Photon
Offline
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: On
|
brainiac wrote:
ulrikft wrote:
Brainiac:
Are you stating that: Bounce flash is useless, All flash diffusers are useless and that off camera flash in general is useles... AND expect to be taken serious? Or are you still trying to make some point? 
No - I'm saying that bounce flash works in a narrow set of circumstances:
1) the bounce surface is bright enough
2) the bounce surface is near enough
3) the bounce surface is of neutral colour
4) the bounce surface is continuous and not interrupted by glass-covered pictures or mirrors
5) the bounce surface is in the right direction to illuminate your subject matter appropriately
6) the photographer like the look of bounced flash
I find that at least half of the time (6) and at least one of the others fail. I don't like to suck the life out of my pictures by wasting my subjects' time.
As for diffusers, as I said, the micro-apollo is the only one that manages to spread the light beyond an effective point source, and frankly it's a nuisance as it's always getting knocked into. The omni-bounce, or small white diffusers and reflectors do virtually nothing, because they don't spread the light source. It's not bouncing the light off or through a diffuser that helps, it's how broad the light source is as seen from the subject's point of view. Doubling the light source width from 3cm to 6cm, when it is 6 feet away from the subject achieves so little that it is barely possible to tell the difference between direct flash and diffused flash. At normal shooting distances like 6 feet, the light would need to spread over at least a foot or two to see any significant diffusing effect. Most modifiers fail to do that.
Off camera flash:
Off camera flash, if used with diffusers can look OK, but otherwise all it does is to produce harsh and long shadows across faces or under noses and chins. It's not nearly as practical if you have to keep moving and have a lot of ground to cover. Two undiffused off-camera flashes just cast double shadows, as any studio photographer can tell you.
What it boils down to is that if you need to shoot social stuff professionally, whether it be for press or weddings or what have you, ring flash is the most flattering (almost) practical option, while built-in pop-up flash is the next best, by virtue of the flash bulb being close to the lens. Anything else is a bit student, and interferes with your ability to respond, and capture the ephemeral heart of the event.
Edited by brainiac on Sep 06, 2008 at 06:49 PM GMT
Fair enough, but some counterpoints:
1. When a high proportion of the people are wearing eyeglasses, flash near the lens axis can be a disaster.
2. When rooms are small and ceilings not too high, a flexible system like the Demb bounce on a 580 or similar flash let's you very quickly position the main proportion of the light in a good portrait orientation for individuals and small groups.
3. If the ceiling or wall is anywhere close to white, the white balance can be very easily corrected in raw if needed. The mix of fill direct from the flash with main bounced off a wall or ceiling can cause slight color cast drift in shadows, but in practice I find it looks natural and attractive compared to straight on flash.
For high ceilings, black rooms, outdoors, and various other situations - including perfect set ups for an off camera flash but when I don't happen to have one - I would like to have a decently powered pop up flash. Maybe in a few years none of us will need eyeglasses anyway, thanks to improved microsurgical procedures.
This long, rambling post was intended especially to annoy Ralph! 
Just bring out the 5DII. I don't care what it has. I'll check it out and then decide what I think. 
Edited by Photon on Sep 06, 2008 at 10:26 PM GMT
Edited on Sep 07, 2008 at 03:26 AM
|
