wilonstott
Wil O.
Okay, I've asked questions similar to this before, but I thought I'd see if you guys might weigh in.
Here's a fairly unremarkable photo by David Alan Harvey that was taken in France in 2000.
http://www.magnumphotos.com/C.aspx?VP3=SearchResult_VPage&VBID=2K1HZOSU5UR8P&SMLS=1&RW=1259&RH=702
Now, he's using a flash with a CTO gel, a very common technique for him, (you can tell from the shadows behind the chairs, and the color of the light). At the time, I know he was using Leicas, and I can tell from the K-code on the photo that it's slide film (also common). Additionally, he was most likely using a small flash, like a Vivitar 2800 (he used this in his Cuba work, and achieved a similar effect)--it may, in fact, be that flash, but there's no real way to tell.
Oddly enough, that's the flash I'm using (well it's really not that odd--I saw that he was using one and picked one up). They go for next to nothing and have an adjustable head, albeit not too powerful. Decent unit despite its limits.
Anyway, here's the question:
Do you guys think he's matched the ambient light outside the window (in terms of intensity), or do you think the light from the flash is pulled back a stop or so?
I like the effect, and I could do some experimenting, but I thought if someone had attempted similar shots, they might could impart some wisdom.
Thanks in advance.
Here's a fairly unremarkable photo by David Alan Harvey that was taken in France in 2000.
http://www.magnumphotos.com/C.aspx?VP3=SearchResult_VPage&VBID=2K1HZOSU5UR8P&SMLS=1&RW=1259&RH=702
Now, he's using a flash with a CTO gel, a very common technique for him, (you can tell from the shadows behind the chairs, and the color of the light). At the time, I know he was using Leicas, and I can tell from the K-code on the photo that it's slide film (also common). Additionally, he was most likely using a small flash, like a Vivitar 2800 (he used this in his Cuba work, and achieved a similar effect)--it may, in fact, be that flash, but there's no real way to tell.
Oddly enough, that's the flash I'm using (well it's really not that odd--I saw that he was using one and picked one up). They go for next to nothing and have an adjustable head, albeit not too powerful. Decent unit despite its limits.
Anyway, here's the question:
Do you guys think he's matched the ambient light outside the window (in terms of intensity), or do you think the light from the flash is pulled back a stop or so?
I like the effect, and I could do some experimenting, but I thought if someone had attempted similar shots, they might could impart some wisdom.
Thanks in advance.
wilonstott
Wil O.
Yea it's a boring question, but nothing?
VictorM.
Well-known
Looks like he came close to matching the daylight. Look at the door on the right. This fill-flash technique was at one time common, but needed practice. When auto flash and auto exposure came along so did auto fill flash; very little practice and skill required.
telenous
Well-known
Like Viktor, my guess is flash/ambient are balanced, judging from the balcony doors (the one taking light only/mostly from the flash looks about as much exposed as the outside, the other one taking both flash and ambient light looks half-and-half. Another thing, it looks he dragged the shutter as the shadows of the chairs are not as heavy as would be expected (bounced flash?) and the blurred walking man indicates, what, 1/15s? Just a guess.
I remember reading here and there DAH used Fuji Provia 100 (and/or Velvia 50) for Cuba. The book came out in 1999 and this photo is from 2000, so probably of same stock.
.
I remember reading here and there DAH used Fuji Provia 100 (and/or Velvia 50) for Cuba. The book came out in 1999 and this photo is from 2000, so probably of same stock.
.
VinceC
Veteran
There's a gel/filter to match the strobe to the color temperature of indoor lighting, but otherwise not a lot of bounce going on (the shadows are too distinct). Looks like he's underexposed the room by about 1 to 1 1/2 stops compared to the exterior. That was the most common way to fill flash back when people mentally did the settings and gives a very natural look where the flash enhances but doesn't overpower the ambient light.
wilonstott
Wil O.
Cool guys, thanks.
When nobody was commenting, I got a bit more curious, so I took a screenshot and pulled the photo over to aperture, cropped it, and converted to black and white.
Weird thing happens when I convert it (well, not that weird).
The two doors are really within about a 1/2 stop of one another, although the one on the left shows some natural light variation from front to back--the color difference really threw my perception of their relative exposure.
The door on the right is about a whole stop (I think) from the road and balcony, which you can place right next to each other in the bottom corner of the door's window.
So, if he's working with a 2800, which is an auto-thyristor, I think he's closed the aperture down about a stop more than indicated on the flash (it doesn't have a digital dial-back).
I think the shutter is dragged, but more than likely, this is a logistical thing. Look at the scene--no shadows outside, so, heavy overcast or twilight. He's either shooting 100 or 50 iso film, and he has a pretty healthy depth of field on this shot. Also, he's probably shooting with a 35mm lens (looks like it). So that's what, EV 10 or 11 (best guess), and for that depth of field, aperture of at least, say, f8(?)--might be smaller, the chairs in the foreground look pretty sharp to me, and the focus goes fairly deep. So for that EV, he's gotta be doing a somewhere inbetween 1/30 and 1/8. So yea, the shutter is dragged, but not for fun.
When nobody was commenting, I got a bit more curious, so I took a screenshot and pulled the photo over to aperture, cropped it, and converted to black and white.
Weird thing happens when I convert it (well, not that weird).
The two doors are really within about a 1/2 stop of one another, although the one on the left shows some natural light variation from front to back--the color difference really threw my perception of their relative exposure.
The door on the right is about a whole stop (I think) from the road and balcony, which you can place right next to each other in the bottom corner of the door's window.
So, if he's working with a 2800, which is an auto-thyristor, I think he's closed the aperture down about a stop more than indicated on the flash (it doesn't have a digital dial-back).
I think the shutter is dragged, but more than likely, this is a logistical thing. Look at the scene--no shadows outside, so, heavy overcast or twilight. He's either shooting 100 or 50 iso film, and he has a pretty healthy depth of field on this shot. Also, he's probably shooting with a 35mm lens (looks like it). So that's what, EV 10 or 11 (best guess), and for that depth of field, aperture of at least, say, f8(?)--might be smaller, the chairs in the foreground look pretty sharp to me, and the focus goes fairly deep. So for that EV, he's gotta be doing a somewhere inbetween 1/30 and 1/8. So yea, the shutter is dragged, but not for fun.
wilonstott
Wil O.
This is funny too. I was looking at Harvey's collection because I'm planning a trip.
I was looking a Bourges. I ran across the location that this picture was taken.
Hotel balcony-second story.
http://goo.gl/maps/onCmw
I was looking a Bourges. I ran across the location that this picture was taken.
Hotel balcony-second story.
http://goo.gl/maps/onCmw
Clint Troy
Well-known
I'd say -1, -1.5
Was that intentional? Who knows. By simply pointing and shooting, it could have ended up that way if he measured the outside light.
I love auto-thyristor flashes. They are so simple and straightforward and when you get to know them, it becomes second nature.
Was that intentional? Who knows. By simply pointing and shooting, it could have ended up that way if he measured the outside light.
I love auto-thyristor flashes. They are so simple and straightforward and when you get to know them, it becomes second nature.
ibcrewin
Ah looky looky
Will, have you been to David Hobby's site (strobist)? There's tons on there.
http://strobist.blogspot.com/2013/02/how-to-easily-fine-tune-your-flash.html
http://strobist.blogspot.com/2013/02/how-to-easily-fine-tune-your-flash.html
Justin Smith
Established
I've been following DAH for a while now, via his postings on the Burn Magazine site. I cannot recall him ever mentioning using gels on his flashes, but he has mentioned using: Band-Aids, beer bottles, and his fingers for flash coloration. 
wilonstott
Wil O.
I've been following DAH for a while now, via his postings on the Burn Magazine site. I cannot recall him ever mentioning using gels on his flashes, but he has mentioned using: Band-Aids, beer bottles, and his fingers for flash coloration.
Yea I've heard about all of those as well. There's a NatGeo vid of him shooting in Cuba w/ a Vivitar 2800 on an M6 and it's got a gel on it--fairly obvious from the clips where it is shown. What it really comes down to is the effect. If he's shooting through beer bottles (green), then the flash will be that color. The light from his flash in a lot of these shots, as well as a lot of his shots from Cuba is distinctly orange. A full CTO get will warm a 6000k flash (what the Vivtar 2800 is) up to around 3400K, which is in the range of incandescent bulbs (incandescents are slightly warmer than 3500 though). The light from his flash is distinctly orange-red. Slide film will saturate with slight under exposure as well--so he may be using more than one gel, thereby intensifying the color effect, or backing off of his flash a bit, which would underexpose slightly and possibly increase the saturation of the color of the light.
However, it's all speculative. Definition of educated guess.
VinceC
Veteran
It's all about craft. If your craft includes color photography at that level of paid professionalism, then you know the tools needed to get a warm color balance while shooting a scene that includes warm indoor and cooler outdoor overcast light.