Newbie Q re: Portable Soft Light for fill

Hi, I am a 35mm film shooter taking ad hoc portraits of local baristas. I'm having difficulty capturing the baristas in action, particularly at one shop where the window light doesn't quite reach far enough.

Flash is undesirable because it annoys the baristas and customers. Also, I'm shooting an Olympus OM1N and I'm not sure how to rig up off camera flash, anyway (open to learning, of course!).

 

I've been going up the film speed ladder with Portra 400 to Portra 800 and just tried 2 rolls of Fuji Natura 1600. Didn't really care for the Fuji, so far. Portra 800 turned out much too grainy. Best results have come from CineStill 800T but I think it would be so much better if I could just add another stop of soft light.

 

I've tried the LumeCube and a Manfrotto LumiMuse. Both seem to be almost bright enough (I'm looking for about 1 to 2 more stops) but I need to diffuse them. With an umbrella or collapsable diffuser these solutions are just too hard to setup on-the-fly and without getting in the way of the barista. I've seen some led lights that claim to be usable without additional modifiers and I'm skeptical but curious (read: ready to take the bait). Have any of you used the Fotodiox "FlapJack" edge lights?

No affordable LED panel is going to be powerful enough to be useful, or big enough to give soft light. Forget 'em. The technology needs about another decade before it gets anywhere near to replacing flash IMO.

 

Soft lighting depends on size. (Like bigger than a foot square.) No getting round it. If you want soft light, then you need a large source. This can be got from "bouncing" a flash off a light-coloured surface. Sorry, but you won't get it from silly little diffusers you stick on the front of a speedlight - despite what the makers of those overpriced plastic food-tubs tell you.

 

Read up on bounced flash. You need a good powerful flash with a tilt/swivel head to do it, and unfortunately most coffee shops seem to prefer a dark and dingy decoration style. However, the advantage is that in most cases the flash can stay fitted to the camera and faces away from the subject.

 

Or you could buy a decent digital camera that will give you almost noiseless 3200 ISO with no hassle.:)

Edited May 7, 2017 by rodeo_joe|1

Digital. sigh. Yep, it would definitely be easier!

 

thanks!

Edited May 7, 2017 by marcusk

Bounce flash works with film, but digital allows ttl, ie camera and flash communicate and get you in the ball park. Checking the lcd allows you to perfect that. What you are seeing is one of the reasons digital took off. Immediate feed back so you can adjust as you shoot. Oh, and it didn't cost you for film, processing and printing. But if you have a meter, take a reading of what your on camera bounce flash is doing sitting on your film camera. One thing you won't get feed back on is how the shadows are falling and have the ability to fine tune the flash head up/down, left/right. As for bothering customers, first wait for the slow part of the day when there are no customers around the barista. Then bouncing 45 degrees up, even the barista won't notice.

If you decide on the bounce flash route, you don't have to bounce off a ceiling. Reflecting the flash off a wall gives a look closer to window light. However the light will take on the tint of whatever colour the bounce surface is painted.

 

This opens another problem with film - colour casts. There's a myth that any colour cast can be corrected in printing when using colour negative film. This is totally untrue. A harsh lesson I learned early on when I was setting out as a professional. I shot some daylight-balanced colour neg under 3200K studio lights with no filter. Oooops! Big mistake that needed an expensive reshoot. You can't retrieve lack of blue exposure that just isn't there in the printing. Unlike digital, which is hugely forgiving of CT when shooting RAW.

 

With digital I've bounced flash off a bright yellow wall and still come away with perfectly acceptable colour after setting a custom WB.

 

As Bob said, digital has so many advantages over film you'd be crazy to ignore it. Not least that it's more ecologically responsible than film, which wastes silver and water and uses toxic chemicals that require disposal.

 

I can see the attraction of shooting B&W film, but not 35mm colour in this day and age.

Joe, Yes, I agree with you about digital versus film. I'm not one of those film lovers, I actually just really love my film cameras. I started out shooting digital (an Oly EP-3 mirrorless) and I liked it, but it was fiddly and I never felt like *I* was in control. The reason I entered the film realm was that the EP-3 first got damaged and then later stolen, so I just went out and bought a cheap film camera. Now, I've had that batch of cameras and lenses stolen as well, but it doesn't hurt as much when you can replace them for $50-100 for the body. (Lenses are still painful to replace).

 

I dug out a flash for my OM and found that it doesn't tilt or rotate so I'd have to upgrade that. Also, the other problem that you mentioned is the need to find something to bounce the flash off of would be an issue. The ceiling is quite high in this particular shop, probably 20 ft, and it's dark, rough textured wood. Also, the nearest wall is behind the barista and covered with shelves. Still, I think it's worth trying and it's another skill to add to the toolbox.

 

I'm not prepared to give up my OMs but I hadn't thought about the environmental impacts of film for a long time and that did give me pause. Lots of water used for sure and I've been doing my own C-41 recently, too, so more chemicals. I appreciate the reality check. Thanks, again.

Bob,

if I can find a flash for my OM, I'll give this a try. I hadn't really thought about using a handheld meter to test the effect of the flash when I bounced it but that makes total sense. Thanks for the info.

I understand your use of film. But in a place where lighting is tricky to setup, as Bob said, digital is wonderful. Digital give you what used to be done with a Polaroid. You can check the effect of your flash and lighting IMMEDIATELY, so that you can make adjustments/corrections.

 

Having said that, I spend MANY years shooting film + flash, and for the most part things worked.

You just have to work out the generalities of your flash. Example I used the calculator on the back of the flash, but when in open spaces I opened 1 stop.

Bounce flash with a manual flash and film was such a can of worms that I just did not bother. I waited for digital to do bounce, so that I could chimp and make adjustments for the 2nd shot.

Auto or TTL flash would help a lot for bounce. You just have to practice and see how it work out, because you WILL loose a lot of light when you bounce off the ceiling/wall. Auto/TTL technology was not available when I was doing a lot of flim+flash work, so I did not bounce.

Expect to spend $ (for film and processing) experimenting with the flash to learn how to bounce and learning how much light is lost in different situations. And write it all down, so you don't forget.

 

If you are shooting with the approval of the shop manager, bring a 2nd person to hold a 2ft x 3ft or 3ft x 4ft foam core reflector, or a similar size collapsable reflector. One side plain foam core, the other side crinkled aluminum foil. This would reflect window light or bounce your flash to fill. In a pinch, when no customers are in the shop, you might be able to get one of the workers to hold the reflector for you.

 

gud luk

Bob,

if I can find a flash for my OM, I'll give this a try. I hadn't really thought about using a handheld meter to test the effect of the flash when I bounced it but that makes total sense. Thanks for the info.

 

Just to be clear, you need a FLASH meter.

Agree with Gary on using a reflector. Arrange the subject in a such a way that the available light gives desirable modelling. Then bring the reflector in to soften and balance the lighting. A reflector can be a typical photography-based metallic fabric collapsible affair, or it can be a piece of 2' x 3" foam core from a craft store.

Using a reflector alone doesn't help with the underlying problem of not having enough light to begin with! It also won't soften a hard light.

 

Soft light is not the same as hard light with a low contrast ratio. Moving away from any source of light will harden it, and adding light into its hard-edged shadows doesn't soften them. The modelling and look of soft light is completely different from, say, a filled spotlight, which will still show specular skin refections and harsh nose shadows, etc.

 

What Gary was suggesting was using a bounce board with flash. Not a reflector alone.

Well I was also suggesting using a reflector to reflect some of the window light, to fill the shadows on the side away from the windows.

Using a reflector is easier than a flash for film, because you can see the effect of the reflector before you shoot, rather than wait for it to come back from the lab.

But this presumes that there is enough window (and other ambient) light to begin with. If not, you are forced into use a flash. And "where the window light doesn't quite reach far enough." means for that shop, you need to use a flash.

 

Or FAST flim and a FAST lens, and shoot wide open.

How about a video camera light?

They are pretty bright & don't have the "shock effect" of a strobe.

Some of the newer ones using the high intensity Cree bulbs are amazingly powerful for a compact, battery-powered unit.

Joe,

I get what you're saying about the reflector versus the bounce board. In order to soften the light from the flash, I'd need to bounce it off something that spreads the light out at as many random angles as possible. Also, I understand about the size, too, I think. Ideally, I'd put the foam core as close to the barista as possible and make it as big as practical (from your previous post, at least 12" in diameter). If I'm misinterpreting, let me know. Thanks

Chaz,

I tried this in concept, using a LumeCube and then a Manfrotto LumiMuse. They're bright, but the light is very hard. I tried to put a collapsible diffuser in front of it (30" round) but it was too cumbersome to use in the small confines of the shop and I lost about a stop of brightness. I got caught up in the sales pitch for the LED panels some of which are saying they're bright and soft enough to use without additional diffusion. I've had a look at one or two of them but I'm leery of buying gear to solve a problem which I know photographers have dealt with for many years.

Gary, you totally get my situation!

 

While I've been looking around for a suitable flash, I've kind of been forced into doing the thing that is probably the most fun for me--making completely different decisions about how to shoot the subjects. I've been pulling them out toward the window, "faking" a certain operation in better light, going so far as to drag one poor barista out into the street, but it has made for some interesting and different shots and looks!

Could you use a bounce card with the LED?

Just flinging out wild ideas!

In a deep location away from the windows, you might use a foam core with aluminum foil on it, or a commercial silver reflector, to get more light reflected than a white foam core board. In fact you may have to use 2 reflectors to reflect more light into the shadow side of the subject.

 

A suggestion. Get a relatively inexpensive DSLR, and use it to practice learning about how the reflector lighting works. All you are doing is using the LCD screen of the DSLR like a Polaroid camera.

With regard to any reflector, diffuser or LED panel. There's no getting away from the fact that soft light depends on size. The bigger and/or closer to the subject, the softer the light will be.

 

I suggested 1ft square as a very minimum that would have any visible effect on the quality of light over, say, a bare speedlight or single LED cube. Most video lights don't come close to that area.

 

To emulate window light you'd need something a lot bigger than 12"x12". 2ftx2ft might get you a reasonably soft effect if it was 3ft or less away from the subject.

 

The rule of thumb is that soft light "starts" when the source area diagonal is greater than its distance from the subject. So you can see that portability and soft light are slightly exclusive of each other. Hence the suggestion to use bounce flash or foldable/lightweight reflectors.

 

LED panels of sufficient size to give soft light, and enough of it, are still very overpriced. That's compared to a cheap flash that could be picked up from a junk store for peanuts, and will put out 10 times as much light.

 

An average power speedlight bounced off a white ceiling will easily fill a 20ft square room with enough light for an exposure of f/4 to f/5.6 at 400 ISO.

 

FWIW. I've used bounce flash to good effect in barn-sized function rooms where the ceiling height has been 20ft or more, and the walls have been painted rose pink or some other hideous colour.

Just a quick update. I located the gear I need to add off-camera flash to my OM1n and OM2n so once I receive it I'll try some of this out and report back. Thanks for the advice and problem solving help.