Should I have used a fill flash or reflector?
Dec 6, 2015 21:41:31 #
I want to grow up to be ED!!!!! A classic example of both sides of the brain functioning to the max.
Dec 15, 2015 12:46:19 #
Dec 15, 2015 16:13:55 #
photoguy43 wrote:
I want to grow up to be ED!!!!! A classic example of both sides of the brain functioning to the max.
Ed has gained a bit of a cult following in the Wedding Photography section. I almost get jealous when I catch him out here sharing with other people :)
Honestly, he's a great resource that we're lucky to have.
So.....even though my wife often says I'll "never grow up" IF I do, I hope I grow up to be like Ed as well. :thumbup:
Dec 16, 2015 13:12:13 #
Yes! As a kid, I always wanted to have my own "cult" until I found out that was not a little horse!
I think that not really "growing up" is the first prerequisite of being a good photographer, especially in the wedding specialty.
Growing up to be "me", might not be the best goal; I am a 71-year-old geezer with arthritis. I can still shoot a wedding with the best of them, but my biggest fear is unceremonially dropping dead in the middle of a job! That could really mess up the festivities! Well, if it should happen in a synagogue, that would be more convenient- they could just knock off the ceremony and pack me off the graveyard right on the spot! Anyway- my assistants are well trained enough- they could finish the job- no sweat! It's my morbid sense of humor that keeps me going!
Thanks for the kind thoughts guys! They are appreciated!
Ed
I think that not really "growing up" is the first prerequisite of being a good photographer, especially in the wedding specialty.
Growing up to be "me", might not be the best goal; I am a 71-year-old geezer with arthritis. I can still shoot a wedding with the best of them, but my biggest fear is unceremonially dropping dead in the middle of a job! That could really mess up the festivities! Well, if it should happen in a synagogue, that would be more convenient- they could just knock off the ceremony and pack me off the graveyard right on the spot! Anyway- my assistants are well trained enough- they could finish the job- no sweat! It's my morbid sense of humor that keeps me going!
Thanks for the kind thoughts guys! They are appreciated!
Ed
Feb 23, 2017 19:03:52 #
Rob47 wrote:
Over the few years I have been part of UH, I have learned so much from the pro, semi pro and amateur photographers who frequent this site. A friend asked me to take some shots of his daughter heading off to college. I like shooting with backlight but now asking the experts would these have been more effective using a fill flash or reflector? Or are they acceptable as they are? I chose to use spot metering. Always appreciate comments, help or suggestions.
I think they're nice shots as is, but would have been certainly a lot better with a flash!
Mar 2, 2017 23:21:00 #
I realize we are in the age of digital and fully automatic cameras, but sometimes going back to the pre-historic days of photography will teach people the very basics of good image making. So let me give it a shot.
Back in the 1970s I was a wedding photographer. In those days, every time you made an image (clicked the shutter), you just spent a dollar. There were 24 images to a roll of film, which cost about $6.00 ($0.25 per shot) plus developing and "proofing" your film. You'd send your rolls to the lab, and a week later you got your 5x5 photographs at a cost of about $12.00 ($0.50 per shot). This was early 70s. Later it was more like $9.00 a roll and $15.00 for processing.
Anyway, to make sure we made great outdoor shots, we always used flash on camera, because the best shots were typically backlighted shots, which caused faces to be in the shade. On a bright sunny day, normal exposure was typically f11 @ 1/125 or even f16 @ 1/125. If exposure was measured on the face, there was typically a two to three f stop difference. If you'd expose for the face, the background would be blown out. If you'd expose for the background (ambient light) the face would be dark. And remember, there was no PhotoShop in those days.
So to compensate for this dilemma, we had to make two adjustments. 1) We would set the flash for the face exposure. Imagine you are in a totally dark room, and you had to make a well exposed face. Using the manual flash that we had, that would take an exposure of f8 at 10 feet, or f16 at 5 feet. (two f-stops difference for halving or doubling the distance). 2) Than for the outdoor ambient shots we needed to make it such that there was a ONE f-stop difference between the ambient light (back ground) and the face. To do this, we use SHUTTER speed to achieve that effect. Since we are shooting at f8 for the face, and since we are in a make believe dark room, shutter speed is irrelevant when using a flash. But when we are outside, it makes a big difference. So going back to the above, our light meter tells us to shoot the outdoors at f11 @ 125. But using the fill flash, we have to shoot at f8. So to balance the ambient light, we change the shutter speed to 1/250 and leave the f-stop at f8. We get a perfectly exposed outdoor shot, and a beautifully balanced frontal (shade) shot.
Again! even today, with my digital camera, I use the same technique. If my flash requires an f-stop of f5.6, I need to make my shutter speed around 1/500 if that combination is necessary to make a normally exposed ambient (available light) image. Keeping one f-stop difference between your fill flash and the available light should result in very naturally lit images.
Give it a shot. It's not that difficult once you do it a few times.
Back in the 1970s I was a wedding photographer. In those days, every time you made an image (clicked the shutter), you just spent a dollar. There were 24 images to a roll of film, which cost about $6.00 ($0.25 per shot) plus developing and "proofing" your film. You'd send your rolls to the lab, and a week later you got your 5x5 photographs at a cost of about $12.00 ($0.50 per shot). This was early 70s. Later it was more like $9.00 a roll and $15.00 for processing.
Anyway, to make sure we made great outdoor shots, we always used flash on camera, because the best shots were typically backlighted shots, which caused faces to be in the shade. On a bright sunny day, normal exposure was typically f11 @ 1/125 or even f16 @ 1/125. If exposure was measured on the face, there was typically a two to three f stop difference. If you'd expose for the face, the background would be blown out. If you'd expose for the background (ambient light) the face would be dark. And remember, there was no PhotoShop in those days.
So to compensate for this dilemma, we had to make two adjustments. 1) We would set the flash for the face exposure. Imagine you are in a totally dark room, and you had to make a well exposed face. Using the manual flash that we had, that would take an exposure of f8 at 10 feet, or f16 at 5 feet. (two f-stops difference for halving or doubling the distance). 2) Than for the outdoor ambient shots we needed to make it such that there was a ONE f-stop difference between the ambient light (back ground) and the face. To do this, we use SHUTTER speed to achieve that effect. Since we are shooting at f8 for the face, and since we are in a make believe dark room, shutter speed is irrelevant when using a flash. But when we are outside, it makes a big difference. So going back to the above, our light meter tells us to shoot the outdoors at f11 @ 125. But using the fill flash, we have to shoot at f8. So to balance the ambient light, we change the shutter speed to 1/250 and leave the f-stop at f8. We get a perfectly exposed outdoor shot, and a beautifully balanced frontal (shade) shot.
Again! even today, with my digital camera, I use the same technique. If my flash requires an f-stop of f5.6, I need to make my shutter speed around 1/500 if that combination is necessary to make a normally exposed ambient (available light) image. Keeping one f-stop difference between your fill flash and the available light should result in very naturally lit images.
Give it a shot. It's not that difficult once you do it a few times.
Mar 8, 2017 13:21:33 #
Rob47 wrote:
Over the few years I have been part of UH, I have learned so much from the pro, semi pro and amateur photographers who frequent this site. A friend asked me to take some shots of his daughter heading off to college. I like shooting with backlight but now asking the experts would these have been more effective using a fill flash or reflector? Or are they acceptable as they are? I chose to use spot metering. Always appreciate comments, help or suggestions.
I always use fill flash, but off camera. The pop up makes my shots look stark not soft. I use a Speedlite/diffuser. If you have time you can also use a reflector but that might entail using an assistant. Back lit shots will close down your aperture, making the darks tones darker and have less detail.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.