Flash or no flash?

[Allen Herbert]

Flash

 

Sort of cold and flat.

[tholte]

Flash

 

Sort of cold and flat.

Make it warm and dimensional.

[chazfenn]

You have to actually USE the light, not just blast it from on camera. Otherwise, as you say its cold & flat.

[GerrySiegel]

<Sort of cold and flat.>

 

Except when it is warm and contoured. Easy to demonstrate in a quick review of galleries here. And not so hard to master. Susan McMaster shows how with those dinky and dirt cheap but peppy old thyristor Vivitars in her book " Mastering Flash Photography." https://www.amazon.com/Mastering-Flash-Photography-Advanced-Techniques/dp/0817445455/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1511740494&sr=1-1&keywords=Mastering+Flash+Photography.......Auto flash is fine. It works as well or better than TTL and the variants.

 

Use the tools that professionals use. Bring your photos to life when nature needs a helping hand. Ever watch a commercial photo shoot. Those guys with the reflectors and the lights and light stands. Of course they have a pre conceived result in mind. Sunlight often needs a little help. it is a revelation what a hunk of fomecore can do. Or a flash shot through an umbrella or brolly can do to cut five years to a subject's age. I am prejudiced. I like control. A control freak. I could use a team of gaffers. Just kidding.. But I like to get the dyamic range in the image and not play to much in Photoshop if it looks right in the finder and the histogram. That may take more than an overall ISO boost.( I like to stay at 400 most of the time, good enough for me and a challenge I like).:)

Edited November 27, 2017 by GerrySiegel

[Allen Herbert]

Unfortunately, the reality is, most flash photographs you look at are just blasted from the camera.

 

Fill in flash is useful.

[bob_bill]

Gerry, you are absolutely right, this shot was taken using a piece of foam core for a reflector camera right reducing the contrast ratio, evidenced by the catch light. Main was a 5' octa with an egg crate camera L a couple of feet away that I didn't bother to clean up in the catch light as it was just a test of a wireless camera trigger. It definitely takes 10 years off but is helped by a just high enough camera position that eliminates a view of any double chin aided by a shadow placed there with main position. Getting the flash off the subject/camera axis creates shadows that reveal form, in no way flat, and here, shooting from the shadow side also takes off weight as the viewer's mind erases the side of the face in shadow. If the flash was on camera axis, the side of the face would be illuminated and and make it look wider. As for warmth, a bit of sepia added. When using flash I like the analogy of a circle drawn on a sheet of paper. It is flat, but if you take the side of the pencil and shade the circle, it becomes a ball, three dimensional. Flash on camera axis is that circle, the off camera shadows, the pencil shading. We paint with our lights. In addition to camera height creating a more flattering image, shooting with 200 mm at 11 feet really compressed the nose. The distance was not a problem communicating with the subject. It was like he could read my mind. Using on camera flash can produce similar results, just adjust bounce angle and produce a larger lit spot on the wall, ie a larger source and keep the subject close to the wall. Adjusting flash head angle and height can produce a similar rembrandt lighting pattern, an upside down triangle under the shadow side eye yet light in that eye or loop before the nose shadow reaches the cheek shadow. Also, on the planet where I live there are 5 suns and here one acts as a kicker/hair light from camera l rear. In the profile shot, 2 kickers, one from each side/rear might appear to be a bit hot, but rules are meant to be broken if they serve the purpose of the shot. This is an homage to one of my favorite photographers, Karsh and favorite authors, Hemingway to the Karsh shot that hangs over Hem's mantle in Key West. In it he had his trademark fisherman's knit sweater and a white beard. I have emulated the white beard with light. Light can also have meaning in itself in a shot. Like Alton Brown says about deep frying, frying isn't bad, bad frying is bad, flash isn't bad, bad flash is bad. Unfortunately flash seems to get the same bad rap as frying.

 

[Allen Herbert]

Bob.

 

Just cannot have the feeling natural light would have more atmosphere for the want of a better word....particularly window light.

 

Seems sort of a strained photograph, in your face, without depth and somewhat whitewashed.

 

Hey, just my thoughts....tell me to take a hike.

[Allen Herbert]

to be honest all th photos posted look cold/sterile and false.

 

Hey, can I pass on having the hang mans noose.

[arthur_gottschalk]

JDMvW, not sure why you posted that picture. I don't mean to insult you, but it's just plain ugly. Anyway, "it's not the ships, it's the men in them." Flash can be wonderful when used by a skilled photographer, and available light really isn't good enough when there's no light available.

[Allen Herbert]

." Flash can be wonderful when used by a skilled photographer, and available light really isn't good enough when there's no light available" Arthur.

 

agree.

 

Just a non flash street photo without the coldness and falseness of flash.

[Allen Herbert]

[Allen Herbert]

Somewhat overly sharp...

 

But notice the natural feel of the photo without the weird flash look.

[GerrySiegel]

All Natural. No artificial ingredients. Organic. I get it now..:-)

[bob_bill]

Allen, do you realize that the qualities of natural light can be reproduced with strobes. Creative live did an experiment with Sue Bryce, window light photographer and Felix Kunze, strobe user. Sue shot her favorite window lighting set ups and Kunze used strobes to emulate her shots. They were indistinguishable. I can produce an identical shot using the window next to where this shot was taken. Same exposure, same direction, same highlights, same ratio, same shadow edge transition and even same white balance. Might even be able to control the background shade, but not nearly as precisely as with strobe, by opening, closing, or blocking a window behind subject. However, that natural light makes huge changes as the sun moves and totally disappears once it sets. An important advantage for a professional is being able to produce a particular light at any time, day or night. Clients can't always be shot at a particular time and that limits the amount of shooting time. The shot above is simply a test shot for a camera trigger. but I don't know what you mean by natural feel, coldness and falseness of flash. And no depth??? If you expect principles to reveal depth used in your outside photo with multiple subjects like subject overlap, decreasing size, one point perspective to be done with a head shot, that is just not possible. But the highlight and shadow reveal shape form and depth, the sharp mask of face and out of focus back of head and shooting vest, the kicker showing separation from a background all provide depth. How is flash false? I can blow out using the sun. Looks like the highlight on the woman in front is blown out or nearly so without flash. So all art must be natural? Tell that to the impressionists, surrealists painters. I'm sure the Realist school would agree though, Your comment is exactly the kind of adverse opinion about the use of artificial lighting I was referring to, almost always from those not schooled in it's use and often not understanding light. We see the same from those who don't use photoshop/lightroom. Recentiy I had someone claiming to know about photoshop that it makes images look fake. I love Stieglitz because he fought to get photography recognized as an art form, more than a mechanical aping of nature.

[Allen Herbert]

Bob, these folk are experts in their field.

 

My comments are about dabblers without knowledge or understanding....and looking at the majority of flash photography....cold, lack feel and depth, much like they have been taken by a photocopier from a page in a magazine.

 

Apologies if I did not clarify my thoughts properly.

[glen_h]

In the days of Ektachrome 100, I used my Vivitar 283 pretty often.

 

Since I started using a DSLR, I rarely use flash.

[Norman 202]

My comments are about dabblers without knowledge or understanding..

like those who dabble in SP, eh? Allen, you are so judgemental.

Edited December 4, 2017 by Norman 202

[Ed_Ingold]

I detect the theme in this thread that "real photographers don't need flash." The fact that careless use of a flash can produce poor results is used to prove that point.

 

I suspect that someone slinking about taking "candid" photos on the street would be unduly encumbered with a flash. Flash is generally unwelcome during concerts (or completely ineffective from the peanut gallery). You won't find one on a golf course either, or anywhere the talent could be distracted or temporarily blinded.

 

With fast lenses and incredible ISO sensitivity, I find I don't need a flash for enough light, rather light where I need it. A clear example would be someone in shadow, backlit by a bright window where you want to see their features clearly. There is no way to get that by exposure settings only, since flare would obscure the outlines of their face. Sometimes a ring of light is okay, but more from the artistic point of view than that of the subject. I carry a set of gels to match the color of the flash with ambient light - solving another issue.

 

Rather than condemn the use of flash inappropriately, let us guide the beginners (or anyone new to flash) in a creative, supportive manner.

[glen_h]

The flashtube on the Vivitar 283 has a slight yellow tint. I don't know which others do, but I think not all of them.

 

Just a little warming.

[Allen Herbert]

.."like those who dabble in SP, eh? Allen, you are so judgmental "Norman

 

Its great that folk dabble in any genera of photography as it is all about a learning curve. However, it is about moving on from the very basics, Norman.

 

Here comes the judge...judging other folks posts without a contribution from....err the judge.

 

I gave my thoughts to the question asked and contributed a photograph...try doing the same instead of sniping.

 

And what has a monkeys rear end got to do with this post about Street Photography....pray do tell.

Edited December 7, 2017 by Allen Herbert

[Norman 202]

Allen, you talk nonsense about flash, are proved wrong and then backtrack by saying “my comments are about dabblers…” which is highly dismissive of dabblers hence my comment about your SP. In other words, your dabbling in SP brings as much to SP as people who dabble in flash bring to flash photography. Edited December 7, 2017 by Norman 202

[Norman 202]

I gave my thoughts to the question asked and contributed a photograph...try doing the same instead of sniping

Please see the third post from the top. Hope this helps.

[Ed_Ingold]

The flashtube on the Vivitar 283 has a slight yellow tint. I don't know which others do, but I think not all of them.

The yellow tint may be added to reduce the amount of blue and ultraviolet light emitted for a warmer tone. It is an added expense option for some studio units. It could also be re-deposited tungsten, vaporized from the electrodes, if it is heavier near the ends.

[glen_h]

(snip on Vivitar 283 flashtube yellow tint)

 

The yellow tint may be added to reduce the amount of blue and ultraviolet light emitted for a warmer tone. It is an added expense option for some studio units. It could also be re-deposited tungsten, vaporized from the electrodes, if it is heavier near the ends.

 

I believe it was advertised as a feature at the time, but that was a long time ago now.

 

Not so obvious to put it on the tube, instead of the reflector or filter.

[JDMvW]

detect the theme in this thread that "real photographers don't need flash."

 

I can only speak for myself when I say that was not my intent or feeling. Perhaps I was lurking under a bridge (link) a little, of course.

 

I do use flash where it is a necessity, but my preference is for "natural light," as Ansel Adams put it.