Sony A7x lounge

vinmunoz wrote in post #18118399
thanks I will try that AV technique you have. Yah i got the BFT idea from him. I also bought one of his flash photography video.

been hearing many times about "the flash will freeze the motion" but i really don't understand how is it possible. any theories for that?

You might wanna check this article out.

vinmunoz wrote in post #18118399
thanks I will try that AV technique you have. Yah i got the BFT idea from him. I also bought one of his flash photography video.

been hearing many times about "the flash will freeze the motion" but i really don't understand how is it possible. any theories for that?

Just to possibly supplement the article Jocau referenced, and provide an extreme example to demonstrate the principle.

If you look at the shots I posted here:
https://photography-on-the.net …p?p=18114864&i=​i265912868
you will see that they were taken at 1/160, which, on its own couldn't possibly freeze the water in mid-air. However, by using speedlites at low power, the duration of light falling on the subject was around 10,000th of a second, simulating a shutter speed of the same duration. My images were shot in complete darkness, which, of course, you couldn't do at an event, so it is a case of 'overpowering' the ambient with the flash, as explained in Jocau's article.

I should say that I have never used the technique at an event, so can't vouch for its success under those conditions – but the article suggests that it could be useful, so maybe worth a bit of experimentation.

vinmunoz wrote in post #18118399
thanks I will try that AV technique you have. Yah i got the BFT idea from him. I also bought one of his flash photography video.

been hearing many times about "the flash will freeze the motion" but i really don't understand how is it possible. any theories for that?

my understanding is that flash is EXTREMELY fast, but the shutter speed may be confusing. If you take a photo with with flash and take the same settings and turn off the flash, the subject *should be* unexposed, and in some instances, a silhouette. In that case, that's where flashes freeze the motion, essentially 2 photos in one, one for the camera exposure, and the flash as the second exposure for the subject.

just remember that the unflashed photo should be underexposed, therefore it's a bottom layer in photoshop, where the flashed image is a white masked layer on areas where flash hits the subject.

Having fun with the stars on the lake-

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/KYWz​B5

Charlie wrote in post #18118486
my understanding is that flash is EXTREMELY fast, but the shutter speed may be confusing. If you take a photo with with flash and take the same settings and turn off the flash, the subject *should be* unexposed, and in some instances, a silhouette. In that case, that's where flashes freeze the motion, essentially 2 photos in one, one for the camera exposure, and the flash as the second exposure for the subject.

just remember that the unflashed photo should be underexposed, therefore it's a bottom layer in photoshop, where the flashed image is a white masked layer on areas where flash hits the subject.

my brain bleeds... lol thank you though.

Meet Shelby....

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/KYZb​kj

vinmunoz wrote in post #18118489
my brain bleeds... lol thank you though.

There's a really old mark Wallace video on the explanation of flash, it's really easy to understand, will have to find in the morning

Very minimal edit....

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/KZfA​8Z

Thanks Jocau, Rayfo and Charlie. Will check it out in the morning.

Meanwhile, enjoy with Shelby.

TRhoads wrote in post #18118081
Kinda rare...but I will share it here...just for giggles...I find the Sony files to be flat...and lack the pop reality had...but it doesn't take much to get it back...this is the file as it looked when it exited LR.

Wow, you even cloned the light poles out. Crazy cloning job! Very nice done

Vinz, did you clip around her and blur the background a little more? The first one in particular looks like she has a very sharp edge to her surroundings, less so on the second one.

davidfarina wrote in post #18118512
Wow, you even cloned the light poles out. Crazy cloning job! Very nice done

That I did...I hate those light poles...

vinmunoz wrote in post #18118399
thanks I will try that AV technique you have. Yah i got the BFT idea from him. I also bought one of his flash photography video.

been hearing many times about "the flash will freeze the motion" but i really don't understand how is it possible. any theories for that?

Flash duration is much faster than the SS, so if your subject is primarily exposed by the flash, it will stop the motion of your subject. The effectiveness of this depends on how much ambient light is exposing your subject. If you're using an EC of -2, then your subject is primarily exposed by the flash (ambient is underexposed), then you'll likely freeze motion. The direction of the light also matters....if you bounce directly behind you, then your subject will be hit straight on and there will be less ambient light exposing your subject and you'll get less blur. If you bounce at diagonal angles, you might get some blur in the shadows (areas of your subject exposed by ambient light).

On that note...using a mixture of ambient light and a bounced speedlight to expose a shot is a similar mind-set to studio lighting...bounced flash is your 'key light' and the ambient is your 'fill'. Since the camera exposes the ambient, and the flash exposes the subject, if you trust EC and ETTL (I do), then adjusting the EC is the way you manipulate the lighting ratio. As such, adjusting the EC is how you control the prominence of the shadows/contrast on your subjects. Lower EC = more prominent shadows/contrast...als​o more isolation from the background.

Last note...mixing ambient light and bounced flash to expose a shot means you need to use flash gels to avoid getting color casts. I've be meaning to get that expodisc you use, as that should really simplify the process of geling a light to the right temperature to match the ambient.

vinmunoz wrote in post #18118490
Meet Shelby....

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/KYZb​kj shelby-Chris-5 by timobong, on Flickr

Nice one Vinz! Great work as always but the reflection off of the water makes this a stand-out shot.

David Arbogast wrote in post #18118333
Batis 18mm and 25mm owners: Any vignetting issues with using a thin ring CPL? I'm doing a little scheming right now and want to plan out my budget.

Think I'm going to aim to getting down to just three Canon lenses: TS-E 24L II, 24-70mm f/4L IS, and 70-200mm f/4L IS. The rest I want to sell so I can get the complete Batis kit. Between Nadim, Eddie, and Alfredo I've reached a threshold where I've seen enough to be 100% convinced that those are must-have lenses. Love the color, contrast and sharpness.

I'll probably hate selling my still-new Sigma 20mm the most. It's absolutely awesome and absolutely in my focal-length wheelhouse. But, so is the Batis 18 and 25 - and they are much lighter (easier on the lens mount) and I can minimize needing the adapter.

Glad to hear you are going for the Batis lenses David, looking forward to your images with them. Can't answer your question though as I only use filters on the 18 And 25 and it's my Lee kit

Testing out how the 24-70 would work as a straight up portrait lens and am pretty impressed. Given that its max aperture is f2.8, you have to manage your expectations around the quantity of blur you can produce, but at 70MM the bokeh is very pleasing and the sharp transition between the subject and the OOF areas is very similar to the 85 GM.

The 85 GM will still be my go-to for posed portraiture, but seriously, I would have no beef using the 24-70 for portraits.

On our last Disney trip I lugged around a bag that included the 85 GM, Loxia 21, RX1RII, and the FE 24-70 F4. While the 24-70 GM is a massive lens, I realistically could have used the 24-70 GM in lieu of that entire kit of gear and would not have sacrificed much.