Critiques on lighting here....

[Lmphotos]

#1 #2


#1 the lighting I am happy with the sun is slightly above her head and I had an ocf to the right side which illuminated her face well. Now for #2 this the lighting was directly behind his head and flash still same position still same power. I have had this problem before when the sun is directly behind the subject any thoughts?
#1 is lightly edited but came out of the camera just about like this
#2 has no editing

 

[ronlane]

They both seem to be good fill lighting but #2 is underexposed. #1 looks good.

 

[pixmedic]

move the subject so the sun isn't directly behind them.

 

[tirediron]

#2 is definitely under-exposed; part of the problem is that your light was too high. If you look at the catchlights in #1, they show a "two o-clock" position, which is appropriate for this sort of lighting, whereas in #2, they're closer to noon.

 

[Pallycow]

What they said...all of them.

One other thing, had you hit the kid with the flash harder...meaning more powerful..and exposed for that power, the backlight/sunlight on the sky would have appeared more like nearing sunset as well. It's a good way to fake a sunset any time of day. ;-)

 

[Lmphotos]

How can it be underexposed when the sky is that blown out? When the sun is a bit higher I have no problem but when it gets lower I always run into this. The sky was such a pretty orange and I metered and had my settings for about. 1/3 stop underexposed so how did the sky get like that

 

[Ballistics]

How can it be underexposed when the sky is that blown out? When the sun is a bit higher I have no problem but when it gets lower I always run into this. The sky was such a pretty orange and I metered and had my settings for about. 1/3 stop underexposed so how did the sky get like that

Because the difference between the subject and the sky is too much. What you are supposed to do is meter the sky, and then match or come close to matching the exposure of the sky with your flash's output. If there is a 2 stop difference,
your subject is going to look very under exposed.


In other words, if the sky metered at f/11, and you are shooting at f/8 and your flash is set for f/5.6, your sky is going to be blown out and your subject is going to be too dark.
To fix the exposure in number 2, you could have halved the distance of the light to the subject(by moving it closer and lower) and decreased the aperture.

 

[2WheelPhoto]

I like everything about #1 but not sure why you didn;t shoot that one in portrait and also it may have worked centered

 

[Lmphotos]

I like everything about #1 but not sure why you didn;t shoot that one in portrait and also it may have worked centered

This is my niece and nephew and this was purely a lighting exercise not working on composition or anything.

 

[2WheelPhoto]

I like everything about #1 but not sure why you didn;t shoot that one in portrait and also it may have worked centered

This is my niece and nephew and this was purely a lighting exercise not working on composition or anything.

Ohhh gotcha, again I like everything about it and had to ask that!

 

[Lmphotos]

How can it be underexposed when the sky is that blown out? When the sun is a bit higher I have no problem but when it gets lower I always run into this. The sky was such a pretty orange and I metered and had my settings for about. 1/3 stop underexposed so how did the sky get like that

Because the difference between the subject and the sky is too much. What you are supposed to do is meter the sky, and then match or come close to matching the exposure of the sky with your flash's output. If there is a 2 stop difference,
your subject is going to look very under exposed.


In other words, if the sky metered at f/11, and you are shooting at f/8 and your flash is set for f/5.6, your sky is going to be blown out and your subject is going to be too dark.
To fix the exposure in number 2, you could have halved the distance of the light to the subject(by moving it closer and lower) and decreased the aperture.

I get the whole metering and flash output and when the sun is not directly behind them all these things work great why does this only happen when the sun is lower?

 

[Ballistics]

How can it be underexposed when the sky is that blown out? When the sun is a bit higher I have no problem but when it gets lower I always run into this. The sky was such a pretty orange and I metered and had my settings for about. 1/3 stop underexposed so how did the sky get like that

Because the difference between the subject and the sky is too much. What you are supposed to do is meter the sky, and then match or come close to matching the exposure of the sky with your flash's output. If there is a 2 stop difference,
your subject is going to look very under exposed.


In other words, if the sky metered at f/11, and you are shooting at f/8 and your flash is set for f/5.6, your sky is going to be blown out and your subject is going to be too dark.
To fix the exposure in number 2, you could have halved the distance of the light to the subject(by moving it closer and lower) and decreased the aperture.

I get the whole metering and flash output and when the sun is not directly behind them all these things work great why does this only happen when the sun is lower?

It's not that the sun is lower, it's that your perspective changed, altering the exposure of the scene.

 

[tirediron]

Search the term, "Lighting ratio".

 

[The_Traveler]

Look at how flat the lighting on their faces are and how uninteresting the lighting is.
It is the same as an on-camera flash. All the micro-shadows are gone and the faces looks almost lifeless.

 

[Lmphotos]

Look at how flat the lighting on their faces are and how uninteresting the lighting is.
It is the same as an on-camera flash. All the micro-shadows are gone and the faces looks almost lifeless.

Thanks for your opinion I am obviously not a fan of #2 and didn't even edit it because its going in the trash but I quite happy with #1 and I think it suits the scene and a young pre teen girl.