How to get a sun-shiny, illuminated picture like the pros take.. =)

[Stradawhovious]

Flash definitely has its place.

I think hell just froze over.

 

[paigew]

Flash definitely has its place.

I think hell just froze over.

contrary to popular belief I have NEVER ONE TIME said flash = bad; those words were undeservedly put into my 'mouth'. I myself own a speedlight...and I even (sorta) know how to use it. I rarely do though and am far from an expert. Now if you flash addicts would admit you don't NEED flash for a good image...THEN hell would freeze over.

 

[Stradawhovious]

Now if you flash addicts would admit you don't NEED flash for a good image...THEN hell would freeze over.

contrary to popular belief I have NEVER ONE TIME said you need flash ALL THE TIME for a good image.

I merely stated that when used effectively, if can be beneficial in most circumstances.

 

[cgipson1]

Flash definitely has its place.

I think hell just froze over.

contrary to popular belief I have NEVER ONE TIME said flash = bad; those words were undeservedly put into my 'mouth'. I myself own a speedlight...and I even (sorta) know how to use it. I rarely do though and am far from an expert. Now if you flash addicts would admit you don't NEED flash for a good image...THEN hell would freeze over.

You can get good images without flash... just as you can get good images with flash.

Many of the non-flash shots I see (especially the backlit stuff), including yours.. would be improved by flash, although I know you would never admit that. Especially since you really don't know how to use one (SORTA, right?), and really have no desire to learn how to use it.

The thing is that being able to shoot either way give you a lot more options on when and how to shoot. Why limit yourself to one, when you can have both?

I know you have probably missed many shots (or threw them away) due to blown out background, or heavily shadowed faces.... or when it was just too dark to shoot without cranking the ISO to the max, haven't you? Or will you even admit that?

 

[paigew]

I personally do not like the look of outdoor shots using flash. Off camera or on. To me it looks fake and even when actual professionals use it I don't like it. I can appreciate a good OCF image, but it is not my style, and I would NEVER purchase one if I was a client. I have seen plenty of ocf images done in studio or bounced (inside) that do look nice though.

I know you have probably missed many shots (or threw them away) due to blown out background, or heavily shadowed faces.... or when it was just too dark to shoot without cranking the ISO to the max, haven't you? Or will you even admit that?

I have seen photos that you yourself have posted (portraits) that could have benefited by not using flash, but instead repositioning yourself/subject to make better use of the ambient light.

I know you have probably missed many shots (or threw them away) due to blown out background, or heavily shadowed faces.... or when it was just too dark to shoot without cranking the ISO to the max, haven't you? Or will you even admit that?

Well, no, not really...I place my subjects in ways that allow me to not NEED flash whenever possible. And actually I have missed more shots using flash than when I don't. (waiting for it to recharge) . Also I like the look of dramatic shadows, and especially in my own personal candids. I do not mind grain/noise and I frequently shoot at very high ISO. I personally feel like it gives images a certain feel/tone. I also do not like drawing attention to myself (shooting) but instead prefer to shoot without my subjects being aware. But that is my personal shooting style.

 

[Stradawhovious]

I have seen photos that you yourself have posted (portraits) that could have benefited by not using flash, but instead repositioning yourself/subject to make better use of the ambient light.

.................

I also do not like drawing attention to myself (shooting) but instead prefer to shoot without my subjects being aware. But that is my personal shooting style.

So let me se if I understand this correctly........... you don't want your subjects to know you're shooting photos, yet you take the time to reposition them to take advantage of ambient lighting?

I'm curious as to how you pull this off.

Seriously.

No foolin'

 

[paigew]

So let me se if I understand this correctly........... you don't want your subjects to know you're shooting photos, yet you take the time to reposition them to take advantage of ambient lighting?

I'm curious as to how you pull this off.

Seriously.

No foolin'

okay here is what I do complete with examples (because I sincerely dislike it when *people* talk the talk but can't show pics explaining it). Keep in mind these are family snapshots

I take candids one of two ways. One would be to encourage play in certain areas (with good light). Then I watch and wait until I see the a moment/expression that I deem 'worthy' and shoot. I often set up activities with this in mind...coloring, doll play, eating, if it needs 'set up' it WILL be set up in good light. It isn't that my subjects don't know I am shooting, but rather my shooting (flash) doesn't interfere with the activities going on.

The other approach I would have is to position myself in good light so that I am ready to shoot when my (moving) subjects cross my path right into the perfect light.

this photo (candid) was taken was taken using this method. Yes I had to wait for the perfect moment when he was turned to the light but that is the way I shoot (when I can at least).

then of course if my subject just happens to be in great light I will try to take advantage of that as well

I have hundreds more examples if you are interested, these were the first I saw when I went to my album.

 

[skieur]

Well, once you know what you're doing, things are pretty basic. However, getting to that point may take both lots of learning and a bit of equipment ("bit" is somewhat understated). Quite a bit of learning applies to understanding how to "read" sources of light (primary source, secondary source, etc), and deciding when additional light (from flash(es) or reflectors) is needed and in what proportion. That's what makes a photo "pop" - the light brings out the best of the subject. The light colour determines if it is reddish, bluish or neutral, the light intensity determines how much light we have to work with, the light size determines whether the shadows are hard or very soft. The light direction is also important to determine where the shadows and highlights will appear. The balance between multiple sources generally determines the dimensionality of the subject relative to the background, and the apparent three-dimensional shape of the subject.

I don't disagree with anything you have said above, but it depends on the photography that you are doing, as well as the time and equipment that you have available to set up. If you are working with models and you have "control", then you have an advantage over public relations or journalistic events where you have little or no control and the need to get the shot when it happens, irrespective of ideal lighting. Different needs require different methods and approaches.

skieur

 

[skieur]

I have seen photos that you yourself have posted (portraits) that could have benefited by not using flash, but instead repositioning yourself/subject to make better use of the ambient light.

.................

I also do not like drawing attention to myself (shooting) but instead prefer to shoot without my subjects being aware. But that is my personal shooting style.

So let me se if I understand this correctly........... you don't want your subjects to know you're shooting photos, yet you take the time to reposition them to take advantage of ambient lighting?

I'm curious as to how you pull this off.

Seriously.

No foolin'

Actually, it is surprisingly easy. If you crawl around the floor or the ground with really young kids, even with a camera, they quickly forget that you are there and ignore you. You can move them around and if they are playing with another child, they soon stop noticing your presence and you can start shooting. A wide angle prime is ideal for close-in shooting.

skieur

 

[Stradawhovious]

okay here is what I do complete with examples (because I sincerely dislike it when *people* talk the talk but can't show pics explaining it). Keep in mind these are family snapshots

And you NEVER miss a shot due to having improper ambient lighting. Never. Right?

Kind of the way you make it sound and I find that very hard to believe.....

Whatever floats your goat I guess. If you want to fight ambient light for some of the shots you take, that's your choice. Just imagine though, the doors that could be opened for you if you just stopped fighting it, and learned to use the speed light you paid good money for!

I bet you'd like it. And you wouldn't even have to use it all the time!

Come to the dark side.

We have cookies.

 

[skieur]

Yeah, how does that squelch or add exposure to the background and compensate for the studio lighting adjustments for the subject? I mean if you're into shooting "auto" modes, I reckon that methodology would work.

One pop of my light into the Sekonic light meter and i get fstop/ambient settings AND ratio. And tweak the wheel on the meter and it outputs settings per.

I never ever use my pop-up for anything, wish it wasn't wasting space on my camera =)

The background stays the same exposure-wise when you are shooting outside like in the sample shots and the flash adds just enough light to the front to avoid a silhouette. Studio lighting when you have more time, lights, and flexibility is a totally different story.


skieur

yeah, but increasing or decreasing the shutter speed will take the ambient from that "snap shottish" look and then adjusting for the amount of fill will enhance it even more.

But if snapshots like the examples are all we're after here...... I must humbly agree you're right

Well, I doubt that they were considering wireless flashes, umbrellas, gold or silver reflectors etc. or even had them available. Keep it simple.


skieur

 

[paigew]

okay here is what I do complete with examples (because I sincerely dislike it when *people* talk the talk but can't show pics explaining it). Keep in mind these are family snapshots

And you NEVER miss a shot due to having improper ambient lighting. Never. Right?

Kind of the way you make it sound and I find that very hard to believe.....

Whatever floats your goat I guess. If you want to fight ambient light for some of the shots you take, that's your choice. Just imagine though, the doors that could be opened for you if you just stopped fighting it, and learned to use the speed light you paid good money for!

I bet you'd like it. And you wouldn't even have to use it all the time!

Come to the dark side.

We have cookies.

I do know how to use bounced flash. I use it at times when I really want to take a photo and there isn't sufficient ambient light. I would post photos but like I said, I rarely use it and the shots I have are not appropriate for the internet. But most of the time I do just as my new favorite member Skieur suggests. KEEP IT SIMPLE!!

oh, and I have cookies on my side too .

Well, I doubt that they were considering wireless flashes, umbrellas, gold or silver reflectors etc. or even had them available. Keep it simple.


skieur

 

[skieur]

I'm sure! Flash definitely has its place.

What is also used in the evening outside by the way is LED lithium lights that are manufactured by the drill companies.

skieur

 

[2WheelPhoto]

Monolights FTW

 

[cgipson1]

Monolights FTW

Eggzackly! It's like having Sunshine on a Stick!