Printable View
Hi guys,
Shot a bunch of photos today trying to practice with off camera lighting.
I've posted only 2 shots which seem to be "decent" enough to be posted.
PLease critique......
Attachment 241
here's another
Attachment 242
would you say that the images are too dark? Lighting too hard?
Thanks for looking....
james
It doesn't appear that you used any diffusion on your flash. Was it bare?
hi sean,i was kind of waiting for you to chime in. yes flash was bare.
The shots look relatively well exposed (my guess is ETTL was working for you). But I'm not really a fan of the shadows being created by the bare speedlight. Typically speaking, light coming from a window (which your shot sort-of mimics) would present a much larger lightsource than what is indicated by the shadows in your shot. A softbox, umbrella, or bedsheet might have been used as a diffusion material or as a material to bounce light off of. This would increase the size of the lightsource relative to your subject and turn those hard-edged shadows into much more pleasing gradients.
Unless you're wanting to recreate a hard-edged look, I'd avoid using bare light sources as my mainlight. You're much more likely to get away with them when used as a rim/hairlight.
I've got a pair of Lastolite 24" Ezyboxes that do a great job of softening the output of my 430EX II's.
@sean.. ETTL was on.... I always shoot in AV mode. so I darkened the background 1 stop via exposure comp. then on the flash was set to a zoom of 105mm and shot was taken at around 70mm... I was kind of hoping to limit flash coverage. All I have in terms of a diffuser right now are those lightspheres and they seem to light up the whole place [ which I guess is what theyre supposed to do], but I was kind of looking for a "snooted" flash effect. Not really a fan of bare flash pictures myself but for now it's what my gear affords me. Did order an umbrella though.....
thanks again sean. Well i'm off to practicing again.......hopefully in time I will get better.....
@neuro.... I noticed you're using 430EX IIs, so does this mean that you avoided the 580s because of their published "incompatability" with your PW triggers?
Not really - I was aware or the reduced range, but most of my use is indoors in medium-sized rooms, so even 30' is plenty. I already had one 430EX II, so my main reason for getting a second was actually to have balanced light output. For a timely example, tonight I shot some portraits of my daughters, using an Einstein 640 with a 48" octabox as the main, and the two 430's fired at the white muslin backdrop from behind - balanced output meant same flash group and symmetrical placement yielded even lighting, which was easier to set up and control.Quote:
Originally Posted by jks_photo
If I do end up getting a 1D X, I'll pick up a 580EX II for full AF point coverage by the assist lamp.
Using a 1DmkIIN I have discovered that when using multiple focus points the AF beam spreads more but not as bright. In really dark places like dance halls I have found that putting my 1D on the center focus point I get a brighter AF beam and therefore faster AF in these dark dance halls.Quote:
Originally Posted by neuroanatomist
Mark
They are not "incompatable", the PW's are distance limited with the 580ex. You can get about 45 feet without a shield.Quote:
Originally Posted by jks_photo
It is easily corrected. When I bought my PW's they included a AC5 RF Soft Shield. It is a sock that wraps around the 580ex, I tested it with it on and it functioned out to 360 feet.
hi guys,
took some more pictures over the weekend..... please see what you think...
Attachment 282
Attachment 283
this time around flash power was manually set to around 1/16.
thanks for looking.
james
Taken with 60D and 18-135 lens, shot at 1/200 shutter, f/11, and 100 ISO. The onboard flash was used to optically trigger my external flash. Onboard flash setting was manual at 1/128 power (goal to not effect exposure). The external flash used was the Lumopro LP 160 set to maximum focal length, 1/64 power, and snooted.
Attachment 304
Now we're talking...I really like these.
great photos Dave
I'm 4 1/2 years late for this assignment, but am going through the Strobist blog while trying to get better with off camera lighting. I wanted to submit the attached image for the group's critique. Please excuse surface flaws on the silverware.
First, the assignment:
http://strobist.blogspot.com/2007/07...ing-light.html
Second, the image: (settings: f/11, 1/200 sec, ISO 320, 87mm focal length, 1/2 flash power through)
Attachment 391
Third, the setup:
Attachment 392
Thanks
Dave
I was wondering if anyone had any feedback. Like? Dislike? Ideas for improvement?
Dave
Dave, I think this is an interesting image but there are a couple of things that IMHO would improve it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave Throgmartin
1. The bottom left side of the image seems to be a little too dark ---Perhaps some type of reflector might help---even a piece of tin-foil wraped around a piece of cardboard may suit this purpose.
2. The image would look better if it were sharper---but my guess is this is a function of the forums and not the image itself. I think most have found that to get a sharp image on the forum, you have to upload via a thirdparty site like Zenfolio or Flicker.
Hope this helps
My first thought was it is underexposed just a bit. Unless you were going for this darker look.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave Throgmartin
Thanks guys. I made some tweaks per your suggestions. I shot this RAW so I changed the exposure to +2/3 from 0 and upped the sharpness.
I really do appreciate your help. This site has a number of excellent photographers (most with gear that far exceeds my humble 18-135 used in this picture!) that have excellent advice.
Attachment 402
You know I just realized why I picked the EV value that I did... the plate is blown now in the re-do. DOH!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave Throgmartin
The plate doesn't appear blown to me, Dave. Unless you changed it again? The re-do seems better to my eye; the first was a little dark and a little cool.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave Throgmartin