Confusion over Omnibounce.

HI.

I am a little confused over the correct use of my Stofen Omnibounce and would like some advice on it.

I am going to a motorbike show on Friday and will be photographing both Bikes and Models.

On other posts it says that the Omnibounce is only used in conjuction with bouncing off of walls and ceilings is this correct and would that mean that, because this venue will have very high ceilings, I would be better off not using the Omnibounce at all or should I keep it on and point the flash directly at the subject?

By the way I am using an EOS300D with a 550EX.

Many Thanks

Darren

the whole purpose behind that omnibounce is to diffuse light (make it softer).... especially when you don't have a ceiling to bouce off. I never use the omnibounce when I bouce off the ceilig or wall because you have a whole ceiling to soften your light, plus it absorbs some of the light.

I use it like that a lot and it work just fine.

Thanks Chris.

Are you saying that I should keep the Omnibounce on and point the flash fully forward rather than upwards and forwards like I would when bouncing?

Cheers

Darren.

yes. That's what I do and it works okay for me.

Look at my wedding gallery on my website. All the indoor pictures are taken like that (300D+550EX+omnibounce​).

Well, I don't agree with Chris.

That thing isn't called the OmniBounce for nothing. It only works well if you have white walls or ceilings to bounce the flash off of.

I have an OmniBounce for my 420 EX flash, but I don't use it often because it doesn't do a lot to diffuse light when there is no surface to bounce on.

Better alternatives are the products from LumiQuest - I've just bought the ProMax system (and a 550 EX). (Can't tell you yet if it works well, because at this moment it's waiting for me at the post office....).

Without ceilings/walls for bounce, I found the OmniBounce to be great at reducing flash output. But this is quickly combatted by E-TTL trying to properly expose. So it became a game of full-power flashes resulting in sporadic exposures.

Take a look at a Lumiquest PocketBounce, which is (IMHO) more specifically made for this type of situation.

I find that I get good results if:


1. With low light colored ceilings, I aim the flash/omnibounce at the ceiling at an angle that brings light down on the subject.


2. WITHOUT said ceilings, I aim it up 45 degrees.


YMMV.

In a big room with no bounce potential I'd normally leave the Stofen off of the flash. As others have said it's just weakens your flash. The only two things that will make light softer is size and proximity. A big umbrella or big softbox will give you soft light. A small umbrella will give soft light if it's very close to the subject. A big, big light will be harsh if it's too far away (i.e. the sun).

But I also used my Stofen as a wide angle diffuser when I was using a 20mm lens on film Nikon, with a Vivitar 283 flash. The wide angle flip diffuser built into the 550EX flash has been wide enough to forgo this with my 16-35, but I suspect that I may need the Stofen again when I get the 10-22.

Jesper wrote:
Well, I don't agree with Chris.

That thing isn't called the OmniBounce for nothing. It only works well if you have white walls or ceilings to bounce the flash off of.

I have an OmniBounce for my 420 EX flash, but I don't use it often because it doesn't do a lot to diffuse light when there is no surface to bounce on.

Better alternatives are the products from LumiQuest - I've just bought the ProMax system (and a 550 EX). (Can't tell you yet if it works well, because at this moment it's waiting for me at the post office....).

I don't know why that this is called omnibounce. When you bouce off a ceiling you need a lot of flash (omnibounce becomes an obstacle absorbing some of it), plus you have a ceiling to soften your light.
When you aim the flash towards the subject, you can afford to lose some as most of the time you won't need all the output the flash can give you.
There is no doubt that you'll get better results with an umbrella / big softbox (even that lumiquest mini softbox thing), but whoever said that you get worse results with the omnibounce than without it, please show me some pictures and proove me wrong.

Hmmmm, I have used it with my 300D and not bounced it off a wall or celling and it has worked great. It still brings out some shadows but no where near as bad as it would with out it and I don't have to walk around with a mini-box attached to my 550....

Here are some tests:
http://www.toddwalker.​net/e20/flashtest/
and some opinions:
http://www.sportsshoot​er.com …ge_display.html​?tid=10177

Personally, I think that straight on the omnibounce isn't very good, it makes the light look a little washed out. I prefer the Lumiquest Pocket Bounce when there is no ceiling to bounce off of.
Scott

When there is no ceilings to bounce, I use it at an upwards angle and it works like a bare bulb. Yes, it does eat up more juice with E-TTL trying to compensate, but I've had no problems with expsoure. The omnibounce cannot work miracles since the light source is still small relative to the subject, but it does add some easily portable diffusion.

I swear a white business card and a rubber band are more usefull than the omnibounce......

That depends on the room.

If there is an eight foot white ceiling and pastel walls, then the bare bulb effect of the Stofen is very nice.

As for the white business cards, I think that they're too small. I use a corregated white plastic (an election sign works great) with Velcro attached to it. I have Velcro on the 550 and can attach the fill card. The corregated white plastic is very light so I can use a fairly large card if I choose. I have a bunch cut up in different size for different purposes but mostly since I lose them.

In a non bounce situation I prefer not to use the Stofen, not because it makes a bad image but because it reduces my choices. It significantly reduces the power of the flash so I wouldn't have all of the apertures available if I used the flash directly. And the no bounce Stofen and direct flash are the same harsh point source under these conditions, so why weaken the flash to no effect?

My opinion exactly.