Please help...frustrated with flash!

Hello everybody,

I'm just a bit frustrated with using flash for portrait photography!??? I am so awful at this. I can't seem to get consistent results. Here's a couple of examples of what I'm talking about:

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Redirected to error image by FLICKR

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Redirected to error image by FLICKR

Practice Practice Practice...step your flash output down, etc. ...and if that's not enough add a "specialty" diffuser: harry wong's "tupperware" (we really do like this one); an alcohol bottle bottom cut out to fit like the more expensive commercial units. There are many creative solutions here, try a "search" in this forum and you'll find some additional help.

Good luck!

Jenn,

Both of those shots look great to me! Wonderfully even lighting, no harsh shadows, catchlights, properly exposed.

The white balance is definitely on the cool side. That's the easierst thing to fix. What camera are you using?

Nice looking kids, too!

I agree - exposure looks excellent!

Jenn, your examples don't exhibit 'inconsistency' although they do exhibit some issue with WB being on the cool side. Can you verbalize what makes you say 'inconsistent' (even though your examples are fine)?

Curtis N wrote in post #2271391
Jenn,

Both of those shots look great to me! Wonderfully even lighting, no harsh shadows, catchlights, properly exposed.

The white balance is definitely on the cool side. That's the easierst thing to fix. What camera are you using?

Nice looking kids, too!

Thanks, Curtis! I am using a Canon Rebel XT. I knew my WB was definitely off. I think I used either tungsten or flash. How do I fix it? Should I do a Custom WB? I'm just not sure how to do it. I'm usually shooting sports, so flash photography is new to me.

BTW, you're gallery is fantastic! That's the kind of flash photography I was trying to achieve.

digitaljoe wrote in post #2271590
I agree - exposure looks excellent!

Thanks!

Wilt wrote in post #2271653
Jenn, your examples don't exhibit 'inconsistency' although they do exhibit some issue with WB being on the cool side. Can you verbalize what makes you say 'inconsistent' (even though your examples are fine)?

I feel that the flash photos I take aren't consistent when it comes to lighting...some are dark and some are light even though they were taken in the same location and at the same settings. I also can't seem to get the hang of WB. I'm just really confused about it.

JennB wrote in post #2272565
I feel that the flash photos I take aren't consistent when it comes to lighting...some are dark and some are light even though they were taken in the same location and at the same settings. I also can't seem to get the hang of WB. I'm just really confused about it.

Understand that every shot you take in default mode is in Evaluated mode...whether you do it with or without flash. Move the frame around and it alters the light seen in each segment of the scene, so it can (and does) alter the exposure set. In flash mode, the camera does them same evaluation segment by segment. So with every subtle shift of the frame, your camera can subtlely alter its exposure and the amount of light coming from the flash. If you mounted your camera on a tripod and exposed exactly the same framing 10 times, I bet it will be consistent within those 10 shots. but if you reframe each shot slightly different, you'll start to see shot by shot variation. So it is 'the nature of the beast'.

Camera manufacturers will tell users to shoot a panoramic sequence on Manual, simply because they know the meter in the camera will vary with each reframing, making it more difficult to have the sky density consistent from shot to shot, which makes the stitching of the multiple images challenging. Same problem as your flash inconsistency.

Those pics are fine, just a bit cool.

If color balance is the issue I suggest either a custom color balance (consult you camera manual). or

Use RAW and adjust the color temperature to your liking when opening the image.

Either of these approaches will tame your very minor problem.

Enjoy! Lon

JennB wrote in post #2272528
knew my WB was definitely off. I think I used either tungsten or flash. How do I fix it? Should I do a Custom WB?

Tungsten WB setting with flash is a sure-fire recipe for blue pictures. The Flash WB setting should get you close, otherwise either set a custom WB (the camera's instruction manual describes how) or shoot RAW and adjust later.

BTW, you're gallery is fantastic! That's the kind of flash photography I was trying to achieve.

Thank you for the compliment, but please be aware that none of the shots in my theatre galleries were taken with flash. We never use flash in the theatre.

Curtis N wrote in post #2272688
Tungsten WB setting with flash is a sure-fire recipe for blue pictures. The Flash WB setting should get you close, otherwise either set a custom WB (the camera's instruction manual describes how) or shoot RAW and adjust later.Thank you for the compliment, but please be aware that none of the shots in my theatre galleries were taken with flash. We never use flash in the theatre.

Thank you for the advice and tip, Curtis! I truly appreciate it. If I do shoot RAW (another thing I have no clue about, but would like to learn), how exactly will I process the shot in PSE? Will I need the full version of PhotoShop?

I do apologize for thinking that your photos were taken with flash, but I really thought they were! Wow...you really make those pictures pop!!!

Wilt wrote in post #2272596
Understand that every shot you take in default mode is in Evaluated mode...whether you do it with or without flash. Move the frame around and it alters the light seen in each segment of the scene, so it can (and does) alter the exposure set. In flash mode, the camera does them same evaluation segment by segment. So with every subtle shift of the frame, your camera can subtlely alter its exposure and the amount of light coming from the flash. If you mounted your camera on a tripod and exposed exactly the same framing 10 times, I bet it will be consistent within those 10 shots. but if you reframe each shot slightly different, you'll start to see shot by shot variation. So it is 'the nature of the beast'.

Thanks, Wilt! That makes sense and I knew that, but I just didn't take the time to "evaluate" the whole problem.:o Sometimes I just need to stop and think like a camera before I berate my shots to pieces.

JennB wrote in post #2272748
If I do shoot RAW (another thing I have no clue about, but would like to learn), how exactly will I process the shot in PSE? Will I need the full version of PhotoShop?

Canon's Digital Photo Professional, which comes with your camera, is a great RAW converter. Use it to adjust white balance & exposure (you can do lots of other stuff with it too), then convert to JPEG or TIFF and do the rest with PSE.

In the world of post-processing, learning to adjust and convert RAW files is one of the easiest things you'll ever try. It's a whole lot easier than learning to use flash.

londuck wrote in post #2272647
Those pics are fine, just a bit cool.

If color balance is the issue I suggest either a custom color balance (consult you camera manual). or

Use RAW and adjust the color temperature to your liking when opening the image.

Either of these approaches will tame your very minor problem.

Enjoy! Lon

Thanks, Lon! I usually use Auto SmartFix when it comes to processing my shots. Would it be better if I actually adjust everything myself? I guess I'm just afraid that if I do, I'll end up totally ruining all my photos. This is another reason I haven't ventured out and used RAW.