Direct Flash? Does anyone use it?

Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM

12/25/2007 12:28:09 PM · #1

Does anyone use direct flash anymore or do you simply bounce?

What utility is there for direct flash? What are the benefits, downfalls?

Photologist

Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max

12/25/2007 12:58:33 PM · #2

Originally posted by PGerst:

Does anyone use direct flash anymore or do you simply bounce?

What utility is there for direct flash? What are the benefits, downfalls?

Two times when I normally use it:

1) The built-in flash--when I don't have any other choice
2) Outdoors in daylight (backlight) or at dawn/dusk as a fill-in light for foreground subjects. The daylight is normally bright enough (even at dawn/dusk) to soften the harshness of a direct flash.

OdysseyF22

Panasonic DC-G9

Olympus 12-45mm f/4.0 Pro

12/25/2007 05:10:32 PM · #3

I use bounce or off-camera flash 90% of the time, and never the built-in flash. On the occassion that my 430EX is in the hotshoe, I have a Sto-Fen diffusor on it, and keep it at an angle to the subject.

SamDoe1

Canon EOS-350D Rebel XT

Nikon AF Nikkor 85mm f/1.8D

12/25/2007 05:38:55 PM · #4

Originally posted by OdysseyF22:

Out of curiousity, how do you trigger your flash(es) when they are off camera? Do you do this for portraits or for everyday type of thing?

Sorry for the hijack...

LERtastic

Nikon D200

12/25/2007 06:10:07 PM · #5

Originally posted by PGerst:

Does anyone use direct flash anymore or do you simply bounce?

What utility is there for direct flash? What are the benefits, downfalls?

I NEVER point the flash directly at a person if it's on camera as it creates nasty shinyness on people's faces (plus it makes your photos look like they were taken with a digicam). I bought a GaryFong WhaleTail but I am considering selling it as I hardly ever use on-camera flash. I do bounce as well when my flash is on camera.

Originally posted by SamDoe1:

Out of curiousity, how do you trigger your flash(es) when they are off camera? Do you do this for portraits or for everyday type of thing?

Sorry for the hijack...

As far as off-camera flash, not sure what OdysseyF22 uses, I recently ordered some cheap rf triggers off of ebay (arrived last night!). If you are the least bit interested in off-camera flash, and haven't checked it out, you gotta head over to Strobist.com and check out the Lighting 101 section.

Edit to add: I use off-camera flash whenever I can. I don't have a stand or anything, but this morning, for my family opening gifts, I just placed my flash on a table aimed towards my family. I would never do a portrait session with on-camera flash, even bounced.

Message edited by author 2007-12-25 18:13:37.

hanneke

Nikon AF-S Nikkor 28-300mm f3.5-5.6G ED VR

12/25/2007 06:11:27 PM · #6

Originally posted by PGerst:

Does anyone use direct flash anymore or do you simply bounce?

What utility is there for direct flash? What are the benefits, downfalls?

some people in the fashion photography use it as a "style" -> hard shadows on the BG and harsh light. I'm not really fond of it.

NikonJeb

Nikon D850

12/25/2007 06:33:22 PM · #7

Originally posted by PGerst:

Does anyone use direct flash anymore or do you simply bounce?

What utility is there for direct flash? What are the benefits, downfalls?

Well, I bought a direct flash not too long ago, and though it's become a real quest to develop the skill to know when and how to use it and when not to, I like it and will eventually get the hang of it.

What I have found is that in really low light situations, the effect is just awesome for portrait work when you don't have a studio setup and it's semi-candid.

These were from an experiment during a cheerleading event where I was looking for some individual shots for a picture CD I made for the team, and I was quite pleased with the results.

[thumb]619212[/thumb][thumb]620350[/thumb][thumb]619513[/thumb]

None of these are spectacular, but I was happy because I liked the way that the backgrounds disappeared and gave the negative space effect simply because of the lack of light. I got more bad shots than good trying to gauge the optimum distance to use the flash, but that's what I meant by experimentation. It seems to take a delicate touch to get the balance between enough and too much light.

My main motivation was that I wanted to get shots of these kids under different conditions and this direct flash does give me mobility for the cheer events. It's severely limited in its usage during the performances, but again......it does have its applications.

My biggest objections? The d@mn thing is hard work to use well, and it eats AA batteries like nothing I've ever seen! LOL!!!

Message edited by author 2007-12-25 18:38:04.

Derf

Canon EOS-7D

Nikon AF Zoom-Nikkor 18-135mm f/3.5- 5.6G ED DX

12/26/2007 09:32:41 AM · #8

Get a good set of rechargables and your good for a year. It should cost about $8.00 for 4 good AA's at your local 7 eleven. I keep two sets of new alkalines in my bag just in case!

A great charger for them is always nice to have
//www.thomasdistributing.com/la_crosse_bc-900_battery_charger.php

A video on the charger...really neat
//216.227.215.197/bc900-video.php

rupypug

Nikon D300

12/26/2007 11:38:48 AM · #9

Not going to use it much longer as it causes bad shadows and overexposure.

Jeremy

raish

Olympus C-2500L

Nikon AF Nikkor 50mm f/1.4D

12/26/2007 11:48:47 AM · #10

I've just discovered the manual setting for the on board flash - 1/16 power to cut out/minimise shadows from a window. I pleased :-)

Olympus 12-45mm f/4.0 Pro

12/26/2007 11:49:58 AM · #11

was taken with direct flash, however prior to this shot I had manually exposed for the background (using high ISO/wide aperture) then dropped the exposure a wee bit, I then knew that when I took the shot, the background/foreground would be slightly darker than the main subject which the flash would expose correctly.. This gave me a nice full-bodied shot with out a dark/black background and a nicely exposed and frozen subject. However, this was quite easy at the marquee was quite well lit..

This next sample was shot in the street a few weeks back..

Now there was NOTHING I could of bounced the flash off (except maybe Alex Saberi who was also there) so I had already exposed for the background lights and again, I let the flash deal with the main subject. Not as rich as the other shot, but not a horrible/dark direct flash kind of shot we are used to getting on Automatic modes.. Sorry I just skimmed over this, if anyone wants a bit more info let me know and I will write a bit more later once the Simms Clan have gone home.

OdysseyF22

Panasonic DC-G9

12/26/2007 12:06:29 PM · #12

Originally posted by SamDoe1:

Originally posted by OdysseyF22:
I use bounce or off-camera flash 90% of the time, and never the built-in flash. On the occassion that my 430EX is in the hotshoe, I have a Sto-Fen diffusor on it, and keep it at an angle to the subject.

Out of curiousity, how do you trigger your flash(es) when they are off camera? Do you do this for portraits or for everyday type of thing?

Sorry for the hijack...

I use a pair of the 16-channel eBay radio slaves. They're more dependable than the 4 channel models, but I had to cut the jacks off and splice PC connecters on - very minor, and now they work great.

I use them for everything: portraits, nature, macro, scenes...

PGerst

Canon EOS-20D

12/26/2007 12:53:44 PM · #13

Actually, it was an article in the strobist that made me ask this question. I'm referring to the article on "Guide Number: Your Free Flash Meter".

I just wondered, who fires their flash straight on anymore....

Originally posted by LERtastic:

If you are the least bit interested in off-camera flash, and haven't checked it out, you gotta head over to Strobist.com and check out the Lighting 101 section.

fotomann_forever

12/26/2007 01:13:54 PM · #14

Sometimes you have no choice but to use direct flash. I use a Lumiquest Softbox for those situations.

PGerst

Canon EOS-20D

12/26/2007 01:35:16 PM · #15

Thank you. One question though, Why did you not use diffuse direct flash?

Originally posted by Simms:

I think you are missing some of the plus points of direct flash.. Direct flash, when used as fill in, or in manual mode doesn't have to be `harsh` or `flat`, it can be used to isolate a subject from a slightly underexposed background.. I will write a brief description here, but have got THE FAMILY coming around in about an hour so need to get the house straight.. OK, this wedding shot here

was taken with direct flash, however prior to this shot I had manually exposed for the background (using high ISO/wide aperture) then dropped the exposure a wee bit, I then knew that when I took the shot, the background/foreground would be slightly darker than the main subject which the flash would expose correctly.. This gave me a nice full-bodied shot with out a dark/black background and a nicely exposed and frozen subject. However, this was quite easy at the marquee was quite well lit..

This next sample was shot in the street a few weeks back..

Now there was NOTHING I could of bounced the flash off (except maybe Alex Saberi who was also there) so I had already exposed for the background lights and again, I let the flash deal with the main subject. Not as rich as the other shot, but not a horrible/dark direct flash kind of shot we are used to getting on Automatic modes.. Sorry I just skimmed over this, if anyone wants a bit more info let me know and I will write a bit more later once the Simms Clan have gone home.

12/26/2007 02:03:30 PM · #16

no need, too much mucking about..

12/26/2007 02:03:46 PM · #17

No need, too much mucking about..

Originally posted by PGerst:

Thank you. One question though, Why did you not use diffuse direct flash?

Originally posted by Simms:
I think you are missing some of the plus points of direct flash.. Direct flash, when used as fill in, or in manual mode doesn't have to be `harsh` or `flat`, it can be used to isolate a subject from a slightly underexposed background.. I will write a brief description here, but have got THE FAMILY coming around in about an hour so need to get the house straight.. OK, this wedding shot here

was taken with direct flash, however prior to this shot I had manually exposed for the background (using high ISO/wide aperture) then dropped the exposure a wee bit, I then knew that when I took the shot, the background/foreground would be slightly darker than the main subject which the flash would expose correctly.. This gave me a nice full-bodied shot with out a dark/black background and a nicely exposed and frozen subject. However, this was quite easy at the marquee was quite well lit..

This next sample was shot in the street a few weeks back..

Now there was NOTHING I could of bounced the flash off (except maybe Alex Saberi who was also there) so I had already exposed for the background lights and again, I let the flash deal with the main subject. Not as rich as the other shot, but not a horrible/dark direct flash kind of shot we are used to getting on Automatic modes.. Sorry I just skimmed over this, if anyone wants a bit more info let me know and I will write a bit more later once the Simms Clan have gone home.

12/26/2007 02:03:57 PM · #18

double post - tooo much vodka.

fotomann_forever

12/26/2007 02:45:16 PM · #19

Originally posted by Simms:

double post - tooo much vodka.

Just don't muck about with the vodka :-D

Nikon AF Nikkor 50mm f/1.4D

12/26/2007 03:52:51 PM · #20

lol, singstar hss juuts come out...

raish

Olympus C-2500L

12/26/2007 03:54:40 PM · #21

h k gvmv jh?