Experimenting with off camera flash

[Handlebars]

A couple of years ago I got a speedlight to mount in the hotshoe of my digital camera. This got a lot of use as fill light for backlit daytime photos and I was pretty happy with the results. It gave me detail in shadow areas that would otherwise be underexposed. Unfortunately, mounting a powerful flash so close to the camera lens also flattens out all textural information you would get from having those shadows. Another side effect was the bright flare from any reflectorized surfaces such as license plates and tail lamps. Simply moving the flash away from the camera lens solves all of those problems at the same time.

It turns out that the camera manufacturers had already figured out a solution to getting the flash off the camera. Nikon and Canon both have proprietary systems that allow their cameras and speed lights to communicate via infrared signals. I have a Nikon D700 and 2 SB-600 flashes that I have been experimenting with. Nikon’s manuals are of only very basic help with figuring out what is possible with the system. The world of off camera flash creativity really opened wide when I discovered the Strobist (http://strobist.blogspot.com/2006/02/welcome-to-strobist.html) website put together by photojournalist David Hobby. He explains in detail how to use the limited power of battery powered flashes in conjunction with existing light to make beautiful images out of otherwise bland scenes.

This will be an ongoing chronicle as I learn how to apply Strobist lighting philosophy to jeepin and general outdoor photography.

My very first attempt at using the Nikon “Creative Lighting System” as their wireless flash setup is called was on a trip to a B&B in southern New Mexico. Cabin fever had set in after a couple of months without any trips so I took my wife down to the Casitas de Gila for the 3 day MLK weekend. They have several casitas, each with their own theme. We stayed in the Casita de los Pajaros, or the Little Bird House for you gueros. I wanted a photo of the front porch and the bird on the door, along with the view. I was underwhelmed with the result straight out of the camera. The door and the front yard were black holes while the surroundings were nicely exposed.
http://www.fototime.com/D4169D60A6D1CA6/orig.jpg
Up to this point in time I would fix the under/over exposure problems by shooting in raw format and adjusting the fill light and recovery sliders in Adobe Camera Raw. The results were much closer to what I saw when standing there with camera in hand but editing each photo this way would take at least 15 minutes.

Two SB-600 speedlights were sitting just inside that door, waiting for a good reason to use them. One flash went on the ground, just on the other side of the bench, pointing up at the shadow area of the door and the wood work of the porch. The other is “perched” on a birdhouse to camera left, pointing down at the chimenea and picnic table in the front yard. This looks much more like it did to my eye when I decided that I wanted a photo of the scene:
http://www.fototime.com/FED1E9F965137BC/orig.jpg
Best of all, it looks the way I wanted, straight out of the camera.

Now for my blundering first attempts at using Strobist lighting for jeepin photos. I went with a couple of friends to Gordy’s Hill OHV area to check out some trails. Most of them are either moderate or extreme, there is nothing in between. We turned around on this trail at an obstacle called Pucker Falls.

First a photo using the speedlight mounted on the camera.
http://www.fototime.com/82EEFB37B4FE6CA/orig.jpg
It demonstrates a couple of the shortcomings when using on camera flash. While it does illuminate the shadow area, it flattens out the texture. Second, falloff is very apparent in this shot. Falloff is the noticeable reduction in the quantity of light on parts of the scene that are farther away from the camera. The dirt in the foreground is well lit, but the rocks and ledges get almost none of the extra light from the flash.

Pucker Falls, Take 2. I removed the speedlight from the camera and balanced it on the boulder to the right. Look carefully and you’ll see it sitting there upside down so the infrared sensor faces the camera. I wanted the light to rake across the rocks and undercut ledge to show just how nasty this obstacle is.
http://www.fototime.com/94B13FD2725CC73/orig.jpg
I was happy with the results at the time, but when I got home and viewed it on the computer screen I was bothered by the bluish color cast of the rocks illuminated by the flash as compared to the sunlit rocks across the gully. It was obvious evidence of flash illumination. To me, this is just as bad as the underexposed shadows I was trying to fix with the flash in the first place. My goal here was to have my flash enhance the existing lighting without making its use apparent.

Pucker Falls, Take 3. My buddy Adam wanted to go back to Gordy’s Hill the next weekend so I bummed a ride. He loves his Jeep and gets hundreds of photos out of the deal. I decided during the intervening week that the flash needed to be filtered to match the existing light. I had a Rosco Cinegel sample pack so I selected a #12 Straw Yellow gel, cut off a couple of pieces and taped one over each speedlight. New Mexico is known for its abundant sunshine, the one thing I didn’t expect on this day was a thin layer of clouds. The color temperature from an overcast sky is towards the blue end of the spectrum, compared with the more yellow light of the direct sunlight shining during Take 2. The ambient light zigged ,and I zagged, making the resulting disparity of color temperatures 100 times more obvious than my first take.
http://www.fototime.com/134EE45ADEBCE84/orig.jpg
At least you can get an idea of exactly how much light 2 SB-600’s will put out. I used them both this day.

Take 4. Whaddaya know, with the gels removed the bare flashes balance nicely with today’s cooler ambient light.
http://www.fototime.com/12952DE72880910/orig.jpg




Here’s a good example of why I originally got the flash: shooting directly into the sun.

First, with the flash mounted on the camera. It helps the underexposure of the shadow areas but it flattens out the rocks in the foreground. The license plate and taillights exhibit the flare you always get from having the flash close to the lens, even on the distant Jeep.
http://www.fototime.com/A8060AAF00ABDBF/orig.jpg

From the same spot, the following weekend. No flash here, the foreground rocks have better texture, thanks to the slightly overcast sky but are still underexposed.
http://www.fototime.com/C33B03E18701883/orig.jpg

With the flash mounted to a lightweight stand to camera right, shooting across the rocks. They do look like three dimensional rocks now, instead of a two dimensional picture of a dirt ramp or something. Now it looks just as rocky in the photo as it did from the driver’s seat.
http://www.fototime.com/FD7C71A5458D7B6/orig.jpg
Looking at this photo now makes me want to redo this shot with a second light on the driver’s side of the Jeep, lighting Adam. I’ll bet I could sell him that one!

Another sunny day of jeepin. This time I had much fun photographing my buddy Lawrence’s Venom R/C Crawler. I also took another stab at gelling the flash to blend with daylight. Roscosun CTO is an orange filter used to convert flash output to match ordinary tungsten filament incandescent light. I chose a ¼ CTO, which is used when a smaller amount of correction is needed, according to the Rosco Filter Facts booklet. I wish those Rosco people would help the Nikon people rewrite their manuals! The ¼ orange gel turned out to look a whole lot more natural than a bare flash head or the Straw Yellow filter on this sunny day.

Once again, this is shooting into the sun. Flash is mounted on a stand to camera left. The rock has good exposure and excellent texture! It is also pretty hard to tell that there is any light added to this photo. The only post processing done was to resize it for the web, nothing else was necessary. This is the goal I am working towards!
http://www.fototime.com/26F8CFF44532372/orig.jpg

Same spot, without flash. The ledge looks two dimensional and boring. It lacks the contrast you get with directional light from a small source.
http://www.fototime.com/A8138D3A6D0D714/orig.jpg

Here’s my entire setup: an SB-600 flash on a LumoPro light stand, using a Pocket Wizard radio slave as a trigger. The infrared signals of Nikon’s Creative Lighting System did not work reliably in broad daylight so radio triggers became an expensive but necessary addition. The whole thing weighs about the same as my camera. I can walk around shooting with the camera in one hand, holding the lightstand out like a boom with the other if I don’t have time to set it down. I haven’t gotten any photos to be proud of with that method yet, probably because the flash is still too close to the camera.
http://www.fototime.com/FE3AD8E535CD0D2/orig.jpg

Most of my life I thought I was taking photographs of beautiful landscapes, or jeeps, or people. Usually it has been some combination of the three. Then one day a photography teacher explained to me that I am really taking pictures of light. The quality of that light, reflecting off that landscape, those jeeps or those peeps and into my camera lens directly effects the end result. Having that simple fact pointed out to me changed the whole way I think about photography. The ability to control light opens up possibilities I had never imagined before. These few days I have experimented with off camera flash have demonstrated to me that I no longer have to settle for “taking photographs”. It is now possible for me to create images.

I have a lot to learn. I am really looking forward to the process.

[DrMoab]

Very cool Alex!

[dphillips]

Lovin it! Please keep the info coming. I've been thinking of picking up one of the SB-600 to mess around with. I think after seeing some of these photos I will definetly be getting one.

[ECKSJAY]

Good stuff. Strobist FTW. I'll be getting my Strobist kit from Midwest Photo Exchange in the next month or so. I've been dying to try out a 3-light setup. :)

[xjblue]

This is great Alex.

[gbyrnes]

Nice guide, great info. I like how you explain each photo.

[Handlebars]

Adam and I work together. Almost every day he says, “When are we going to Moab?” He’s had his Jeep for almost a year and has not yet been there. My reply is always, “Pick a weekend and we’ll go!” Last week on Monday I slapped him with a calendar as I gave him the usual reply. After much consideration he chose to go that very Thursday. Off we went for his first trip to Moab, on the spur of the moment.

We took his Rubicon and my Cherokee. I don’t have much chance to set up photos when I am driving but I did find a couple of opportunities. One situation that came to mind before leaving was to try to better capture the dinosaur footprints at the Poison Spider trailhead. I hoped that by shading them from the direct sun and replacing the light with some coming from a sharper angle I could give them better depth and definition.

Straight daylighting, it appears that someone polished off the desert varnish so they would stand out better:
http://www.fototime.com/B843CC022BB293D/orig.jpg

The best take out of several attempts shows depth, but I am not crazy with the results:
http://www.fototime.com/69F0735B3D918D3/orig.jpg

My setup for this shot was 2 of the ever versatile Human Light Stands.
http://www.fototime.com/1D7BB7318FD9725/orig.jpg

I really needed a larger shade and better access to the site for positioning my HLS’s, as we were all perched awkwardly on a rocky slope above a cliff. Maybe using one large shade and one bounce card to reflect daylight into the footprint at the desired angle would have worked nicer. The harsh texture created by the small light source competes with the claw print. There is definitely room for improvement here.




Seeing Adam and his girlfriend eating lunch with an expansive view of Moab and vicinity gave another opportunity to set up off camera lighting. The background looks nice but the people are mostly in shadow, especially her black hair and his black shirt & hat:
http://www.fototime.com/DEC83B334977E2C/orig.jpg

One light to camera left fills in the shadows nicely, giving them a bright and cheery look:
http://www.fototime.com/ECB0FFBCB7C9E86/orig.jpg

I used a single SB-600 with a ¼ CTO gel at full power on a 7 foot light stand stabilized with a big rock. Also notice the difference in contrast and saturation between this photo and the last one, while noting that the only postprocessing done was cropping for better composition and resizing for the web.
http://www.fototime.com/665103086DE3A06/orig.jpg
I used a circular polarizer but neglected to turn it 90 degrees to keep it indexed in the maximum polarization position when I turned the camera to the portrait orientation. Adam wanted me to remember the lesson so he punctuated it by shoving me off the cliff.
http://www.fototime.com/208F7E147F302EF/orig.jpg

Luckily I survived to take photos another day. :)

[Ghost]

Stopping the flash down or reflecing it into a lumiquest makes nice results too. I like to have the flash accent the daylight not overpower it. I've used 3 flashes and lumiquests in the past to do location portraits. I really need to get a nice digi slr. Looking good keep playing and you will learn a lot.

[ECKSJAY]

Lookin' good, mang. :D

[nightfoam]

Man, I'm envious. Some good equipment really can make a difference. We need to bring you on our night runs, that'd improve the the documentation :)

[Handlebars]

I have found that the infrared control signals for the Nikon Creative Lighting System don’t work very well in daylight. They work GREAT in darkness, or near darkness. On a recent trip to Moab I got to use wireless flash to enhances a couple of scenes.

Moonhouse is a unique ruin off the Snow Flat Road on Cedar Mesa. It is a cliff dwelling with an additional outer wall covering room blocks built into the back of an alcove. The room blocks are remarkably well preserved thanks to the extra protection provided by this outer wall. There was a snake-like pictograph outside the alcove, as well as a painted motif on the inner walls which I wanted to capture in a photograph. Unfortunately the exposure difference between the pictograph and the inner chamber was more than my camera could handle.
http://www.fototime.com/2B93C7699981687/orig.jpg
The exposure is ok for the interior walls, although at 1/40 sec and f/3.2 the depth of field is pretty shallow. You can’t even see the pictograph on the outer wall as it is completely blown out. I was traveling light on this hike, bringing just the camera with one lens… and an SB-600 flash in the pocket of my cargo shorts.


I experimented with several different flash settings and locations, ending up happiest with the results from holding the flash out with my left hand while operating the camera with the other. I used a Rosco Cinegel #02 Bastard Amber gel over the flash to give my added light the warm glow similar to sunlight reflected off sandstone. With the flash in TTL mode and the exposure value set to +1.7, the camera exposed at 1/200th @ f/7.1, allowing for a greater depth of field and a sharper overall photo. Most importantly, the pictograph on the outer wall is now visible!
http://www.fototime.com/EC9A8168E1E45BD/orig.jpg

For the ultimate in low light photography, try taking pictures in a mine tunnel. I didn’t expect this adit in Bull Canyon to go very far so I didn’t bring a flashlight. I had to use the test mode of my SB-600 flash to light the way, which is quite painful to the eyes. Next time I’ll bring a normal light too! Luckily Jared and Kyle followed and had flashlights. I handed the SB-600 to Kyle, who became my Human Light Stand. In the near total darkness of the mine the infrared signal from my camera worked perfectly, no matter where the flash was in relation to the camera. I was really happy with how this photo came out:
http://www.fototime.com/A1D2C00F5B9C043/orig.jpg
Kyle held the strobe in his right hand, the flashlight is silhouetted in his left. It appears that the illumination on the photo is coming from the flashlight. The weak circle of light on the hood of Jared’s sweatshirt is all that flashlight put out, the rest is coming from the strobe hidden behind Kyle. If I hadn’t told you I’ll bet that you would have assumed that all of the light in the photo was coming from the plainly visible flashlight!


I spent a night camped in Comb Wash with the Ward clan. What do these two photos have to do with each other?
http://www.fototime.com/297023FC91253FC/orig.jpg

http://www.fototime.com/8360AF226DC5FDD/orig.jpg

Actually, nothing! I didn’t even have my own Jeep on that trip. The second photo took place in my garage:

http://www.fototime.com/37386D89194A841/orig.jpg
The red glow of the “campfire” came from a flash on the floor, shooting through a red gel into a translucent umbrella and further diffused by a red tarp. The “stars” in the “night sky”, which I agree were quite hokey, came from a homemade snoot taped to another flash on a light stand. Several pinholes are what created the star field against the white garage wall. The boxes scattered around blocked excess red light from showing up on the wall behind the Jeep. This was a great exercise in creating and controlling light. It is also an extreme example of how light can affect the mood of a photo.

[DrMoab]

http://www.fototime.com/8360AF226DC5FDD/orig.jpg

OK...this proves it to me. You, my friend have entirely too much free time.

[Handlebars]

Yes, I was pretty bored that night!

[Ghost]

http://www.fototime.com/8360AF226DC5FDD/orig.jpg

OK...this proves it to me. You, my friend have entirely too much free time.

Sometimes I really hate digital photography. :looney: Do you have any clue what it use to take to do an image like that in the darkroom 20 years ago?

[DrMoab]

Do you have any clue what it use to take to do an image like that in the darkroom 20 years ago?

I do actually. I grew up under my fathers knees getting in his way almost every night in a dark room.

In a lot of ways digital has ruined the magic of photography. Although there are some awsome photographers today it's really not that hard to go buy a 100 dollar camera and snap all day long and come up with some wonderful images.

[XJEEPER]

Just stumble across this thread......thanks for sharing the photo tech, Alex. I agree with Ryan, envious of your free time to play.....you need a couple of kids!

[Ghost]

I do actually. I grew up under my fathers knees getting in his way almost every night in a dark room.

In a lot of ways digital has ruined the magic of photography. Although there are some awsome photographers today it's really not that hard to go buy a 100 dollar camera and snap all day long and come up with some wonderful images.

As an avid photographer who has experminted with all kids of camera and darkroom techniques I would have to agree 100% with that statement. Once I get my rig built I have plans to put in a darkroom. Keep the experiments coming and good luck with it Handlebars!

[Handlebars]

No responsible person would ever let me have kids before I grow up myself, anyways.

If it is any consolation I spent a couple of hours goofing with the flashes in the garage just to come up with that one photo. :looney:

[Ghost]

No responsible person would ever let me have kids before I grow up myself, anyways.

If it is any consolation I spent a couple of hours goofing with the flashes in the garage just to come up with that one photo. :looney:
LOL! I have spent a couple of hours in the darkroom trying to get a print right.

[Handlebars]

This is my attempt at capturing the feeling of being there, in a jeep. Instead of having to explain in the caption how steep or off camber that trail really was I am trying to figure out how to make the image stand on its own, without resorting to cheap tricks like tilting the camera.

What does this have to do with off camera flash? Here’s what no flash looks like:
http://www.fototime.com/84763717D78851E/orig.jpg
Silhouettes are a nice theme but not for this situation. Do you remember the interior of your jeep being pitch black in the middle of the day? Neither do I. Then there is the problem of deciding what to have in focus- the interior of the vehicle or the scene outside the window.
http://www.fototime.com/228FF5A14142F37/orig.jpg
I used a fast shutter speed to prevent motion blur as I was bouncing around in the back seat. This required a wider aperture which gave me a depth of field too short to keep everything in focus. What to do? What to do? Get out the wireless flash dummy! :D

First I tried holding the flash in various positions with my left hand. The results gave some strange patterns of light and shadow.
http://www.fototime.com/135E4FB93D421FC/orig.jpg

http://www.fototime.com/83893B42F4FBD98/orig.jpg

Giving it to Amanda to hold in the passenger seat gave muuuch better results. She pointed it up, towards Adam for this shot. The white ceiling makes for a nice bounce card but it is a little hot.
http://www.fototime.com/E75A7F4BE0CC522/orig.jpg

On a whim I did something I had never done before. I slid the speedlight into the hotshoe. The result was an image that matched what I thought the world should look like from the inside of a jeep!
http://www.fototime.com/8F723F88902B4C7/orig.jpg
Adam was a little orange due to the CTO filter on the flash. Removing it matched the exposure and color of the interior to the outside quite nicely.

Lesson learned here: Sometimes the lighting is ok when it comes right from the camera. I think it works here because there is enough "stuff" going on that the lack of textural information is irrelevant. It is also difficult to evenly illuminate in a confined space when using a wide angle lens.

The next step was to try to capture the feeling of speed. I don’t know about you but I really enjoy hauling ass down deserted dirt roads. OK, so maybe I am only doing 30mph, but with no sway bars and 20 psi in the tires it sure feels fast. I want to take a photo that preserves that rush for enjoyment at a later time.

Using a slower shutter speed gives an impression of the landscape rushing by. Unfortunately everything in the jeep is blurry too. This is 1/20sec @ f/22, no flash:
http://www.fototime.com/0F384063F19D9BB/orig.jpg

The best way to evoke that feeling of speed is for the inside to be sharp while the outside whizzes by. Flash is the perfect tool for this job. I set the exposure for the ambient light and relied on my flash to stop motion inside the dimly illuminated jeep. According to the manual for my SB-900, flash duration varies from 1//880 sec at full power down to 1/38,500 sec at 1/128 power. In case you didn’t know, the flash changes its output by altering the duration of its “on” time. A flash duration of 1/1,000 or faster should freeze everything inside the jeep.

Once more, 1/20sec @ f/22, this time with flash:
http://www.fototime.com/0F5C0EE76498E14/orig.jpg
The interior is pretty sharp and decently exposed. A couple of things I could have improved: Adam’s looking kind of blue, I should have used the ¼ CTO gel on the flash to warm him up. Also, next time I will be more mindful of sunlight shining on the interior. Notice how the sunlit areas of the dash are fuzzier than those illuminated by the speedlight? Here’s a crop to better show this to you:
http://www.fototime.com/54DB35848AA5569/orig.jpg
Notice how much sharper the lettering is on the cruise control switch compared to the temp gauge? The camera is seeing the sunlit parts of the scene for the entire 1/20 of a second that the shutter is open. The camera is only seeing the shaded part of the interior for the 1/880 of a second that the flash is firing. Flash has only a minor effect on things that are already under direct sunlight. My AA-powered strobe can’t overcome the illumination provided by the jillion ton ball of flaming hydrogen that is our sun. Not at a 20th of a second. At considerably faster shutter speeds it becomes possible for the intense, short duration burst of light emitted by a portable flash to overcome sunlight but that requires a fast shutter speed and a wide open aperture, which is completely opposite of what I need for this particular project. I have yet to apply that concept, all of the examples I have seen are outdoor portraits. When I figure out a jeep-related subject to practice this on I will share the results.

[Ghost]

Nice experimentation. All the first ones are too hot IMHO. The last one at F22 and 1/20 is about perfect balance. You want the flash to illuminate the interior and not overpower the exterior. GJ!

[asp]

My parents gave me a SB-600 to go with my D60 for my birthday a few days ago. It's still in shipping, but I can't wait to experiment with it.

Slightly off topic: Is this forum the appropriate one for photography talk? Or is this one more for people to post pics of their jeeps? Just wondering. Thanks.

[DrMoab]

Yes, this is the appropriate forum.

[Ghost]

Yes, this is the appropriate forum.

x2

[xjblue]

This year I've been messing around with the old flash Handlbars gave me, and other light sources off camera. I need to experiment it a lot more and save up for a remote system.

http://www.photozo.com/album/data/4638/CombWashcmp2010.JPG (http://www.photozo.com/album/showphoto.php?photo=167103)

http://inlinethumb53.webshots.com/32308/2868048750043863621S600x600Q85.jpg (http://outdoors.webshots.com/photo/2868048750043863621XuhJJI)

Thanks Alex, I'll have to post some more from the Maze trip soon.

[Handlebars]

Beautiful images, Jared! Here’s my cheap way to use a single remote flash:
http://www.fototime.com/3EB7DA8012A2CDC/orig.jpg

It is a flash cable. Since you already have a camera and a flash that are completely compatible in TTL mode, adding a cable to get the flash away from the camera will give you the same control as the wireless systems. Panasonic says that they make a TTL flash but nobody has them in stock. Panasonic and Olympus flash systems are 100% compatible so I ended up buying another FL-36 for my pocket cam. Ironically, the new version is set up for the Olympus wireless flash system. That doesn’t do me any good buuut there is also an optical slave mode that will work with any camera that has a built in flash, no hot shoe needed. Unfortunately the LX3 has a pre-flash that will trigger the slave and if it is shooting at a high output, the slave will not have any juice left for the actual exposure. So most of my off camera flash usage with the pocket cam involves that cable. Compare the number of contacts on the cable hot shoe vs. the one on the camera. I also had a really hard time locating an off camera flash cable that was compatible with an Olympus/Panasonic flash. It turns out that Canon flashes use one extra contact in the array on their hotshoe. Do yourself a favor and shop for a Canon flash cable, those are muuuch easier to find. Nikon has a slightly different arrangement so that cable and the Canon cable are not interchangeable.

Since you like doing close ups of wildflowers maybe this will give you some ideas of what to do with a portable light source or 2.
http://www.fototime.com/4363A6BECE7D6D3/orig.jpg

This is one of the toads that reside in my yard. You know how hard it is to do macro photography of anything that is 3 dimensional. At close subject to camera distances your depth of field is measured in millimeters, not inches or feet. The easiest way to help stretch out that DOF is to use a small aperture. Unfortunately that requires either a longer shutter speed or more light. You know I hate tripods so my solution was to set up a couple of flashes off camera to make a portrait of our toad. Mr. T. only comes out after dark. He hangs out underneath the porch light because it attracts the bugs that he likes to eat. The lamp has a CFL bulb and the light is weak and of an awful color. All of the light seen here is from my 2 speed lights, one on each side of me. Earlier in this thread I mentioned how you can control the ratio of ambient light to your flash output by varying shutter speed. Mr. Toad’s portrait was done at ISO 400, F/36 @ 1/320. The fast shutter speed prevented any of the porch light from registering in the image. Two flashes had plenty of power to expose properly at such a small aperture, especially since they were only a couple of feet away from him. The inverse square rule of light is normally the enemy of flash photography, but at macro distances you can move the light source close enough to your subject to be effective.

One last photo using off camera flash, also of a subject in his natural habitat. This time it is to overcome a backlight situation:
http://www.fototime.com/79D37357A54BA3B/orig.jpg

I’ll bet that turned out much nicer than the photos the creepy taser and gun toting ranger got of you. :photo:

[DrMoab]

I’ll bet that turned out much nicer than the photos the creepy taser and gun toting ranger got of you. :photo:

I'd like to hear this story...

[Handlebars]

It is best shared in a proper trip writeup. Hopefully someone will start one somewhere... :)

[DrMoab]

You are talking about Jared here...who is still "getting around" to getting his photos posed from the trip he took in 1982.

[Handlebars]

That "someone" includes me too. "The longest trip report begins with a single keystroke." :D

[xjblue]

I'm trying to forget about that creepy ranger guy, yikes.
The cable idea sounds good, I shall get one as it will allow me to get the most out of that flash unit. The FL-50R would compliment it nicely I think. I would have loved having the cable at Aztec Butte in Canyonlands the other day. After trying in vein to coordinate a flash via the test button in various ways, I finally slapped the flash back on the camera hotshoe and made use of the swivel head on the FL-36 with a couple different angles to light the ruin to the one side of the composition, still a bit flatter than I would have preferred but it helped exposure at least. It was all for fun, that site begs to be photographed with a good sunset rather than a stormy overcast anyway.

Ryan, I don't know why Alex or Adam havn't written up that trip yet, I wondered if they might be really patient waiting for me to have the honors!

[Handlebars]

Your mention of Aztec Butte reminded me of another photo to share. This is the reconstructed Great Kiva at Aztec Ruins National Monument. I wanted to get the roof detail... can you spot the flash? :)

http://www.fototime.com/E1E875D8E2563C9/orig.jpg

[xjblue]

I think I see it, lined up with the far pillar, nice shot!

[Letterman]

Very cool shot but you could and should have hid that flash.

[Handlebars]

99% of people viewing that photo would only see the flash because they read this thread. As for that other 1%, I guess I am busted. :D It does not bother me at all.

[asp]

An easy way to hide that would be with CS5's new content aware fill feature. With a textured background like those rocks, it would work really well and hide it perfetly.

[Ghost]

99% of people viewing that photo would only see the flash because they read this thread. As for that other 1%, I guess I am busted. :D It does not bother me at all.

You are 100% correct :cheers:

[DrMoab]

An easy way to hide that would be with CS5's new content aware fill feature. With a textured background like those rocks, it would work really well and hide it perfetly.

I so bad would like to play with some of the new features of CS5. Just can't get over the price. I could buy a camera body or a decent lens for what they want.

[Letterman]

99% of people viewing that photo would only see the flash because they read this thread. As for that other 1%, I guess I am busted. :D It does not bother me at all.

Really? The flash was one of the first things I noticed, it's in the center point of the room and almost the center of the photo. Kind of hard to miss it.

Looks like you could have just hid it behind the knee high object between the people and the flash and still got the same amount of lighting on the roof.

[DrMoab]

Really? The flash was one of the first things I noticed, it's in the center point of the room and almost the center of the photo. Kind of hard to miss it.

Maybe you are just a 1%ER man. :D

[Handlebars]

I'm cool with getting busted by a better photographer for leaving my flash out in the open. :) I actually would prefer that than to being lauded by the masses for klutzy use of HDR or a split neutral density filter... which I see a lot of but usually keep my mouth shut. But I do appreciate all comments, this is how I learn.

BTW, I have posted trip reports using photos that had far more blatant examples of the flash being in plain view... :D
http://www.fototime.com/E08CBF11DB917A8/orig.jpg

Re: CS5. I agree with Ryan. It is beyond my budget aaaaand my whole goal with using off camera flash is to open up the dynamic range of my photos the moment I push the shutter release and not having to fix them in post. My favorite part of $59 PS Elements 6.0 is batch processing, checking the resize and auto sharpen boxes. This works for 90% of the photos I put online, my goal is 100%. I enjoy being out working with my camera and flashes. Time spent at my computer editing photos, not so much.

[Letterman]

I'm cool with getting busted by a better photographer for leaving my flash out in the open. :) I actually would prefer that than to being lauded by the masses for klutzy use of HDR or a split neutral density filter... which I see a lot of but usually keep my mouth shut. But I do appreciate all comments, this is how I learn.

BTW, I have posted trip reports using photos that had far more blatant examples of the flash being in plain view... :D

Re: CS5. I agree with Ryan. It is beyond my budget aaaaand my whole goal with using off camera flash is to open up the dynamic range of my photos the moment I push the shutter release and not having to fix them in post. My favorite part of $59 PS Elements 6.0 is batch processing, checking the resize and auto sharpen boxes. This works for 90% of the photos I put online, my goal is 100%. I enjoy being out working with my camera and flashes. Time spent at my computer editing photos, not so much.

I am in no way a better photographer!

I like your stuff and have followed this thread from when you first started it, and like I said, I really like that shot. I noticed the flash sitting there before I even read the text, that's all.

I pick apart almost everything I shoot to learn from it, why I like or don't like a part of it, in the hopes I can learn something for the next time I am out shooting. To leave a flash in the photo is not wrong, some might even like it better, but if it was my photo, I would have hid it in that one photo.

In that second photo the blatant flash adds something to the photo, and I like the use of it the in that one.

90% untouched is really good, I am at best 65%, and that is after I have over shoot everything and end up deleting more then 40% of what I shot. If I could get into the 70% - 80% I would be happy.

Oh and I just got the full Adobe CS5 suite installed at work last week! :D


Please keep posting em! :clap:

[Handlebars]

I disagree, you are good because you saw the flash and knew what it was!

I was kind of forced to leave it in plain view because the trigger signal from my pop up flash to the remote is pretty weak and relies on a line of sight to function reliably. With a 17mm lens it is pretty tough to get the flash out of the frame and still able to trigger. I also was walking around photographing from various places so I was not sure what my ultimate composition was going to be.

Here’s one to show you what I consider a reject:
http://www.fototime.com/C5A7AD343510129/orig.jpg
The flash visible in the frame is only one of several problems that killed this photo. The output was a couple of stops too hot and the light was too close to the camera, creating the flat light and the prominent shadow behind me. The blurry rock in the extreme foreground is also very distracting. I ended up using one without flash for the trip report.
http://www.fototime.com/DA49D7EF6463394/orig.jpg
Composition was tough because I used a 16mm fisheye and had the camera and speedlight propped up on rocks. Yes, I had a tripod strapped to my back. No I didn’t use it. I hate those things and refuse to use them for anything other than long exposures in complete darkness.

[Letterman]

I was kind of forced to leave it in plain view because the trigger signal from my pop up flash to the remote is pretty weak and relies on a line of sight to function reliably.

I did not even think of the line of site for the flash. :dunce:

The rocks above show up better with out the flash, but the person is a little lost in the background with out it. With a little Photoshop work you could . . . :doh:

Time to start the tripod haters club? I am in! I think they are way to cumbersome and restrictive. I have a friend who always shoots with his monopod, and he loves it, but even that is too much for me. I only use the tripod for work shots, when I have to close it down, and shot slower to get everything in focus.

The flexible mini tripods are not so bad, less to carry around and really helps to get the camera just right for the shots you want to be in, or the long exposures.

[Letterman]

You might be on B&H email list already but Allan Weitz just had a write up on Wireless Flashes:

http://photography.bhinsights.com/content/wireless-flashes.html?BI=7373&kw=Article_Flashes

[Handlebars]

Thanks for the link! It looks like Canon > Nikon in the GN department. :( If Nikon can't give me a higher output Speedlight I would gladly settle for a faster sync speed. :D

I recently coughed up 60 bucks for PS Elements 9, mainly for the ability to process the RW2 files out of my pocket cam. One of its new features supposedly is "content aware fill" although I have not messed around with that yet.

That pocket cam is great for impromptu photos, I got a great portrait of my MIL/FIL with it this weekend. Lighting was courtesy of the windshield sunshade from my wife's car reflecting light onto them via a south facing kitchen window. It made some nice, soft light and was quick and easy. The resulting portrait will make a cheap and meaningful Xmas gift for her family as the existing photos of Mom & Pop are 20+ years old.