garden rose Posted December 28, 2005 Share Posted December 28, 2005 I recently joined this forum and recently purchased a Lightsphere PJ with the inverted dome. I am looking at the family pictures I took this week and thinking about my next wedding I am shooting and wondering if I could use a lower ISO level on my Nikon D70 when I use my LPJ. Whatever Lightsphere you shoot with what do you find is the best ISO setting for you? Thanks,Candice Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jmichaelc Posted December 28, 2005 Share Posted December 28, 2005 I'm just curious as to why your concerned about the ISO in conjuction with the LS? The ISO sensitivity is in no way dependent on a light diffuser. The amount of available light v/s your need of shutter speed should be the determining factor of your ISO (Unless your shooting high ISO just for the "Look" of grain/noise). The LS's purpose is to diffuse what ever ISO fits your lighting needs. IMO, the question isn't "What is the best ISO to use with the LSPJ" it is "What is the best ISO to use for XXX lighting conditions". The answer would then be dependent on whether you are using a tri-pod or hand-holding. Then, you would need to meter the scene to evaluate your shutter speed. Then you would need to test your light for output and make proper compensation adjustments. Once you have a good understanding of your light reading, only then would one be able to decide what ISO would be sufficient to capture your subjects properly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kari douma Posted December 28, 2005 Share Posted December 28, 2005 I like my Lightsphere II with ISO 400 inside. I have never used it ouside. With decent cealings (not too high) my "majic" formula seems to be ISO 400, 1/60-1/90, F3.3-F4. I know Gary Fong says to use the highest ISO you can, and he says to use the largest aperture you can, and he says to use the slowest ss you can. I have experimented a lot, and the settings I mentioned seem to work the best for me. I use a Fuji S3.<div></div> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kari douma Posted December 28, 2005 Share Posted December 28, 2005 I agree with Jamie, soemwhat. If I take an avalable light reading inside a dark reception hall, there is not much light. My ISO would be very high, and my ss would be LOOOONG. I use my flash and my lightsphere to fill in the light. One thing that is nice about the lightsphere is that it seems to fill in the surrounding light too. Not just light up the subject. It is because it bounces light, instead of direct flash. So, yes, you need to learn your light, but you need to learn how your lightsphere will fill in the light also. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kari douma Posted December 28, 2005 Share Posted December 28, 2005 Sorry, the caption on my picture shoud read 1/90, not 1/190. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ben_rubinstein___mancheste Posted December 28, 2005 Share Posted December 28, 2005 Damn, but the colour of those Fuji's kicks *ss! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
picturesque Posted December 28, 2005 Share Posted December 28, 2005 ISO 400 or 800. Anything slower will not be enough to allow a decent f stop (for DOF) given the amount of flash power the LS soaks up, in most situations, although if you have a low white ceiling, you can use ISO 200 without much trouble, with maybe f5.6 or even f8. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kelvinphoto - arlington, t Posted December 29, 2005 Share Posted December 29, 2005 ISO, shutter, and aperture depend on how much ambient light you want to allow in. I always use 800+ iso for indoor. The darker the brackground, the higher iso going to be and alway use slow ss and open wide my Fstop. To me, the picture above is ugly becuase i can't tell if the B&G is dancing in the cave or dancing hall. I can't see the background, so I assume the B&G is dancing in the cave. That is ugly to me, but not to others. everyone have different taste. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
barry_davis___st._louis__m Posted December 29, 2005 Share Posted December 29, 2005 Kelvin, I think the picture displays her romance toward her groom and even if she was in a cave she'd have the same expression. It's about when she sees this picture does it convey emotions that only she will know or remember about that particular moment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kelvinphoto - arlington, t Posted December 29, 2005 Share Posted December 29, 2005 Barry, that y i said everyone have different taste. You look at emotional perspective and I am not. My taste is different from your. It's a great capture moment, but it is an ugly picture to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
photopaintball.com Posted December 29, 2005 Share Posted December 29, 2005 I agree with Barry, portraits dont need to have a background if they tell something about the person by the way they are acting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kelvinphoto - arlington, t Posted December 29, 2005 Share Posted December 29, 2005 corrected! Barry, the image above look great and the background is perfect. My monitor at work is stupid... the background was dark and the image was under-xpose. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garden rose Posted December 30, 2005 Author Share Posted December 30, 2005 The reason I asked it because I have noticed that (as with all flash photographer) the harshness of shadow is directly linked to the light sensivity. No matter what diffuser you use if you shoot at 200 iso in a dark room the shadows will be harsher. There is also the graniness issue. As well. If I go up to 400 ISO on my Nikon D70 then will my grain be fine enough if my client orders a 16x20? I am just trying to trouble shoot before there is a problem, to avoid them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kelvinphoto - arlington, t Posted December 31, 2005 Share Posted December 31, 2005 There is always a noise ninja or whatever software out there that clean up the noise for you, and this the reason why I switch over to Canon 1DmarkII because I can shoot at iso1600 and don't have to worry about noise problem Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fotografz Posted December 31, 2005 Share Posted December 31, 2005 Candice, I disagree. For many years I never exceeded ISO 400 and shot mostly @ 200 (Nikon D1X), Same with the Canon 1Ds first version which produced too much noise in the darks at higher ISOs. Only recently have used ISO 500+ for wedding work with the newer Canons, and never more than 400 with the new Leica DMR. Shadows aren't an issue if you use the right shutter/aperture combo and BALANCED diffused flash. In terms of noise control, more folks should shoot RAW and learn to alter contrast, curves, color balance, brightness, shadow ... and use the advanced features to reduce color noise in ARC. You rarely if ever need things like Noise Ninja if you learn to process RAW files properly. Sizing is also a function better handled at the RAW stage. ARC interpolation is superior to just about any "after the fact" sizing program out there unless you are making a 8' print (in which case Genuine Fractals is the way to go). Other than mural sizes, using the pure RAW data to enlarge is the way to go. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
khaisy Posted January 7, 2006 Share Posted January 7, 2006 Hi Kari, I am new to Digital I have not yet attempted to shoot a wedding but hopefully soon. My question to you about your photo above since i had the FUJi S2 which took a dive and went to the trash because the repair was more than a new body will cost. I have noticed that no matter what i have done the camera has a red cast to the photo. Was your photo processed an dthat the look you wanted or ist my monitor but it appears too red to me.Thanks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
khaisy Posted January 8, 2006 Share Posted January 8, 2006 I am Sorry Kari if I took the liberty to fidel with the image a little and I gree everyone has a different tase I happen to like it. It is about B&G. The background should enhance the photo, it should not be the main subject in the photo well i hope I made sone sense. I am not very good at explaining sometimes. My aplogy Kari if I stepped over my boundry. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
khaisy Posted January 8, 2006 Share Posted January 8, 2006 I am Sorry Kari if I took the liberty to fidel with the image a little and I gree everyone has a different tase I happen to like it. It is about B&G. The background should enhance the photo, it should not be the main subject in the photo well i hope I made sone sense. I am not very good at explaining sometimes. My aplogy Kari if I stepped over my boundry. opps too much blue Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now