UPDATE: The interview, very much worth reading, is archived here.
Long-time Strobist reader and architectural photographer Scott Hargis, whom we have mentioned before, will be doing a live chat-style interview on Photo Camel tonight, at 8:00 p.m. Pacific Time in the US (which is GMT -8).
Scott specializes in efficiently shooting architectural interiors for real estate, and makes heavy use of his speedlights in the process. If you are into small-flash interior lighting and Scott is talking, you'll wanna be listening.
To pull off this beautiful close-up shot of a guitar, reader Paul Morton, of Phoenix, AZ, had to solve several problems: The guitar was black, the chrome sees everything, and table had to separate from the body of the instrument.
Paul used a total of five speedlights, and a healthy dose of ingenuity. Take a moment to reverse engineer it before making the jump to see how he did it. _____________________
Says Paul:
"My girlfriend inherited this guitar. Well, actually, her sister did -- and I have had it for 3 months to shoot. Needles to say It's about time I give it back. So I have been playing with it. As it is black and the chrome is pretty much white, I noticed the colorful anchors to the strings. I love different, close-up angles like this and the colors were a bonus. I wanted the neck and strings in the shot so everyone would know it is a guitar and I liked how they appear to be moving due to the shallow depth of field."
He goes on: "It was fairly difficult to get the light on that chrome bar the strings are anchored in. I liked the gradient light in the top part, which came from an SB-26 firing into my ceiling, but the side facing the camera was black until I put a piece of foam-core around my lens and fired two strobes into it. It kind of worked out like a ring light, although it wasn't round. I also used a couple SB-26s at the other end to light the table and seperate the body. ..."
The trick to lighting chrome is to light what the chrome sees. The reflection creates your tone. Paul built his white wall of foam-core around the lens to give something nice and consistent for the chrome to reflect. This is a classic technique for shooting objects which are highly specular. And it doesn't get much more specular than chrome.
Paul continues:
"I setup a quasi-ring flash with the foam-core around the lens and an SB-26 and a 580EX on either side firing into it. Because there is no eye in the photo to show a catchlight, the square sheet worked fine. I added the other sheets on either side of that to further fill in the large chrome nuts on either end of the string mount."
"The sb-26 to the left with the big starburst is firing up into the ceiling to fill the top of the strong mount as well as the strings and neck further down. Two more SB-26s are fired into the table to light it up, because it was getting kind of dark down there. I put a gobo on the right flash because it was lighting up the neck and the chrome tuning knobs that are closest to the camera in this shot."
"I shot at 1/40th to 1/200th of a second and from F16 to F11. I also worked between ISO 100 and 200 -- it just depends on the shot. I would lower the shutter speed to bring in some ambient, and closed down the aperture to make the blacks go black. I put the camera on a tripod so I could play with light position and the camera settings until I got the light I wanted."
This is a classic example of building light a single zone at a time and solving the problems one-by-one. In the aggregate, this is a very tricky photo. But broken down into segments, it is very doable.
Nice shot, Paul. Makes me wanna play it. Tuned to an open chord, of course. 'Cause I pretty much suck at anything other than the easy slide stuff.
(Keith Richards, white courtesy phone, please...)
Many thanks to Paul for the great caption info and especially for the setup shot. When you add setup shots and good lighting info, it makes a huge difference for the people viewing your photos who want to learn.
If you guys get a chance, cruise over to Paul's photo and leave a comment.
It's my birthday today. So I am taking the day off and handing the keys over to "Baritone Bert" Stephani, who is back with another one of his smooth-voiced, small-flash lighting videos from Confessions of a Photographer.
For the newbs, note how quickly and easily Bert constantly adjusts his lighting to vary the effect. He just grabs them and goes, whether he is backing the light up to get more even lighting over a larger area or hitting his model with 12:00-high umbrella for an Iggy Pop look.
Remember, the more you do this stuff the easier and more intuitive it gets. Just do it.
Now, if you'll forgive me, I will be spending the next two hours with my senile self trying to figure out where I left my car keys -- and yelling at kids to get off of my lawn.
UPDATE: Well, I can honestly say that I did not expect this on my birthday... (Thanks, guys!)
The upcoming Feb 16th and 17th Orlando, Florida lighting seminars are sold out. But there is lots more education stuff on the menu, including more upcoming seminars, after the jump. ___________________
Education Notes
• I am in the process of venue selection for the Mar. 15-16 seminars in Phoenix, AZ. More details coming soon.
• Scott Kelby's new tome, The Digital Photography Book, Vol. 2, is out, following the wildly successful Vol. 1. I helped edit the chapter on flash, which, like the rest of the book is vintage, nuts-and-bolts Kelby. It is reviewed by a Strobist reader Ivan Makarov, here.
• Registration for the Northern Short Course (Rochester, NY, Mar. 13-15) has opened. I will not be teaching there this time due to a scheduling conflict. But they have a very strong roster of speakers this year, including my long-time friend, Chris Usher, whom I will be very sad to miss. These NPPA things are always killer deals and you should definitely try it out if you are in the Northeast USA.
• I will be doing four two-hour workshops at the Southern Short Course (Charlotte, NC, Mar. 27-31) geared toward working photojournalists and environmental portraiture. These NPPA things are ridiculously cheap, and tend to sell out quickly. (Last year's was $75.00 for all four days of speakers and workshops.) Registration is not open yet, but it pays to keep a watch on the site.
Charlotte, BTW, is starting to come on as a Strobist meetup city: See the recent garage-shoot video, here.
• John Harrington just posted a truckload of new gear videos on his Assignment Construct site. It is becoming clear to me that John is single-handedly supporting the entire photo gear industry at this point. I am thinking his next video will be on how to choose the best U-Haul trailer to carry it all.
UPDATE: John has a great video, from the photog's perspective, on covering Bush's last State of the Union Address last night, posted here.
• Long range planning, I will be teaching long-form, multi-day seminars in Dubai (UAE) in late April / early May. If you are in that area of the world (Dubai is an easy flight for many) I'd love to see you there. There are others teaching -- people you will most definitely want to see -- but if I told you about them now, I'd have to kill you. More details coming soon.
Earlier this month, I was lucky enough to spend several days on the Google campus. For a guy like me, that borders on being a religious experience.
I have never been more intimidated than I was while setting up to spend all day teaching to a room full of fifty Google employees. On the one hand, I was absolutely certain that I was the dumbest guy in the room. But on the other hand, the whole campus just oozes with camaraderie and collaboration. Which adds a whole new (and very cool) layer to the enlarged frontal lobe thing.
But when it was all said and done, I could not remember ever having hung out with a more broadly intelligent and fun bunch of folks. Add to that the amazing environment that Google has created for their people, and you have a remarkable place to spend a career.
I won't get all of the perks and bennies of being a Googler, because there's a lot. But I will take a moment to give a shout out to the food -- all free -- and prepared by 5-star chefs. These guys know how to get their grub on.
Just imagine being on a cruise ship, every day, three times a day, but with better food. (Lobster tacos, anyone?) It is said that some Googlers do not even keep a fridge in their house. And yes, the campus coolers were stocked with ice-cold DMD's.
That food is from all over the world, and top notch. But they still know how to bring it down to street level: All hail Chef Dave's Special Bacon Fried Rice.
Okay, now I am getting all distracted. Back to shooting Steve, after the jump... _________________
The Need for Speed
Google prides themselves not only on being the best search engine on the planet, but also on being breathtakingly fast. That's a good skill to have when lighting a portrait, too. In this case, for instance, the sun was quickly disappearing behind the top of a nearby building on campus. (The building just past a full-sized T-rex skeleton sculpture devouring the remains of a Christmas tree, to be exact.)
So this was gonna have to happen within just a few minutes, or it wasn't going to look very good. Just for fun, I am going to run this one real time. Times are pulled from EXIF data. But please remember to allow for the fact that we are explaining the process as we go, which slows us down a bit...
(Fortunately, with these guys, you rarely have to explain something twice. They pretty much get it the first time.)
Time = 00:00
My lights are on stands, and I am walking to the shoot with them, just as if we were doing a few looks, shoot-and-scoot style.
First off, choose an angle. Grab a natural light shot to assess the ambient portion of the photo and check the sight lines. No problems here. Exposure, 1/400, f/4.5, ISO 400. That's an easy place to hit, and to move around, with flash.
Note all of those not-very-bright guys hanging out in the back.
Time = 00:10
We are now ten seconds into the shoot. Having placed a bare flash (1/2 power, if memory serves) I grab a test shot, blocking the light with my hand, to see what my backlight will do to the surroundings when blocked by Steve.
Everything looks fine. In fact, I am always amazed at what one hidden backlight can do. Here, it is working in spades, reflecting off of the glass and white aluminum and doing all sorts of cool things. More often than not when designing light, I start in the back and move forward.
Later, when editing at a less insane pace, I would realize that the people who were just hanging around in this test looked pretty darn good. Especially Aaron, back center right, leaning against the post with the "come hither" stare. (He is nowhere near that attractive in real life.)
I could use this technique (combined with a front light) to shoot a kickin' 10-person group shot, if needed. So I file that away somewhere, for later.
(EDIT: Second thought, I think there is some un-aimed, unadjusted front light kicking in here on my hand. See my head shadow. But it is not reaching back to the back guys -- it is too far and the gridded beam way to narrow to get them all like that. That's all bouncing backlight, I'd bet.)
Time = 00:56
Just for comparison: Note how useless a backlight test is if you do not block it with something when testing it.
That's an important thing to remember. I always travel with one hand, and a spare, just for this reason.
Time = 00:59
Less than a minute after first visualizing the scene, I am testing the second light -- from the position of the second light. This is critical when working fast, as it allows you to test both exposure and aim while seeing what your light will see. This light had a gridspot, so aim counts.
Then I waste twenty secs of precious sunlight talking about the fact that the front light is too dark. Adjust light to be more powerful. Shut up and get back to work. Note that I am not even bothering to focus these shots yet. No need. Why waste the time?
Time = 01:22
There, that's better. If memory serves, I am at 1/2 power on the back light, and 1/8 power on the front light, which is coming from just a little bit camers right in the final shooting position, and a little higher than Steve's face.
The power settings are not important. The thought process is important.
I see here that I would like a little more exposure in the sky. Open the shutter from 1/400th to 1/200th of a sec. Problem solved for first real shot, which is at:
Time = 01:44
We are off and running. Starting at 01:44, I am making photos I can use. For the next two and a half minutes, I concentrate on making good frames. Vary the angle. Get different expressions. Watch for changing ambient light and adjust the shutter if needed. Remind the fifty people standing behind me to leave a path in the tunnel, because people are actually needing to use it as we shoot.
In four minutes and change, we go from visualizing a two-light photo to having thirty usable frames to choose from. Not that we're stealing a car or anything. But I want my frames before the light goes away, simple as that. That's a good way to be able to work, and very doable when you have been lighting long enough for it to get intuitive.
Here's the frame I chose. For one thing, Steve wasn't blinking or picking his nose in this one, and the expression and lines both look good.
Someone asked about the reflection of the backlight in the glass. It is either too close to me (in the side glass) to see, or is hidden by a post. You can see it popping up in the first "real shot" frame, at time = 01:44.
I was working to fast to know or care why it was not a problem later. But if it had been a problem, I would have moved forward or back to hide the reflection in a white post and zoom the lens to recompose. Easy-peasy.
NOTE: You can see an available light / setup / compromise exposure shot, here. (Thanks, Jennn!)
And why, you may ask, is this man smiling? Because he, my friend, works for Google. And that's enough to make anyone happy:
Thanks to all of the Googlers for showing me such a great time on campus. I cannot remember a tenth of the stuff I learned, but it'll come back to me a little at a time, I am sure.
And to all of the new friends I met in Mountain View, if you ever get over to the new Washington, DC Google office and want to hang out, shoot me an email. I am only 20 mins from there. __________________
This whole free info fountain thing works because a few very cool businesses make it work. Thanks much to Midwest Photo, PhotoShelter, Zenfolio, and ModMaster Flash, David Honl.
If you've got what it takes to flaunt your biz in front of 200,000 Strobist readers, I actually have an opening starting this month: 200p x 100p below the fold, at just $1.50 CPM. Click here for more info.
Who did I wake up to find under my bowl of Frosted Flakes this morning but the Incredible Being of Lightness herself. Does this mean she has jumped the shark?
Maybe, maybe not. More inside. __________________
Note to this site's perfectly sensible foreign readers:
"Jumped the Shark" is slang for when anything has clearly reached its peak, and is on the downslope. It's from a "Happy Days" TV episode in which the writers had a lead character jump a shark on a motorcycle (correction, on water skiis) in a desperate ploy to save plummeting ratings. More here. __________________
Jill "Dingo Made Your Baby Cry" Greenberg has not been without notice on this site. She has what anyone would at least have to admit is a very interesting lighting style. And she has worked it to the point to where she is practically the Aaron Jones of the day.
As for her lighting, she can imitate Jill Greenberg better than perhaps anyone else on the planet, if that is a good thing. But as for her range, well, I would compare it to the number of facial expressions mastered by Keanu Reeves in his movie career.
(Okay, that's not fair. Keanu has mastered two facial expressions and is said to be working on a third.)
But now Ms. Greenberg is getting written up in family newspapers, aimed at the general public. Or at least The Washington Post, who had a two-page photo spread and interview in honor of her monkey show at the National Academy of Sciences. Usually a newspaper getting around to writing about something being hot is pretty much the death knell.
Her Washington Post piece, by the numbers:
9: Total number of her photos used in the Arts section today.
6: Number of photos which contained monkeys. I thought it was seven at first, but one turned out to be of American Idol host Simon Cowell.
75: Percentage of a page dominated by the lead photo. Seriously, Pulitzer Prize Winners do not get that kind of space.
9,000: Approximate percentage of dot gain on the photos in the spread. They looked pretty rough. This photo, bounce-fill-flashed and adjusted, does not do the monkey-howl-inducing repro justice. Welcome to the world of newspapers, your Jillness.
IMO, she is could go either way. One direction being Annie, Avedon and the like -- the fabric of American culture -- and the other being Fonzie, suiting up to jump. Nothing against the quality of the photos -- they are stunning. But any specific technique, so heavily used, is always in danger of suddenly going out of style. Witness Aaron Jones and the Hosemaster craze of the late '80's.
It will be interesting to see just how long the ride lasts.
At least a little longer, apparently, as shown in this Fast Company magazine video of a recent cover shoot. I did notice the way she just lights the backgrond from behind the paper, to keep things clean and wire-free. (Yes, I'm so pathetic.) ____________
All things being equal, I would rather shoot someone than be shot by them. But that wasn't gonna fly last Sunday when I popped in on the Seattle Flickr group meetup while on a trip to see Chase Jarvis.
But getting shot at is a small price to pay for getting to see one of these legendary Seattle Strobist meetups first-hand. Darien Chin, the guy who did the cool multi-flash car shot, had another one of his speedlight-hungry concepts in mind for me. So I got to be the model for a change.
More on that, and the video Chase Jarvis' crew made from the evening, after the jump. __________________
Now that I have been to one, I can tell you that attending one of these Seattle shindigs is a total hoot, and worth flying 3,000 miles for. I spent the evening walking around talking to people and checking out all of the various setups. But I also had a turn at getting shot in Brittney's famous bear hat (and in about a dozen other ways) and trying to keep a straight face when Robyn kept requesting an particular type of not straight face. I'd say more, but this is a family blog.
Suffice to say that this group knows how to have fun.
The photographic highlight of my night was getting shot by Darien Chin (AKA Knottyy on Flickr) in the photo seen at the top of the post. It was a great example of the collaborative spirit of the evening -- Darien stole borrowed speedlights with Pocket Wizards from as many people as he could find.
He arranged them on the floor, set mostly on 1/64th power. There was one at 1/32nd power which was aimed a little up to catch my face. My job was to sweep them up, like so much trash.
The fill light was from an White Lightning monobloc in an octa, which was on a large light stand which itself was being held up by volunteers to get extra height. For those of you who I have not met, I am very tall -- about 6'11", and you have to take special measures to light me form the top. (Hey, whatever it takes.) It was positioned overhead and a little behind me, to bring up the shadows. (You can see a setup shot here.)
Add a few more speedlights (clearly we did not have enough in the frame yet) to light the background and to separate me from both back sides, and we were ready to go.
This was a cool concept for Darien to think up, much less to execute. He did some with Chase in the frame, too, to up the average attractiveness quotient a little.
This was not an easy shot to pull off on a technical basis. But having fifty photogs in the room made for no shortage of ideas and opinions. Nice one, Darien. But get a prettier lead subject next time...
Here is the video Cody shot from the night, including some pretty spiffy time-lapses that show just how big this hangar was:
Chase has a post with a lot of back story on his site, here. Check it out if you are thinking of having one of these in your own town. (And if you are not thinking that, you should be...) __________________
After that it was off to Chase's new studio for one of those cool "after parties" which I almost never get invited to. Great food, great people and lots of good conversation. Chase and the crew know how to roll, and this place is equipped to the nines.
A couple hours into the evening, someone broke out the Wii set (on a huge projection screen, of course) and a long string of Guitar Hero battles soon followed. Chase offered up some respectable riffs as the host. But it turns out that Danny Ngan, whom you may know as the guy who does all of those jumping photos on Flickr, is like, a 9th-degree Guitar Hero black belt. Dude can wail.
I think there was actually some close-up video done while Danny, who is seen playing above, with chase watching. But it is pretty useless because the camera was only filming at 30 frames per second. Seriously, he was amazing. Just throwing up six-digit scores left and right.
The Seattle folks are taking this lighting meetup thing and running with it. But there are lots of other meetups happening all over the world now. You can search for one here, and I highly recommend trying it.
Just do not challenge Danny Ngan to a Guitar Hero contest, because he will smoke your butt. And watch out for Robyn if she shows up, too. She'll bust you up laughing and then shoot you when you lose it.
Thanks for a great night, guys. _________________________
The Seattle crew has posted their video from the latest weekend meetup, raising the bar yet again on their peer-to-peer lighting meetups. I was able to pop in on this one -- and if I would have known they were this fun, I would have started coming long ago.
Just the usual: Fifty photographers, a rented airplane hangar, a ridiculous amount of lighting gear, nine models, a table full of way too realistic-looking weaponry and an "after party" at an insanely cool local studio.
There's a full write-up, including photos a vid by Chase's guys, coming shortly. But I thought you guys might like this look at how the Seattle folks roll.
UPDATE -- 3/27/08 -- These things are proving very popular, and are now on backorder. They are subbing out a different swivel, which also has the set screw. See here for more info and a pic. ___________
The $16.99 LumoPro LP632 "shorty" umbrella swivel mounts have been updated. They are now sporting better build quality (bolts for the head instead of rivets) and a "set screw" for the newer, metal-shoed flashes. Which means no more wobbly $300.00 strobes.
This pretty much takes care of my quibbles with the first version, leaving a very compact model that gets the job done. If space is at a premium in your lighting bag, these could very well get the nod over the larger standard swivels. Although some will still prefer the bigger ones for ease of adjustment with the big friction lever.
In addition to de-jet-lagging and climbing Mount Unanswered Email after a week-long trip to the West Coast, I was also behind on looking through the Strobist Flickr pool to fave pics for the gallery.
In one week, one hundred and five pages of new photos had been added. That's over three thousand new pictures. Suffice to say there was some nice stuff in there.
I am working up a post from the awesome Seattle meetup on Sunday night. (I crashed it for the free food.) Also, there will be some On Assignments from the two lighting seminars we did. Those will be coming soon. And if you are expecting an email from me, have patience -- I am pedaling as fast as I can.
If the embedded slideshow above does not work for you (it is slick-looking, but a bit buggy) you can see the standard, big version here.
You might not think a small flash -- or even a flashlight -- could make such a big difference in a landscape photo. But the trick is waiting for the ambient to come to you, and being selective about what you light.
More pix, and how they were made, after the jump. __________________________
In Elphotoman's light-painted photo of a campsite (above) he combines a flash inside the tent (with a cooling gel) with light painting on the trees.
The exposure is 30 secs at 2.8, which tells you how low the ambient is. Even so, there is still tone in the sky (which is important remember when choosing that shutter speed) to get a sense of depth in the photo. Click on the pic (as with all of the pics in this post) to see more info on how it was done.
Shot mid-afternoon on a foggy day, Gregory Pleau was able to increase the exposure level on the stump with an SB-600 at camera right. This allowed him to underexpose the ambient-lit snow to create a mood for the whole scene.
There is another strobe (an SB-800) presumably lighting the branches at left to a lower exposure, too.
This stand of beeches, by Patrick Eden, also combines light painting and strobe. The strobes (the effects of which are hard to see at this resolution) are coming in from camera right on some of the trees in the background.
Again, waiting for the ambient to drop low enough to allow you time to work is important. Especially if you are light painting, too. Just remember to use the shutter to control the tonal range of your waning sky.
Last but not least, JohnTPleaser uses the technique of spotlighting a portion of his shot (in this case a date palm, in Costa Rica) which was done in the daytime in mottled shade.
Note that he is shooting into the ambient light, which creates shadows in the camera side of the trees. This allows him to bring up the tree and add some texture with a strobe mounted on a voice-activated light stand at camera left.
The above landscape photos jumped out at me during a recent scan of the Strobist Flickr pool. Have you been experimenting with small flashes out in the wild? Hit us with some URLs in the comments.
I have been locked away teaching all day, but wanted to note the announcement of a new version of the Pocket Wizard Multimax. RobGalbraith.com has a comprehensive write-up on it. Which is great, because I need me some serious shut-eye.
Comment moderation is a bit slow and unanswered emails are piling up. But the important thing is I am having a great time in California. Met lots of neat folks at the Googleplex yesterday, ate some gourmet food (lobster tacos, anyone?) drank strawberry mojito smoothies and occasionally talked about lighting for a few minutes.
As a user, I have always been impressed with the whole Google experience, and now all the more so having met some of the people who make it happen. That's Steve, who we shot in the habitrail, pictured. More pix from the shooting portion of the seminar are here.
Saturday's lighting seminar in Santa Clara is right on track. Checked out the room and it looks great. If you are attending, please remember to bring your PayPal email receipt as your ticket.
It's darn near shorts weather here, but back home we got four inches of snow. Hope there's still enough left when I get home Sunday for a snowball fight.
Now that we have played around with restricted light in a blunt-instrument sort of way, it's time to learn to finesse it to go for something a little more subtle.
Just because that beam of light is tight, does not mean it has to be garish. By combining a couple of different lighting controls, you can tweak restricted light to do just about whatever you want.
More after the jump. ___________________________
As an excellent example of what I am talking about, I offer this moody, full-length portrait by Katherine Gaines, AKA ambienteye, whom you may remember as having taken the cool film noir shot from last week's discussion. Click here to open the shot pictured at left in a new window, bigger for reference.
I'll be a little less formal from here on out and refer to her as Katy. I can do that because I have seen her wake up one morning. Although, to be fair, it was at about 11:45 a.m., and it was over two hours into one of my lighting seminars.
Katy is quite the night owl, and doesn't normally do mornings. So I was quite honored that she even showed up for a Sunday morning session.
Her well-executed photo calls into play at least three different light control techniques: Crosslighting, Balance and Restricted Light. Let's look at them, in order.
Crosslighting
Katy's main light in this photo is the late afternoon sun. (This could also be done in the early morning, except for I am pretty sure that someone else would be shooting it.) It is defining the scene, and as such is considered the main light even though it is not coming from camera front.
It's coming from back camera right, about 30 degrees above horizontal. I am pretty sure it is the sun (as opposed to a flash) because of the even quality of the light. That tells me it is pretty far back. You could do this with a strobe, but you'd have to be pretty far away with it (and high to get the angle).
NOTE: If you were going for a sodium vapor street light look, you could gel the flash with a green fluorescent gel and a 1/2 CTO and simulate a puke green sodium vapor streetlight quite nicely, thank you.)
Her flash is pointed fairly close to back at the sun. (Not possible to get an exact crosslight because of he wall.) This creates a zone of 3-D wrap-light which makes for a well-defined subject.
Exposure Balance
No secrets here: Katy has the two light sources balanced pretty close to even, exposure-wise. It is safe, and still can be quite interesting if you are restricting the light.
Remember, each of these controls works individually, but they can be combined with other techniques for great effects.
Restricted Light
This is the control that makes the picture, IMO. (Lighting-wise, anyway -- the color scheme, wardrobe, body attitude, etc., all rock in this photo.)
As for light position, she placed her snooted Nikon SB-600 down lower, at camera left, to just get up under the hat. But the use of a snoot creates a beautiful fall-off to the strobe's light, calling attention to his face but fading out as the light travels down the subject's body.
By the time it gets to his hand, it is there but it is not there. By the time it gets to his feet, it is gone. This shows you how dark the subject would have been on the shadow side without the added light.
This is just a cool technique when you consider the lighting equipment involved: A speedlight and a cardboard tube.
But there is some seeing involved here, too. You have to be able to previsualize what you want and make it happen. Which brings us to this sections's assignment. __________________________
Assignment: Cross, Balance and Sculpt
This time around, we'll be aiming a little higher on the subtlety meter than film noir. Your goal will be to take advantage of some directional light, and then to sculpt some restricted light into the scene in such a way as to add interest to your photo.
You do not have to crosslight it, either. For instance, Katy could have shot this guy from against the wall (current camera left) in profile, and filled under his hat with a snooted strobe in front of him as he faced away from the wall.
The point is to be able to learn to go with the interesting ambient that is presented to you, and to selectively improve it through some off-axis fill -- exactly where you want it. Add to this the ability to control the fall-off via grid shape and light position, and you can start to see the possibilities.
Here are the specifics. Tag your assignment as:
Strobist Lighting102 assignment crossbalancesculpt (note -- one word)
The assignment is due Thursday, Jan. 31st. You can view the completed exercises of others, here. There is a discussion thread set up for this post here.
Grover over at PhotoShelter has put together a light box with some cool work by Strobist readers who also happen to be PhotoShelter members. And he is offering a special deal for the site's readers until the end of January.
There are only 50 slots, and this is just for us. So don't go telling people over at Photo.net, OK?
American photojournalist David Honl, who is based in Istanbul, has posted a video of a belly dancer shoot. In it, he uses his snoots, gobos and gels to create zones of light in a very small room.
I like his idea of gobo'ing a flash on the bottom to keep the floor from being too hot in the foreground. Always neat to see other peoples' workflow.
David manufactures light modifiers and sells them via his website, with grid spots for speedlights coming soon. More info at his site.
Thousands of miles apart (and brought together by the magic of Photoshop) readers Tanya Shields and David X. Tejada both made ring flash adapters recently. Then they proceeded to test them out on a nearly identical subject. I found the differences in the way they tested their new lights to be very interesting.
More after the jump. ________________________
Canadian amateur photog Tanya Shields, (left) built her ring light adapter out of common household items. It's a neat approach, as attested to by the fact that I immediately went out and ripped the design off. I built mine in about three hours (one good movie, one so-so movie) from cardboard, parchment paper, foil-backed tape, gaffer's tape and glue.
Total (prorated) cost: Under $5.00.
Yeah, yeah, I know: "What about the cost of your time, David?"
Well, first of all, I like making stuff like this. I also like watching movies. And my accountant will tell you that my time does not in fact appear to be particularly valuable in the monetary sense anyway.
Long-time pro David X. Tejada, (right) whose lighting videos have spent so much time on Strobist that they keep a toothbrush here, made a spiffy new hardware store ring flash. (He shows you how to build it here.)
While the two ring lights are very different in construction, they create fairly similar light sources. What you'll get from these designs is a typical ring flash look, flavored by the fact that the ring will likely be a little hotter on the side closest to the flash.
Some may see the lack of absolute consistency as a hindrance, but I would prefer to think of it as a feature. The ring is going to fill all the way around, with likely about a stop or so difference between the flash side of the ring and the other side.
Since the rings are very portable and hand-holdable, you can choose to put the hot side on the top or bottom by rotating the ring. The hot bottom will give you more of an in-your-face ring shot look, whereas a hot top will give you more of a subtle ring look.
(Incidentally, this is the first time that the terms "David X. Tejada" and "hot bottom" have ever appeared on the same web page.)
Anyway, through some freakish and coincidental force of nature, both Tanya and David both proceeded to test their new ring flashes out on a young man wearing a hoodie. The similarities in light source and test subject matter struck me as interesting, and made me think about two completely different approaches to thinking about the same light source. ________________________
Tanya did exactly what very many of us would have done: Walk around here house shooting anything or anybody who would sit still long enough. Her self portrait up top was done with her ring flash, too.
When I made my first ring flash, I did just about the same thing. The light just puts a whole new spin on just about everything. And you are like a kid in a candy store -- a weirdly 3-D, flattish, wrapped-shadow candy store. You go out and shoot a memory card full of photos that each like all of the other ring flash pix out there.
Nothing wrong with that. You just can't help yourself. It's too fun.
But someone like David, who has been around the block a few times, tends to think of the ring flash a component in a multi-light scheme. This is an approach that many of us can learn from.
Take the example above. David shot his nephew (and fellow Strobist reader) Ian, using a similar ring flash to Tanya's model.
But David is using the flash as part of a triangle lighting setup, with two other speedlights positioned about 20 degrees behind Ian on each side. In doing so, he is completely wrapping Ian with light. Working about two stops above the ambient exposure (as David is) means that Ian is effectively being lit on another plane than the diffuse, grayish ambient.
___________
POP QUIZ:
Q: How would I know David is working about two stops over the ambient? A: Because on a cloudy day, properly exposed snow would be rendered a couple of stops over medium gray - bordering on white. But David's snow is very close to medium gray. Bringing his subject up with strobe allows him to put the snow at any tone that he wants, from near-white to pitch black. ___________
Okay, back to the photo: Which means that not only can David get this cool separated (dare I say, almost Dave Hill-ish) look, but he could also do the warm gel / cool gel thing, or make that dropped-down ambient any color he wanted.
Mind you, this is not a typical look that will pop up every week in one of David's oil-rig annual reports or brochures. But one day when he needs to amp a boring portrait, will be able to whip this technique out to save the day and look like a hip young Gen-Y shooter in the process. (Don't worry, Dave. You're better lookin' than that Lawrence kid.)
Here's the point: The first thing someone like David T. does with a new light source is to get past the obvious and start to experiment with it as an integral part of a lighting scheme rather then as an end to itself.
To be fair, my first experiences with the ring light were much more similar to Tanya's. But I am learning to think more like David T. as I go forward.
________________________
UPDATE: Australian reader Sam Webster took his new ring adapter into the bathroom to shoot underwater portraits. I thought that was a neat twist, and a cool look for the water-themed series of shots he was doing for a local band.
He did a video of the shoot here. More of his pics are here.
With these seminars, my goal is threefold: To refine your approach to creating light, to fill you with as many ideas as possible in a day's time and to have fun doing it.
We'll start with a roadmap for the day, which I will do my best to keep us on. But each session will take on somewhat of a life of its own. Which is a good thing.
Our Anticipated Schedule
Morning check-in/setup: 9:00 a.m. - 9:30 a.m.
Please plan to arrive between these times, as we will still be setting up before then. Anything you may see onscreen before 9:30 is not part of the event and is only used for projector testing purposes.
Morning session: 9:30 a.m. until approximately 12:30 p.m.
We'll talk about gear (I'll have a good gear selection there for a petting zoo) and take an extended, integrated look at what is essentially the Lighting 102 material in it's entirety. The focus will be on taking all of the things we talk about on the site in a day-to-day sense and integrating them to gain more of a holistic approach to lighting. Everything really is interrelated.
Lunch Break
On your own, approx. one hour, and we'll be looking for your nearby suggestions in the Flickr discussion thread related to this seminar. Link to a discussion thread will be posted shortly.
Afternoon Session:
~1:30 p.m. - 5:00 p.m.
Assuming we have finished the theory stuff, we'll move into the practical/demo session. (Sometimes we go into a little overtime on the theory.) We'll get into some real-world lighting exercises photographing some models I will have cleverly hidden around the room disguised as ordinary attendees.
This is basically a lighting version of "Whose Line is it, Anyway?" with a focus on improvisational lighting based on available gear, the room, found objects, lighting mods, etc. I never know what ideas we will come up with, which is what keeps me equal parts interested in and petrified of the afternoon session. It's a good thing.
Shortly after each shoot, we will view each setup and discuss the results onscreen. This instant feedback in a group environment is an amazingly efficient way to drive home the thought and technique process. We can read and write all we want, but for photographers there is nothing better than "monkey see, money do."
The goal will be to incorporate lighting theory, room environment, assignment constraints and our available gear to create a photo that seeks to produce an photograph that is an appropriate response to our situation.
Working within that framework will allow us to concentrate on better freeing ourselves in the other areas: Creativity and subject/photographer interaction.
The entire day will be a non-stop flow of ideas and techniques, punctuated by spur-of-the-moment Q-and-A. I want you to bring lots of questions, and to feel free to voice the ones that pop into your head throughout the day. In fact, if you do not ask me enough questions, I will start throwing some questions at you.
You might want to bring a notebook and pen. (I will have a URL to download the presentation, so you can relax and listen.) And bring a camera if you want to shoot the setups as a visual reference. And dress is casual, so you won't feel out of place if I show up in shorts.
As with my philosophy for the website there will be no secrets and no posturing. This stuff is not rocket science. It's light. And the first step in learning to light is to realize that anyone can get very good at it.
We will plan to wrap up at about 5:00. But if we are still going (and they don't kick us out) who knows. Normally, a fair number of people come back to the hotel bar after dinner, where we discuss lights, darks, ambers -- whatever. Always fun.
If, for some reason, you require a cancellation after booking, refunds will be granted up until February 10th. After that time, you would be responsible for transferring your seat to another attendee.
Very Important: If, through events beyond my control, I am unable to present this seminar, refunds will be limited to the ticket price. As I already have airfare, hotel room and our venue rental paid in advance, I do not anticipate this happening. But I just wanted to cover all of the bases, in case I get run over by a bus tomorrow, or one of those Big Macs catches up to me.
Bases covered, I have to say that I am very much looking forward to this trip and especially to meeting many of you. As I do more of these seminars, I find that each session develops a vibe of its own. You put a few dozen photographers who are all eager to learn in a room, and what starts out as a simple stack of talking points turns into a rich, organic discussion that ends with everyone - including me - having a head swimming with new ideas.
You can see feedback from some of the previous seminars here:
The cost for either seminar is $159.00. Both seminars are sold out.
To register for either seminar (with any major credit card) please click on the link at the bottom of the post, which will take you to PayPal. A PayPal account is not required to register. You will be returned to this site after successfully registering. Again, if you are in the process of registering and the seminar sells out, your fee will be refunded by the end of the day. Make sure your PayPal email address is one at which you can actually be reached.
Please leave your name and phone number (and a working email if different from the PayPal address) in the info box on the PayPal page, in case I should need to contact you.
I look forward to seeing you there. The discussion thread is here.
Looks like Santa might be coming a little late this Christmas, but coming nonetheless. Hey, about 87% of you thought this whole thing was vaporware anyway. So this is good news, right?
Lots of new info up on the fully operational Radiopopper Blog. That's right, young Skywalker. The Radiopopper blog is now fully operational...
To recap: Radiopopper claims to greatly extend the range of IR-based TTL flash modes via a piggyback radio system in two of its three models.
But the big news, if you'll remember, is the third model: A standard RF remote trigger set at ~$50 a pop with a 2,000-foot range. _________________________
It's been a bit of a photo-oriented TV season this year, what with the VH-1 reality show The Shot, in which photographers are booted off the show one-by-one as they try to be even more pretentious than the others while trying to score their their Big Break.
But rather than give that any ink, there's another show premiering this weekend that may actually be of interest (albeit in a completely different way) to real photographers.
More after the jump. ___________________
Let me preface this by saying that my wife and I are searching for a new house. And as such, it is possible that I may be completely addicted to enjoying watching HGTV during the wee hours while I work.
Hey, we are house hunting, okay, people? And besides, do you even know how much you can update a room by spray painting your cabinet pulls silver? Huh? Huh?
...Oh, hang on a sec. I'll be right back.
That was the UPS lady at the door. I have been waiting at home all day because I have to be here to sign for a delivery of three new SB-800's!
(Sorry. I had to tell someone. My wife still doesn't totally understand the joy...)
Okay, sorry. Where were we? Oh yeah, HGTV.
So, for those of you who have been learning about light over the last couple of years, have you actually applied any of this stuff to the lighting in your house? I mean, seriously, with CFL's using so little energy, you really can afford to do some neat looks with continuous light without propping up the electric company.
Just like light can drastically alter the way a photo looks, it can do the same for the rooms in your house. The same concepts apply, but the results last for a lot longer than a 250th of a second. I have been spending a lot of time thinking about this lately, as I plan for the I hope to turn into my cave office.
If you spend a little time thinking about the lights in your house in the same way that you think about the light in your photos, you'll start to see lots of parallels. Indirect lighting as a base "exposure," with spotlights and task lighting as accents. (Think grids and snoots.)
Cheapskate that I am, I love the concept of changing the way a room looks through lighting. I have played with it some in my current home, but am waiting to get a blank canvas to work with in the new house rather than throwing work into the one that we are leaving.
Premiering this Sunday at 9:00 ET/PT on HGTV is "Light it Up", a show that will focus only on home lighting ideas and techniques. I do not know how they will approach it, but most of the other stuff on the channel is actually pretty well done. So I'm game to give this one a try, too.
Some of the other shows touch on lighting as a theme, and I find this stuff to be very interesting. Here's one example, from another show, and I am just lighting geek enough to wanna see what the full-time lighting show will be like.
I'm looking forward to looking at interior, continuous lighting through the eyes of someone who knows what they are doing. I expect that I will certainly learn more about interior lighting, and may even get some ideas for photographic lighting. There's a lot of intellectual crossover between the two.
So, am I the only one trying to use my photographic lighting experience to improve my interior lighting at home? I am thinking at least a few of you have had the same idea.
Hit us in the comments with your ideas, solutions and/or pic URLs.
If you are local to Central Florida, or Phoenix, AZ, hit the jump for upcoming seminar details (including the registration announcement for Orlando for this Sunday).
Otherwise, nothing to see here. Move it along, please...
Orlando February Seminar Registration Opens Sunday, 1/13/08
Registration for the previously announced Orlando seminar, set for the weekend of Feb. 16th and 17th, 2008, will open Sunday, Jan. 13th, at 11:00 a.m. ET. As for format, it will be much like the northern California seminars which are coming up next weekend. Only much warmer.
(If you want to pre-read about the schedule and what to expect on the Feb. Orlando seminar, hit that NoCal workshop registration page.)
We will be at the Embassy Suites hotel, at 8978 International Drive in Orlando. If you are looking for a hotel room to crash before/after the seminar, you can certainly do a lot better than the $300 rooms the seminar hotel has remaining in the high tourist season. Hit Priceline.com or others for many cheaper choices nearby.
I know Nick Haskins has a LUMU meet-up in Inverness on Sunday the 17th. So it will be a very small-flash weekend in central Florida if you are into learning hard on Saturday and test driving your skills on Sunday
Full info coming Sunday morning at 11:00 a.m. ET.
Save the Date: Phoenix, AZ in March
We are spending Spring Break with the curtain climbers -- going to see the Grand Canyon -- so what the heck. I'm planning to do a two-fer in Phoenix on the weekend of March 15th and 16th. Family will be in tow for the week, so I will not be scooting over to L.A. on this trip. But it is still on the list.
As always, I am open to cool venue suggestions from the locals. Planning is still live this one -- hit me in the comments.
(And no, all of us showing up at Wizwow's front door drunk off our butts at 3:00 a.m. is not a "cool venue". At least for him, anyway.)
Registration details will be coming in early February.
It was only 8:00 in the evening, but it was already dark outside. Real dark. As in too-underexposed-to-be-saved-in-Photoshop dark -- even if you were shooting raw.
But I was well-lit, thanks to the off-camera flask in my hip pocket. Not that the victim I was presently staring at cared.
She had apparently been hit from two different directions with a well-aimed '25. An Nikon SB-25, to be exact. And it was up to me to figure out exactly how it had been pulled off.
(See the Film Noir Assignment results after the jump.) _______________________
If you haven't already guessed, today we are looking at photos from the post of December 4th in which you were asked to use hard, restricted light to create a "film noir"-type of shot. Film noir lighting is about a subtle as a ball peen hammer, and it's a good way to experiment with restricted light.
Subtlety and nuance took the week off in favor of edgy and contrasty light, window blinds as gobos, and lots of knives, guns and liquor.
As always, click the pic to get to the Flickr page. This gets you to a bigger version of the photo, along with lighting info (hopefully...) and an easy way to comment on individual photos. __________________________
Leading off is this study in subtle symbolism from TheBauerGallery. Check me if I am wrong here, but I think the shadow you can just make out on the back wall represents the person who may be causing the tense expression in the subject.
I could be way off base, as I never was one for picking up obscure hidden messages in art. But that's my guess. Can you find the photog in the photo? Click through to learn about his setup.
Next up is a shot by Richard Melanson. He uses a very tight snoot, balanced several stops over the ambient, to draw attention to the the subject's eyes and away from the gun in his hand. Let alone the bottle of courage the subject has apparently loaded himself with.
Snoots and flash/ambient balance are a match made in heaven, and that's what we'll be playing with in our next exercise.
The whole effect is governed by two variables: Where the snoot is allowing the light to fall, and how far the exposure falls off in the area which is not being lit by the tight beam of light.
There is no right and wrong in the lighting ratio, either. You figure out the look you want and adjust the balance to create it.
Quick: Where is the snooted light coming from? Try your hand at reverse engineering before clicking on the pic to find out.
Liquor is again the scene setter in the third photo, by John Leonard. I like the way John is using snoots to highlight the two areas of interest in the photo. But let's look at the balance thing again.
Assuming John is on a plain background (or could shift the setup of the shot to where he was against a wall a few feet away) I would love to see him tweak it for just a tad bit of separation between the shadow side of his head and the background. Be nice to hold that shoulder, too.
He is shooting at 1/200th at f/11. I would open the shutter up (1/125, 1/60, 1/30, etc.) until I brought the wall to a very dark grey, barely separating the black elements on camera right.
I just noticed that he appears to be wearing a white shirt, which could be a problem. (Shirt comes up as the wall does.) But you could solve that by bring the wall up to a higher ambient level than the shirt.
How? Just stick a lamp between the subject and the wall.
You can't have a selection of film noir photos without a set of blinds, and itsjustanalias doesn't disappoint. And here is a great example of the "no correct exposure concept, in which being able to place various areas of your photo at different tonal levels gives you total control.
The inside is "too dark" according to just about any continuous light camera meter. The outside light is "too bright" by the same measure.
But the whole bowl of porridge is just right, connoting a dark room at night lit by streetlights below. That's what I am talkin' 'bout. All that's missing is the flashing "HOTEL" sign, with the last two letters burned out.
Last but certainly not least is one of those gratuitous female shots that tends to pop up in our 95% male-dominated site. (We gotta balance that out a little.) I send you guys out for film noir and you use the assignment to do a chicks-and-stockings-and-knives shot.
I say all that because this one is by ambienteye, AKA Katherine Gaines. Katy is busting some really cool stuff lately and one of her other photos will be featured in the next L102 installment, which is coming next week.
This is just pure, elegant light on an extreme budget. The grid is made with straws. The cookie is made of foam, as is the "ND filter" on the third speedlight to knock it down to a usable range.
Katy gives you the strobe placement info on the photo's Flickr page, but think it through before you go and look.
Without giving away the light positions, I would say that the SB-600 sets the whole tone of the photo, with the first 383 calling attention to the knife and filling the face. The second 383 pulls the whole thing into range (tonally) and provides light for the first 383 to push against.
___________________________
You guys obviously had some fun with this one. To look at the whole take as a slideshow, click here. Or join in on the discussion thread, here.
And if you think about it, leave a comment or two on the stuff you really like.
The video above was done as an introduction Joe McNally's upcoming book, "The Moment it Clicks," and originally appeared on Nikon's website. But Monday it also popped up on YouTube -- on a new Joe McNally channel.
We have seen other pros (i.e., David X. Tejada and Chase Jarvis) creating an online presence and allowing people to plug into their brains. And we have seen how having access to that faucet of quality information helps so many other photographers. Someone like Joe McNally buying into the idea is a great step in the right direction, IMO. It will raise the quality of the whole, ongoing discussion. And I'm thinking he won't be the last one to make the jump, either.
For all of the bitching and moaning that happens about the huge changes rippling through the world of photography, in terms of pure learning this much is true: There has never been a better time to be a photographer.
Back to the book, I was lucky enough to get a sneak peak at it when it arrived in my email in-box a little ways back one evening at about 11:30 p.m.
As for what I thought of it, suffice to say that Mr. McNally now owes me one good night's sleep. I ate the whole thing in one late-nite sitting. It's a great read, and there will be more in this space when it gets closer to shipping, hopefully later this month. ____________________
Grover Sanschagrin, the animated guy without the hat (or the hair) in the ad up top at right (not to be confused with the evil genius at left) would like to talk to some of Strobist's readers who also use PhotoShelter.
He's got some cool ideas to bounce off of you. Nothing sinister, mind you.
Grover can be reached at: grover [at] photoshelter [dot] com.
UPDATE: The main body of this post now has an expanded list of high-sync cameras and a link to a .pdf tutorial on both Nikon and Canon proprietary high-speed pulsing flash features. -DH ___________ Anyone can nuke their environment late in the evening, when just a little twilight is left in the dusk sky. In fact, the usual problem is failing to open up your shutter to let the ambient burn in for some flash/ambient balance.
This speedlight-lit photo would be a very good example -- except for the fact that it was taken at about 1:30 p.m. on a sunny day at a recent Strobist meetup near Baltimore, MD. That little patch of dark grey up top is sunny mid-day sky.
More after the jump. ________________________
The exposure for the above flash-lit shot was at ISO 200 at f/16 and a 1/4000th of a sec. It's that last part which makes everything possible. High-sync cameras are the little hidden jewels in various manufacturers' lines. We have talked about them before, but I came across these two photos which really show just how far you can go with it while archiving the other day.
There are a few special cameras with electronic shutters which do not really have a hard maximum sync speed. At some point while going up the shutter speed scale, the mechanical shutter does not actually continue to speed up. Instead, the chip just uses software to take a smaller and smaller slice of time to create the picture.
This totally rocks, because for every shutter speed you can climb up and can still sync the flash, the aperture can open up a full stop. So the flash has to put out half the light to get the same effect. And you can have it both ways, too, by walking that shutter up and leaving the aperture closed down to turn day into night. Or wherever you want it to be.
The trick is, you have to fool the camera into thinking there is not a flash attached to it. This way it will not restrict itself to its normal maximum sync speed.
These days, the camera normally knows it has a flash on it from the TTL circuitry that talks between the two. You can get around this pesky restriction by using a non-TTL PC cord if the camera has a PC jack. You can also use an adapter such as the Nikon AS-15 (~$20) which turns a TTL-enabled hot-shoe into a dumb PC jack. Works fine, but it needs a PC cord and a sync jack on the flash to complete the connection.
Even cheaper and better is a used Nikon SC-17 cord, which is normally TTL until you neuter the little guy by opening it up and snipping all of the wires except for the ones that are connected to the center post and the edge strip. This turns the TTL cord into a dumb (non-TTL) hot-shoe extension cord.
You can also high-speed sync with a Pocket Wizard, which does not make use of TTL signals, either.
Cameras to Control the Sun
Before we go any further, lets review some of the cameras which have the ability to sync right on up there through the shutter speed scale past their nominal sync speeds. None of them are particularly expensive, and they make ideal second cameras. Just keep an eye out for them on Craigslist or eBay -- especially right after a hot new model comes out (cough, D300, cough) and people get a case of upgrade-itis.
Number one on the list is my very favorite sleeper DSLR, the Nikon D70s, and to a slightly lesser extent, it's older sibling, the D70.
The 6.1MP D70s is now my primary body. I have three, and I am pretty sure my wife is now considering an intervention. But you can buy four of them is great shape for about the price of one D300.
The Nikon D40 (but not the D40x) can do this sync trick, too. It's a newer chip than the D70/s, but it is not compatible with many Nikon lenses. Make sure you check your charts if you are considering buying one.
Also, the old D1 (and /h and /x) bodies are said to sync up high in the range, too. I have no first-person experience with this, so check it out if not sure.
(UPDATE: According to a couple commenters, the Nikon D50 does the high-sync thing, too. Ditto the Sony R1, Olympus E-1 and E-3. Cool.)
On the Canon end, I am told the EOS 1D's do it. Again, never owned one. But I have heard they work from several people.
What I have owned are both the Canon G7 and Canon G9, which are neat little 10- and 12-MP point-and shoots. You have to turn off the in-camera flash and sync via a Pocket Wizard or a PC adapter (like the Nikon AS-15) and a PC cord. I love both of them. They'll sync up to a 1/2000th. The neutered Nikon TTL cord works great with them, too. (Works best, actually, IMO.)
You should be able to find any of these cameras new (G9) or used (all of the older models) for under $500.00.
Schweet. ________________________
Now, just because a camera will sync with a flash does not mean a flash will sync with a camera.
(Huh?)
Follow me for a sec. A full-power flash from a speedlight usually has an actual duration of about 1/1000th of a sec. Which means that no matter what, you will not be able to sync one at full power at a 1/4000th of a sec. The actual flash pop lasts too long for the length of time the shutter is open. Rule of thumb is, the more you dial the flash down, the faster it will sync higher up with one of these special cameras.
If you are using remotes, they will limit you, too. My PW's limit me to about a 1/1600th of a sec with a D70s. But the neutered TTL cord will sync at right up to an 1/8000th(!!!) of a sec at lower flash powers (and thus, durations -- and higher manual flash power settings as you walk down the shutter speed scale.
So, working in relatively close, we might just open up the shutter until the sky was at a tone that we liked, as in this example which was shot at f/14 at 1/500th of a sec. I know, the trees are a little cluttered, but the point was to show the other meetup-ers that we could place the sky tone wherever we wanted with high-sync.
If you want to do multi-light setups this way, no problem. (A nice rim light coming from back camera right would have amped our example quite a bit.) You can add another PW, but it is usually easier to slave the other flash(es).
A couple of thoughts about the flash mode: If you are working with static subjects, manual is an easy way to go. But if you are in a dynamic setting, consider the old-fashioned "auto" mode. This'll get you some flexibility, considering you cannot go with TTL. (Remember, we don't want your camera to find out there is a flash attached and start telling us what shutter speeds we cannot use.)
Some high-end cameras have a special, pulsing, high-speed flash mode, too. If you are lucky enough to have both a flash and camera that supports these sophisticated functions, definitely enable them. No reason not to.
(UPDATE: A commenter pointed to a pretty good paper on this high-speed, pulsing flash setting here. (Via Naturescapes.net.)
But you'll find that you'll actually get more light out of your flash at super high sync speeds with the above neat little supercameras, if you are able to scrounge one for your bag.
Remember that "Hasselblad Masters, outtakes-and-all" video done by our favorite A-lister, Chase Jarvis, a few months back?
Well, this is what the shoots were for: Check out the December "Hasselblad Masters" page to see the results.
Interesting note: Chase turned pro only 12 years ago. He's also self-taught. Any of you folks who think you have what it takes to put in the long, hard, smart hours -- you could find a far worse compass point than this guy.
(And, mind you, back in 1996 we didn't have none of this free internet learnin' stuff, neither.)
I woke up Friday morning to find in my email box a 10-minute long reader-created "Strobist commercial," organized and posted to YouTube and Viddler by reader Bill Millios. As embarrassing as it is for me to watch (my wife had a field day) it is also very cool, funny, clearly heartfelt and Web 2.0 in its purpose.
Getting past the weirdness of all those props being pointed upstream for a moment, the community that has been developed around this site is far, far better than the site itself. Seriously, thanks much, guys. I would say that I am at a loss for words, but you guys know me better than that.
So, if you are into fun, goofy (maybe NSFW-ish) user testimonials -- or just want to see and hear many well-known site contributors, view away at your own risk.
(I, of course, am floored by this, as was my wife. Many, many thanks or everyone who took the time and effort to participate in this. And especially to Bill Millios for setting it all up and editing it.)
Fair Warning: It's been a long time since one of those non-lighting-centered photo rants. And to be fair, it is a Friday (TGIF). ___________________________
About 25 years ago, upon admiring a photo shot by photojournalist Russell Price, a reporter said to him, "That's a great shot."
To which Price responded, "Yes, it is."
If the name Russell Price doesn't ring a bell, that may because he is in fact a fictional character from a movie. But the brief exchange marked a turning point in the way that I thought about my own pictures from very early in my career as a photojournalist.
It also neatly wraps up one of the biggest differences in mindset between amateurs and long-time pros. And understanding this mindset can help you become a better shooter.
More (and a fast-growing stream of great comments and links) after the jump. ______________________________
The movie is "Under Fire," a 1983 flick set in Nicaragua about a photojournalist who gets too close to the story while covering the overthrow of Samosa. The movie is pretty good, save a romance triangle that cheeses it up a bit.
But it's practically career porn for an aspiring young photojournalist. Which is exactly what I was becoming in 1983. Nick Nolte trots around the globe, Nikons and Leica in hand, shooting away and trying to change the world. The resulting pictures freeze, onscreen, in black and white as he shoots.
High marks for whoever trained Nolte to act like a shooter -- and to Nolte for picking up so many little mannerisms and camera handling techniques. The only tech problems are mostly centered around swapping in telephoto freeze-shots some of the times when he was shown shooting with a 24mm wideangle.
But what can Russell Price teach us about photography?
When I first heard the exchange, ("That's a great shot." - "Yes, it is.") I thought, "Wow, what an arrogant jerk."
But he wasn't being an arrogant jerk. It is not as if he was agreeing with a person who thought he was talented or dashing or witty. He was merely agreeing with a person's opinion of a photo he happened to take.
If he thought the photo sucked, and someone said so, he would have likely agreed with them in the same nonchalant way. That is because he had learned to separate himself from his photos.
That's a huge step for a photographer to take, and one that many amateurs never make. Honestly, very few young pros are at that point, either. But those folks who have been shooting for 20 or more years are very likely to have surgically separated their egos from their photographs.
Why is this important? Because for people who have not done this, the "Love Me, Love My Pictures" thing is always keeping them from making objective judgements about their photography.
We get so much pleasure from a great shot (and so much displeasure from a crappy one) that it is very hard to separate ourselves from our photos. Which is a shame, really, because it hopelessly clouds our judgment.
If you feel that you are still in the mindset that a picture is better simply because you took it, try to look at your own photos as if someone else took them when you make your judgements. And judge other peoples' photos by the standard of what you would think of them if you would have taken them.
Don't feel bad if this is difficult. Some long-time pros still can get very emotionally attached to their photos. Which can be a real problem in team-coverage situations in which one of the photographers also has to act as the group's picture editor.
In addition to better photo judgement (or at least, more objective photo judgement) as a benefit of separating yourself from your photos, there is a more tangible upside: You get a more stable compass point.
If you can be easily swayed by what the other people in the room think of your shots (good or bad) you begin to be less of a thinking photographer, and more of a weather vane. This inhibits your growth as a photographer and will almost certainly preclude you from developing a strong personal style.
In the end, which is a more satisfying photo to have taken -- a photo which you love, but everyone else doesn't get? Or a photo that you consider to be a miss, but everyone else loves?
Changing your opinion of the latter to join the others for a quick ego fix may be gratifying. But sticking with your gut (despite the views of others) yields far greater long-term rewards.
Here's another thought: If you are a photographer who blogs (or even if you're not) putting your thoughts down in written form can add a lot of clarity to your understanding of your emotional attachments to your photos. ________________________
If you want to experience the life of a "been-there, done-that conflict photographer," for a couple hours, you could do far worse than to pick up a copy of "Under Fire" (or Netflix it here).
Fortunately, the movie is old enough for the DVD to have made its way to the bargain bin. Pass the popcorn and another roll of Tri-X, please.
Warning: The marketing folks cheese up the love triangle subplot thing even more in the trailer than in the movie. The movie is actually pretty intelligently done, and a good look inside the mind of a talented (but far from perfect) photojournalist. Not to mention an imploding political situation.
__________________________
Have you seen Under Fire? What did you think? Sound off in the comments.
And let us know your thoughts on separating yourself from your photos, whether you are only now just considering it, are in the process of doing it, or well past it.
