Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Forums  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear
Guest
Forums  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Photo Sharing & Discussion Critique Corner 
Thread started 06 May 2009 (Wednesday) 21:30
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links (only for non-logged)

Experimental lighting for C&C - Any good at all?

 
Zoso23
Member
Avatar
218 posts
Joined Nov 2008
Location: Geelong! Aus.
     
May 06, 2009 21:30 |  #1

this is a shot i got while messing around last night with flashes out side.

still deciding if i like it or not so i would love your opinions, fire away. dont be afraid to rip it apart because it is still very experimental.

30 Sec. Exposure.
ISO: 250
F/9

IMAGE: http://i104.photobucket.com/albums/m190/Zoso23/IMG_4413.jpg



  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Robert_Lay
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
7,546 posts
Joined Jul 2005
Location: Spotsylvania Co., VA
     
May 06, 2009 21:58 |  #2

Just a couple of curiousities -

1 - Why shoot such a simple scene, which requires very shallow depth of field, at f/9? Seems like that just unnecessarily makes you use a very long shutter time (not a problem for the camera, but certainly a problem for the stooge).

2 - Why do you throw out a red herring in mentioning use of flash when you did not actually use flash (at least not that the camera knew about)?

3 - What is the rationale' behind such ghoulish lighting when you could just as easily use conventional lighting?
:confused::confused:


Bob
Quality of Light (external link), Photo Tool ver 2.0 (external link)
Canon Rebel XTi; EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-f/5.6 USM; EF-S 18-55 mm f/3.5-f/5.6; EF 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM; EF 50mm f/1.4 USM; Canon Powershot G5; Canon AE1(2); Leica R4s; Battery Grip BG-E3; Pentax Digital Spotmeter with Zone VI Mod & Calibration.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
tonydee
Goldmember
Avatar
2,009 posts
Joined Sep 2007
Location: Tokyo
     
May 06, 2009 22:21 |  #3

Interesting work... the face is a bit solid... isn't until/unless you look to the body that you notice the "ghost" effect. Lighting works in with that ok... I assume you fired the flash off camera for a moment from underneath. Neck's pretty hot though... might bring it down a touch in PP. Main thing for me is just that it seems kind of unrelated to anything or anyone else. This ghost's just there in front of the wall, trying hard to make eye contact. I guess it's suggestive, and vaguely threatening, but I'd like a clue about where I - as the viewer - am when confronted by this, or whether the ghost is at some place of relevance to prior history... maybe even getting the viewer to wonder about such things is an indication of some success with your image ;-)a.

Cheers, Tony


5D and too much glass. Mamiya 645E.
http://www.picasaweb.c​om/anthonypon (external link) recent work

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Zoso23
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
Avatar
218 posts
Joined Nov 2008
Location: Geelong! Aus.
     
May 06, 2009 22:23 |  #4

Robert_Lay wrote in post #7872649 (external link)
Just a couple of curiousities -

1 - Why shoot such a simple scene, which requires very shallow depth of field, at f/9? Seems like that just unnecessarily makes you use a very long shutter time (not a problem for the camera, but certainly a problem for the stooge).

2 - Why do you throw out a red herring in mentioning use of flash when you did not actually use flash (at least not that the camera knew about)?

3 - What is the rationale' behind such ghoulish lighting when you could just as easily use conventional lighting?
:confused::confused:

1) I used F/9 to get both the wall and subject sharp. I actually wanted a long shutter speed so I could walk around and fire the flash multiple times. This was shot out doors at night while I was doing some light painting so no matter the F stop i was goin to need a 30 second exposure approx.

and also, the subject didnt need to stand still for the entire 30 seconds, they just stood there, I fired the flash, then they moved, they only had to be still for like 1/1000th of a second or whatever, which wasnt a problem for the stooge.

2) I did use a flash, an off camera flash which was fired 3 times. I dont see why this would be questioned. That is the correct way to describe it. It doesnt matter if the camera knew about it, I still used a flash.

3) I could have used more conventional lighting, but as I mentioned multiple times, this shot was experimental. i was trying something different, something non-conventional. The lighting setup was purely experimental, just wondering what everone thinks.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Zoso23
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
Avatar
218 posts
Joined Nov 2008
Location: Geelong! Aus.
     
May 06, 2009 22:28 |  #5

tonydee wrote in post #7872844 (external link)
Interesting work... the face is a bit solid... isn't until/unless you look to the body that you notice the "ghost" effect. Lighting works in with that ok... I assume you fired the flash off camera for a moment from underneath. Neck's pretty hot though... might bring it down a touch in PP. Main thing for me is just that it seems kind of unrelated to anything or anyone else. This ghost's just there in front of the wall, trying hard to make eye contact. I guess it's suggestive, and vaguely threatening, but I'd like a clue about where I - as the viewer - am when confronted by this, or whether the ghost is at some place of relevance to prior history... maybe even getting the viewer to wonder about such things is an indication of some success with your image ;-)a.

Cheers, Tony

thanks for that tony, much appreciated.
i fired the flash from underneath at the subject, then another two times on the walls behind.

your right about the setting of the shot, could be taken with a more interesting/relative background and setting, this is something i will try out in the future.

thanks again for the great feedback, thats exactly what i was after.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
DerekSimon
Senior Member
736 posts
Joined Feb 2009
Location: Cleveland, OH
     
May 07, 2009 06:07 |  #6

Only a red x for me. I think the hosting server crashed or is temporarily down.


www.dereksimon.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Robert_Lay
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
7,546 posts
Joined Jul 2005
Location: Spotsylvania Co., VA
     
May 07, 2009 15:29 |  #7

Zoso23 wrote in post #7872859 (external link)
1) I used F/9 to get both the wall and subject sharp. I actually wanted a long shutter speed so I could walk around and fire the flash multiple times. This was shot out doors at night while I was doing some light painting so no matter the F stop i was goin to need a 30 second exposure approx.

and also, the subject didnt need to stand still for the entire 30 seconds, they just stood there, I fired the flash, then they moved, they only had to be still for like 1/1000th of a second or whatever, which wasnt a problem for the stooge.

2) I did use a flash, an off camera flash which was fired 3 times. I dont see why this would be questioned. That is the correct way to describe it. It doesnt matter if the camera knew about it, I still used a flash.

I understand. The reason I raised the question on flash is that the EXIF data ln the image file did not indicate use of a flash. Therefore, I was curious as to why flash was mentioned.

3) I could have used more conventional lighting, but as I mentioned multiple times, this shot was experimental. i was trying something different, something non-conventional. The lighting setup was purely experimental, just wondering what everone thinks.


Bob
Quality of Light (external link), Photo Tool ver 2.0 (external link)
Canon Rebel XTi; EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-f/5.6 USM; EF-S 18-55 mm f/3.5-f/5.6; EF 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM; EF 50mm f/1.4 USM; Canon Powershot G5; Canon AE1(2); Leica R4s; Battery Grip BG-E3; Pentax Digital Spotmeter with Zone VI Mod & Calibration.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
PETERSYMES
Goldmember
Avatar
1,502 posts
Joined Dec 2007
Location: Kent,England
     
May 07, 2009 15:49 as a reply to  @ Robert_Lay's post |  #8

I think it is a pretty neat idea.

Strobists in action;)

I would be interested to see the effect with the flash physically moved out of the frame slightly left and right to avoid the hots spots on the wall and reduce the light reaching the face.
If i understand this correctly that would also increase the transparency to the face.
Interesting stuff.:D




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Zoso23
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
Avatar
218 posts
Joined Nov 2008
Location: Geelong! Aus.
     
May 07, 2009 21:36 |  #9

Robert_Lay wrote in post #7877566 (external link)
I understand. The reason I raised the question on flash is that the EXIF data ln the image file did not indicate use of a flash. Therefore, I was curious as to why flash was mentioned.

yeah thats cool. thanks for your feedback.

I think it is a pretty neat idea.

Strobists in action:wink:

I would be interested to see the effect with the flash physically moved out of the frame slightly left and right to avoid the hots spots on the wall and reduce the light reaching the face.
If i understand this correctly that would also increase the transparency to the face.
Interesting stuff.:grin:

thank you for taking the time to give some feedback peter,very much appreciated.

im going to be trying out a heap of different stuff in the next few weeks, i love experimenting with the strobist style, and i will keep your thoughts in mind when reshooting someting like this.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links (only for non-logged)

1,806 views & 0 likes for this thread, 5 members have posted to it.
Experimental lighting for C&C - Any good at all?
FORUMS Photo Sharing & Discussion Critique Corner 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Forums   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset   •  Home

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.55forum software
version 2.55 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is lakemacaircon
776 guests, 229 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15,144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.