Fill flash

KmH · May 8, 2011

Here is a good example of using fill flash in daylight.

Notice how dark the background is, and how dark the driver's legs are where the flash did not hit them.

http://www.autoracing1.com/Images/2011/OtherSeries/GP3/GP3TurkeyTillman.jpg

jands · May 8, 2011

Not knowing what I don't know, I'm trying to decide if you are being sarcastic or serious.

480sparky · May 8, 2011

I think he's saying, "Without a fill flash, the driver's face would be as dark as the grandstand, if not as dark as his legs."

My guess is the flash couldn't reach his legs due to the 16mm lens' FOV.

subscuck · May 8, 2011

To further illuminate, pun intended, Keith is showing you that in a back lit situation (note the sun directly behind the subject) flash is a must. It would be impossible to have subject, sky and background all properly exposed without flash. In this case the grandstand is still in shadow because of flash range, tho in this case that may well be how it looked anyway, Your camera can expose for the sun, or for the subject, but not both. Fill flash solves that. This is an area people who shoot in auto run into trouble, and don't understand why their back lit shots never turn out. Now you know why.

analog.universe · May 8, 2011

That's a really good point, but this is a weird photo to choose, no? on the whole it doesn't really look good... Fill flash is important in a backlit situation, but nothing about this photo makes me say "I want to learn how to do that".

subscuck · May 8, 2011

True, it's a very candid type shot, but it still works well to illustrate how to overcome a problem everyone has when they first start shooting. A side by side of the same shot with and without flash would further reinforce the concept of why one would want to learn how to do it, but I think this shows the gist of it, as looking at his legs gives you an idea of the shot without flash, as Keith pointed out.

jands · May 9, 2011

I understand now. Thanks for the posts.

KmH · May 9, 2011

analog.universe said:
That's a really good point, but this is a weird photo to choose, no? on the whole it doesn't really look good... Fill flash is important in a backlit situation, but nothing about this photo makes me say "I want to learn how to do that".

No, it is not a weird photo to choose, because my intent wasn't to show a perfectly made photo using fill flash.

My intent was pretty much as subscuck described.

gsgary · May 9, 2011

subscuck said:
To further illuminate, pun intended, Keith is showing you that in a back lit situation (note the sun directly behind the subject) flash is a must. It would be impossible to have subject, sky and background all properly exposed without flash. In this case the grandstand is still in shadow because of flash range, tho in this case that may well be how it looked anyway, Your camera can expose for the sun, or for the subject, but not both. Fill flash solves that. This is an area people who shoot in auto run into trouble, and don't understand why their back lit shots never turn out. Now you know why.

Not necessarily correct, when shooting field sport there is no way of using fill flash, this is where i use sport metering

kundalini · May 9, 2011

analog.universe said:
That's a really good point, but this is a weird photo to choose, no? on the whole it doesn't really look good... Fill flash is important in a backlit situation, but nothing about this photo makes me say "I want to learn how to do that".

How about this example. Post #11. A little experiment I ran last year for fill flashing in a backlit situation.
http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/...how-use-your-built-flash-sun.html#post2032386

Please excuse how the remainder of the thread got a bit testy.

480sparky · May 9, 2011

jamhassan said:
Recently people follow the adobe photo shop i sure that adobe is better then flash do now about adobe photo shop.

Huh? Are you saying it's better to try to salvage a poorly-exposed image in post than to try to get it right in-camera?

gsgary · May 9, 2011

jamhassan said:
Recently people follow the adobe photo shop i sure that adobe is better then flash do now about adobe photo shop.

WTF are you on about ?

mjbine · May 9, 2011

gsgary said:
subscuck said:

To further illuminate, pun intended, Keith is showing you that in a back lit situation (note the sun directly behind the subject) flash is a must. It would be impossible to have subject, sky and background all properly exposed without flash. In this case the grandstand is still in shadow because of flash range, tho in this case that may well be how it looked anyway, Your camera can expose for the sun, or for the subject, but not both. Fill flash solves that. This is an area people who shoot in auto run into trouble, and don't understand why their back lit shots never turn out. Now you know why.

Click to expand...

Not necessarily correct, when shooting field sport there is no way of using fill flash, this is where i use sport metering