Strobe / Monolight hyper sync

bobbyz wrote in post #15872649
I know what ND does and I only mentioned ND for not using smaller apertures. How is CL-180 going to help freeze action and let you bring down ambient at the same time. Please someone post one shot to prove this. I will happily send $10 to buy them lunch. We all know as you increase ss, power is going to go down on CL-180. You guys showed it in your CL-180 thread. You can use that strobe for fill fine not over power full day sun.

Here Einstein at full power with Kacey dish. See I can barely match sun as light is far from the subject than just a head shot. ND filter used only to let me shoot at f2.8 instead of f11.

Good Stuff

Scott, where, exactly, did you get that image?

If you're going to quote it from earlier in the thread, it's proper etiquette to include the quote.

To answer your question its a LR gradient from the left. Not the light. It seems most people would have been able to see that.

These threads are taking on a much too confrontational tone which detracts from the educational intent of the forum in my view.

If we can help one another by offering our experience and suggestions we should. If our gratification comes from highlighting shortcomings without constructive suggestions, maybe that's better left out of the thread. A PM if one must.

I got it from the second page of this thread.
https://photography-on-the.net …p?p=15868228&po​stcount=11

I found that out after going back through the thread.
It's much more polite to use the quote feature to maintain the integrity of the thread and origin.

It appears you were able to accomplish that simple task when commenting on Bobby's post.

Consistency can be learned.

And I'm not even sure what the purpose of the post was. Didn't contribute anything useful to the thread.

Nice I hear a alot blah blah blah
Its funny how some stuff slides here and some stuff don't. All i asked was simple question and it turns into a drama.

I'm not sure what the issue is. Abbadon31 quoted from earlier in the thread, I remember the original post. Has post 45 been edited to include verbiage that wasn't there before the kerfuffle?

windpig wrote in post #16097716
I'm not sure what the issue is. Abbadon31 quoted from earlier in the thread, I remember the original post. Has post 45 been edited to include verbiage that wasn't there before the kerfuffle?

Yes. Originally all that was in the post was the comment and the image, without the link to the thread post.