Reply #9 - August 19, 2008, 11:26:29 AM
So basically reduce the light contribution of any other source but flash?
Wouldn't that mean that it would be easier to achieve same effect in the night?
Yes. You can reduce the actual amount of light; or the amount your camera absorbs through the shutter speed. But use a shutter speed faster than your max flash sync speed and you're going to have a problem with getting a partial frame when the shutter closes before the flash fires. It makes things easier at night if you only want to see the subject. If you want some background you need some light. If you're using multiple flashes you can show what you want and hide what you want. Remember you can more or less shape light within the laws of physics.
So is flash light usually shot from a source different than the cameras? I currently don't have any flash but the build-in.
Yes. No. Both.
-You can shoot it with a built in flash on the camera. But your going to get flat harsh frontal lighting at close range.
You can use a speedlite on a hot shoe and get the same thing but with some more range and flexibility.
-You can use a hot-shoe cord and put your speedlite on a bracket or hand hold it and change where the light is coming from a bit.
-You can bounce the light off of a ceiling, wall, reflector, floor, etc. This will soften the light and out it over a broad area. You also loose intensity of light and have to compensate for it. Think of a bank shot on a billiard table.
-You can mix on camera fill flash with ambient light, off camera speedlites, studio style strobes, or anything else that gives off light. You just have to have an idea of what you want to show.
I would highly suggest investing in at least one speedlite. You can get some for less than $100 that will work. More money=more features.
Do you use direct flash light or is it bounced or diffused?
All three. It depends on what I'm trying to do. And I don't always choose correctly.
Doing what you say do you immediately get a picture like that? or do you usually need to darken areas (like background) in PS afterwards?
Usually if I want a pure black background that's what I'll use. Just hang up a piece of black cloth or wood or something like that and have your subject six to eight feet away from it and use the method from above. That's the easy way. If you're stuck with a location you just have to deal with it will still work; just remember that the less ambient light the better. I still get stuff in the background that I don't want and photoshop my way out of it. Personally I don't like to use photoshop to fix things I should have done in camera. I'd rather spend my time on the computer doing things I can't do in the camera. A little side note on that. With everybody using digital these days if you take a photo of a person most of then love to see some of your shots on the LCD right after you take them. If you take a clean, well lit shot it's going to be a lot more impressive to your model than mediocre shadows and your refrigerator in the background.
Now if you've digested all that we need to realize what I've said so far is like an iceberg. You're only looking at a little bit of it and the rest is below the surface waiting for someone to dive down and take a look. There's light ratios, proper metering, soft, hard, long, short, directional, and diffused lighting. And who knows how many other little things in between. As I said in my earlier post; I don't claim to be an expert...yet. I have a good idea of what I need to learn and a few mistakes I don't need to make again. (always keep a spare set of batteries for your speedlite in your pocket if you're going to assume you have enough power left in it before you try to get 180 people together for a group shot in a small room) There are some people that know a lot more on this subject than I do on this forum, and some good threads on the subject here too.
Logged
-John
Sarcasm, frustrating the clueless since 3000 b.c.
.
