Surprised by a pro's flash technique
Oct 15, 2017 13:23:03 #
The other day I worked with a certain pro for the first time. I’ve worked with many in the same conditions over the years. Photography is a violation of the Jewish Sabbath, so we pose and shoot Bar Mitzvah photos in advance. I’ve seen everything from three strobes to a single speedlight, but always off-camera and bounced or diffused. The other day, the photographer (not new to the business!) used a camera-mounted flash aimed directly at her subjects. She used it 100% of the time. Maybe she had some negative flash compensation dialed in, but it sure surprised me. Does it surprise you, especially you pros who shoot stuff like this?
Oct 15, 2017 13:26:34 #
Oct 15, 2017 13:26:44 #
Oct 15, 2017 13:28:18 #
Oct 15, 2017 13:28:21 #
Rongnongno wrote:
Pro means paid, not qualified.
Agreed, but this person has a satisfied client base who pay well—low expectations?
Oct 15, 2017 13:29:27 #
Oct 15, 2017 13:29:50 #
Though I don't shoot events such as this, I've avoided on-camera flash for years. There are times when it is necessary due to the nature of the event, St. Patrick's Day at a pub for instance. I prefer to use off camera flash and direct the lighting for the best illumination to suit the nature of the photos. Off camera flash prevents the subjects from looking like police booking photos.
Now, if whatever she does with her technique produces attractive photographs, whose to say that she's not using correct technique. If it works, it works. If it pays well, all the better.
--Bob
Now, if whatever she does with her technique produces attractive photographs, whose to say that she's not using correct technique. If it works, it works. If it pays well, all the better.
--Bob
Rab-Eye wrote:
The other day I worked with a certain pro for the ... (show quote)
Oct 15, 2017 13:30:43 #
Doyle Thomas wrote:
and how were the results?
The real question. I’ve not seen them yet, but if you’re interested, I’ll report back when I have.
Oct 15, 2017 13:31:27 #
Oct 15, 2017 13:31:29 #
That is something I'd really be interested in reading.
--Bob
--Bob
Rab-Eye wrote:
The real question. I’ve not seen them yet, but if you’re interested, I’ll report back when I have.
Oct 15, 2017 13:36:19 #
Rab-Eye wrote:
Agreed, but this person has a satisfied client base who pay well—low expectations?
She knows how to please her clients. That's the larger half of being a pro.
Oct 15, 2017 13:45:17 #
BebuLamar wrote:
She knows how to please her clients. That's the larger half of being a pro.
If I had to guess, I would hazard that she used ambient light with a very low amount of fill from her flash. That could work.
Oct 15, 2017 13:46:56 #
rmalarz wrote:
That is something I'd really be interested in reading.
--Bob
--Bob
I’ll be sure to let you know.
Oct 15, 2017 13:50:26 #
That " pro" technique is new to me? MMM no red eye? Sharp harsh shadows. I prefer my technique of,( if allowed), off camera/umbrellas, or bounce light or at least a diffuser. There has been a few occasions when I was not permitted to shoot an actual ceremony and had to shoot a reenactment. I consider myself a qualified professional photographer, and through the years have come across many different types of shoots.
Oct 15, 2017 13:51:12 #
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.