A Discussion About Fill Flash for Weddings--2011

picturesque · February 26, 2011

Since there has been a recent thread in which a member asked for fill flash tips, I decided to start a thread about fill flash for weddings. While the basic technique does not change, how it is used for weddings has changed (IMHO), particularly since one can manipulate images so much with digital capture. And of course, there are trends.

But I need your help–all of you. I will start off with the basics and add a bit about my philosophy, but I invite anyone who has good information about fill flash and how it can be used at weddings to post that good information. In anticipation of receiving a lot of good teaching and thought provoking material, I will be ‘stickying’ this thread for a few weeks. I only ask that you limit your image examples to a maximum of 3 illustrations. This means that if you combine images, that composite is counted as 1 illustration. If you prefer to post whole images only (no composites) you may do so, but I would like it if you don’t hot link, because I want the images to remain in the archives, so you may need to post multiple times for each image to be uploaded using photo.net’s utility. I understand if you do not want images to be archived, however.

Remember that now, uploaded images are restricted to a 700 x 700 pixel area. An uploaded image, to show in the thread, must be up to 700 pixels wide, but not more than 700 pixels long.

I am hoping that wedding photographers of all levels, from beginning through advanced, will find something new to think about re fill flash. I am anticipating that I will.

I also ask that if you despise fill flash, save your input for the follow-on thread which I will be stickying immediately after this one, rather than post in this thread with arguments against flash. It will be about using ‘found’ light to the fullest, hopefully including post processing techniques to help equalize the dynamic range in cases of extreme contrast. This is not to say you can’t question a technique or post an opposing view–as long as you give reasons for your opinion in a calm manner and don’t attempt to derail this thread.

Finally, since a member’s question was the reason for this thread, I want everyone who posts to keep in mind this particular member’s situation, which involves a rooftop wedding ceremony, couple’s photos and family groups, meaning there will be a mix of uncontrollable and controllable wedding specific situations to photograph. The link to the thread is below.

<a href="../wedding-photography-forum/00YHTX">http://www.photo.net/wedding-photography-forum/00YHTX</a>

Why Fill Flash?

Before getting into the fine points of using fill flash, let’s define it for our purposes here and ask ourselves why we would use fill flash.

The term ‘fill flash’ is a little confusing, IMHO. The word ‘fill’ has been used to mean weak light, not the main source of illumination, used to mitigate deep shadows on a subject in contrasty light. It has also been used (mostly in studio lighting set ups) to mean a source of frontal illumination (on or near the lens axis), usually weaker than a main source of illumination, but not always so.

Both kinds of definitions are used when we talk about fill flash at weddings. Here are some reasons to use fill flash.

1. To mitigate deep shadows on a subject.

2. To illuminate the shadow side of a subject, in particular, so that the highlight side of the subject can be exposed with detail (not overexposed). This differs from item 1 because this assumes there is a lot of shadow to illuminate, for instance, the subject has their back to the sun.

3. To illuminate the subject so that the subject exposure is balanced with the background exposure, which can then be shown with detail (not very dark or underexposed and not blown out or overexposed).

4. As in studio lighting, to illuminate the front part of a subject in relationship to the main source of illumination. I do not touch on this here.

In addition, there is another reason, which is not often discussed. That is–to provide catchlights in the eyes of a subject, and to help keep colors saturated and uncontaminated in mixed lighting or with color casts on subjects.

In keeping with the situation for which fill flash tips were requested, most of my information will pertain to outdoor situations, particularly where there is sun in the picture, although fill flash can be beneficial in overcast and shaded situations as well.

To Mitigate Deep Shadows on a Subject

This is best illustrated with a subject lit by direct sun, which generally means shadows on the subject will be deep, dark and harsh. Basically, one gets the exposure for the main illumination right and then uses the flash to ‘open up’ the shadows. Technically, one would use flash at a power that is about 1 stop less than it would be if one were to illuminate the subject by flash alone. See example A and B. In example A, the shadow from the arch falls upon the father's face and chest, and half of the groom's face is in shadow. Without fill flash, the shadows would be deep. In example B, shadows on onlookers' faces were mitigated by fill flash.

While a burst of flash affects both the bright parts of a subject as well as the shadow or dark parts of a subject alike, the degree to which it affects the two areas differs. It affects the bright parts only a little, while it affects the dark parts a lot. But this is why you will see the bright parts get very slightly brighter, and why backgrounds can go darker than they would if you didn’t use flash.

For sunlight, the calculation is very simple. Sunlight is pretty consistent all over the world. Normally, the exposure will be f11, 1/250th, ISO 100. I use 1/250th because that is the fastest sync speed one can normally use on most DSLRs, without using high speed sync, which cuts your flash reach quite a bit.

Since most of us use TTL flashes, one would set a lower or minus compensation amount on our flash and take the picture. Just how much compensation is something that has to be experimented with.

In post processing, one can often use digital fill and adjust contrast, but taken too far, it is hard to control the color and to me, the file begins to look a bit 'off'.

?

To Illuminate the Shadow Side of a Subject

This is best illustrated by a subject who has his or her back to the bright sun. And since we are wedding photographers, by a subject wearing white.

Technically, figuring exposure would be very similar to the above, but now we add a wrinkle. Since most of the subject is in shade, can we hedge a little on the sunlit parts so that the resulting image isn’t so ‘flashy’ looking? We all know that direct, frontal flash is not the most flattering light for human beings.

So instead of f11, we use f8, overexposing the sunlit parts of the subject by a stop, for the sake of using (even) less flash to help avoid the flashy look. We may lose some highlight details, but if those details are not the important details, the resulting photo can look quite good–more natural looking, and not overcome with flash. Now, with digital capture and post processing, highlights can often be recovered.

The above look is a more trendy look, I’ve noticed, with some dress/veil blow out ‘allowed’. Whether it is a look you like, is up to you.

To Illuminate a Subject to Balance with the Background

This is best illustrated by a subject standing in shade or is only partly lit by sunlight, but standing against a bright background.

The technical part is still pretty simple. One first determines the background exposure–set it to taste. If you like a fully rounded, detailed background, expose it that way. If you like a light, more blown out background, expose it that way. Same for a dark, underexposed background. For example, you determine that your background is exposed correctly (say it is a sunlit field and grove of trees) at f6.3, 1/250th, ISO 100. Put those settings on your camera. Use your TTL flash to illuminate your subject–compensate as you like/is necessary.

The only other things to be concerned about would be if using f6.3 would blow out subject details too much (blonde hair, veil and dress), and if the image could be better if the flash were used directionally, rather than frontally.

In example C, which I use for the item above as well as for this item, I used directional fill to both 'lasso' subject highlights and put the background value where I want it--a medium to light green.

To Provide Catchlights and Clean up Color

This is best illustrated by a subject in shade, which can be bluish, with no source of light reflected in the eyes. See Example D and E. Technically, minus comp your flash way, way down. You can be surprised how the very minimal amount of flash helps give the image some sparkle.

Example D is processed to jpeg without any other changes than about .5 stop bump up in exposure. The image is bluish and desaturated. Example E has some fill flash. Whether you like the effect or not, note that definite catchlights are present (along with possibly unwanted specular highlights) but the color is better and the image is not desaturated. It is possible to turn example D into a nicely color balanced, crisp and saturated file, of course, but this is why before digital imaging, we used fill flash. I should also say that taken too far digitally, the image will begin to be 'off'.

Speedlites and the Sun

As said above, most DSLRs have a flash sync limit of about 1/250th (1/200th on the 5D, for instance). Without getting technical, the flash just can’t illuminate the entire frame/sensor area with the shutter blades moving faster than 1/250th of a second. There is a work around–high speed sync–which is available on most modern DSLRs and speedlites, but your flash reach is diminished significantly.

This latter piece of information is important because speedlites don’t fare too well power-wise, against the sun anyway. You will find that against the sun, or balancing with the sun, shooting a group shot necessitating 35mm or 28mm focal lengths, you will not be able to get farther away than about 10 feet from your subjects and still have the flash affect your subjects. This is important to know so that you don’t wonder why you can’t shoot with fill flash against the sun using a telephoto lens which necessitates your standing 20 feet away from your subjects.

Wedding Specific Considerations

I will use the rooftop wedding as my jumping off point. The first thing I’d say is that one would have to make decisions about fill flash (and even whether to use flash) from frame to frame and angle to angle as you go through the ceremony, where you will not have control over subject position. For instance, as the processional starts, and you are shooting from the altar area, the sun may be heavily backlighting your subjects. If the sun is at a more oblique angle to the subject (and to you), you may not have problems with flare (another topic altogether!), but you will have more sun on the subjects, and consequently, more highlight areas which will be blown out if you don’t expose for the sunlit parts. If the subject is squarely backlit by the sun, you will have minimal parts blow out and may be able to overexpose the sun more.

In addition, most TTL flashes operate off a pre flash for exposure determination, and backlighting will affect its ‘thinking’, usually meaning that you end up with an underexposed response. So extra plus compensation is usually necessary.

Then, when the couple is standing before the officiant, the sun is now on their backs, meaning, if there aren’t deep, important shadows to worry about, you won’t need flash.

Next, say you wander around so that you are standing behind and to one side of the officiant, so you see the bride’s face and a profile of the groom. The bride’s face is mostly shaded, and there is a building or buildings immediately behind her head that is/are medium toned. Here, you could expose for the shaded face, the background won’t be blown out, and her veil will be nicely glowing–without using flash.

But then you go to the opposite side and the groom’s face is side lit by the sun. Unless you want to blow out one side of the face or have the other side be plunged into deep shadow, use the flash.

For situations you can control, such as formals, the important control is where you position the groups so that fill flash will give the best, most even results. You don’t want little bits of highlights on faces but you also don’t want veiling flare. The usual situation is to have the sun on people’s backs, with no sun intrusion into faces, and use fill flash frontally. The wrinkle is always the couple’s desire to have the formals be wherever the ceremony took place, which may not be ideal.

I think I’ve talked enough, so I leave other tips to others. However, if anyone has any questions, feel free.<div></div>

hannah_givas · February 27, 2011

Thank you Nadine, I will be following this thread :)

frank_skomial · February 27, 2011

Great! Thanks!

Perhaps you will need to place this under the "Learning" tab, in Weddings section, so it will be easy to find it later?

pete_s. · February 27, 2011

TECHNICALLY SPEAKING Technically speaking fill flash is when flash is used as a fill light for the subject. In a controlled lighting scenario fill light are used to lift the shadows and the key light provides the majority of the light.

So Nadine's example C & E are not really fill flash because flash is actually providing the majority of the light on the subject. So when it comes to the subject the flash is here actually the key light, also called the main light.

It is however common to call it all fill flash though it is technically speaking incorrect. This may all seem like semantics but there is difference here.

FLASH AS FILL LIGHT When the flash is used as a fill it is optimal if the flash light comes from the camera position because the purpose is to provide light to shadows caused by the key light. The key light outdoors is usually the sun. Since we are viewing the scene from the camera lens it is optimal to send out light from the lens direction because the fill light can fill any shadows the lens sees.

Typical scenarios include put some light in raccoon eyes, lift shadows without detail, tame high contrast, brighten harsh dark shadows.

FLASH AS MAIN LIGHT When the flash is used as the main light (for the subject) it is actually better if the flash comes from another position than the camera. Our brains perceive depth and form by light and shadows. To get shadows the light can't come from the lens position. If it does we get flat lighting on the subject. So optimal in this case is to place the flash off camera and if we don't want harsh shadows use some kind of modifier to make the light source bigger.

Typical scenarios include back lit subjects, taming overexposed backgrounds.

SUMMARY So in summary, while it is not uncommon to call it all fill flash the flash actually serves different purposes. Given the time and opportunity we could use that to make better pictures.

pete_s. · February 27, 2011

Some feel that fill flash looks intrusive and unnatural. One cause to this is mixed color temperatures. The sun is warm (yellow) and the shadows are cold (blue). The flash is colder than the sun. Even if non-photographers can't see it everybody almost always prefer if things are warmer looking rather than colder looking.

So my tips is to gelling the flash with a 1/8 or 1/4 CTO depending on taste. Now the flash will integrate better in the scene.

BTW,

Remember also if you are using auto white balance that some cameras will screw up the white balance when you activate the flash. So the same scene shot with fill flash and without will have a different WB setting.

frank_skomial · February 27, 2011

Nadine's write up is very helpful, no matter how you call it, technically or not. Examples show how to improve pictures with use of flash light.

marten_holmes · February 27, 2011

Thanks for flagging this one up Nadine. In the UK we don't as many bright sunny days as our friends on the other side of the pond, but we do get some! I'm looking forward to learning loads and hoping I don't have to ask too many seemingly dumb questions:)

picturesque · February 27, 2011

OK, Pete--you might be right. However, the situations I included are commonly referred to as 'fill flash', as you noted. I have to mildly disagree with you though, about E. The flash is not primary in this shot--maybe close to half, but I think that if it were primary, you'd see a much more 'flashy' look.

Can you post an example re gelling the flash for sunlight? I think it might be tricky in uncontrolled situations, but certainly something to consider for controlled situations and as the sun heads toward the horizon.

pete_s. · February 27, 2011

Yeah, Nadine I know you already knew what I wrote and I don't care about semantics one bit. The only distinction I think is worth noting is that the purpose of the flash light is different.

Your example E is close, I agree with that. I think you shot D then dropped the ambient one stop or maybe slightly more with the shutter speed and put some flash in the shot to get E. I think flash is dominant because you have a distinct shadow under the jaw which you wouldn't have had otherwise. Would have been interesting to compare the exif on those two shots.

I'll see if I can dig up some old test I've done regarding gelling the strobe outdoors. I basically always gel with a 1/8 CTO which I think drops the color temperature 600K or so. Only time I would go with more is when then sun really starts getting warm.

William Michael · February 27, 2011

I want to show a how there can be differences, in the final image caused by mixing different TYPES of ambient light with the Flash Fill (downward pointing indoor ceiling light vs. softer, outdoor open shade). Also, I want to show the result of a small, but significant difference in the amount of Flash Fill, relative to the SCENE AMBIENT. I have taken two examples, both using a similar Flash Fill Technique executed at about the same Shooting Distance, but with different outcomes.

Covering Weddings, I found there were many opportunities to make some relaxed group photos. These opportunities were often were inside with not the most suitable room lighting and were sometimes a “please take our Photo” when I would otherwise be concentrating on what next the Bride and Groom might be doing. I have a very simple approach to Flash, when working on the hop, (as opposed to setting for Bridal Portraiture or “Formals”). When moving around I prefer to work very light weight and be mobile, so that means I rely on a Bounce Card and an Off Camera Cord, quite often. Assuming the inside area has cruddy lighting, not suitable for Available Light Photography AND we want some separation of the Subjects; I have found measuring the room ambient light and using the Bounce Card Flash from ½ to 1½ Stops Less than the Room Ambient, provides a subtle separation whilst just giving enough front on illumination, in most cases. This first shot, I have at hand and although not at a Social Engagement is typical of a shot of a casual Group Photo inside - it is shot an Airport. The ambient measured: F/4 @ 1/60s @ ISO200 – which is also typical of many indoor locations such as Halls and Reception Areas with lots of ceiling lighting. Off Camera Flash and Bounce Card used at about 1½ stops less than the Ambient and held in my left hand high and above the camera. Even though I used a bounce card, there is still a small amount of specula reflection. I was working very close – but I can’t find any harsh Flash Shadows, because the flash was held back so much, compared to the Room Ambient and the room ambient was mainly downward.

(The group is positioned under one of those square banks of ceiling lights - so even though the group is random and it appears to be like a grab shot, there was a little manipulation as to where they were standing. And I think it is importnat to consider using all and every lighting facillity available, if one can).

These specula reflections have been discussed in other “Flash Fill” threads: and I wanted to include this particular sample image, to show that it is possible to get these reflections when using a bounce card. Sample 1: <img src="http://d6d2h4gfvy8t8.cloudfront.net/12751156-md.jpg" alt="" width="680" height="486" />

***

I use the same Flash Fill Technique outside also, when the ambient light is low enough. Sample 2 is shot at a Party just at or after the sun has set and when the Flash is about to become the Key Light BUT where I don’t want the Flash to be the key light. Keeping the Flash exposure in check and subordinate to the ambient (in the whole scene) allows for more inclusion of the background and the ambience thereof. In this shot I was a little too heavy with the Flash as those Hard Flash Shadows are beginning to creep in and we might have that technical discussion that the Flash is now the Key Light based upon those shadows. I wanted to use this Sample 2 to show what begins to happen when the sunlight is failing very quickly and when one is a little too slow making the “perfect” Flash Fill adjustments for the shot. The ambient in this shot was F/4 @ 1/60s @ ISO1250 – the Fill Flash is only about Half a Stop under the Ambient – but note how powerful that Flash actually is, in respect of the Flash Shadows which are beginning to show. And I suggest that this is because the Flash is now filling a softer overall ambient of “open shade”, even though I used a similar technique: Off Camera Bounce card and held high and to my right (camera in left hand) at about the same shooting distance. Sample 2: <img src="http://d6d2h4gfvy8t8.cloudfront.net/12751154-md.jpg" alt="" width="680" height="486" />

As for the technicalities: I think it is sometimes important to describe the lighting of the whole scene and the lighting specifically on the subject as two different lighting scenarios. Thinking about it this way – in my second sample the Flash is still “filling” the backyard party scene, even though it might be termed the Key Light on the groups of boys. Note in Sample 2, the Flash Shadows are a little more severe in the LH side of the scene where the ambient light is slightly less strong.

WW

hannah_givas · February 27, 2011

Reading and following these threads! They are great! Keep them coming, please. On a side note, what is best resource to use for mastering operating/controlling a single light, such as my 430 EX, as far as exposing/compensating, etc. Like I mentioned before, my primary field has been flashless, horse photography/

picturesque · February 27, 2011

Neil Van Niekerk's tutorials (google him) are great for this, but he does not get too much into the finer points of fill flash. Other than that, NK Guy's book on Canon flash or a new one just came out by Syl Arena.

If you have specific questions, just ask.

picturesque · February 28, 2011

Pete--here is the exif info on D and E. D was shot on TV, ISO 200, 1/125th, f2.8, ambient exposure comp was +1, plus I was mistaken above--in post processing, I pulled the exposure down by 0.50 stops. E was shot also on TV, ISO 200, 1/125th, f5, ambient exposure comp +2/3, but I pulled the exposure up by 0.17 stops in post. On E, the flash comp was -2. NEVEC might have played a role in the difference between the two exposures, since with Canon, the automated modes like to 'make room' for flash.

E was taken after D, and D had a wider angle of view--I cropped it to be similar to E. This is why the ambient exposure changed, and maybe I pulled the ambient comp back on the spot, from D to E. Flash comp, as you know is meaningless really. I have subsequent images to E that have the flash comp at -2 and 1/3, and it has way less flash than E, probably because there is a bit more of the bride's (white) dress showing.

pete_s. · February 28, 2011

Thanks Nadine.

Given your numbers and exposure corrections it means that you/the camera dropped the ambient exposure with almost exactly one stop. So my initial guess was in the right neighborhood but your cropping got me because the aperture looked the same which is why I though you changed the shutter speed :-)

So if you hadn't used flash the subject would have been one stop underexposed. But since it's overcast and you have same exposure on the subject in these both images so that means that the flash needed to raise the exposure on the subject back up with one stop. So in image E the ambient and flash actually contributes equal amount of light on the subject.

Which is kind of crazy when you had flash exposure compensation set to -2...

Not being a Canon user I had to look up <a href="http://eosdoc.com/manuals/flash/NEVEC/">NEVEC</a> though. Your exposures in image D indicates that the light levels were 8.5 EV. With ISO200 it seems like you should get a 1/2 to 1 stop ambient reduction just by powering on the flash when it is overcast. That's interesting and maybe something to consider when shooting in auto modes and switching between flash on and off.

pete_s. · February 28, 2011

Nadine, regarding gel on the flash for fill I couldn't find any old test images. Right now we only have dark overcast weather here every day so I can't shoot any.

But I noticed that on the WB presets on the 5D MkI/II, and I guess all other Canons, the WB setting for flash is 6000K and for daylight it's 5200K. Browsing some of my photography books they seem to agree that around 5200K is considered midday sun. A Rosco Cinegel 1/8 CTO on a 6000K flash will turn the flash into 5350K which is pretty close to the sun.

I think it looks more natural so if you shoot in sunny conditions you might want to try it. A <a href="http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/44207-REG/Rosco_RS341011_3410_Filter_RoscoSun.html">20x24" sheet of 1/8 CTO </a>is only $6 so it's not a huge investment. You can layer two gels to get the double effect for late afternoons.

picturesque · February 28, 2011

Pete--it was sunny, not overcast. The white sky is blown out sky. The sky was actually blue.

I also think the 'real' exposure was around f3.5/4, 1/125th, ISO 200, for the shady side of the subjects' faces. Since I was using shutter priority, what the camera did re calculating the exposure was due to (probably) two things. First, the difference in what was included in the two frames. Secondly, if NEVEC was involved, it would typically apply some level of underexposure to make room for the flash exposure. So yes, as I said, the flash was maybe close to half the exposure.

I use averaging flash metering (even though it is ETTL) and center weighted metering pattern for ambient measuring. I can never make any sense out of ETTL anyway, and go by feel and experience.

In any case, I don't claim the flashed image is 'better' than the no flash image. I wanted to illustrate that some very low level of flash--probably lower than this example--can help restore saturation, contrast and cleaner white balance, plus add a catchlight (not so important in this shot). Besides the bluish color of shade, grass can add a green cast that is just wonderful on human skin... :^)

fotografz · March 2, 2011

Great thread Nadine.

When teaching how to use fill flash, I often set the tone by defining it as using supplemental light to either help out Mother Nature, or to help out when you are simulating Mother Nature by using modified off-camera artificial light where there is no decent natural light. The ultimate objective being to make it appear as if no flash was used.

I have 3 basic, common applications to demonstrate use of fill flash. Indoors with a strong key light source ... outdoors, again with a strong key light source ... and lastly situations where off-camera artificial light is a key light source. I will post separate examples of each with explanations in three different posts.

I'll start with indoors ... where often windows can provide the key directional light.

Here are three different indoor situations featuring natural key light in different ways ... all using an on-camera speed-light for fill:

The image of the Bride gazing out the window was manually metered to just hold detail in her face and shoulder, while TTL fill flash with a diffuser was compensated +1 stop to provide fill, or she would have completely been silhouetted.

For the Bride reading a gift card from the Groom, I manually metered to hold the window, and rotated the TTL flash camera left to fill in behind her with feathered light hitting her as well as bouncing off an opposite wall about 8 feet away.

The Bride putting on her make-up was manually metered to hold the make-up mirror light reflections, and the flash was rotated to fire off a wall behind me, aimed slightly camera left to avoid casting my own shadow on the scene.

fotografz · March 2, 2011

Example #2 features Outdoor Fill against Mother Nature's most excellent light ... well, sometimes it isn't so excellent ... LOL!

The "first kiss" shot featured strong key back light coming from high camera right ... without fill the Groom would have cast a harsh shadow on her face ... in retrospect, I could have taken the flash down 2/3 to 1/2 stop to maintain a bit more natural feel, The Bride had really fair skin and a touch less would've been better.

The B&G with their Doggies is the typical scenario where you are forced to shoot in the wrong place at the wrong time. The only shade was still dappled, and exposing to hold any background in direct 1PM sunlight on a clear summer day would have grossly underexposed the subjects. For this, we used a portable studio strobe in a beauty dish, plus on-camera fill, that combined to even out the contrast level and balance the lighting over-all. So, there was two strong lights here ... Mother Nature lighting the background, a strobe as key subject light from camera left ... and weaker fill from the on-camera speed-light.

The sunset kiss is sort of obvious directional light ... and for fill I aimed the speed-light directly at them with no modifier and the reflector manually zoomed to its maximum telephoto setting (105mm).

Just a note: for those who use telephotos outdoors with speed-lights ... forget using standard bounce modifiers ... in fact, there are modifiers designed to magnify the flash lighting to increase its reach and effectiveness at distance.<div></div>

fotografz · March 2, 2011

#3 shows scenarios where there is no help from Mother Nature ... and directional artificial light is used as the key.

The Bride reclining was done using an off-camera key light, high camera right almost parallel to her and feathered across her full length ... in this case a strobe on a light stick with a 40" shoot through umbrella ... but a speed-light would also work. Fill was provided by an on-camera TTL speed-light. For this shot I used a high shutter speed to make the background go black because there was all kinds of activity going on which distracted from the shot.

The Garter reception shot utilized the videographer's light as a backlight and on-camera TTL fill opened up the foreground subjects ... I think I compensated the flash +1 stop

The Altar Kiss was done using an off-camera speed-light directly camera left and even with the subjects to light both them and the altar behind them ... TTL fill then filled in the harsh cast shadows that the Key side-light created.<div></div>

ray_rg · March 2, 2011

excellent thread :) I am not a pro, even not a wedding photographer. I like to read Wedding forums regularly for this same reason "How to use?"

Appreciate Nadine and Marc W for helping others with the detailed information.

markonestudios · March 5, 2011

Marc, superb show-and-tell! Thanks for the behind the scenes explanations. Very subtle use of flash for fill.

fotografz · March 5, 2011

Thank You Mark!

herma · March 11, 2011

I don't mind using some kind of fill flash outdoors, even from my pop up flash, but I disllike shooting at f8 for outdoor portraits in bright light. I want to experiment shooting wide open, with ND filters, so I can render the back ground blurry, while using f2.8. I would like to know if any of you use ND filters in such a situation. Other than trying a millions shots, does anybody have experience or tips? Lightmeter? Compensation? I have not seen any bright sunlight for a while, so I can't go out and practice this yet, but I think this could be cool.

benstanley · March 11, 2011

Usually shooting outdoors with middle of the day sunlight on people's faces isn't going to result in the best looking portraits.

Having said that, you shouldn't need a ND filter anyway. You need 1/4000th @ f/2.8 and ISO100 in bright sunlight. Is your camera limited to a shutter speed slower than that?

William Michael · March 11, 2011

There are several older threads which address the idea of using ND filters to keep the Tv (Shutter Speed) at or below the Flash Sync Speed, of the camera. Alternatively, we could choose to use a faster Tv and use High Speed Flash Sync, if the camera and Flash unit allow. Perhaps some technical basics / points about each method are best explained with a (typical) example using One, On-Camera Flash Fill Unit:

In Hard Sunlight, a typical On Camera Flash will have enough power to allow an SD (Shooting Distance) of up to around 15ft. If we engage HSS (High Speed Sync) that SD is reduced to about 12ft. If we add enough ND filters to nuke the Sunlight enough, to get a Tv equal to the camera’s Flash Sync, then the Flash is still working to fill the same sunlight shadows - the ND filters do not magically make the Flash Fill more useful - so you are still at a maximum SD of 15ft.

Now here’s the fun bit of working at SD = 12ft to 15ft (max) and wanting shallow DoF:

Let’s assume we are using 135 format (aka “Full Frame”) – we are using this format, because it best leverages Shallow DoF which the aim of the exercise. Let’s assume we are shooting Portrait Orientation and are at SD = 12ft. If we want a Full Length Shot: at F/2.8 we will get a DoF of about 2ft and we need about a 50mm lens. That is a nice shallow DoF and is an acceptable solution. If we want an Half Shot: at F/2.8 we will get a DoF of about 6” and we will need about 100mm lens but it is probably better to use F/5.6, as the DoF will be about 12” – or even F/8 and the DoF will be about 18” as 18” DoF is also an acceptable solution. If we want a Tight Head Shot: at F/2.8 we will get a DoF of about 1.5” and we will require a 200mm lens, but it is probably better to use F/11 as the DoF will be about 6” as 6” is an acceptable solution.

So really the whole idea about stacking enough ND filters to get to F/2.8 has to be thought through, especially assessing how many Full Length Shots (or longer) we will take. If we are shooting mainly Half Shots, or tighter, then arguably High Speed Sync would be a better option – even if that is necessary. . . read on . . .

In Hard Midday Sun with the Subject Top Lit (F/16 Rule), if we reckon our Ambient Exposure for the SHADOW on the face is: F/11 @ 1/200 @ ISO200 and our camera can get to ISO100: then we pull: F/8 @ 1/200s @ ISO100 for that shadow.

1/200s is a typical Flash Sync Speed for most DSLR and F/8 will provide ample Shallow DoF for all shots from an Half Shot or Tighter. Provided any Hard Background is at a reasonable Distance behind the Subject, (about 30ft, the Separation will be more than adequate, with the DoF.

The kicker is - if the Backgound is Distant Mountains - we are home and hosed and laughing as we could probably shoot the Full Length Shots at very close to F/11, where the DoF will be about 8'.

Personally, I think the idea of using ND filters for this purpose is not a practical solution at all, as there are many easier ways around the issue – AND this exercise pre-supposes that a teeny-weeny DoF is a requirement, for every shot.

There is another solution, which is rarely mentioned, and that is to use a Leaf Shutter Lens.

WW

Sign In

A Discussion About Fill Flash for Weddings--2011

Recommended Posts

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

Create an account

Sign in