RE: Fill flash in low light - balancing natural and flash
Hi all First off, many thanks to those who offered advice. Apologies if this reply is misplaced, I am subscribed to the digest and it sometimes gets a bit confusing as to who replying and whee I should be replying to. I have one quick question to Tom, who kindly went through quite a bit regarding flash: I understand that I can manually set the camera 2 stops underexposed and set the flash exposure to 2 stops over, Well, you could do that, but your shots would have 2 stops too much flash. I'm confused as to why I'd be exposing incorrectly on this - if I deliberately ask the camera to underexpose ambient by two stops, and after that simply ask the flash to take this setting and add two stops to it (at least that's my assumption of what +2 flash comp would do), wouldn't that therefore be the correct exposure? The only way I can see this not being the case is if the flash TTL exposure takes absolutely no notice of the camera exposure settings, and simply works out what it thinks is best, in which case my two stops flash compensation would indeed be two stops overexposure. If anyone can fill me in on this (pun not intended) I'd really be very grateful. I think, on the balance of it, I may just have to go with ambient light as it's patently obvious I don't really understand how flash works, and I'd rather have slightly soft, grainy pictures (ISO 3200 film) than shots of drummers looking like startled bunnies in car headlights. After having seen how Frank's shots came out, I'd be more than happy with anything looking like those (http://www.photo.net/photodb/folder? folder_id=383331 for those who haven't got the link from the previous message). Unfortunately I have a student lighting engineer who seems to enjoy using rear lighting a bit too much for my liking, so there are few (if any) kickers lighting the face. That would be one area where I might just have a crack with some standard fill flash - in which case I'll just turn on the flash with no compensation and leave it entirely to it's own devices. Someone suggested a Pz-1 and 500FTZ combo, well I can borrow a Pz-1 but I'm stuck with the 400FTZ unfortunately - limited funds mean everything is bought used as and where it turns up. Is it reasonable to suggest that Pentax have made this balancing ambient and flash thing unnecessarily difficult to do with the MZ series (to recap, I have an MZ-3 and 400FTZ)? By the way, what's PUG and PAW? Thanks for all your comments, the battle of the bands is tonight and I've just realised I'm down to 2 fast films. I'll let you know how I get on, and will try to get the photos up somewhere. Cheers Matt
RE: Fill flash in low light - balancing natural and flash
Hi Morgan, many thanks for reply. I think there's something you're might be missing here... I shot a band for the second time under very similar circumstances two weeks ago. It was my first attempt at using a flash at all, and so I found and read everything I could about it (which BTW is not a lot). I think you should really look at and try to figure out the Guide Numbers for your flash. I'm trying to infer information from your post, but it sounds like you want a very high level of detail on the film. I think you want a.) everything in focus -and- b.) everything well lit. If you were outside in bright sunlight, this would be no problem. Just close the aperture down for a big depth-of-field, and you can use all that available light to create a great high-detail negative. Unfortunately, those are not the circumstances you are working with. It took me a while to wrap my brain around how the throw distance of my flash works. Basically, as the aperture opens up, you can use your flash to expose a greater distance of space. As your aperture closes down, the total distance that you can effectively expose with the flash will decrease. So basically, you could use a relatively fast shutter speed and a small aperture (which would produce big depth of field in normal lighting), but you would get a very short throw distance from your flash. Thus, your fast shutter, small aperture combination would result in a black background because the aperture wasn't open enough for the flash light. Likewise, you could open the aperture up and get small depth of field, but everything illuminated. I'd be willing to bet there's a way to get what you want, but I'm not sure without knowing a.) the distances between you, the subject, and the background -and- b.) the length of your lens. Hope I could help and not exacerbate the problem... -m You're partially right in deciphering my question, having reread what I have written I didn't perhaps phrase it as well as I could, so I'll try again now. I really want to do away with flash, and shoot as I would in daylight. I can do this with certain compromises, as in fast film, slow shutter and wide aperture. However, I'd like to improve pretty much all of these but only by very slight amounts. The real problem is shutter speed, as I am getting blurred hands etc., and the lighting really is not that great so I am stuck with it. What I want to be able to do is to get as close to being able to take the photo WITH THE APERTURE AND SHUTTER AT SETTINGS I WANT, NOT THOSE REQUIRED FOR THE CORRECT EXPOSURE (apologies for caps, I don't know how to italicise in this email package!). All I want the flash to do is to bring the exposure up to what it should be, thereby using the absolute bare minimum amount of flash for my needs. I have use full auto flash before and it just flooded everything - the flash has a guide of 40, it's quite powerful and the stage isn't that big. I also much prefer the effect of stage lighting, and would like to keep some idea of this in the photo. I hope this clarifies, thanks again for your commnets Matt. p.s. If I reply in this way, does it fit into the thread structure of PDML properly?
RE: Fill flash in low light - balancing natural and flash
Tom, many thnaks for your reply. My apologies for labouring the point slightly, but I've another question regarding the use of flash. The compensation dial always measures compensation from the meter. In other words, the compensation isn't measured in relation to your settings, it's set in relation to what the camera sees through the lens. Basically, shifting to manual mode shifts the compensation calculation from the ambient meter to the ttl flash meter. If this is the case, then if I manually set the camera to underexpose by two stops and just turn the external flash on with no compensation, would this balance the ambient and flash light correctly? In other words, the ttl flash side of things would just use the camera meter and decide, for itself, how much flash to use for correct exposure, and the fact I'm underexposing would just cause the background to be slightly underexposed and the areas reached by the flash would be fine? I'm a bit unsure of what is meant re. shifting to manual (the second paragraph I've quoted), does this mean I can only ever use flash compensation in manual? I was under the impression that, even in aperture priority, when flash was used the dual purpose exposure dial became flash compensation (and actual exposure compensatio is no longer possible). Just to clarify, I take it now from your comments that I can only use flash compensation in manual mode, is this correct? Sorry to lumber you with so many questions, I hope I'm slowly iterating towards actually figuring out what the hell is going on with flash Matt
Re: My own DOF confusion
Lasse (and, for that matter, Collin) Your point(s) is/are made, now can we move on please? thanks in advance Matt Quoting Lasse Karlsson [EMAIL PROTECTED]: From: William Robb [EMAIL PROTECTED] From: Lasse Karlsson Subject: Re: My own DOF confusion Who's spewing now? Being compared to Kirkland Ramsey, being called a Scandinavian twit as well as getting my posts characterized as childlike extreme and spewing puss by you only confirms my good case in this matter. Now you are calling everybody who doesn't want Collin's American political preachings on the list to enter a sig. file flame war on U.S. domestic and international politics! That's not only highly irresponsible, it may also mean a devastating blow to the PDML as such. Only in your mind, my dear little man I'm 184 cm:s tall. You may be fatter, but I am still a man. does my reply confirm your case. I am just calling it like I see it. As am I right now. What you are doing by continuing this little diatribe on list may be far more devastating to the PDML than any sig files may do. Who entered and is now continuing this diatribe, while complaining about others doing the same? You are a hypocrite. Your best bet is to try to stay on topic, and if you have issue with an off topic post, or portion thereof, take it up off list with the person in question. Given your record of on list entering and continuing off topic posts as well as demeaning personal attacks, you're a hypocrite and you know it (as does everybody else who's been on PDML for a while). I reserve off list communications for friendly contacts. At the moment, both you and Collin are close to hitting my auto delete, which is something I don't do lightly. As if I'd give a rat's ass about who hits your auto delete. If you want to killfile my posts, please do. I'm perfectly fine with whoever will be left. Lasse
Re: My own DOF confusion
Lasse, moderate it please. Not agreeing with someone isn't an excuse for wild insults, and I personally don't appreciate receiving such mail. As others have asked repeatedly, please keep your comments on this matter outside of the mailing list. Thanks in advance Matt p.s. can the others involved perhaps not respond and let this thread die? Quoting Lasse Karlsson [EMAIL PROTECTED]: From: graywolf [EMAIL PROTECTED] Q: What is the difference between Lasse Karlsson and a terrorist? A: A terrorist has guts. I have to admit I have been waiting for him to tell us that Spain got what it deserved as he did about the US after 9/11. You scumbag of a liar - you present the list proof of what your saying or apologize, you little creep!! Do you have the guts for it, slime bag? Lasse
Fill flash in low light - balancing natural and flash
Hi all This is my first post, so hello to everyone. I have a question regarding flash I'd like to ask. I am taking photos of a band in quite a small, dark venue and I usually just use a fast lens with high speed film without flash. I'm after a bit more quality (i.e. smaller aperture and slower film) and would like to experiment a bit, but unfortunately I have to print a few photos for band members so I can't mess up too badly! I have got an MZ-3 with a 400FTZ flash and when I use flash in normal situations I simply shoot in aperture priority and let the camera work out the shutter and TTL flash, and if I only want a bit of fill flash I take 1 to 2 stops off using the Exposure Compensation dial which doubles as the flash compensation dial. The problem I am facing is using flash to supplement low light levels, in effect how to balance natural light and flash. I have always considered fill flash as something that simply lights up a few shadows, where the exposure would be correct without the flash but that little burst just puts a bit more light where the scene is a bit dark. I am confused as to how to set the camera to automatically use flash to supplement low light levels, where I can shoot off aperture priority but underexpose by two stops and use the flash to bump the light back up these two stops. I can't figure out how to do it, as on the MZ-3 the exposure and flash compensation are done by the same dial. If I set the flash compensation dial to take 2 stops off, I assume that the camera will (under aperture priority) simply set the shutter speed for 'correct' exposure and use the flash for fill only, which hard-won experience shows is too slow ('soft' hands and drumsticks etc.). I understand that I can manually set the camera 2 stops underexposed and set the flash exposure to 2 stops over, but there's so much going on I always miss shots if I have to manually balance exposure - poor AF doesn't help, and the shutter speed dial is a pig to turn with the flash mounted (little camera and big fingers!) I would hence like to automate the process, does anyone know if this is possible? As you can probably see, I'm quite new to the flash area, any advice or comments would be greatly appreciated. Many thanks Matt