midgley

<p>Went for lunch on a steam train near Corfe Castle in Dorset. <br />Only recently got round to editing (very very minimally) and posting.</p> <p><img src="https://c1.staticflickr.com/1/736/32410162141_96ee1a931a_c.jpg" alt="" width="800" height="534" /></p>

<p><img src="http://photo.defoam.net/moulou/IMG_8729a-750-sig.JPG" alt="" width="750" height="969" /></p> <p>Couple of punk girls modelling.</p>

<p><img src="https://c2.staticflickr.com/8/7563/27614324462_00e5d3daaa_z.jpg" alt="" width="640" height="483" /></p> <p>Our garden pond. Reds, blues, and a green.</p>

<p>Asking them to play fair, and helping them to do so as above is sensible and proportionate, no?</p>

<p><img src="https://farm1.staticflickr.com/269/18112933093_575717153c_c_d.jpg" alt="" /></p> <p>In the garden.<br> There's a young woodpecker nearby but that's harder to catch.</p>

<p>EOS 7D mark 2 has exposure compensation with auto ISO. It is tucked away somewhere in the menus. I've not used it yet.</p>

<p>I've seen that. The current version of dcraw is reported to handle them. I can wait, as time has gone on I seem to need raw less often.</p>

<p>Nice enough website. Do change the page title prefix though - including your name would be better than just "photography", indeed Wedding Photography by ... and Portraits by .... is better. THe page title is used by search engines to match what you say you have put up to what people say they want, so give it as much help as you can.</p>

<p>I think it is Flash.<br> I do not run Flash on the computer I look at this with, so I got a plain white page with nothing else.<br> It is possible to provide a few lines of text if Flash is not running, and it is better to provide the website as HTML5, although people looking at it at work may not be able to use their corporate web browser, if that is MS IE. That may not be intirely bad.</p>

<p>I think this is very helpful, thanks.</p>

<p>Very tight. I suspect making one wall mirror, and then shooting entirely as reflection in that to get additional distance would not work all that well, but optically ...</p> <p> </p>

<p>I got some mud stuck in one of those buttons with somewhat similar results. <br> Some quick work with spit and a tissue resolved it, before the next people to photograph appeared.<br> It was an entertaining day, but muddy.</p>

<p><strong>"Either the flash stays on long enough for the shutter to transit the frame or it doesn't - no two ways about it.</strong> And if it does have a long enough duration,"</p> <p>I know nothing of the particular kit involved, but I'd expect it to be similar to Canon's approach to high speed sync. The problem is that the slit between the first curtain and the second curtain is narrow, and transits the sensor so that the usual flash would only illuminate a small stripe. Their solution is to make many, small, flashes, so as to illuminate each stripe as the slit in the shutter passes over it. This means that if, say, the number of slices was 4, the maximum power of each flash would be 1/4 of the full power of the flash-unit, the total power of the unit being available to share between as many as required. The duration of each flash will be less than the duration of a single full-power flash, because of physics.</p> <p>To have a single big flash that stayed on for the whole traversal of the sensor by the second curtain would require a flash with at least 4 times the power of the unit required otherwise, and probably many times the power. It seems unlikely and really is just continuous lighting switched on at the right moment.</p> <p>Since the task for the controller is to give out sub-maximal flashes, there seems no reason why it should not be able to do so at lower power than full/n where n is the number of flashes required to paint the sensor stripe by stripe. However it cannot provide a brighter effect (guide number?) than full/n <br> I don't have a monolight (yet) so I may be missing something - do say.</p>