm using it to illuminate a very dark scene.
    anyway this flash of mine has been 'da ru leng gong'(gone into exile) as it's very bulky and heavy for a gal to use it.
    prefer my sb800 nowadays.

    sorry for offtopic TS.

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •