p.6 #1 · do u prefer flash photography or available light?
Cableaddict wrote:
I hate the term "flash," because it sort of implies an on-camera strobe used in ETTL mode.
IMO, until you've become proficient at using ancillary light, (call it what you will) you're not really a photographer, just an Uncle Bob with really good equipment.
Natural light can be great, if the conditions are JUST right, and the subject is facing the perfect direction, (especially outdoors) but how often does that happen?
+1
p.6 #2 · do u prefer flash photography or available light?
Cableaddict wrote:
IMO, until you've become proficient at using ancillary light, (call it what you will) you're not really a photographer, just an Uncle Bob with really good equipment.
Or just an Uncle Henri Cableaddict wrote:
Natural light can be great, if the conditions are JUST right, and the subject is facing the perfect direction, (especially outdoors) but how often does that happen?
You make a good point. The problem is, too many photographers think that blasting the scene with on camera flash somehow will compensate for lack of proper ambient light. What you get is illumination, not lighting. Many fail to understand the difference.
To be fair, the lovely natural lit photos be Uncle Henri and other documentary/fine art/street photographers are because that type of photography affords the luxury of only photographing when the light is right. Professional photography doesn't often give you that luxury.
While I prefer natural light, I'm certainly not averse to ancilary light. One of my favorite rigs for my outdoor Senior work was a portable flash with softbox on a stand, a Mamiya RB67 with a 150mm soft focus leaf shutter lens and a reflector or two. The leaf shutter let me perfectly blend daylight and flash.
p.6 #3 · do u prefer flash photography or available light?
dmacmillan wrote:
Or just an Uncle Henri
You make a good point. The problem is, too many photographers think that blasting the scene with on camera flash somehow will compensate for lack of proper ambient light. What you get is illumination, not lighting. Many fail to understand the difference.
To be fair, the lovely natural lit photos be Uncle Henri and other documentary/fine art/street photographers are because that type of photography affords the luxury of only photographing when the light is right. Professional photography doesn't often give you that luxury.
While I prefer natural light, I'm certainly not averse to ancilary light. One of my favorite rigs for my outdoor Senior work was a portable flash with softbox on a stand, a Mamiya RB67 with a 150mm soft focus leaf shutter lens and a reflector or two. The leaf shutter let me perfectly blend daylight and flash....Show more →
Agreed.
I use flash when I need to, but there are times when the natural light is just right and knowing when its just right is a skill just like using strobes (and if that makes no better than Uncle Bob then so be it)...
p.6 #5 · do u prefer flash photography or available light?
I do almost everything with available light. I will use use reflectors for outdoor shots. However, I would like to start working with flash more often. It really depends on the subject and situation. Sometimes additional lighting can add a lot to an image. Sometimes it can destroy the mood of the scene.
p.6 #7 · do u prefer flash photography or available light?
dmacmillan wrote:
[To be fair, the lovely natural lit photos be Uncle Henri and other documentary/fine art/street photographers are because that type of photography affords the luxury of only photographing when the light is right. Professional photography doesn't often give you that luxury.
.
Depends on what kind of proffesional photography you do.
p.6 #8 · do u prefer flash photography or available light?
dancam wrote:
Sometimes additional lighting can add a lot to an image. Sometimes it can destroy the mood of the scene.
This is all that needs to be said on the subject, the bottom line. Now, knowing when "sometimes" is and how to apply it, well there could be books written...
p.6 #9 · do u prefer flash photography or available light?
Flash is just a means of manipulating light. Any "ambient light" photographer that uses a reflector is doing the same: manipulating light. Even an ambient light purist that uses not even any light modifiers is likely still manipulating light. Repositioning a subject effectively moves the light source, as does waiting for the right time of day. So, why do some people have a fundamental objection to using flash?
Is the difficulty of understanding flash exposure vis-a-vis ambient exposure one of the reasons? Would you be more inclined to use flash if you understood how flash exposure works?
p.6 #10 · do u prefer flash photography or available light?
slin100 wrote:
Flash is just a means of manipulating light. Any "ambient light" photographer that uses a reflector is doing the same: manipulating light. Even an ambient light purist that uses not even any light modifiers is likely still manipulating light. Repositioning a subject effectively moves the light source, as does waiting for the right time of day. So, why do some people have a fundamental objection to using flash?
Is the difficulty of understanding flash exposure vis-a-vis ambient exposure one of the reasons? Would you be more inclined to use flash if you understood how flash exposure works?
I rarely position a subject. I don't like posed photos for the most part. I don't like the way artificially lit photos look. It has nothing to do with not understanding how flash exposure works, That's kind of an insulting assumption. I'ts a personal preference thing. Look at the title of the OP/Poll....prefer.......
p.6 #11 · do u prefer flash photography or available light?
watkinssr wrote:
I rarely position a subject. I don't like posed photos for the most part. I don't like the way artificially lit photos look. It has nothing to do with not understanding how flash exposure works, That's kind of an insulting assumption. I'ts a personal preference thing. Look at the title of the OP/Poll....prefer.......
Why do you think it is an insulting assumption? Perhaps you understand how flash exposure works, but I think a fair amount don't. And my hypothesis is that that could be one of the reasons why people prefer available light photography.
The OP did not direct his question only to people who understand flash photography. If he had, I would posit that the number of responses in favor of or at least neutral to flash would be higher. Flash exposure is not that straightforward. Just look at any of the long and well-written treatises by Chuck Gardner.
p.6 #13 · do u prefer flash photography or available light?
watkinssr wrote:
I don't like the way artificially lit photos look. It has nothing to do with not understanding how flash exposure works, That's kind of an insulting assumption.
Many times, when ancillary light is used well, you can't tell it was used at all. Not with a gun to your head. That's part of the craft.
p.6 #14 · do u prefer flash photography or available light?
watkinssr wrote:
I rarely position a subject. I don't like posed photos for the most part. I don't like the way artificially lit photos look. It has nothing to do with not understanding how flash exposure works, That's kind of an insulting assumption. I'ts a personal preference thing. Look at the title of the OP/Poll....prefer.......
Candid shooting is mostly knowing where to stand to capture a person in flattering light from a flattering angle. Here's an example.... Barry Black, Chaplain of the US Senate was a guest preacher at our church where I volunteer my services as a photographer.
We have theater quality computer controlled lighting on the stage so shooting him was just a matter of moving to the shadow side and finding the spot where when he turned so that his face was nicely short lit I could also capture a very nicely balanced oblique view...
Here's the same room different occasion: the going away party one of the pastors. Shooting with ambient just wasn't an option because the room lights were lowered and bouncing flash wasn't an option because the ceiling in the room is 25ft high.
All of those shots used dual flash, but none of them were posed and in most cases the people weren't even aware I was taking the photo. I use one flash on a bracket for flattering frontal light with a downward "butterfly" pattern, and an off camera flash on a wheeled IV stand I can grab and position with one hand.
Using the bracket or second light isn't as convenient as just using a single flash on camera, but for me effective lighting is controlling the direction of the light and whether or not it flatters a person so its worth the trouble in that type of situation. Had the party been outside on a overcast day I wouldn't have needed any flash, but it wasn't so knowing how to use flash effectively was a useful skill to have.
p.6 #15 · do u prefer flash photography or available light?
michael49 wrote:
Agreed.
I use flash when I need to, but there are times when the natural light is just right and knowing when its just right is a skill just like using strobes (and if that makes no better than Uncle Bob then so be it)...
No, that makes you far superior to ol' Bob, because you know when & when not to use it, plus you know how. Bob's the guy who either takes an average pic because he thought he didn't need extra light, or takes a P&S-looking shot because he used a flash improperly. (all he knows is on-camera bounce flash) -or he gets lucky, uses no flash, and all the elements of the universe align just right, as he clicks the shutter. -but it 'aint skill.
p.6 #16 · do u prefer flash photography or available light?
slin100 wrote:
Why do you think it is an insulting assumption? Perhaps you understand how flash exposure works, but I think a fair amount don't. And my hypothesis is that that could be one of the reasons why people prefer available light photography.
Well, it's insulting because of the way you phrased it.
if you phrase it as "one of the reasons some people prefer available light photography." then that's different.
p.6 #17 · do u prefer flash photography or available light?
Cableaddict wrote:
Many times, when ancillary light is used well, you can't tell it was used at all. Not with a gun to your head. That's part of the craft.
well, we are painting with pretty broad brushes here....I have rarely seen an artificially lit photo that didn't look that way to me. I can admire the skill that goes into properly using artificial light, but it's just not my preference.
p.6 #18 · do u prefer flash photography or available light?
watkinssr wrote:
Well, it's insulting because of the way you phrased it.
if you phrase it as "one of the reasons some people prefer available light photography." then that's different.
You were insulted by my original post, but I had clearly stated that I was wondering if an understanding of flash exposure was one of the reasons some people have a fundamental objection to using flash. So, you either missed my use of the qualifier, "some", or you were insulted in spite of this.
p.6 #20 · do u prefer flash photography or available light?
I am not advanced in my flash use skills, but I know that I have been able to get some good shots with fill flash in situations I was not able to get a usable photo without flash. I think if I practiced and studied flash use more, I could get even better results. But to the OP's original question, which do I prefer. Generally I prefer available light, but often my results with that are worse than my results with flash.
. - but I have no hope of ever being THAT good!