elliot_n Posted June 29, 2003 Share Posted June 29, 2003 Great, you shot a test. I'm slightly perplexed by your flash settings. It's hard to ascertain from these scans, but it appears that there has been sufficient flash exposure in the first test. If this is so, then your second test is over-exposed by 2 stops (you've changed the flash from 1/4 to full power, and kept the aperture constant at f8). In itself, 2 stops overexposure isn't a problem, but it will drain your flash very quickly. And as I've said before, shooting on full power is impractical in your situation as the recycle time is about 10 seconds. In the heat of moment you'll forget this and end up with wildly fluctuating exposures. Which shot do I prefer? Without doubt, the first one. It is an example of 'dragging the shutter' - the technique that Timber so deplores. I like it. You've got the right mix of flash and ambient. If you've got a tripod it's the way to go. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
benjamin_cromwell Posted June 29, 2003 Author Share Posted June 29, 2003 What do you mean 2 stops over exposed? The the shutter was 1/60 in the second shot thus the same exposure, just more flash to compensate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elliot_n Posted June 30, 2003 Share Posted June 30, 2003 How are you calculating your basic flash exposure? With a flashmeter, or by doing the math with the guide number, film speed and shooting distance? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
benjamin_cromwell Posted June 30, 2003 Author Share Posted June 30, 2003 Flash Meter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elliot_n Posted June 30, 2003 Share Posted June 30, 2003 Which flashmeter? How did you use it? With my meter (Sekonic L308) in this situation I would be be shielding the dome of the meter from the tungsten lights so as to get a reading of the flash alone. I would also set the shutter speed on the meter to 1/500 (again to over-ride any ambient light). I'd then meter the ambient separately, and balance the two light sources in my head. If your second test (flash at full power) is properly exposed at f8, then in your first test (flash at 1/4 power) the flash is 2 stops under at f8. And the ambient is 1 stop under at 1/15. This means that the ambient is the mainlight, and overall the shot is underexposed. But it doesn't look like that to me - hence my queries about your metering technique. Anyway, which is your favourite shot? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
timberwolf1 Posted June 30, 2003 Share Posted June 30, 2003 Benjamin: I am answering your e-mail. What these "tips" are doing are showing you how to mix colored light sources. If you have 3 Vivitars, even 2 Vivitars, you don't need to mix ambient colored light sources. You will not have to take multiple readings of ambient light and do calculations, etc. Make your life simple and simply light everything with professional flash units. The colors will become natural, and nothing will become discolored yellow/orange. The method of using 100% flash to do the job is very easy and forgiving. It is possible for you to be off 1/2 or a full 1 stop with your background illumination, and there will be no complaint from the Client. The more lights you have up to about 6 the more fun things you can do. If you only have two lights, then simply flash straight on, then put the 2nd slave flash on the deck of the altar set on wide angle and point it at the background. You can also have a person hold it from one side as they point it at the background. If the power from the background unit is approximately the same as the power used on the person, you are fine. The goal may be to make the light hitting the background of the same strength as the light hitting the person. You use your incident flashmeter for this; then you adjust the power of the background flash while you have the incident meter close to the back wall. This will read the flash power hitting the wall. Take one of the person on the altar, too. With one Vivitar 285, a bride with a long dress at 320 iso on full power, you should get a f8 1/2, maybe a f11. So, all it is is just flashing the person normally, then putting the 2nd flash on the altar pointed at the background and set at full power at wide angle setting. This takes no complicated calculations, and the whole thing takes about 5 seconds to do. The nice thing about using 100% flash, is that the whole scene will be exposed at about 1/1000th of a second. This means that you will have sharpness, no movement, everything frozen. With the techniques the other photographers are teaching you, you will be exposing at about 1/8th of a second, and any movement will soften or blur your picture. Don't take this risk. Just use 100% flash. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
timberwolf1 Posted June 30, 2003 Share Posted June 30, 2003 The examples of a woman standing on the altar are examples of what goes wrong with using ambient fill. Look at the edges of her legs; look at her cheeks, forehead, and side of her face. That orangy "glow" is discoloration from using this ambient light fill. Now look at her eye sockets, right around her eyes. Notice that this area is not orangy, it is rather alittle blueish or cold. For a woman, having "cold colored skin" around the eyes is a sign of aging. This is why women spend millions on make-up. So here the photographer created discolored areas on her body and face. The background, is not especially lit, the ambient light didn't help much here to make the background anything but a darker dark. When you use 100% flash units, you can make the background as light as you want, simply up the power. You won't have discolored skin, and the eye sockets will be the same color as the outer part of her arms and legs. You will have no complaints. No questions. You won't have someone who says; I prefer to have this color taken out. Please do it! This color cannot be taken out. If the printer tries, he will make the eye sockets a more saturated blue, ugly. This is the catch 22 of using this method of ambient light fill. Experience should tell you that taking a picture at 1/1000th will be sharper than one taken at 1/4th or 1/8th. Yet, some of the other photographers here would have you taken the picture at 1/4 or 1/8th instead of 1/1000th. The issue of sharpness is thrust aside. In a group shot, you need all the sharpness you can get! Therefore, go for using multiple, even 2 flash units to light your scene. You'll have a sharper result, even if someone flinches, moves a hand, talks, wags their head, blinks, moves a foot: they will be frozen at 1/1000th. Disregard this ambient light fill recommendations from the other photographers, and purchase 2 or more flash units to light your scene. If you like to fiddle, fiddle with flash units, not ambient light fill which causes this coloration shift. Timber Borcherding timberborcherding Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
timberwolf1 Posted June 30, 2003 Share Posted June 30, 2003 Benjamin: The photographers who accept discolored skin as a final product to be sold to the client, will not be chosen by Fashion Art Directors to do a Modern Bride layout. They do not want the dresses discolored or the skin tones discolored. They want powdery skin and white dresses. Simply pick up a magazine and look. This ambient light fill technique is mainly used by wedding photographers who lack equipment or who don't want to take the time and trouble to carry a suitcase of flashe equipment into the church. They get lazy. Again, to use 100% flash, simply have a guest or usher point a 2nd flash at the middle part of the wall in back of the bride at full power. Be sure that the main light from your camera "sees" the slave unit attached to the background flash fill. That way, the background light will trigger on the light impulse from your camera. All very simple, no disasters possible, no discolored skin, no complaints, no aging bride, etc. Go get some Wein slave eyes from Adorama or Ebay or bhphoto.com now! Get those 3 Vivitar 285s! Timber Borcherding timberborcherding Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twmeyer Posted June 30, 2003 Share Posted June 30, 2003 While there is plenty of sound technical advise buried in the bluster, getting to it is a lesson in sado-masochism. I'll be shocked if anyone gets anything useful from this approach to "teaching" (flogging)... t<div></div> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twmeyer Posted June 30, 2003 Share Posted June 30, 2003 oh yeah, the bride, her family and all her friends, co-workers and clients think it's beautiful. If Modern Bride calls, what should I tell them? "Sorry the dress isn't whatever"... <p>I recall reading about Ansel Adams chastising Elliot Porter because his clouds weren't white. I wonder if Elliot mentioned that Ansel's skies weren't blue... t<div></div> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
timberwolf1 Posted June 30, 2003 Share Posted June 30, 2003 The examples above do not show the ill effects of orange fringing because this photogrpher did not expose and fill an ambient light. Notice how dark the shadows are on the faces in the city shot? No fill evident. The other picture is the same but the floods in the rear may be daylight balanced floods. These rarely appear inn churches due to their stark feeling of light---but great for airports. This photographer is fooling us with his "examples". He is well meaning, but he has mislead himself. Again, look at facial shadows for the evidence of high % fill. There should be no dark shadows. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
timberwolf1 Posted June 30, 2003 Share Posted June 30, 2003 The photos above I like. However, both could have had softer flesh tones, no harsh shadows, if the photographer had used a white card on his camera flash while he bounced, if there was anything to bonce off of! I suspect that he detached his flash and held it to the side alittle to create a 3-d look. At night, when harsh shadows reign, these harsh shadows will be acceptable to the client. It is not a portrait, but 1-2 steps above an amateur quality shot. Weddings have lots of these done by pros to add alittle quality increase to their candid shots. Again, this is not evidence of a facial/body ambient light fill job. It does not prove the case for ambient fill. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twmeyer Posted July 1, 2003 Share Posted July 1, 2003 I use candids only to add another level of service to these "not portraits"... t <p>p.s. Oh yeah, there are tungsten, florescents and halogen lights "contaminating" the pool-side por.. oops "not portrait", while there are only the city lights in the background of the... um...other shot. I did not use modeling lights so there <i>was</i> enough light to focus, and I was at or close to maximum aperture (2.8) on all of these. The S2 is <i>not</i> good at focusing in low light. I had to be very careful. To be redundant, there was one light, on a stand, in a 45" Halo. Just what did you mean "if the photographer had used a white card on his camera flash while he bounced, if there was anything to bonce off of!" (sic). If I used a white card, wouldn't there be something to bounce off of... like the card? There was (right) nothing to bounce off, I did not use "on camera flash". I used a 45" hexagonal softbox just outside the image frame, and I did it <i>on purpose</i> because I <i>like</i> this kind of light.<p>I am not posting these images to prove any theories or disprove any pedants. I only attempt to show that there are many ways to approach a given situation, commonly called style. And before anyone freaks out, let me say... don't try this for the first time on a job. Figure it out on your own time, <i>then</i> sell it (or don't)... t<div></div> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
timberwolf1 Posted July 1, 2003 Share Posted July 1, 2003 I offered to do photography for the "Devil Dolls" motorcycle club. Your ambient light here is in character for them! They hang out with the Hell's Angels; they have their own Harley's. Say, could we be on a tangent here...poor Benjamin must be tearing his hair out. No Benjamin, no, not the red light thing, not for the altar pic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tom_menegatos Posted July 1, 2003 Share Posted July 1, 2003 The main thing to ask yourself is why are you taking these photos? Are you a friend with a decent camera setup that was asked to take the photos because she's looking to save money? In that case try and shoot the photos in a style Are you just looking to get some experience in this field? Then shoot in the style you want to pursue. Is she a friend who has been impressed with your work in other areas and would like you to take photos based on that work? Then shoot in the style you normally shoot in because I doubt she specifically asked for you to take photos like timber or tom or larry or whoever (well maybe not before you started this thread). There are at least half a dozen general styles in wedding photography. None of them are right or wrong, they are dependant on the client's preferences and they will look for a photographer that shoots in that style. Basically, spend more time talking to your friend than to us :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twmeyer Posted July 1, 2003 Share Posted July 1, 2003 I actually powered up and stopped down to get a 2 sec exposure out of the red table lamp to camera right, then told her to shake her head after the strobe popped (and hand held it! wahoo!)... real big fun (it was a birthday party full of visually rich and "adventuresome" people). This technique might be appropriate for the occasional "Bride From Hell" portrait, but only for the groom after their divorce... t :^) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
timberwolf1 Posted July 1, 2003 Share Posted July 1, 2003 I would like to knoww what these "half dozen" styles are. I think this should be answered in its own question. Look for it! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
carl_williams1 Posted July 5, 2003 Share Posted July 5, 2003 Hello everyone I'm kind of new to all this, but here are some shots taken of a group @ f8 &1/60 sec. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
carl_williams1 Posted July 5, 2003 Share Posted July 5, 2003 Here's #2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
carl_williams1 Posted July 5, 2003 Share Posted July 5, 2003 here's #3 they were all taken at f8 1/60 , with 2 220 watt Britek strobes at full power and about 15 ft. away Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
carl_williams1 Posted July 5, 2003 Share Posted July 5, 2003 also I metered with a minolta III flash meter on both ends of the group Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
timberwolf1 Posted July 5, 2003 Share Posted July 5, 2003 Notice in these examples: No orangey color cast arund the edges of their bodies or clothing, only white whites. No bluish color cast in the veil of the bride (this is where it usually first appears). No dark shadows cast across faces due to a 2-head set-up. It is sharp. Carl got lucky and got some reflection off of wood panels which actually helped here to separate dark skin tones from the dark background. A 2 head set-up gave a slight feeling of 3-d without creating dark, messy shadows across young faces.. Carl could experiment with 2 background lights pointed in from the sides to tone down glare from walls. Using even more power than 440ws total into 2 3ft umbrellas would make skin tones even more even; reducing shine. Perhaps 1600ws would be needed for this technique!---2 stop loss! If Carl moves back from 15ft to 20ft he will have even more lighting eveness among group faces front to back---but this takes more power! I think he did a good job, and I am sure the bride will be very proud of her pictures! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
timberwolf1 Posted July 5, 2003 Share Posted July 5, 2003 Although there is a bluish color cast of the bride's veil in one picture, notice that one has blue bride'smaids dresses in it which reflect bluishness against anything near---like the veil of the bride. Carl is using UV filtration or coated uv bulbs to eliminate bluish flouresence. If the maids dreses were red, the veil would turn red tinged in this one picture---unavoidable! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jerry_johanson1 Posted July 7, 2003 Share Posted July 7, 2003 <i>While there is plenty of sound technical advise buried in the bluster, getting to it is a lesson in sado-masochism. I'll be shocked if anyone gets anything useful from this approach to "teaching" (flogging)... t</i><br><br> ditto. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
timberwolf1 Posted July 8, 2003 Share Posted July 8, 2003 The bottomline answer here is: For altar pics use 100% flash. Use 2 or more light heads like in Carl's submission above. Don't create black shadows on a bride's face at the altar. Do not create a color cast in the altar pics. Expose at highest sync speed. Do not expose at 1/4 or 1/8th second. Own 2 or more flash units of at least 100ws each, higher the better. Try to not throw many shadows on the wall. Use a 2:1 lighting ratio. Use a Kodak uv color printing filter on your flash to eliminate bluishness in white dresses; or use a uv coated bulb. Use f4.7-f8 on any group pics. Ambient light is not an acceptable "fill" indoors for an altar or indoors group shot. Buy an incident flash meter. Timber Borcherding timberborcherding 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