Do you sleep with it too

[Battou]

I've been shooting photography with out a flash for years. I use whatever light is available to me be it incandesant bulbs, sun light and even moonlight to achieve the photo I am looking to get.

The more I read in various forums on the internet, people seem to be so completely relyent on their flashes. Of course camera manufacturers are not helping my suspicion either with two of my three point and shoot cameras having the flash on by default (the one that is off by default was produced in the late eighties if that says anything.)

I have over the last few weeks seen on various sites on the web people asking for advice shooting inanimate objects and the flash always gets calculated into the advice. I just got done reading a thread where in the advice was to take the subject out to have it partially dismantled so it could be seen properly....

Seriously it is really that bad that one needs a tripod and a flash to shoot something that ain't going to move? Is shaving a few clicks of the shutterspeed dial really going to save you any real time?

Flashes have their purpose.....and I firmly believe it is not everything under the sun one can shoot. [/rant]

 

[Village Idiot]

I shot a portfolio for a local college student last night. For some of the work I would have needed a boom arm to get the camera over the art projects to hold it steady. It was done in a room with crappy incandescent lighting. I was also shooting beer bottles she made the labels for and trying to get that nice smooth reflection on the bottle would have been impossible with the halogen light in the corner.

They're tools. I use them when needed and when shooting product photography I like to have have control over the way the light hits the objects I'm shooting.

 

[Derrel]

I've been shooting photography with out a flash for years. I use whatever light is available to me be it incandesant bulbs, sun light and even moonlight to achieve the photo I am looking to get.

The more I read in various forums on the internet, people seem to be so completely relyent on their flashes. Of course camera manufacturers are not helping my suspicion either with two of my three point and shoot cameras having the flash on by default (the one that is off by default was produced in the late eighties if that says anything.)

I have over the last few weeks seen on various sites on the web people asking for advice shooting inanimate objects and the flash always gets calculated into the advice. I just got done reading a thread where in the advice was to take the subject out to have it partially dismantled so it could be seen properly....

Seriously it is really that bad that one needs a tripod and a flash to shoot something that ain't going to move? Is shaving a few clicks of the shutterspeed dial really going to save you any real time?

Flashes have their purpose.....and I firmly believe it is not everything under the sun one can shoot. [/rant]

Your rant comes from a point of view that's quite old and some might consider outdated now. I had a college photography instructor that railed,continually, about how awful flash was. However, flash is a pretty valuable tool as far as controlling lighting ratios on-scene,and if it is used skillfully, it is often fairly hard to spot that flash was used. I think an aversion to flash on general principle does not make much sense in this day and age; skillful use of flash is the new "modern" way to do high-quality photography, and is a method used by many people today. Simply taking whatever lighting that happens to be ambient under every condition means settling for sub-par lighting that is dull and uninteresting in many instances; taking control of one's lighting and one's photography by using supplemental lighting techniques--like reflector fill, flash fill, flash as main light--that is the mark of a serious and dedicated photographer. BLindly eschewing flash on principle takes me back to my now-dead old photography professor's constant railings.

 

[craig]

I see your point. Me; I am the complete opposite. More and more available light is bringing me down. Maybe because it is so harsh here in SoCal. During the summer I photograph hoards of soccer players. We create shade with Eazy up's so we can use a flash.

For me it comes down to absolutely controlling the light. As a young assistant I worked in the studio for 40+ hours a week. I think that is what started it for me. Now it is my signature style.

Love & Bass

 

[Dominantly]

I don't have much flash experience, I've used a lot of studio hot lights, and natural light, but have yet to jump into working with multiple strobes.

I am actually eager to jump into it though. My "artistic vision" if you will, swings towards high contrast, dramatic lighting.

If you spend time on Strobist, you'll develop a desire to have many flashes laying around.

 

[FrankLamont]

Well, I see your point - that people are 'just using' it. I also agree in some sense, that after a while, you can only get some types of shots using ambient lighting. You can explore flash over and over, but the best thing is to have a good balance.

 

[usayit]

I'm with Derrel...

People who have associated flash photography as just a means to gain more exposure simply don't understand the creative use of flash. Considering all resources at your disposal (including flash) when trying to create a particular photo or look as absolutely the proper way to think things through.

I shoot mostly ambient but that's just because of the type of photography that I "fell" into in the years past. Last year I acquired a couple stands, umbrellas, and mounted some wireless flashes on triggers (strobist kit of sorts). It opened up a whole new world of possibilities.... There are some examples of studio produced photos with explanations on the internet. Many use dozens of strobes to achieve results that are near impossible other wise. In those cases, it is clear the thought put into lighting is far far far more important than lens/camera selection.

Even my P&S travels with a optical triggered compact flash... Even though it has a hotshoe, getting the flash off the camera and triggered remotely opens up the door to many possibilities. It allows for some creative control over lighting even while on the go when the primary camera stays at home.

 

[Pugs]

Hm...

Are we talking about the on camera flash or strobes in general? Even with a speedlight on the camera and bouncing, I rarely find any use for "flash" other than event photography, which is not bag at all (from an interest or talent point of view).

However, off camera strobes for portraiture and the like, I use a lot. I find being able to control my lighting environment to be HUGELY beneficial.

That flat, harsh light from an on camera flash is rarely (if ever) what I want or find pleasing/attractive. Even bouncing it or diffusing it tends to produce "second-best" results for me. That could be a statement of my skill, but I'd rather have the light source off camera where it can be manipulated more fully.

 

[Mike_E]

If you'd put down that old Canon and pick up a Nikon that does fill flash well you might go "oh-ho".



:lmao::lmao::lmao::lmao::lmao::lmao:


-running away in rapid mode- :greenpbl:








all kidding aside, it's just another tool in the kit. Nice to have when you need it, a mistake to use when you don't.

 

[FeistyFeeFee]

HECK YEAH I SLEEP WITH MY CAMERA!!! I only sleep with it because I told my son that if he touches my camera, I'm going to go in the back yard, dig a hole in the woods and push him in it. Now, I didn't say I was going to commit murder, I said I would push him in the hole in the ground, lol.:lmao:

 

[Casshew]

I took a photography workshop a couple of weeks ago and the instructor said he always used his flash outdoors in broad daylight, set his camera to force flash.

 

[Overread]

Don't you mean fill flash? And yes using fillflash or a reflector is a very good way of trying to up the exposure on the shadows whilst exposing for the highlights of the shot as caused by the bright sunlight. Some shade tends to work better but sometimes you don't have that option.

And I don't sleep with my flash - its abig flash now and has its own little bed

 

[Derrel]

I received an e-mail from Nikon, USA on flash techniques on Feb. 18. Here are three of the four links.

Mixing Flash and Ambient Light from Nikon

Dave Black: Mixing Flash and Ambient Light

Grand Master Flash from Nikon

Grand Master Flash-Joe McNally

Flash Value (FV) Lock from Nikon
Flash Value (FV) Lock--a function of the Nikon Creative Lighting System, FV Lock maintains the same exposure for your main subject when you're shooting a sequence of photos,allowing you to zoom in on your subject, change the composition or adjust the aperture, all without altering the intended exposure.

 

[danielrwelch]

Looking at the work of true professionals in the field, what stands out to me as truly impressive is unique use of flash.

To a n00b like myself, using flash correctly (and artistically) can be daunting because it requires seeing the subject in their imagination differently than in ambient light. It's like hearing music in your head and being able to reproduce it with an instrument. This can be difficult if you don't know your instrument well, or if you haven't practiced playing by ear.

In the same way, seeing something that's "not there" and then producing it exactly the way your mind's eye dictates can be intimidating.

Learning to use produced lighting is one of the reasons I ended up here at TPF, because the use of non-ambient light can be killer in the right circumstances...and completely necessary in others.

 

[djacobox372]

The "art" of photography can be boiled down to lighting and composition... if you are only able to manipulate one of those things you are severely handicapping yourself.