Fill flash on a sunny day? Too much light? Wrong gel?
Jun 21, 2012 13:14:52 #
Today, I took some shots of us as we were passing Monte Carlo.
The pictures were taken in harsh light. So I decided to use 1/4 CTO gel for fill flash (0 FEC) and underexpose the ambient light by 2/3rd of a stop so that the background isn't blown out while the faces are properly exposed.
The pictures turned out as if they've been photoshopped.
I'm thinking that I should do one/some of these things:
- pick different gel; too warm? not warm enough?
- drop FEC by a stop
- accept that the sky/background will be blown and not underexpose the ambient light on purpose
Any suggestions on how to balance fill flash with bright background so that it doesn't look fake?
The pictures were taken in harsh light. So I decided to use 1/4 CTO gel for fill flash (0 FEC) and underexpose the ambient light by 2/3rd of a stop so that the background isn't blown out while the faces are properly exposed.
The pictures turned out as if they've been photoshopped.
I'm thinking that I should do one/some of these things:
- pick different gel; too warm? not warm enough?
- drop FEC by a stop
- accept that the sky/background will be blown and not underexpose the ambient light on purpose
Any suggestions on how to balance fill flash with bright background so that it doesn't look fake?
f/7.0, 1/250, ISO 100 -- (EC -2/3, FEC 0)
f/5.0, 1/250, ISO 100 -- (EC -2/3, FEC 0)
Jun 21, 2012 13:19:14 #
donrent
Loc: Punta Gorda , Fl
I think they are super good... The fill flash was just enough to make your subject stand out and away from the background... Almost give a 3-d effect...
I think they are excellant...
I think they are excellant...
Jun 21, 2012 13:22:07 #
I don't think they look fake at all. Of course if you want less difference, just underexpose the sky a little less.
Jun 22, 2012 06:26:24 #
I think the background is a bit too dark, ( maybe 2/3 of a Stop ). Ironically, that is what you underexposed on purpose.
Try it at "0" and see how it looks.
BTW, the pics do NOT look PhotoShopped
Try it at "0" and see how it looks.
BTW, the pics do NOT look PhotoShopped
Jun 22, 2012 07:35:24 #
Turbo wrote:
I think the background is a bit too dark, ( maybe 2/3 of a Stop ). Ironically, that is what you underexposed on purpose.
Try it at "0" and see how it looks.
BTW, the pics do NOT look PhotoShopped
Try it at "0" and see how it looks.
BTW, the pics do NOT look PhotoShopped
Since they're your pictures of you, it's your call, but I likem them.
Jun 22, 2012 07:55:33 #
Jun 22, 2012 08:05:25 #
Jun 22, 2012 08:17:42 #
Have you got any in camera sharpening or the contrast pumped up too high? The gels might exaggerate this.
Jun 22, 2012 10:03:11 #
Jun 22, 2012 10:13:37 #
nas5000
Loc: Miami
Andrea wrote:
I think the above photos look much better than any sunny16 rule!
So you are the one , That Ansel Adams is worried about.
Jun 22, 2012 10:35:43 #
KG wrote:
Today, I took some shots of us as we were passing ... (show quote)
I think these look fine KG. I use a similar technique. I shoot a Canon so I underexpose the background by a stop or two (depends on how light the background is) in aperture priority mode, independently set the flash output to turn out a but brighter than the background (-2 stops to +2 stops in 1/3 stop increments). Sometimes I have to play with the flash output because, in aperture priority mode the ETTL part of the flash can be fooled by the background or the brightness of skin or clothing and require some tweaks, but, for the most part I can get it to do what I want in a pinch. Would rather use the flash off-camera but that just isn't possible everywhere I go. Example attached of this technique. I don't like the "dead-center" catchlight an on-camera flash puts in the shot so I always change them in Photoshop.
Jun 22, 2012 10:57:00 #
For my taste, the "fill" is too strong, overpowering the ambient light. I prefer fill to just soften the shadows, not eliminate them. barry.lapoint shows a nice example of the technique, but it's your picture; do it your way.
Jun 22, 2012 11:42:07 #
Adjust Flash Exposure Compensation. If you think the flash is a little harsh, back it off by 1/3 increments to your liking. I know, it's hard to do when you're just trying to get the shot and move on.
But, I agree with the rest - I think they are fine. You can tone them down a little bit in post processing. ACR has features where you can paint on the subjects with a mask and adjust the exposure to your liking.
But, I agree with the rest - I think they are fine. You can tone them down a little bit in post processing. ACR has features where you can paint on the subjects with a mask and adjust the exposure to your liking.
Jun 22, 2012 12:05:02 #
Jun 22, 2012 12:34:52 #
I agree with Captain C. These photos look very natural, not processed at at all. I like the strong contrast, which may be a bit too strong for the taste of some people. To me, they are perfect. I'm no expert, but Captain C. certainly is.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.