p.2 #1 · do u prefer flash photography or available light?
Dawei Ye wrote:
I don't agree, that's taking the view that flash is used when there is an absence of light quantity - however flash is often used when there is an absence of light quality, to clean up and supplement the existing light. Even having a slew of f/1.2 and f/1.4 primes will still deliver a crap image when the light quality is not there
True. I guess I should have stated it differently: if the light quality isn't good, I try not to take pictures If shooting outdoors, and the light quality is poor, I use fill flash - but consider that an act of desperation. Indoors, I don't think I have encountered many a case where I actually used flash - I feel that I can do a much better job with available light. The notable exception being shooting against windows - where fill comes in again - once more as an act of desperation
Does "as a last resort" sound better than "desperate"?
As an aside: the OP title is asking about preference. So, by a long shot - available light.
p.2 #5 · do u prefer flash photography or available light?
I use whatever I need to get the light that I want. Most of my shooting is in natural light, but I don't hesitate to use reflectors and/or one or more flash when I want the effect. I guess I'm getting more desperate as time goes on, as my studio setup is getting pretty capable. I can live with the desperation, it adds an 'edge' to the experience.
p.2 #6 · do u prefer flash photography or available light?
im still learning a lot, but there are a lot of times where even though a wide aperture is sufficient to get proper shutter speed, there are situations where you need more depth of field than what 1.4 or 1.8 will give. i find it useful at these times where i can bounce a flash indoors. i have seen some stunning results with flash. i too prefer natural soft light, usually i can only get this quality of light outdoors, usually on a sunny day shooting in the shade or something similar to those conditions. i find myself mostly shooting indoors however so to me this is like a revelation.
p.2 #7 · do u prefer flash photography or available light?
Light is a tool and a skilled photographic craftsperson learns to use all the tools of the trade. Outdoor and indoor lighting can be equally unflattering or unflattering, flat and shapeless or angled and creating the illusion of 3D in the 2D photo. Knowing how to produce as desired natural looking result in any situation requires knowing how to use both natural and artificial light sources skillfully and sometimes seamlessly.
The basic dilemma of color photography, film and digital, has been that the scene range outdoors exceeds the capacity of the film/sensor to record detail across all of it in a single exposure. So when a full tonal range is desired its necessary to use one or more flashes to change the contrast to match the sensor. In the case of portraiture outdoors one of the more effective strategies is to keep the direct sun off the front of the subject completely and illuminate the face with flash. But the mistake many make is thinking the flash is "Fill". The fill in that situation comes from the skylight. The flash creates a highlight pattern over that fill, and thus acts as the frontal "Key" light and must be positioned over the heads of the subject -- the direction natural light comes from - to produce natural looking results. Flash on camera hits the face at too low an angle, which is why it looks fake (i.e., unnatural). One also needs to recognize the sky fill, which is 3 stops below the sunny side, produces very dark shadows. To control the tone of the shadows, and with it the illusion of "soft" or "hard" light its necessary to use two flash units in front of the subject: one over the camera to boost the sky fill, and the second off axis directly above the camera in line with the nose of the subject (i.e. butterfly pattern for full face pose) or 45 degrees to the side of the nose of the subject (i.e. short lit oblique pose)
Indoors the problems are insufficient light and the fact in many cases the direction is unflattering. But indoors there's the fact that all the light is typically artificial, so the fact some of it comes from a flash unit isn't a big deal. When a seamless match of flash and ambient is needed one just needs to gel the flash to match the color temp of the dominant indoor light source.
So its not a question of the tools, but knowing how to use them. Click the WWW button and read my tutorials and you won't ask such noob questions
p.2 #8 · do u prefer flash photography or available light?
I voted for flash, but I actually generally prefer the look of available light. That said, I use flash more often, and that's because I get the shot 5x more often with flash. I HATE direct flash. I'd rather use ISO 3200 and bump in post than direct flash, so that's only used when absolutely needed. Bounced flash, when done right, looks like available light, so I use bounce flash a LOT. I didn't use it much until I got my 430EX II. I had a Sigma 500 EX DG Super, which was a good flash for power, but wasn't as consistent in exposure, and only used the AF assist beam on the center point, which made it not nearly as easy to use as the Canon flash.
Since I have started bouncing my flash and doing it WELL ( learning just where to bounce the light in a certain room or how the subject is facing, etc), my photos have become MUCH better, and since I can shoot indoors at ISO 200 or 400 while bouncing, much cleaner as a side benefit. The biggest thing, especially when shooting my daughter, is that the flash freezes motion, and when she's flying around like a maniac, available light often won't cut it...even with fast lenses (where I'd be lucky at f/1.4 and ISO 1600 to get 1/80s)...her movements cause a lot of blur, so flash gives me a HUGE increase in keepers and fairly consistent light.
p.2 #9 · do u prefer flash photography or available light?
The truth is that the "best light" often comes from nature, in the right situations, like the late afternoon golden glow or soft side light from a big beautiful window on a partly cloudy day. But the other half of the story is that nature doesn't always provide this ideal light. Sometimes her light is harsh and obtrusive, directly overhead or coming from the wrong angle. Or perhaps you're shooting in an enclosed interior lit by horrible old green flourescents. The only correct answer for a complete and well rounded photographer is that one is able to mimic beautiful natural light with strobes whenever Mother Nature isn't capable of providing in some certain situation for whatever reason. It happens, all the time, and when it does those photographers with more refined flash skills will always come away with the better shot in those situations. But when mother Nature is on, the flash is off! Just be smart enough (and skilled enough) to know when to put it back on...
p.2 #10 · do u prefer flash photography or available light?
There are situations when I use a flash but only if I can bounce it from white ceiling or walls. I tried diffusers but I never liked the effect I was getting. Taking a picture with a flash in church, for instance, ruins the mood completely.
or here (if someone knows Cathedral of Saint Patrick in NYC, one understands what kind of light is there - the flash actually completely changes the colors of the statue)
p.2 #11 · do u prefer flash photography or available light?
I take candids and flash reduces the my ability to take shots in a discreet way. If I could get the same result (expression, capture the moment) without my "subjects" know I'm taking a picture with flash, I'd certainly prefer one. It just wrecks the mood for most of what I shoot.
p.2 #12 · do u prefer flash photography or available light?
For me it's not a question of flash or available light but rather when and how to use flash. I used to be firmly in the natural light camp before I started to understand how to use flash effectively - starting by bouncing it indoors over using it as fill outside on bright days to the off camera strobist style of lighting.
Someone that equates flash use with the 'deer in the headlights' look has no understanding of flash photography. As Jman's examples above highlight, flash can produce high quality lighting in many situations if you know how. Then again it's use can be inapropriate or destroy the mood. It's just another tool in the box, albeit one with much creative potential and one that can be used to augment the available light to create something even better.
p.2 #14 · do u prefer flash photography or available light?
I use flash often. Part of my photographic education has been to try to take high quality shots with flash and understanding lighting and how to light shots. This helps me previsualize all shots whether or not artificial light is used. It also has taught me to focus on getting the shot light correctly instead of trying to fix things in post processing.
For inspiration I look at the works of Joe McNally, Gregory Heisler, or Anne Liebovitz. Great photographers and masters at lighting.
p.2 #15 · do u prefer flash photography or available light?
deepbluejh wrote:
Ever tried studio photography? Wonder how well that would work out with natural light?
Actually I know a few people who own studios that use natural light indoors, I've also seen a few sets in the portrait forum where people have shot with natural light in an indoor studio situation (or in one case in their garage doorway). That's not to say its the best option always, but it does happen.
p.2 #17 · do u prefer flash photography or available light?
M Vers wrote:
Actually I know a few people who own studios that use natural light indoors, I've also seen a few sets in the portrait forum where people have shot with natural light in an indoor studio situation (or in one case in their garage doorway). That's not to say its the best option always, but it does happen.
I did some correspondence courses in photography, and while they talk about strobes and all they want a photo taken from window light, with reflected fill.
I know of a studio in town here, who has a room with windows on the one wall for just this reason.
p.2 #18 · do u prefer flash photography or available light?
RobertLynn wrote:
I did some correspondence courses in photography, and while they talk about strobes and all they want a photo taken from window light, with reflected fill.
I know of a studio in town here, who has a room with windows on the one wall for just this reason.
Window light done properly can be some of the softest but still directional light you can have. It is wonderful for portraits, especially if you use a diffusing screen or even a white sheet.
Dec 06, 2009 at 10:49 AM
Lars Johnsson Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #19 · do u prefer flash photography or available light?
If shooting outdoors, and the light quality is poor, I use fill flash - but consider that an act of desperation. Indoors, I don't think I have encountered many a case where I actually used flash - I feel that I can do a much better job with available light. The notable exception being shooting against windows - where fill comes in again - once more as an act of desperation 