Why are people with DSLRs not using flash?

[patrickt]

Really? I usually wonder why people with point-and-shoots are using flash from a distance of 200 feet.

I rarely ever use the pop-up flash. I occasionally use it for fill flash but not often.

 

[magkelly]

My Fuji's (not a DSLR) built in flash isn't bad if you tame it via the settings panel. Factory is a bit too harsh sometimes, but anything shot at high iso settings without it is definitely not ideal. I got a shoe flash when I got the camera. That's decent but not expensive and I'm really glad I did that overall. Even with the shoe flash though I'm always putting a piece of cheese cloth or my finger over the flash though to get the exact light I want half the time. High iso settings on this camera just don't cut it unfortunately.

Forgive me if I sound dumb here, but I haven't really shot much with a DSLR except for a couple of quick sessions playing with a friend's. Not nearly enough to get an idea of what it was really capable of. (Nice Pentax, drool!) I want to see if I am getting this right.

I am reading the posts above correctly DSLR cameras have less noise at higher settings than say a more complex point and shoot like mine and that means not using a flash at all is often possible or even better for indoor work?

Higher ISO with DSLR doesn't automatically mean horrible grain levels, I take it?

I can't go much further than a medium ISO level with mine before my pictures start looking like they were taken in a hot humid jungle in Vietnam in the 60's or something so that sounds very nice to me. Just one more reason to keep saving my pennies for my own DSLR!

 

[Vinny]

Depending on the DSLR, yes the higher ISO settings will produce images that may not be too noisy. Having a faster lens (larger aperture) may also be needed to not push the ISO too high. But the problem with a faster lens at it's largest aperture is a shallow depth of field.

IMO, using a flash, any flash, will open up the possibilities of taking more and possibly better photos. The people I was observing were not professionals, didn't have different lenses that I could see, didn't seem to have a hot shoe flash unit and weren't using any flash. Quite strange for me as I have a 1970's film SLR (now have a DSLR) and would have needed to use flash back then and would have used flash now.

As far as using cheese cloth for your flash ... Back when I had a hot shoe flash (film camera) and couldn't bounce it because of colored walls, too high ceiling or what ever and needed to fire it directly I would put a white tissue in front of the lens to diffuse the light to get rid of the harshness. I also had an argument with a professional photograher back then about it, today they sell diffusers for the same reason. Keep using that cheese cloth!

 

[table1349]

If you put a blanket statement out saying you would never use your pop up, or that the results of using it correctly were completely unworthy of being accepted, then you're far too close minded.

I would never use a pop up either. Not closed minded. Some of my bodies don't have one and I ain't retrofitting them. :mrgreen:

As for the one body with a pop up flash, I find it a lot more closed minded or just plain lazy to not have basic gear with you when ever you are shooting. I always have 1 580 EX with me no matter what the situation.

 

[Dominantly]

If you put a blanket statement out saying you would never use your pop up, or that the results of using it correctly were completely unworthy of being accepted, then you're far too close minded.

I would never use a pop up either. Not closed minded. Some of my bodies don't have one and I ain't retrofitting them. :mrgreen:

As for the one body with a pop up flash, I find it a lot more closed minded or just plain lazy to not have basic gear with you when ever you are shooting. I always have 1 580 EX with me no matter what the situation.

Well, I'm sure if we all had free access to equipment, we'd all have bodies with no flashes, and numerous speedlights (among other things).
But it all costs, and some may not be able to make additional purchases.

 

[Derrel]

My belief is that some people prefer photos where the existing light is the light used to make the photo--no matter what that existing light looks like, some people want a photo where there is no flash added, so that the moment is preserved without flash. For those people, the "moment" seems to be what they want captured, even if that means dark shadows under chins, and badly-lit faces,and so on...to those people, the "moment" includes the available lighting of the scene, even if it's dark or dim or contrasty lighting.

Other people prefer their photographs to have brighter lighting, with frozen motion and crispness that flash can bring. These people prefer their shadows filled, their strong backlighting augmented with fill-flash, and so on. These people have no problems with letting a pop-up flash do its thing, or insist on using a shoe-mount flash.

Some people like rare steaks, others like 'em cooked till they are done all the way through, and then some. Who is to say who is "right"? It's a big, big world.

 

[magkelly]

As far as using cheese cloth for your flash ... Back when I had a hot shoe flash (film camera) and couldn't bounce it because of colored walls, too high ceiling or what ever and needed to fire it directly I would put a white tissue in front of the lens to diffuse the light to get rid of the harshness. I also had an argument with a professional photograher back then about it, today they sell diffusers for the same reason. Keep using that cheese cloth!

Thanks for the info, very interesting to me and I will remember what I have read here. As for the flash thing, I use all sorts of weird things when I photograph. I have some of those old colored gel squares and I actually like those better than some of my modern filters. I actually find myself using those far more often than I do the ones I bought with the darned camera!

 

[table1349]

If you put a blanket statement out saying you would never use your pop up, or that the results of using it correctly were completely unworthy of being accepted, then you're far too close minded.

I would never use a pop up either. Not closed minded. Some of my bodies don't have one and I ain't retrofitting them. :mrgreen:

As for the one body with a pop up flash, I find it a lot more closed minded or just plain lazy to not have basic gear with you when ever you are shooting. I always have 1 580 EX with me no matter what the situation.

Well, I'm sure if we all had free access to equipment, we'd all have bodies with no flashes, and numerous speedlights (among other things).
But it all costs, and some may not be able to make additional purchases.

Been there, Done that and I have the t-shirt. After 35 years, i have managed to put together some gear now so I can shoot in ways that I would like. I make no apologies for it. I know the sacrifices I have made to get some of the gear I wanted.

Far too many times however I hear photographers bemoaning the fact that they left a basic piece of equipment at home because they didn't want to carry it. I feel the same way and would agree when hiking up a mountain, but it amazes me the number of people that drive to the door, get out at some location and start shooting only to find that they don't have some simple piece of gear that they already own.

If you don't own the gear, then you do the best that you can and do your best to achieve the results you are tying to get. Been there and done that, for several years. As much as it might be a disappointment there are times when you might not be able to shoot at all. It happens. It's life.
This isn't brain surgery, and what we are doing isn't life and death.

 

[Vinny]

When I originally posted the question, I found it odd coming from film that somebody wouldn't use a flash if one was available considering that the pop up flash on my D90 made acceptable photos. As I posted, these people were not professionals and I will assume they had lower end cameras (not that mine is top of the line) with whatever lens came with the camera (just like me). I made the assumption that they had a pop up flash since mine does. DSLRs bring a new dimension to photography since you can dial in an ISO and not be stuck on a single film speed but again the noise vs possible better picture quality using a flash stuck in my mind.

My mindset is learn how to use what you have available if you don't have a lot of equipment, I'm still learning what the D90 can do. Since a lot of photographers here seem to have more than basic equipment (basic = camera & kit lens(es)) it seemed obvious to them to use a faster lens or a bounce flash or flash with a diffuser. For me without either a faster lens or a hot shoe flash I would need to learn the best way to take photos indoors with less light and that would be with flash, in my case a pop up flash.

So after all the discussion about this I can see that some photographers would rather use a higher ISO than use a flash unit. Unfortunately what I have found talking to some not so serious "photographers" (none of the people at this p[arty) is that whatever they take is just good enough and don't care to learn more or take better photos which brought the initial question

 

[Vinny]

Some of us have sacrificed for whatever we want in life. Others are born with a silver spoon in their mouth. Both are the realities of life, personally I believe sacrificing and getting what you have makes it more appreciated but that is just my opinion.

Indoor photography pretty much stopped the day my Vivitar 283 broke. We had point and shoots for a long while and I would break out the old Nikon whenever I needed the extra range of the zooms but film processing is horrible where I live so I only broke it out occasionally.

Yup, sometimes you have to do without!

I would never use a pop up either. Not closed minded. Some of my bodies don't have one and I ain't retrofitting them. :mrgreen:

As for the one body with a pop up flash, I find it a lot more closed minded or just plain lazy to not have basic gear with you when ever you are shooting. I always have 1 580 EX with me no matter what the situation.

Well, I'm sure if we all had free access to equipment, we'd all have bodies with no flashes, and numerous speedlights (among other things).
But it all costs, and some may not be able to make additional purchases.

Been there, Done that and I have the t-shirt. After 35 years, i have managed to put together some gear now so I can shoot in ways that I would like. I make no apologies for it. I know the sacrifices I have made to get some of the gear I wanted.

Far too many times however I hear photographers bemoaning the fact that they left a basic piece of equipment at home because they didn't want to carry it. I feel the same way and would agree when hiking up a mountain, but it amazes me the number of people that drive to the door, get out at some location and start shooting only to find that they don't have some simple piece of gear that they already own.

If you don't own the gear, then you do the best that you can and do your best to achieve the results you are tying to get. Been there and done that, for several years. As much as it might be a disappointment there are times when you might not be able to shoot at all. It happens. It's life.
This isn't brain surgery, and what we are doing isn't life and death.

 

[Vinny]

I was never into studio photography but if I recall they used to mount the gel squares onto "studio" lights to project the color, they may still do that.

As far as using cheese cloth for your flash ... Back when I had a hot shoe flash (film camera) and couldn't bounce it because of colored walls, too high ceiling or what ever and needed to fire it directly I would put a white tissue in front of the lens to diffuse the light to get rid of the harshness. I also had an argument with a professional photograher back then about it, today they sell diffusers for the same reason. Keep using that cheese cloth!

Thanks for the info, very interesting to me and I will remember what I have read here. As for the flash thing, I use all sorts of weird things when I photograph. I have some of those old colored gel squares and I actually like those better than some of my modern filters. I actually find myself using those far more often than I do the ones I bought with the darned camera!

 

[ivomitcats]

The pop-up flash makes my pictures look worse than if I don't use a flash at all.

Pretty basic answer I think.. I've TRIED the popup flash, but I've never actually kept a picture I've taken with it. They just always look better if I take the same shot without it.

 

[table1349]

The pop-up flash makes my pictures look worse than if I don't use a flash at all.

Pretty basic answer I think.. I've TRIED the popup flash, but I've never actually kept a picture I've taken with it. They just always look better if I take the same shot without it.

An even worse look than pop up flash was what you used to get from those crazy flash cubes on the old Instamatic cameras. :lmao: But you were stuck with it. There was no way to use any other flash bulb light source.

 

[magkelly]

I was never into studio photography but if I recall they used to mount the gel squares onto "studio" lights to project the color, they may still do that.

One of my teachers at school told us they used to combine them a lot for fashion photography to create some moody art effects but I can't say I've seen them used like that. Most people just use filters in Photoshop these days, shrug.

I just happened to get these with a bunch of film related photography stuff someone dumped on CL. Most of it I just passed on to someone I knew who had a film camera but those I kept because they interested me. Sometimes I use them directly as filters over the lens, other times I will experiment using them taped to a piece of glass that I have set just under my small spots. I have a rather makeshift lighting assembly, nothing too professional as yet.

I've often thought of taping them on directly as I think that's the way they originally used them, but I only have the new kind of energy saving bulbs and they get so hot I'm afraid I'll melt them if I place them directly. These gels are pretty old and they're a bit fragile. The box they came from looked like was from the 70's and I don't want to ruin them.

 

[Vinny]

Yes the gels will melt, you need air space to keep them from melting.

For "professional" lighting I have to question exactly what does anyone really need. In another thread somewhere here a poster was asking about a light setup that a certain photographer used. It looked like just a couple of painters drop lights on a pole. If photos come out looking good then it works!

I was never into studio photography but if I recall they used to mount the gel squares onto "studio" lights to project the color, they may still do that.

One of my teachers at school told us they used to combine them a lot for fashion photography to create some moody art effects but I can't say I've seen them used like that. Most people just use filters in Photoshop these days, shrug.

I just happened to get these with a bunch of film related photography stuff someone dumped on CL. Most of it I just passed on to someone I knew who had a film camera but those I kept because they interested me. Sometimes I use them directly as filters over the lens, other times I will experiment using them taped to a piece of glass that I have set just under my small spots. I have a rather makeshift lighting assembly, nothing too professional as yet.

I've often thought of taping them on directly as I think that's the way they originally used them, but I only have the new kind of energy saving bulbs and they get so hot I'm afraid I'll melt them if I place them directly. These gels are pretty old and they're a bit fragile. The box they came from looked like was from the 70's and I don't want to ruin them.