Flash or No Flash

[gregf]

<p>I remember, not that long ago, during the film days, when you were inside a cathedral of museum, and if permitted, a flash was required to get decent lighting (as ISO 400 was tops for E6 in speed). Today, we can get ISO 6400, without even pushing it higher. I always hated using the flash, it cast horrible shadows.</p>

<p>I was just wondering, how many people still use flashes for museum/church/cathedral photography?</p>

[ed_k__north_carolina_]

<p>I guess it depends on the museum. I use a flash in transportation or military museums. Doesn't seem to be a problem.</p>

<p>If you shoot in an art museum, they may think otherwise.</p>

<p>Flash requires good technique, as dose available light; do it wrong and it looks crappy.</p>

<p>Ed</p>

<div></div>

[wayne_campbell]

<p>Never. Besides, flash is ugly.</p>

[Spearhead]

<p>Flash requires good technique. It's only "ugly" and "casts horrible shadows" when used improperly. I use flash in 90% of my photos, inside and out, nobody complains about "ugly" or "horrible shadows."</p>

[philip_wilson]

Flash is not good form and it can cause damage (sustained use of flash by many people) so it is often banned.

Cathedrals are very large so unless you are shooting smaller close items or are using a big Metz flash it generally

does not help. It makes me laugh when I see things like people using flash on compact cameras in St Peters in

Rome the dome is About 140 feet up and their flash is good for perhaps 20 feet!

[hjoseph7]

<p>Flash can definately cause horrible shadows, but I sometimes use the pop-up flash to lighten up the shadows and balance out the picture. Other than that it's HDR. </p>

[henryp]

<blockquote>

<p>I use flash in 90% of my photos, inside and out...</p>

</blockquote>

<p>+1. It takes some skill but properly applied, a little fill flash at -1 or -2 can enhance lackluster ambient lighting which while possibly of adequate quantity is often of disappointing quality, lacking specularity. Fill flash can help control contrast, balance disparate light sources, increase color saturation and fidelity, and provide a much more pleasing, better exposed and better looking image.</p>

<p>Of course when I see folks aiming their little point-n-shoots at the ceiling in Grand Central Terminal I know they're just wasting battery power, but I think we all agree that's not what we're talking about here.</p>

<p>Henry Posner<br /><strong>B&H Photo-Video</strong></p>

[hadi_khademi]

<p>Bouncing the flash and/or using a diffuser helps a lot. Also, as menioned above, using the flash while playing with some compensation values can help balancing the lighting; you just need finding that sweet spot.<br>

If camera sensors were as good as human eyes, we probably wouldn't have had this conversation today.<br>

Hadi </p>

[henryp]

<blockquote>

<p>Besides, flash is ugly.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Ugly flash is ugly. W Eugene Smith (IMO among the greatest photojournalists ever) once said he considered available light to be anything available in his camera bag. His "Tomoko in her Bath," is a shining example. Made with a combo of available light and bounced fill flash.</p>

<p>Henry Posner<br /><strong>B&H Photo-Video</strong></p>

[dan_south]

There are a multitude of flash (strobe) techniques. If the flash in your photos looks ugly, you're not using them

properly.

 

Look at a fashion magazine such as Vogue or GQ. These publications are filled with technically brilliant photographs,

and almost every one of them was made with strobe lighting.

 

Regarding cathedrals, the interior photos that you see in the tourist brochures are made at night with multiple flash

units set off in different positions during long exposures. But unless you have that kind of access and clearance, you

probably have to go without flash or do what you can with a single, camera mounted flash unit. Either way you can

make very nice photos if you use the light well. Keep in mind that some churches and cathedrals and abbeys do not

permit flash, and others permit no photography at all.

[gregf]

<p>Regarding cathedrals, the interior photos that you see in the tourist brochures are made at night with multiple flash units set off in different positions during long exposures. But unless you have that kind of access and clearance, you probably have to go without flash or do what you can with a single, camera mounted flash unit. Either way you can make very nice photos if you use the light well. Keep in mind that some churches and cathedrals and abbeys do not permit flash, and others permit no photography at all.</p>

<p>My best cathedral pictures came from Canterbury, where tripods are (or were in 2002) allowed. However, I have noticed that since I can shoot at 6400 (5D2), all my cathedral shots are so much better. No pun intended, but they don't hold a candle to what I used to do with the 550EX. I'm considering selling my 580EX2 since I don't do anything sort of portratit or wedding work.</p>