some more off camera speedlight pictures

[jks_photo]

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

[Sean Setters]

It doesn't appear that you used any diffusion on your flash. Was it bare?

[jks_photo]

hi sean,i was kind of waiting for you to chime in. yes flash was bare.

[Sean Setters]

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.

[neuroanatomist]

I've got a pair of Lastolite 24" Ezyboxes that do a great job of softening the output of my 430EX II's.

[jks_photo]

@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.....

[jks_photo]

@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?

[neuroanatomist]

@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.

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.

[clemmb]

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.
Mark

[HDNitehawk]

@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?

They are not "incompatable", the PW's are distance limited with the 580ex. You can get about 45 feet without a shield.

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.