Careful with that flash, Eugene!!


Status
Not open for further replies.

Goldwing

New Member
Mar 8, 2004
172
0
0
Singapore
(Title inspired by Pink Floyd song, "Careful with that axe, Eugene!!" ). But enough chit-chat, on to the business at hand.

The pictures below are just to illustrate the effect that a flash may have on a picture.
The first picture was taken with the flash bounced off the ceiling. The second one was using natural light.

You can obviously see the flat image in the first pic compared to the 3D effect in the second pic.

Both pictures were taken at about the same time (15 seconds apart) and the same equipment : Nikon D70S, 50mm 1.4 lens. SB600 flash was used for the flash picture.

Picture 1
DSC_1528-1.jpg


Picture 2
DSC_1530-1.jpg


Hope this little tip will help some of you out there.
 

Same pic but under different lighting can generate a different feel.
Really something to take note and learn. :bsmilie:
 

Flash essentially is used to fill in shadows in the case of mixed lighting. By adjusting FEC to between -2 to -4 stops, it seems to give "natural" looking results. I can't explain why, but based on the advice of fellow CSers, I tried this out and it seems to work rather well.
 

for pic like these, I will prefer to set on tripod and use M mode. I agree with doug3fflux, natural light is the best
 

The first pic looks like it's engraved on the wall.
I like the natural color of the first but it's dull (flat).
 

I don't think its a matter of flash or natural light, but where the light sources are. Your natural light is a directional source in this picture, and hence emphasizes the 3D effect that you're looking for. By contrast, your flash was set to bounce, giving a flat even lighting.

You can also achieve the effect in (2) by flash.
 

Generally, I would shoot with natural light source if possible.

With big F primes usually....

If to shoot such photos, I think vince 123123 is right..... you need to use more than one flash......back lighting will be required...... Side lighting with 1 flash source might work..... It would be good to have a flash transmitter.... really fun too!!!!

Flash photography is really a different ball game.... :sweat:
 

sometimes it's better to use ambient light...

but... what is this place.. u mention flash bounce from ceiling,.. pardon me, but wat ceiling, i dont think it's white, how high, etc.. cause differ ceiling does alot of differ for the light bounced...
 

appropriate placement of lighting would enhance the pic. bouncing off ceilings may not be the best all the time. using the flash as a fill-in could help provide more details for the first and second statues in the 2nd pic.
 

Wow. That's a drastic differnce in depth between the two photos. Thanks for posting.
 

DT_ said:
sometimes it's better to use ambient light...

but... what is this place.. u mention flash bounce from ceiling,.. pardon me, but wat ceiling, i dont think it's white, how high, etc.. cause differ ceiling does alot of differ for the light bounced...

The ceiling was quite low, probably about 2.5 metres at most. The colour of the ceiling is the same as the statues as the whole temple was carved out of one solid rock.

In retrospect, probably the low ceiling caused the bounced flash to overwhelm all the details, producing a flat image.
 

i'm not too sure what the comparison is about, i just think that the flashlight has not been properly utilised.
 

eikin said:
i'm not too sure what the comparison is about, i just think that the flashlight has not been properly utilised.

Basically trying point out that if flash is not used properly, you may not get the expected image.
 

Goldwing said:
Basically trying point out that if flash is not used properly, you may not get the expected image.

agree... manually set exposure on a tripod for background n use the flash to fill
 

hammer_400 said:
agree... manually set exposure on a tripod for background n use the flash to fill

:think: wouldn't parts of the subjects be overexposed if metering off the background?
 

Status
Not open for further replies.