Using a single strobe - creative examples - mark II

[ni$mo350]

^ You still going to Quavondo's workshop this month? I'm going to be dropping by his studio to pay this friday. I'm definitely looking forward to it.

[bedojo]

yes i am already sent it via paypal, can't wait!, i also need start going up to portland more, the models in the salem/corvallis parts are flakey and not the best talent :/ i been shooting for practice on them but not posting any :S

[rohicks]

Originally Posted by Dann.Landau

Pham, why did you choose to have the left window as the brightest thing in the photo? It makes you look at it first because of that.

Look at the shadows and sun reflection on the floor.
This tells you that's the way the sun is facing hence the brightness of the window, and the fact that i know that's on the west side of that house.

[sigma pi]

Originally Posted by rohicks

Look at the shadows and sun reflection on the floor.
This tells you that's the way the sun is facing hence the brightness of the window, and the fact that i know that's on the west side of that house.

huh The sun is lighting the window, yes. That wasnt the question.

Exposure 0.005 sec (1/200)
ISO Speed 100

He was at sync speed and the only other thing to do was to go ISO 50 to get rid of some of the sun light. If that was unacceptable then he would have to slap on some ND filters. It is a good exposure on the dress though

[rohicks]

Originally Posted by sigma pi

huh The sun is lighting the window, yes. That wasnt the question.

Exposure 0.005 sec (1/200)
ISO Speed 100

He was at sync speed and the only other thing to do was to go ISO 50 to get rid of some of the sun light. If that was unacceptable then he would have to slap on some ND filters. It is a good exposure on the dress though

Aperture 3.5 and that window is still over exposed which means the sun is facing that window. The guy was asking why it was over exposed. THAT is why. The sun is on that side of the house. You can't kill over head sun with 3.5 aperture, no NDs, and small amount fill light.

The sync is exposed for the interior. Syncing doesn't mean he is killing ambient sun. In that situation you need multiple exposures or an added ND filter or stopping down more.

SAME window SAME room. I shot ashlyn in.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/rohicks...in/photostream

With an ND filter and low aperture, window curtains down, subtle fill, and after or during sunset.

[bedojo]

i think it looks great blown out there, makes the strobe lighting it not as noticeable, looks more clean and natural the way it appears the light is coming from that window and the shadows match up pretty closely to what they should be if it was coming from that window,
whether or not he was doing that on purpose, i dunno.
but i like the look of the blown window, bright subject, and darker foreground of the house (further away from the window) but that is what my not as experienced eye sees, and likes

[Dann.Landau]

Originally Posted by rohicks

Look at the shadows and sun reflection on the floor.
This tells you that's the way the sun is facing hence the brightness of the window, and the fact that i know that's on the west side of that house.

? Not needing to know where the room is, that's not the question.

Originally Posted by rohicks

Aperture 3.5 and that window is still over exposed which means the sun is facing that window. The guy was asking why it was over exposed. THAT is why. The sun is on that side of the house. You can't kill over head sun with 3.5 aperture, no NDs, and small amount fill light.

The guy (that's me) is still confused as to why the choice was to let it be the brightest thing in the photo. Maybe let the photographer answer, he might actually know.

[rohicks]

Originally Posted by Dann.Landau

? Not needing to know where the room is, that's not the question.

The guy (that's me) is still confused as to why the choice was to let it be the brightest thing in the photo. Maybe let the photographer answer, he might actually know.

The point is ... he didn't have a choice in the matter. The situation he's dealing with creates that hot spot because of the complications of the scene. So yes everything i said including where the room is ... is very important to why that window was over-exposed. The only way for pham to get that exposure good on that window, he would have had to take multiple exposures and blend them together. He could of also popped on a ND filter, shot wide open and popped some extra light and expose for the window. Or he could of stopped down completely getting the exposure of the window and just turned the light and ISO up in the image to get it exposed, but then the other window would of probably been under-exposed. Hence the need for multiple exposure and the importance of knowing where the sun is facing the room.

You have 3 extreme levels of contrast in this room. The room exposure itself, the left window being over exposed because the sun is facing that window, and the far side window where the sun isn't hitting it. Exposing for all 3 is impossible without getting multiple exposures to blend together.

[Dann.Landau]

Originally Posted by rohicks

The point is ... he didn't have a choice in the matter.

My lighting teacher says you always have a choice, you just have to work it out. it says in the notes that the AB was 1/4 power, so there's a lot of power left to use. I think that could have balanced it, rather than letting it be the bright spot that takes your attention.

[TwoShoes]

Come on Dann, dont' you know that everytime you reply to something you have to plug your own work?

That window I shot *insert model here* and this is how I did it and and I think if you did it like *insert photo I did here* you'd get better results.

[sigma pi]

Originally Posted by sigma pi

........ If that was unacceptable then he would have to slap on some ND filters. It is a good exposure on the dress though

I said this

Originally Posted by rohicks

In that situation you need multiple exposures or an added ND filter or stopping down more.

With an ND filter and low aperture,

You are validating what I said.

Originally Posted by rohicks

The point is ... he didn't have a choice in the matter........... He could of also popped on a ND filter, shot wide open and popped some extra light and expose for the window. Or he could of stopped down completely getting the exposure of the window and just turned the light and ISO up in the image to get it exposed,

So he did have a choice to do those things or he didnt I am not following. I am also confused why are we raising the ISO, that will bring the exposure of the window back to blown out? Why not just raise the power on the strobe making the room/subject balance the window and adjust the exposure accordingly?

You have 3 extreme levels of contrast in this room. The room exposure itself, the left window being over exposed because the sun is facing that window, and the far side window where the sun isn't hitting it. Exposing for all 3 is impossible without getting multiple exposures to blend together.

I think it can be done with out multiple exposures. I think the BD is lighting the room mostly. The evidence I find is the statue holder. Look in the shadow. It is DARK almost to black. It looks to me like the BD is lighting up the room other than the sun light.

I am just talking nuts and bolts, the technical stuff. Nothing against the shot or Pham.

[ThreeGuysPhoto]

Originally Posted by phamster

hopefully this is creative enough..

Love this! And count me as one who likes the blown out window.

[JayStar86]

dunno about the model's pose in this one but its what she wanted...


IMG_5077WEB by Jay Gill Photography, on Flickr

[izthistaken]

Awesome shot Pham!!

Btw, what if there was something outside that he didn't want in the picture, like a car or people smoking or something? Also, he probably wanted the ambient light hitting the floor? Not sure.

[Shjo]

Flashpoint 320M + Vagabond Mini Lithium + 60" Softlighter II