Flash vs. available light candid

[maderito]

#1
http://display.lifepics.com/imgdisp.asp?filespec=%60foxhx2cuxmwdogx%5D9%3C%3D8 %3B9dOjeOrmlfLuclff%3A4nzj%11254%3F%3E%3D%0D%3A382 98
#2
http://display.lifepics.com/imgdisp.asp?filespec=%60foxhx2cuxmwdogx%5D9%3C%3D8 %3B9dOjeOrmlfLuclff%3B4nzj%11254%3F%3E%3E%0D%3A382 95

I'm curious about your opinions on these 2 "snapshots." The pics are of my wife. She was doing a crossword puzzle; I was bored waiting for friends to show up. I grabbed my camera bag and took several shots (actually, snapshots in the usual sense of the word). These are representative. Both are taken with the Canon 10D.

#1.
On-camera flash (I was lazy and didn't feel like breaking out my 550 EX flash).
Lens: Canon 70-200mm/f4 @ 200 mm
ISO 400, 1/200, f 8.0
PS processing included: dust+scratches noise filter to remove tiny specular highlights that always contaminate direct flash from the on-camera flash; minor color corrections to warm skin tones.

#2.
No flash.
Lens: Canon 85mm/f1.8
ISO 1600, 1/125, f3.5
PS processing: curves and other color ajdustments, preserving the warmth of the available lighting. Blurring of background color noise with Fred Miranda ISOR (1600) plugin.


I liked #2 which exhibits digital grain and lacks sharpness. I almost always prefer available light images to photos using a single flash. Image #1 is sharper and virtually noise free.
What do you think?

[Leighow]

WOODY


I hear you. The 2nd with its shadows et al is more human. The 1st is too cold. But, these must be some way to get an even better shot with more light on the wall behind the head etc. Something more studio-ish. The darkness in shot 2 detracts as does the yellow color balance.

HOWIE