Assignment 2 (Version 2)--Basic Outdoor Fill Flash

I apologize to everyone expecting this re-worked assignment last

Friday. I just got back from out of town and was pretty tired in

addition to having a monster day on Saturday. I hope this

assignment is helpful to people trying to figure out fill flash.

 

As you know, several photo.net members have started a series of

assignments geared to help newcomers to wedding photography learn

about various aspects of photographing a wedding. This is

assignment 2.

 

In this assignment we are going to learn how to manually calculate

fill flash outdoors in bright sunlight and even shade situations.

Then we are going to learn how to use automated flash modes to

accomplish fill flash for these two situations.

 

The first thing to understand is why we need fill flash. Below is

an excerpt from a previous post about fill flash with digital

cameras posted by Marc Williams, who explains the reason elegantly.

I have made bold the pertinent statements.

 

�{...but this digital fill flash has me totally stumped }

It's not specifically digital Todd. It's the newer TTL flash systems

and the missing latitude we enjoyed with film that has you stumped.

It would be the same if you were shooting the same camera/flash and

it was a frame of film rather than a sensor. Only with film, the lab

would automatically adjust the print using the wider latitude of

film to it's best advantage. All that digital is doing is revealing

errors in flash work that some of us have been unaware of for

decades.

 

For that reason ((narrower latitude of digital), proper use of flash

has become more critical. That's because in far too many instances

at weddings the EV range borders on, or actually exceeds, the

dynamic range that digital capture is capable of .

While it is nice to pontificate on natural light while showing

portraits taken in natural settings, these are highly controlled

situations with only a glancing relationship to shooting a wedding

where the time of day, position of the sun, and the location are not

always in our control.

 

The real objective of fill flash SHOULDN'T be to light the subject.

It's real purpose is to narrow the EV range enough to bring it with-

in the dynamic range of digital capture. If you accomplish this, the

image will look natural with all the natural looking directional

light of a non flash shot, but be printable without blocked shadows

or blown highlights.

 

BTW, 95% of my digital images are taken with fill flash ... and

there are circumstances where even the dynamic range of film won't

save you ... so flash is necessary.�

 

Manually Calculating Fill Flash

 

The reason it is important to go through this exercise at least a

few times before using automated flash is so that you know what the

camera/flash should be doing. I am going to assume the use of a

580EX on a Canon digital and a Nikon SB-800 on a Nikon type

digital. If you are using a film camera and negative film, please

say so.

 

Some things to review before proceeding.

 

A. Flash exposure is controlled by aperture only. Shutter speed

does not affect flash exposure, and is used to control ambient

exposure when using flash balanced with ambient.

 

B. Flash exposure is calculated using a number that represents the

power of the flash and the flash to subject distance.

 

C. When using flash to fill outdoors, you do not want to overpower

the ambient light (not usually, anyway) so you use the flash at a

strength that is less than the �correct� flash exposure for the

flash to subject distance. That is why fill flash is used at �one

stop less� or �two stops less�, etc.

 

1. Have your camera ready with the flash on it. Turn on the

camera, set it to manual mode and set up a person in bright sunlight�

either backlit or frontally lit. You will be photographing this

person in a half length image with a normal lens (around 50mm

uncropped). Set your ISO to 100 and your shutter speed to the

fastest sync speed your camera is capable of without using high

speed sync, and use a gray card to determine the sunlight exposure,

or use your spot or partial meter on a conveniently medium toned

subject to determine the ambient exposure. In my example below, the

exposure was f9 at 1/250th. The house is conveniently painted a

medium gray and I used my partial meter to meter the gray wall

only. If you don�t know how to determine a manual ambient exposure,

please ask.

 

2. Take a picture of the person without any flash fill. Then turn

on your flash and use the mode button to set the flash to manual

mode. Make sure your flash is in full power mode�most flashes will

say 1/1 to indicate full power. Note the distance you are from your

subject. Say it is about seven feet. Now start decreasing the

power on the flash (read your manual to find out how, but it usually

involves a dial or button which decreases the power in 1/3 stop

increments). Stop decreasing when your display shows seven feet (or

closest to seven feet). Then, �click downward� 3 more times, which

will mean, if the increments are 1/3 stop, that you have now set

your flash to give one stop less light than the �correct� flash

exposure for your subject at the distance you are from your

subject. Take the picture. For Canon users, the distance scale is

on the bottom of the screen. For both Canon and Nikon flashes, the

power settings�1/1, �, 1/4, 1/8, etc. are shown toward the left

upper screen, and the 1/3 stop increments are shown on the right

side of the screen, with a - if decreasing and a + if increasing.

For Canon, you push the button in the center of the dial, which

causes the display to blink, then you use the dial to decrease. For

Nikon, I believe you just use the top and bottom points of the dial

to decrease or increase. You should now have two images similar to

pictures 1 and 2 below.

 

3. Now set the flash to it�s automated mode. For Canon, that would

be ETTL, for Nikon, use TTL-BL. With Canon, if you are using

evaluative flash exposure, the camera and flash will automatically

do some flash reduction for you if the ambient light levels are

about equivalent to about f5.6, 1/30th, ISO 400 (or f5.6, 1/8th at

ISO 100) and above. If the ambient light level is below (darker)

than the stated levels, there is no automatic fill flash reduction

performed. The range of reduction extends to -1.5 stops, depending

on the ambient level. With Nikon, TTL-BL also reduces the flash

automatically. I don�t know the range, but if you don�t want the

automatic reduction, you should switch to another mode. Don�t set

any compensation on the flash, and take another picture*. You

should end up with a photo similar to picture 3 below.

 

4. Now minus compensate the flash an additional stop by using your

compensation dial. Take the picture, similar to picture 4.

 

5. Now set up your subject in even shade�no bright background, no

sun spots, not backlit�just very even, low contrast lighting.

Repeat steps 1 and 2, using manual mode on the camera and flash but

with any f stop and shutter combination that works�I�d use a wider

aperture--but this time fire the flash at 2 stops below �correct�

exposure�that would be �6 clicks� downward. Then repeat steps 3 and

4, using 2 stops, then 3 stops minus compensation.

 

I haven�t provided examples for even shade because they shouldn�t be

necessary. By now, hopefully, you understand what fill flash should

do, and how your camera/flash handles fill flash in it�s automated

mode. It would be good to do even further testing in the different

lighting situations you typically encounter, and in combination with

your chosen method of automated ambient exposure metering.

 

I want to add some other points about using flash for fill,

especially outdoors, but want to start gathering responses before

making them. If anything is unclear, plus ask. If any other

experienced people want to add any insights, feel free to do so,

especially Nikon/SB-800 users, since I don't use that combo.

 

*For me, +2/3 flash compensation is considered �normal�, so 0 comp

for me means +2/3. So minus one stop in automated flash mode is

for me, -1/3 comp.<div></div>

Two things--above, where you see ? and strange characters, those should be quote marks. Sorry. Does anyone know of a way to fix those? I didn't realize how they would come out on-line. And I should have specified in the example labels for automated flash, that image 4 is with -1 stop flash compensation. Instead, I listed what is actually shown on my flash's LCD, which would only confuse people (see my * note above).

Nadine it is nice that you to take the time and teach a complex subject. Since you wanted to collect responses before you continue I think you may want some constructive critics.

 

Your article seems a bit confusing to me and I think the reason is that you try to explain too many things at the same time to too many different people of various technical knowledge.

 

If you could separate manual flash systems or manual approach from highly sophisticated systems like an SB800 combined with an iTTL body you could be so much clearer. The fill flash concept is the same - just the way to do it with different levels of automation is different.

 

Also if you would explain the flash units from Canon and Nikon separate from the actual topic it would also simplify the actual topic - fill flash.

 

If I may suggest you could explain fill flash on its own. You could then have all the other topics as separate topics perhaps even in different threads explaining e.g. how to switch on a flash and determine if it is a manual or semi-automatic flash. May be it is just that I am easily confused but it might be worth a consideration.

 

Cheers

 

Walter

Just a note Nadine, I've finally made my peace with ETTL II fill flash. Using CF14-1, i.e. not letting the flash dial down automatically for fill, in diffused light I've found that dialing in a -3 or -2 for a bride in white gives me a result that I like. For strong contrastly light '0' compensation does help, + compensation is dangerous for regular photos, especially as in my experience with light that bright the screen flares out so badly it is almost unreadable (5D). On the other hand backlighting often will need more compensation to the + side).

 

Digital is not film and the differences between photos with even 1/2 a stop difference in fill are pretty noticeable side by side. However much you think you know how to shoot, get out there, practise on friends and family until they are sick of you, look at the photos and work out what is happening, use Canon Zoombrowser to look at each image with the full EXIF data next to it so you can see the photo and the 'Flash Compensation 1 2/3' next to it. I have not had a good experience with CF14-0 (evaluative), I need to know what the camera is doing, dialing down FEC after the camera has already done so to an unspecified amount scares me, the wedding where I did use it involved some rather heavy post processing to fix, it had dialed down too far. I don't know whether this is an issue connected to the fact that I meter the ambient light by hand with an incident meter for speed during shooting (otherwise you are adjusting both the ambient for whites/blacks, and the flash, for me even adjusting the flash can sometimes lose the moment). Although my readings often clash with what the camera thinks (and the cameras flash, and especially fill flash is based on what it thinks the exposure should be, not what you have dialed in, another reason to be wary of evaluative flash - be warned all those who shoot in manual mode and dial in fill) with CF-1 the results seem fine.

 

As my mentor keeps telling me, 'you have to control the situation' if the light is bad try not to be bullied into shooting there anyway, find shade and shoot there, if shooting a bride in strong light then turn her face away from the direction of the sun, if it is high above then get her to look down and do some 'demure' shots.

 

As Marc has said, the trick with digital is compressing the dynamic range in the compostion through factors other than the camera body (i.e. shutter/aperture), by using flash, reflectors and best of all, choice of location.<div></div>

I think this was a wonderful assingment. It is a bit confusing if you try reading and grasping everything at once, but I think it can be understood if you sit down and take it step by step. It was intense. But I sat sat down and read it very carefully step by step, and followed the directions.

 

I admit, I did this assignment early. Nadine emailed me for my opinion on it a while back, so I cheeted and did the assingment already.

 

So, here are my findings... I did this assingment with my son, and he wasn't too hip on sitting for me when there was a playground in sight, so they aren't the prettiest images. I shot it JPEG, and these images are right out of the camera, only resized with my Photo.net gallery action and the info on the image. When it says "Manual fill flash" it is using the method that Nadine mentions above.

 

I did the assingment in front lit sun, back lit sun, and full shade. That was the light that was available to me at the time. I found that I NEVER liked the TTL flash as well. I ALWAYS liked the manual fill flash, and I SOMETIMES liked the TTL with -2 comp.

 

The problem I had was this: I am not a good judge at distance. I use a SB800, and the distance scale is metric. (Maybe I can change this and I just don't know it?) So, when I was doing the manual fill, I had to not only guess how far I was away from the subject, but then try and convert it to metric in my mind. That is fine for a test with my son at the park, but not under pressure in a wedding situation. Any thoughts on this?

 

Also I was surprised at the backlit results. MY TTL severely overexposed the image. Is this because the flash was trying to even out the dynamic range by lighting everything up so much to match the backlight?

 

I am missing the non flash image in front lit sun, because I messed up the exposure on that image and didn't realize it until I got home. The rest of the images are in this folder:

 

http://www.photo.net/photodb/folder?folder_id=597440<div></div>

I would be incurring Mary's wrath, but here is another, this time in full shade, again manually metered. The flash exposure in dialed down to -1 2/3 to compensate for the white of the prayer shawl (tallit), on reflection it could have been a 1/3 stop brighter (these two pics are unmanipulated straight from the camera) but....

 

That's the point really, you notice even a 1/3 stop difference in fill flash when shooting digitally though it's possible to compensate with a RAW file using curves to tame the background highlights, with film, especially a pro low contrast film such as NPS or NPH, you just wouldn't notice. Now with digital we really have to be very anal about our accuracy to get the desired effect, not the easiest thing to do at weddings/events, especially for so called PJ photoraphy with those who are IMO unwise enough to shoot such pictures outdoors with jpg claiming that they always get such levels of fill accuracy perfect in camera.<div></div>

Is there such a thing as a small (pocket or smaller)rangefinder that you match the squares or whatever and it gives you a distance readout? Aren't there accessory hotshoe devices similar to this made for the earlier rangefinders? I know there is a digital one though I forget its name, it's not cheap though. I was considering that approach for using manual fill flash back with my 1Ds when I was not getting the fill I liked through auto flash. Again this kind of thing is more time consuming than PJ style snapping away and that has to be taken under consideration.

Beautiful examples of fill flash Ben.

Ok, after seeing Ben's beautiful Samples, Maybe I need to find a better subject and a better location and see if I can produce something that looks a little better! LOL!

There used to be lots of accessory rangefinders on the market. For fill flash calculations you don't need that level of extreme accuracy. Heck, back in the days of Rollieflex twin lens reflexes (and other brands) we used to mostly shoot using the sportsfinder in the hood, and even focus by setting the distance on the focus knob, not by checking the sharpness on the groundglass. You get pretty good at judging distance with a bit of practice!

Nadine, do you have a link to the original thread that had Marc's fill flash dissertation. I have searched for over an hour and still havent found it - maybe Im just dense! Thanks!

Michael--here it is. I notice my bold text didn't come through either--sorry.

 

http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00CheH&tag=

 

Walter--thanks for the suggestions. I had the same feeling about this as you--it is a very confusing topic to begin with, and trying to state it simply is difficult when you are talking to people with varying levels of experience. I made certain assumptions in the interest of trying to keep things simple. I also think that if the whole assignment is overwhelming, one could do just the first two steps and stop to ask for comment. I still strongly feel that doing fill flash manually a few times will help one understand the concept. The reason I bring automated flash into the picture is because eventually, a wedding photographer is going to need to know how to use automated flash at a wedding, and I wanted to bring it's use into the picture quickly so as not to scare people off. Even now, I am sure there are some photographers who will read the assignment and opt not to do it because they are scared off by the manual flash calculation. They want to know how to do fill flash using automated modes but don't want to take the time to learn the concept and manual procedure. Thing is, with this method, sometimes the camera will get it right and sometimes it won't. I'd be interested in other opinions too, so if you experienced photographers have some, please post.

 

Ben--great examples. I would point out to Walter that Ben's methods are exactly why I brought automated flash into the picture so soon. The sooner you start playing with your flash in varying situations and understanding what the camera/flash is doing, the sooner you know what will work for you. To beginners hoping to do the assignment--I ask you to temporarily disregard Ben's excellent technical notes (sorry Ben!)--time for you to digest it later when you have more understanding.

 

Kari--couple of things. First, did you use TTL-BL? Second, your backlit shots are overexposed as far as the ambient exposure is concerned--everything that happened after does not tell you much because of this. What did you use to arrive at your manual ambient exposure? Your front lit shots are in line with the assignment. And based on whether you used TTL-BL, you now are beginning to know what it does in different situations. Your even shade is not quite what I had in mind--Ben's images are exactly what I had in mind. No dappled sunshine, lighter background, etc.

Two other things--this assignment, I believe, runs for a month. So if you want to participate, you can do the assignment and post for comment within this time.

 

Kari--forgot to address your distance estimation problems. There are several things you can do. When I was tyring to get good at distance estimation (for zone focus purposes), I used a tape measure to measure out likely distances. Or, there are electronic gizmos that will give you the distance--I think they use sound waves or something (?). Or--best of all--focus on your subject and consult the lens distance scale, although some lenses are completely unhelpful with this because their distance scales are so compressed.

Hi Nadine,

I used TTL, not TTLBL. I can't get the TTLBL on my camera. Perhaps the fuji is not compatable with the BL? I tried to look in the manual, and all I could find was compatability with Nikon cameras. It seams I remember using the TTLBL before, but maybe that was on a D100 that I borrowed. Any ideas?

 

All the images I metered with my camera meter off a grey card to get my exposure reading. I understand the background is overexposed, but I thought his face was exposed well, you don't think so? I know Bens example is perfect, but I feel he had perfect lighting conditions too. The shade looks perfect. I know the lighting situations I used weren't perfect. Who wants to shoot in Full sun, either backlit or front lit? Even my shade wasn't great. It was a little spotty, but that was the shade I could get where I was. I think I should do this over on a cloudy day, or in a nicely shaded park, but we don't always get those nice conditions. What should I have done differently?

Using a Nikon Flash with my Canon EOS >>> for fill.( Like to set the Auto f~stop on the Nikons ) Just can't get the Eos 580 to re-act >> to my shooting a manual camera setting , from a hand meter...then minusing the 580 > for the correct fill.. AND connecting a Quantum t5 for a Key light situation.

I just did some searching. It looks like my Fuji does not support the TTL BL. It uses D-TTL instead of I-TTL. It is still compatable with the SB800.

Kari--OK, I see the problem. Perhaps I should have explained more clearly. When in a backlit situation (sunlight outdoors), you want to meter the light that is backlighting your subject, so when you hold the gray card, you hold it so that the light that is backlighting your subject is hitting the card. If you held the card so that it was on the same plane as your baby's face, which was shaded, you would be overexposed on the backlight. You want to do this so that the parts lit by the backlight, such as blond hair, don't blow out in your image. You then allow the flash to pick up the exposure on the shaded parts of your subject, and, since there is some light already on the shaded parts, you use flash that is less than the "correct" distance so as not to overexpose those parts, like what happened on your shot with uncompensated flash.

 

Later, when you get into balancing fill flash with bright backgrounds, you can opt to let the hair go slightly "hot" by overexposing it, although with blonds, you can't take this too far. Makes a nice halo effect, especially with brides in veils.

 

Now regarding lack of TTL-BL. That just means you cannot rely on the flash to automatically minus compensate your flash for you. You must do it yourself, like Ben does, although he uses Canons.

 

C Jo--thanks for the input. If anyone is using auto thyristor flash, the concept is the same if manually calculated. There are a few quirks when compensating. If anyone is using an auto thyristor flash, please speak up.

I've put a folder of some images from the wedding I shot Thursday that I feel are good examples of fill flash. Each one has a blurb about the settings.

 

All photos are straight out of ACR at the default settings I've set for my 5D, I've not tweaked anything so you get a better idea.

 

The Chupa (canopy) was a nightmare. The light was coming in from one side and was so strong my screen was unuseable. Shooting under the canopy is a classic backlighting situation, you have to fill the people under the shade to match those in the background. There is a lot of black and the white dress as well!

 

I pursuaded the couple to wait an hour before going to the park for photos, the light was nice and diffused by then as can be seen, the shadows under her eyes is her wacky eyeshadow though it freaked me out when seeing it emphasised in small on the LCD! I'm very happy with the 'look' of the fill flash though.

 

The bride looking out of the window is also classic fill flash, her face and front of dress is lit by window light, the flash is filling in the rest of her which is a good 3-4 stops darker. The trick is to keep the shadows there for the 3D look otherwise it gets awfully flat.

 

The father of the groom clapping his hands is weird, I shot it originally at '0' compensation (for the harsh shadow) which blew out due to the blacks, I tried again at -1 and it again blew the highlighted chin, I wound down to -1 2/3 and the exposure was spot on! I didn't change the shutter or aperture once! Nadine, you once advanced a theory that I've had for a while that the fill adds to the ambient, just as when you add fill in the studio, it effects the overall exposure. With film it would never have been noticed but it could have been what happened here. We love you histograms!

 

Kari, as I said you have to direct, shooting digital in high contrast light is difficult, very difficult, Marc uses film for those situations and each time I've had to such as the ceremony above I've sworn that I'll shoot film for the high contrast bits next time (then I remember how much film and processing costs!). Trying to work with often unuseable light is not good for the blood pressure, far far better to try and get them to go into the shade, or at least to somewhere where the lighting is fairly even, where if you are shooting with sidelighting or backlighting it's because you chose it for effect, not because it's dictated by circumstance. That just leads to headaches with post processing and long times tweaking curves with multiple layers in PS, and you know what? even with the best technique, the photos suck anyway with the couple squinting or staring. I was shooting recently when I discovered the trick of getting them to look down, or away from the light in high sun contrasty light, use the flash to fill in the face, but at least the lighting on it is even, not with huge shadows or flattened perespective from huge amounts of fill. The photographer for our wedding let my parents in law dictate the places in the garden to shoot the 2 bridal portraits he bothered with (long before I got into photography). My wife is squinting directly into the sun and although the nikon fill flash has done a remarkeable job with the shadows, it's as flat as a pancake!

I used auto flash, a metz 54, with my 10D and 1Ds. Close up it was OK-ish, auto flash doesn't work that well close up at the best of times, not being able to shut down fast enough at wider apertures. That said having flicked back over a couple of weddings shot with the 1Ds and auto flash, it did the job, not as subtely as the canon, the photos don't look like there ever was any lower than a -1 though I know I dialed in a -2 but it worked. At a distance it was pretty useless especially for backlighting.

 

I've added a photo to my fill flash examples on the portfolio thingy here, it's auto flash at -2 using the Metz with a 10D @ f3.5, you can see what I mean about it not closing down enough for subtle fill flash outdoors. No doubt many others have different experiences.

Thanks Nadine for clarifing the metering the sun. I did misunderstand you. I thought I was following the assignment the way you thought it should be done. I thought I was supposed to meter for the face which was not in the light. I'll try and redo it this weekend.

 

Thanks Ben. I do everything in my power to shoot in better light than this. I try to find full shade at all times. I thought I was challenging myself! That is what I want to do. I want to learn how to make the best out of not so perfect lighting, so I can apply it in a situation when I HAVE to.

Ben, your examples are wonderful. I only hope I can be as acomplished at flash as you are some day. I have a question on the canopy image. Did you meter for the light outside the canopy? Are you using a hand held meter? When you say you needed to - comp on the flash for the black suits, is it because the ttl wants to lighten them up more? On the bride under the canopy you said you wanted to do +comp if you had more time, is that because the ttl wants to darken the dress? Is it like a camera meter where it wants to make everything 18% grey?

 

By the way... I think your images "pop" if you remember that post! Nice work!

I'm sure Ben won't mind if I answer your question since he is probaly in bed now (in the UK)--at least the part about how the meter works. Just like with ambient metering, flash metering wants to make everything middle gray, so yes, that is why you use plus flash compensation for white and minus for black. Ben has reported that with the Canon flash metering, black doesn't take an equal amount of minus compensation as plus for white. I agree with him. Canon flash metering is very sensitive to any white in the frame. Another reason to understand what is happening with your gear and what it does in specific situations, which is partly what this exercise is about.

Nadine, thanks for the link.

 

Ben, great examples! Thanks! I had the perfect opportunity last weekend to work with the metz 54mz3 in outside fill, but I could not find the flash compensation when in auto mode. Of course I just sat down with the flash again, a spin of the wheel, and up comes the EV setting. Why I missed that last week I dont know. The auto mode on the metz definitely over exposes with no compensation. I will be doing my assignment using the metz 54 in auto thyristor mode and manual mode. We will see how it goes.

 

Not to get to far off topic, but Nadine/Ben how do you get good up close detail shots using the metz? It definitely puts out too much flash power close up. Are you just minus compensating the flash?

Michael, you can use a diffuser on the flash head to cut the power of the flash--like an LS, an Omni, or Pocket Bouncer. Basically you are using it to waste some of the light, cutting the power. Sometimes even that is not enough to cut the flash if you are doing extreme close-ups. You can also take the flash off the camera and hold it back or up with your arm or have an assistant hold it. Or, you can use ND filters over the flash head, but then you'd have to put the flash in manual at it's lowest setting.

 

I would test your Metz auto thyristor. I have found with Metz auto thyristor, that outside, it tends to overexpose, even at medium distances. First, auto thyristor tends to overexpose closer than about 5-6 feet, is fine between 5 to 6 and 10 to 12 feet, and unerexposes after 12 feet. Then, outside, it tends to overexpose generally, maybe because it has a hard time discerning subject reflectance from the bright ambient light. I have found that to get a true 2 stops under for fill, I sometimes have to dial the flash down 3-4 stops...and then you run out of minus power, as you found out. At that point, I would maybe switch over to ETTL II on your 54.

Kari--I meant to say earlier that your even shade shots, though not quite what I had in mind, still give you useful information as to how different compensations affect your subject, so that wasn't a loss. As for wanting to shoot with backlit sun--actually that is a very nice lighting setup, as evidenced by Elaine Vang's photos in her above thread. Backlighting can give that halo effect on blond hair and veils, and nice highlights on dark hair and tux edges. Nobody really likes frontal direct sunlight due to the eye socket shadows and squinting. But sometimes, you have to shoot that way. Either the client asks you to or it is unavoidable, like a ceremony set up so that the couple is facing directly into the sun. You should know how to at least lightening (fill) the eye socket shadows so it doesn't look so bad.