It's been nice ... but I think we're through!

shadowfox said:
Maybe you can appeal to the gallery with the fact that if brightly lit projection screen and monitors are present, you cannot do your job without flash. That should get their attention.

I mean, fighting optical physics is pretty hard if your hands are tied to your back. :bang::bang:
Click to expand...

Along these lines, I just shot Newark Mayor Cory Booker's 40th birthday party at a restaurant in the Sony Center in NY. I used my R-D1. I could have used available light, but the photos would not have looked good and it would have been a pain squint-focusing all night long. Instead, I used a bounce flash on the R-D1 and a CV 15mm lens (EFL 21mm on the R-D1) @f5.6 and ISO400. The CV 15mm was set for a hyperfocal distance of about 3ft - infinity, so I didn't have to focus at all. Just point at what I liked and push the button. And with a lens that wide, I didn't even have to look through the viewfinder, just wandered around and checked the view periodically. I think the results speak for themselves.

530381452_7Q8jg-L.jpg



The rest are here, starting at the bottom of page 2:
http://www.citylightsphoto.com/gallery/8132297_4VYpS#P-2-20


This was the first time in a while I've shot an event with flash, but it couldn't have been done otherwise.

/T
 
Tuolumne said:
Along these lines, I just shot Newark Mayor Cory Booker's 40th birthday party at a restaurant in the Sony Center in NY. I used my R-D1. I could have used available light, but the photos would not have looked good and it would have been a pain squint-focusing all night long. Instead, I used a bounce flash on the R-D1 and a CV 15mm lens (EFL 21mm on the R-D1) @f5.6 and ISO400. The CV 15mm was set for a hyperfocal distance of about 3ft - infinity, so I didn't have to focus at all. Just point at what I liked and push the button. And with a lens that wide, I didn't even have to look through the viewfinder, just wandered around and checked the view periodically. I think the results speak for themselves.

530381452_7Q8jg-L.jpg



The rest are here, starting at the bottom of page 2:
http://www.citylightsphoto.com/gallery/8132297_4VYpS#P-2-20


This was the first time in a while I've shot an event with flash, but it couldn't have been done otherwise.

/T
Click to expand...
The results do speek for themselves
It looks like you casually wandered round with a very wide lens and bounce flash whilst taking snaps.
Still if the customer is happy, job done!

Richard
 
Tuolumne said:
Hmmm...I think that's an insult. 😛

/T
Click to expand...
Please dont be insulted. If you are happy and your client is happy and you have funds its job done! Personally i do not like the shadows under the eyes from bounce flash and the distortion of features with wide angle lenses. The flash still looks a bit harsh and over exposed to me. Also depending on the ceiling one gets rather unpredictable colour casts. But then I am not paying for it.

If i depended on flash a lot I think I would go for something with more sophisticated TTL and flash metering. (it was absolutely superb in my now departed Leica R8).

I used to use a D40 flash with a diffuser on a Hasselblad 503 and that gave lovelly light straight out without bounce. I am also curious about some of these light sphere things which might be similar on a Metz gun. Its all getting rather top heavy on a rangefinder though!

Richard
 
Flash is always a trade-off. Straight on I find it very harsh, especially with the back shadows it creates. You also can't light the room with straight-on flash as you can with on-camera bounce. The flash I was using, a Nikon SB-27, has a reflector card that forces some of the flash forward to eliminate shadows under facial features, but it's not as effective as that on other flashes I have used. And yes, very wide angle lenses do cause distortions, but I actually like them.

/T
 
Tuolumne said:
Flash is always a trade-off. Straight on I find it very harsh, especially with the back shadows it creates. You also can't light the room with straight-on flash as you can with on-camera bounce. The flash I was using, a Nikon SB-27, has a reflector card that forces some of the flash forward to eliminate shadows under facial features, but it's not as effective as that on other flashes I have used. And yes, very wide angle lenses do cause distortions, but I actually like them.

/T
Click to expand...
Agreed your flash has reduced the shadows under eyes, but then the straight on gadget has brought back some harshness!! Agreed one can not light the room as well with straight on, but I would trade this for less shiny white on the subjects. I still prefer straight on with some sort of diffusor and take my chances on shadow not being so bad in a large room. I really do not like flash but if I needed to use it more i think I might look at some of the more recent diffusers (?The Garry Fong thing?) or possibly the Quantum bare bulb with diffusor. That would be pretty similar to the D40 flash which did a pretty good job straight on.

You may like the wide angle distortion, but subjects are usually not too flattered.

Best wishes

Richard
 
Keith said:
only about fifty usable shots from the three hundred I took 🙁
Click to expand...
I think I've probably done quite a lot of shooting in similar environments. Academic / thematic events. Nearly all candid, but some quickly constructed formal poses. I'd never attempt this with my M8, though it would work well-enough in a decently lit room.

When I have to go back into a ballroom or reception or try to get interesting shots of people mostly talking I rely on my 1DmkII and 3 fast L zooms. The 70-200 IS lets me circulate around the perimeter and snoop in.

Image quality with this 5 yr old gear is very good and certainly within tolerances for my happily decreasing needs to use it.
 
Richard,
I have the Gary Fong diffuser for my Nikon system. I haven't used it in a while, but I seem to recall not being very impressed with it. If anyone has a good recipe for diffusing flash on a RF camera without using ceiling bounce, it would be nice to know about it. I know that most RF users don't use flash, so this may be a hopeless request here.

/T
 
Tuolumne said:
Hmmm...I think that's an insult. 😛

/T
Click to expand...

T, Richard is right.

Bouncing is not always to the ceiling, sometimes the results are far more flattering if you use the walls, or "make" a wall by having someone hold a reflector (another very very handy thing to have by your side when shooting an event).

Another good way to manipulate light from flash, is to cover the light path (rubber band and thin black foam from Target or equivalent) from bouncing onto the subject (bad for people with glasses, or less hair than say Fabio 🙂 ).
 
Sam N said:
Sorry to sound defeatist, but one solution is to not take photos of people in an extremely dark room looking at something projected onto a screen. One could choose to expose the people properly or the projected information properly and leave it at that.
Click to expand...
I use flash a lot, but I agree. If the actual content on the screen is important to capture --and especially if it is attractive--perhaps a screen from a PowerPoint that represents the purpose of the event, you can have underexposed viewers frame or silhouette to give the impression of the whole event.
(Do not show a screen with many people ignoring it).

Since your final product will likely include multiple photos, think of them as a composite--without each pic carrying the full weight of communicating the event.
 
Keith

Why not meter for the people (light from the screens). The screens of course will be blown but can you paste these in from power points of the projections of the images. If these are not avaialble shoot them separately from roughly the right place pre the main shoot. (Or after the shoot to get the screens as you initially took them at the shoot? and paste these in) Some perspective adjustments might be necessary but it might actually work!



Best wishes


Richard
 
jaapv said:
Which flash do you use? Leicagoodies has the Sfill for the SF24D which is quite good. Given the concept it may fit a number of other flashes as well.
Click to expand...
Im guessing there is quite a significant power loss, and it is already not that powerful.

I really liked the D40 with dome diffusor on a Hassy for straight diffused light. It is pricey, but i expect the very similar but rather more flexible Quantum Q-flash might work quite well. It would be rather heavy though.

Richard
 
i haven't read all the way through but i am going to second the fuji s5 pro (maybe second or third it). it's high iso ability is often overlooked.

next to the d700/d3 it is the best f mount camera i have used up into the 1600/3200 range. it can also be had for an absolute song and would recover the blown highlights on that poor fella's head with very little trouble.
 
emraphoto said:
i haven't read all the way through but i am going to second the fuji s5 pro (maybe second or third it). it's high iso ability is often overlooked.

next to the d700/d3 it is the best f mount camera i have used up into the 1600/3200 range. it can also be had for an absolute song and would recover the blown highlights on that poor fella's head with very little trouble.
Click to expand...

This is actually a more difficult problem. Have another look at the beginning of the thread.

Best wishes


Richard
 
Richard Marks said:
Im guessing there is quite a significant power loss, and it is already not that powerful.

I really liked the D40 with dome diffusor on a Hassy for straight diffused light. It is pricey, but i expect the very similar but rather more flexible Quantum Q-flash might work quite well. It would be rather heavy though.

Richard
Click to expand...
As the SF 58 is basically a Metz flash, I would guess there is a range of soft accesories available. Plenty of power there.
 
Keith, if you already have the M8 and are comfortable using it, it's a pity to have to give it up. Yes you mention that you aren't all that good at post processing but as you also mention that you encounter these large variances of lighting intensities quite often, perhaps you should have a look at HDR (high dynamic range) techniques.

Shooting DNG files on the M8 provide quite a bit more dynamic range that isn't normally seen in normal processing. With HDR techniques you can unlock the potential of the dynamic range inherent in DNG files.

I personally use Photomatics and it's a little clumsy but mostly works fine in auto mode. All you have to do is to use ONE original DNG file, process it +2, 0 and -2 stops and send the data into the program. Out pops sometime usable. You don't have to shoot 3 shots of the same pic to use Photomatics, just process the one DNG file 3 times under, correct and over exposed.

Yes it's a little bit more work to do and you have to learn to use the program and get to understand what it can and cannot achieve but it might allow you to continue to stay with the M8 - and that's worth some effort. 😛

Have a look at what highlights I can recover here using HDR. It's not shot in a dark room with bright pictures but you get the idea:

Without HDR
L1000919 3_2.jpg

With HDR
L1000919 2_ 1__tonemapped_filtered_2.jpg

Oh, yes there is another side effect with HDR, you get expanded tonal range within the current visible range so if your shots lack range and are overly high contrast, HDR techniques can give you back some of that lost range too. Pretty cool.😀
 
well after reading the whole thread i would have to say a d700 would be an appropriate way to go. a $100 50mm f1.8 and that thing can pretty much shoot in the dark.

(although the xp2 scan at the bresson exhibit looked mighty good)
 
kin said:
Keith, if you already have the M8 and are comfortable using it, it's a pity to have to give it up. Yes you mention that you aren't all that good at post processing but as you also mention that you encounter these large variances of lighting intensities quite often, perhaps you should have a look at HDR (high dynamic range) techniques.

Shooting DNG files on the M8 provide quite a bit more dynamic range that isn't normally seen in normal processing. With HDR techniques you can unlock the potential of the dynamic range inherent in DNG files.

I personally use Photomatics and it's a little clumsy but mostly works fine in auto mode. All you have to do is to use ONE original DNG file, process it +2, 0 and -2 stops and send the data into the program. Out pops sometime usable. You don't have to shoot 3 shots of the same pic to use Photomatics, just process the one DNG file 3 times under, correct and over exposed.

Yes it's a little bit more work to do and you have to learn to use the program and get to understand what it can and cannot achieve but it might allow you to continue to stay with the M8 - and that's worth some effort. 😛

Have a look at what highlights I can recover here using HDR. It's not shot in a dark room with bright pictures but you get the idea:

Without HDR
View attachment 69682

With HDR
View attachment 69683

Oh, yes there is another side effect with HDR, you get expanded tonal range within the current visible range so if your shots lack range and are overly high contrast, HDR techniques can give you back some of that lost range too. Pretty cool.😀
Click to expand...

I like this. I'll have to give it a try. Does it take input of other file formats besides DNG?

/T
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom