Fill or no Fill? Which worked Better?

I got the 580 ex II recently and don't yet understand how to set things up. I had a chance to play with it this weekend. My brother-in:

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.

I prefer the shot without. It's more dynamic and appealing to me. The second shot is great though, no shadows etc. but it seems the flash over-powered the natural light from the right. Ideal would be a good balance of both, which IMO would be a little less fill on the second shot.

Merely 'different', not 'better'! If you want a dramatic, more moody shot the first one (window light only) works well. But if your point was to shoot a 'portrait', the second one, with fill, works better. So the question is what you want to achieve in a shot!

I would have set the fill to be less intense than the window.

Wilt wrote in post #6219318
I would have set the fill to be less intense than the window.

I would have done that as well if I had a clue as to how to.

Thanks for the comments.

dcsmith40D wrote in post #6219331
I would have done that as well if I had a clue as to how to.

What was your setup for the fill? I would have exposed manually for the ambient (like the first shot) and set the flash to -2 FEC.

dcsmith40D wrote in post #6219331
I would have done that as well if I had a clue as to how to.

Thanks for the comments.

If you had a light colored wall or something to your left, you could have tried to bounce the flash of it, to provide just a little bit of fill on the shadowy part of his face, to even out the light.

You probably want to dial down the FEC (flash exposure compensation) a stop or 1½, just for a start, to ensure that the main light is coming from the window and the flash is just lifting the shadows.

Knud

dcsmith40D wrote in post #6219331
I would have done that as well if I had a clue as to how to.

Thanks for the comments.

You could turn down the power of the flash, to like 1/32nd or 1/64th power, as long as you have that capability. Of course, I have no idea what the flash fired at, so, I'm not sure of it's exact power.

Both shots have their own merit. I think the first works better, but, the second could be better were the flash output a tad less, as mentioned already.

I like both shots but they each project a different feeling. Technically, #1 is better to show a mood (thoughtfulness, introspection, etc). #2 is what we expect when we want to pass around a snapshot to the family.

Agree with post above, go for something in between by adjusting the power output in manual mode.

maybe try to fill a bit by bouncing the flash off a wall to the left or celing in between you and him.

I dont' like how you can see up his shorts #2

dcsmith40D wrote in post #6219331
I would have done that as well if I had a clue as to how to.

Thanks for the comments.

If you had the one ETTL flash, to complement the window light, you could merely have dialed in some FEC.

Or, with the flash in Manual, you simply dial down the power. Or with a flash that has its own photosensor, either lie to it about using a larger f/stop, or lie to it about using a faster ISO setting.

I was bouncing the light off of the wall and the ceiling all day. I don't know which I bounced off of for that particular shot. I didn't nor have I taken the time to figure out the different settings on the flash verses camera. I just kept glancing at the histogram and adjusting shutter speed etc.

I like "no fill" on this one. It looks like you were going for a particular goal with shadows and a feeling in the image. #2 looks like it could have been done with any ol' point-n-shoot

No fill.

no fill!
positioning him around so the window light gave a nice fill light accross the face would have worked better, natural light is awesome to use and is so easy to manipulate!

Neither. First goes too dark & 2nd has too much fill. Just MHO.