Christmas Photo Question

Okay so my friends have asked me to do a family portrait for Christmas however all I have is a 480exII flash. Is it possible to make a really nice portrait using this flash or would I need a soft box for sure?

If you're in like a large family room that is located in the house, simply set your flash to E-TTL, rotate it 180 degrees (facing away from the group) so that you are using the back wall and parts of the ceiling as a large light source. Now, using an ISO of about 800, setting your shutter between 1/60 and 1/125 at an aperture around f/5.6, you should get a very pleasing portrait of your family. Of course, this is just a starting point, you may want to do some fine tuning from that point.....

I agree with Mark. And if you have walls to either side of your subjects, you can use them also with the ceiling. If the room is suitable for bounce flash, a softbox with more than three or four people may actually be a liability - uneven lighting and fall-off.

Direct flash.

Thanks guys! I appreciate the response! Will try it out and see how it goes.

Nice samples by Vultureface.

I don't mean to nitpick his images since they are only for demonstration, but notice how the color of the bear is different between direct and bounced flash.

This is to be expected, and it could be significant, depending on what you're bouncing off of, and it's an easy fix. If you're shooting RAW then you would be advised to shoot a white balance reference target to help get the colors correct in post.

Its a little hard to see, but there is a benefit bouncing the flash off a wall or wall ceiling corner to one side or the other. It provides a subtle shadow on one side of the face to create shape.

What's a good way, in the evening, to get the tree lights to show up?

ootsk wrote in post #15323117
What's a good way, in the evening, to get the tree lights to show up?

Slower shutter speed.

Put your camera on a tripod, come up with an ambient exposure that will look good for the tree, lights and environment. This is probably about a stop under what the camera meter wants. Then adjust the ETTL compensation for the flash to be 0 or maybe a bit over for the people.

Here is a similar situation. City lights rather than tree, but same kind of exposure balance.

Nice picture, David. Out of curiosity, using the same example as your photo, what if I do the following:
- Set exposure to 10 second (let's just say this is the correct exposure for the ambient light or the skyline in the background)
- Press shutter button completely to take a picture (flash fires - 1st curtain)
- Have the subjects step out of the frame
- Wait for another 9-10 second for the exposure to complete

What will happen? Double exposure?

morph2_7 wrote in post #15325244
Nice picture, David. Out of curiosity, using the same example as your photo, what if I do the following:
- Set exposure to 10 second (let's just say this is the correct exposure for the ambient light or the skyline in the background)
- Press shutter button completely to take a picture (flash fires - 1st curtain)
- Have the subjects step out of the frame
- Wait for another 9-10 second for the exposure to complete

What will happen? Double exposure?

The lights would certainly record through the dark area of his coat.

Thanks. That's what I thought.

If the subjects stand still too long, there's a risk of movement (blurry image). How can I correct it then? Bump up ISO and open aperture to shorten exposure to an acceptable length, for example 1 or 2 seconds?

morph2_7 wrote in post #15325320
Thanks. That's what I thought.

If the subjects stand still too long, there's a risk of movement (blurry image). How can I correct it then? Bump up ISO and open aperture to shorten exposure to an acceptable length, for example 1 or 2 seconds?

In the case of David's shot the subjects would be in silhouetted against the skyline so the only real risk of blurring is to their outline as their faces would be too dark to record any detail, then the flash fills that in. So the real risk of ghosting/blurring is on the edges of their outline.

gonzogolf wrote in post #15325335
In the case of David's shot the subjects would be in silhouetted against the skyline so the only real risk of blurring is to their outline as their faces would be too dark to record any detail, then the flash fills that in. So the real risk of ghosting/blurring is on the edges of their outline.

Yep. When I do these shots, there are always a couple with "shadows" on the background. Actually its the ghosting Gonzo mentioned.

I try to keep shutter speed to a second. Use ISO to manage the shutter speed. Always do these wide open with 16-35 and closer to 16. Get the couple into a comfortable situation that is easy to hold and then give them warning to stay still. Camera is on tripod or supported on something.

Makes sense. Thanks again for your reply.

Here is another one from that evening to illustrate what happens with movement.
Zoomed from 70 to 24, ISO was 640, shutter was 1 second, F 5.
I think flash was first curtain. -1/3 FEC.
You can see where his shoulder "shadow" is darkening left side of her face and his mouth chin area. Also, his tux is darkening her arm.

Since this, as well as the one earlier, were shot with 24-70 I know it was on a tripod.

Incidently, this was New Years Eve a couple of years ago. The temp was about 10*F. The couple is from California.