Spirit of Photography

Mentoring and Learning => Weekly Photography Assignments => Topic started by: keithsnell on March 06, 2010, 08:46:50 PM

Title: "Zone VI," Weekly Photography Assignment for 8 - 14 March 2010
Post by: keithsnell on March 06, 2010, 08:46:50 PM: As we sometimes do, I'm going to base this week's assignment on questions that were asked during a previous assignment. Towards the end of the Zone VII assignment, several people asked questions about how to use the manual exposure mode for their cameras. Based on those questions, I thought it might be helpful to take the time to cover manual exposure in more depth. So, I needed to pick a topic that would have you use manual exposure again. This week's topic is "Zone VI." For ease of reference, I'll provide the Zone System diagram and description of the zones again.

(http://spiritofphotography.com/coppermine/albums/userpics/10001/image001.jpg)
Zone I Black without any texture
   Zone II Black with slight suggestion of tonality
   Zone III Darkest areas that still retains visible detail
   Zone IV Average shadows in landscapes/portraits
   Zone V Middle Gray - 18% gray card
   Zone VI Average Caucasian skin
   Zone VII Lightest areas that retain visible detail
   Zone VIII White areas with slightly visible textures
   Zone IX Glaring white surfaces - Highlights
   Zone X A light source (maximum white)

As you can see, Zone VI is defined (in our modified zone system) as one stop above "mid-tone," or +1 EV on your camera's manual exposure scale. Simply spot meter on a subject that you want to render in Zone VI, and set your shutter speed and aperture so that your exposure scale displays the reading as +1 EV on the scale. Having trouble finding something in Zone VI? How about "average caucasian skin?" One benefit of this exercise is to get you to consciously think about the tonality (brightness) of skin tones reproduced in your images.

This is also a fun opportunity to experiment with "guessing" the tonality of colors and seeing how close you get. I challenge you to find colors that you perceive as belonging in Zone VI, and then photograph those colors at +1EV to see if you were right. (Yellow, or any of the pastel colors might be good colors to try.) Again, this experiment should be able to help you "nail" the exposure of challenging colors in the future. Not everything in life is "average tone" or Zone V, and as a good photographer you should be able to modify your camera's exposure settings when needed to capture the scene properly.

Since most of the questions about using manual exposure came from individuals that use Canon dSLRs, I'll base the rest of my discussion on setting manual exposure in the Canon system. The first step is to put your camera's mode dial in the "M" or manual position. Once you have placed the camera in this mode, setting the exposure is up to you. For this assignment you will need to choose a shutter speed and aperture combination that results in an exposure reading of +1 EV on the exposure scale. For "rebel" type Canon dSLRs, you adjust the shutter speed with the "main dial" (the wheel by your index finger when it is resting on the shutter release button), and you adjust the aperture by holding down the Av+/- button on the back of your camera by your right thumb and rolling the main dial. As you change the shutter speed and aperture, watch the exposure scale in your viewfinder so that you can set it properly at +1 EV. Your exposure will be indicated by an "exposure level mark" underneath the scale that will move as you adjust your shutter speed and aperture. Adjust your shutter speed/aperture combination so that the exposure level mark is underneath the "1" on the plus side of the scale. (Note that for Nikon cameras, the scale is reversed, and "+" is actually on the left side of the scale. This is because with Nikon cameras, we have historically moved the controls to the left to increase exposure, and so Nikon reversed their scale to keep the directions consistent.)

Semi-Pro and Pro level Canon cameras have an added "Quick Control Dial" on the back of the camera that is used to adjust the aperture. To enable the Quick Control Dial you must set the camera's on/off switch to the "Quick Control Dial" setting above the "on" position.

I talked earlier about using "spot metering" to take a meter reading of your subject. This might have been confusing for readers that have Canon dSLRs from the Rebel (or 3-digit model number) series, since these cameras don't have a "spot" metering mode, but a "partial area" mode instead. The difference between "partial area" and spot is that the partial area covers a much larger area of the viewfinder/scene than spot metering. The "partial area" metered in this mode corresponds to approximately 10% of the viewfinder at the center of the frame. (Roughly equivalent to a circular area contained within the vertical AF sensor locations in your viewfinder.) Using "partial area" often requires you to zoom into an area of your frame to take your meter measurements, and the zoom back out to compose the scene. Use the (http://spiritofphotography.com/coppermine/albums/userpics/10001/canon_metering_symbol%7E0.jpg) button on the top panel of your camera to select the partial area metering mode. Readers that have semi-pro "d" (or 2-digit model number) series Canon dSLRs (such as the 50d), or pro "D" (or single digit model number) series Canon dSLRs should have a spot metering mode available as one of their options. This metering mode covers approximately 3.8% of the viewfinder at center, and is indicated by the center circle in your viewfinder.

A notable difference with Nikon's implementation of spot metering is that the Nikon spot metering area is always tied to your selected focus point. As you move your selected AF point, you are also moving the area that will be metered when in spot metering mode. Spot metering for Nikon cameras covers about 2.5% of the viewfinder centered on the selected focus point.

If you have any questions about how to use the manual exposure mode on your camera, please ask questions and give me the opportunity to clarify this assignment.

The assignment for the week of 8 - 14 March 2010 is to use manual metering mode and spot/partial area metering to properly expose a subject with a "Zone VI" exposure. Please upload your images to the "Zone VI" album in the weekly assignments category of the Gallery no-later-than midnight Mountain Time (GMT -07:00) on Sunday, 14 March 2010.

I'll look forward to seeing your images! (Especially the "fun" images where you attempt to properly capture a Zone VI color.)

Keith
Title: Re: "Zone VI," Weekly Photography Assignment for 8 - 14 March 2010
Post by: Michele on March 09, 2010, 01:12:40 PM: Hi Keith, I'm not sure that the flash does register for the meter reading. Check out my site for 8 pictures. After playing around I got somewhat the same light colors as seen. But are they too light? I wish I had an actual light meter. Do you think someone can buy that second hand?
Title: Re: "Zone VI," Weekly Photography Assignment for 8 - 14 March 2010
Post by: keithsnell on March 09, 2010, 01:41:27 PM: HI Michele,

I don't think the colors are too light. If you want to upload one (or more) to this site, I will check the values in Photoshop and tell you whether I think they are in Zone VI.

What type of flash are you using? And how is it connected to the camera? Flash exposure's are a complicated matter; however it definitely pays to learn how to control flash exposures. We did have a previous assignment on "fill flash," and you might find reviewing that assignment discussion helpful: http://community.spiritofphotography.com/index.php?topic=416.0

I've found that I can "trust" the meter on my camera, it's just a matter of understanding how the light from the flash plays into the equation. You can buy 2nd hand meters from ebay, but personally I would chose to invest my photography money elsewhere. I find I can control my flash exposures well enough with the camera's built-in meter.

Keith
Title: Re: "Zone VI," Weekly Photography Assignment for 8 - 14 March 2010
Post by: Michele on March 09, 2010, 01:52:19 PM: I used an infrared release. I don't think it measures the light. I tried these photos at first in a window and the meter was exactly +1 but the photos were way toooooo light. I did need a flash or I would have a silhouette (Also cool) So I tried them against the wall. Better results, but I did not have the meter on +1.

By the way, what do you do in Photoshop that you can check if it's in the range?
Title: Re: "Zone VI," Weekly Photography Assignment for 8 - 14 March 2010
Post by: keithsnell on March 09, 2010, 05:41:50 PM: Hi Michele,

Canon IR release? With Canon flash? What model?

I check the luminance range of portions of the image by using the "curves" tool in Photoshop. The "input" values displayed on the curves dialog (when you click and hold on a part of the image) show the luminance values in RGB. In our "modified zone system" we consider anything between RGB luminance values of 137 and 188 to be in Zone VI.

(Anything between about 188 and 240 would be Zone VII, and Zones VIII, IX and X are all compressed into the range between 240 and 255. I should note that there is not a direct translation between the "linear" space of camera exposures and the "non-linear" RGB spaces, and there are many interpretations that will match different RGB values to the 10 Zones. The "curves" that camera manufactures use to map the linear sensor output to the "non-linear" RGB gamma 2.2 spaces (like sRGB and AdobeRGB) are constantly evolving, and so the values I'm providing are "approximations" that provide a reasonable match with the majority of cameras/software on the market. The zones in our "modified" zone system are a synthesis of scientific analysis (mathematically mapping linear values to RGB) and rational adjustments to match the "perceptions" that Ansel Adams defined in his description of the Zone System.)

I've looked at the luminance values in the image you posted, and yes, the luminance values in the green dress fall into Zone VI.

Hope this helps. :)

Keith
Title: Re: "Zone VI," Weekly Photography Assignment for 8 - 14 March 2010
Post by: Michele on March 10, 2010, 07:41:48 AM: Hi Keith, do all the colors have to hit within the range? What if the majority of the photo is within the range and then you have dark hair?
Title: Re: "Zone VI," Weekly Photography Assignment for 8 - 14 March 2010
Post by: keithsnell on March 10, 2010, 10:50:23 AM: HI Michele,

No, not everything within the image will be in Zone VI. The point of the exercise is to become familiar with what tones in real life are "Zone VI" or brighter than mid-tones. Our camera exposure meters have a tendency to expose everything as mid-tone, so sometimes we need to recognize that adjustment is needed, either in camera or in the final rendering (on the computer or in print).

It actually takes quite a bit of experience to be able to consistently identify what colors should be exposed lighter than mid-tone. Meters are getting better and better, and unfortunately that lures many photographers into the trap of believing that they can always rely on the meter for the correct exposure. It is useful to recognize that sometimes your camera won't get the exposure right without intervention from you, the photographer. Recognizing when these corrections might be needed is a skill that is developed over time.

Keith
Title: Re: "Zone VI," Weekly Photography Assignment for 8 - 14 March 2010
Post by: Michele on March 10, 2010, 11:11:11 AM: Of course, I used that as a real contrast to illustrate a point, but what if it's more subtle. I did the assignment, and as I check throughout the photos, some parts of the same color range are within and some are lighter. Like skin. My dancer's face is lighter than her shoulders. Although, I don't see such a huge difference.

Thank you again.
Title: Re: "Zone VI," Weekly Photography Assignment for 8 - 14 March 2010
Post by: keithsnell on March 10, 2010, 02:00:49 PM: True, many parts of the image will fall outside of Zone VI.

It is useful to learn to "see" and estimate the brightness of different tonalities. Zone VI is an important area of tonality, and being familiar with the tones that should fall within that range will help us create better images.

The key to the exercise is to pick an area that you believe should be metered at +1 EV, spot meter on that area and take the image, and then evaluate the results on the computer. The process of evaluating your results and determining how "correct" your metering was will help you be able to effectively meter challenging situations in the future.

Keith
Title: Re: "Zone VI," Weekly Photography Assignment for 8 - 14 March 2010
Post by: Michele on March 10, 2010, 02:27:51 PM: I left them alone but I did check them out using your technique to see if I was in the range. Some of it is, some of it isn't always within one photo. I have to finish updating two websites so that's why I finished the assignment a bit earlier. I read your flash attachment. Very interesting. I don't know if you keep all your assignments in archive, but if you have any left (and I don't mean now, of course) I would love to read more.

Also, Easter is coming up, which means a week after that is first communion photos. I have done these three years in a row but I would love to improve whatever I can with them. Can I pick your mind for that at some point when things aren't hectic?

And the school two villages over from mine want me to do their student photos. This is new for me and I want to build a standard or guideline to follow so that all the photos have a consistent look to them. I will definitely need some help with this project.

Well, that's it for now. Thank you, Keith, very much.
Title: Re: "Zone VI," Weekly Photography Assignment for 8 - 14 March 2010
Post by: keithsnell on March 10, 2010, 02:38:03 PM: Hi Michele,

Yes, please do ask questions, and I'll try to give some advice for the first communion photos and student photos. What age are the students you will be photographing for the school photos?

Keith
Title: Re: "Zone VI," Weekly Photography Assignment for 8 - 14 March 2010
Post by: Michele on March 10, 2010, 03:04:01 PM: Primary school. Kindgergarten to 6th grade. I was thinking of using the class rooms as backdrops for the class portrait and an actual backdrop for the portraits. I am not sure.
The first communion begins outside with a marching band as the children follow in two rows behind through the town before arriving at the church. That is not the problem. The problem is the uneven lighting in our church. I will send you a photo to show you what I mean. Side windows along both walls make the light metering very tricky. The alter is very dark. I am allowed to use my flash but nobody else is allowed. First communions are very important in this part of Switzerland. Almost as much as a wedding except that there are about 10 brides and 10 grooms to get just right.
Which brings me back to the assignment. I get the assignment perfectly, but as you see from my photos, the flash does not register. I did use +1 on the meter at first, that is way too bright. Might as well have been ghosts. So I lowered the flash to its minimum and did it again. Still too strong at +1. You know that I am not referring to my dinky tiny flash that I attach to the shoe. I mean a lamp, blitz. Wait, I will look it up. Ok. Got it. It is a strobe in English,not a flash, they use the same word in German but it does attach to the camera, it just does not meter. My flash that I use outside for fill in light is a real dinky Bower auto focus SFD35 C. Never seems to work right indoors properly so I only use it outside. Indoors I use a strobe when I can because the photos look more like natural light.
On this assignment, though, I knew it had to be softer and lighter than the average photo, but at +1 it never worked. I took a picture outdoors at +1, so I know how much lighter it should be and it is not ghostly. So that is why I wanted to know how you spot check the photo after the fact.

Lots again, sorry.
Title: Re: "Zone VI," Weekly Photography Assignment for 8 - 14 March 2010
Post by: Michele on March 10, 2010, 03:23:00 PM: Although, in the church, I can only use a normal flash. I have a new low light fast lens but it is small. I have to play with it to see if it will work.
Title: Re: "Zone VI," Weekly Photography Assignment for 8 - 14 March 2010
Post by: keithsnell on March 10, 2010, 03:36:37 PM: Hi Michele,

Thank you for the additional information on your strobe. From your description, it sounds like you were correct, the camera meter is not registering or taking into account the flash exposure. The camera has sophisticated circuitry to control the exposure of Canon flashes that are connected to the hot shoe of the camera (or fired remotely via a Canon controller on the hot shoe), however, connecting the remote strobe through the IR remote doesn't provide the information to the camera that it needs in order to control or correctly meter the flash. Now that you have explained more about your strobe, I understand now that using your strobe and trying to meter at +1EV would have been a nearly impossible task. I hope that it wasn't too frustrating for you as you struggled to do the assignment.

How do you normally meter (or set your exposure) using the flash? When I use an off-camera flash, fired with a remote radio trigger, I manually set the flash power to provide the appropriate amount of flash on my subject. For my remote flashes, I enter the ISO and aperture the camera is set at, and the flash will calculate the effective distance at the selected power setting. I use the "effective distance" reading as a guide to select the power setting (full power, half power, 1/4 power, etc.) to achieve the proper flash exposure on my subject. I always take a few test shots to balance ambient and flash.

I can now also understand why you would want to buy an external flash meter to set the flash exposures. Given your strobe set up, it sounds like an external flash meter might be useful. I do find however that I can "calculate" the effective flash range (or required power setting) very reliably if I know the guide number of the flash/strobes. Does your strobe provide guide numbers or another reference that you can use to calculate the appropriate power setting for a given distance from your subject?

Again, I'm sorry if the assignment was frustrating for you when you tried to use your strobe. Your images were beautiful, so obviously you were able to overcome the technical difficulties.

I'll post additional thoughts on your school photos in a little bit.

Thanks again for putting such effort into the assignments,

Keith
Title: Re: "Zone VI," Weekly Photography Assignment for 8 - 14 March 2010
Post by: Michele on March 10, 2010, 04:08:10 PM: No. I cannot input information into the strobe. I looked at it just now and there is nothing. But It has many, many levels for increasing or decreasing its power. If I used a cable instead of the infrared, do you think it would meter the light then? It is just so much easier with a trigger that I don't trip over. I am ashamed to say that I take test shots and follow some settings I got off the net for some sort of guide then I just adjust it until I like it as well as with the camera. That is why I am saying I have been very lucky thus far. No complaints but I know I can do this better if I knew what to do. I need to have consistency somehow. I can't possibly just shoot as many as I do everytime. Especially if I am going to have a larger quantity to handle. (Now you're probably wondering why they picked me... Me too.) People like what I have given them and word spreads. I don't turn people down because I need the work and I do get some money out of it, but I always tell them that I am not a professional. I try really hard to make sure I have many, many photos to chose from (especially for a wedding) but the work is a very time consuming one. Just one wedding, I took approx. 3000 photos. I never intrude unless it was for the posed photos and I snap away. I make a list of every family member and tick them off as I go. I have another list of shots I feel are absolute musts so that I don't forget anything. I may be very picky and hard on my results but I get one shot at it. I feel that every time whether it is important or not to me, it is to the person who asked me to take the photo. Family photos, pets, whatever. I love your assignments because I don't feel the need to get it right for anybody else exept for myself and just the desire to learn as much as I can. I get frustrated when I did not learn something as well as I thought I did. But in the end, I just love to take photos. Especially outdoors. I read and enjoyed your turorials (bedtime reading). Which is about now. So I bid you goodnight and thanks for the ear.
Title: Re: "Zone VI," Weekly Photography Assignment for 8 - 14 March 2010
Post by: keithsnell on March 10, 2010, 08:10:55 PM: Hi Michele,

I think the use of a "guide number" for your strobe would help with your objective to be able to consistently control your flash photos. Usually, a photographer uses the guide number, and their aperture and ISO to calculate the effective distance of their flash for a specific setting. Since you don't have a guide number, I can help you determine one so that you can use it in the future to help determine the appropriate strobe power and aperture settings.

So, normally a guide number works like this. If the guide number for my flash is 38 (in meters) at an ISO of 100, then I can calculate it's range for any specific aperture by dividing the guide number by the aperture value set on my camera. So at an aperture of f8 (and ISO of 100), the range of the flash for a normal exposure will be 38/8 = 4.75 meters. If my aperture is f16, then the range is reduced to 38/16 = 2.375 meters.

So, if you don't have a guide number, but you know your ISO and aperture, and can determine the distance for a "normal" exposure with the strobe at a predetermined power setting, then you can calculate a guide number for that power setting. You will need a prop like my "photo bear" or a person that is willing to sit through some testing in order to let you determine the proper power setting for a specific ISO, aperture and distance. I would recommend a white stuffed animal, or a person dressed in white. You will need something white at the appropriate distance in order to determine if you are "blowing out" the whites. Once you arrive at the setting just below the threshold of blowing out the whites, then you have successfully determined the power setting for your "normal" exposure at that ISO, aperture and distance. You should check skin tones as well in order to make sure they look "natural" at that power setting.

I would recommend starting at ISO 100 on your camera, and choosing a "typical" aperture for individual or group shots. For standard school portrait type shots I typically use an aperture of f8, and for group shots I will use an aperture of f11. Set up your flash at your "normal" working distance from the subject. If you don't have a "normal" distance, then select a comfortable working distance for the conditions that you will normally be working in (size of room, etc). Typically you want to be far enough back that you aren't in someone's "personal space." And far enough away so that you can get "group" shots without using too wide angle of a lens. I find that I am often shooting from a distance of about 12 to 14 feet or so (3.66 - 4.27 meters), but recommend that you adjust that distance based on your individual circumstances. For weddings, I will set my tripod in a position that can be used at wide angle for the group shots and zoomed in for the individual portraits. It's a pain to be constantly moving your tripod, and it takes too much time, so finding a distance that will work for both is optimum.

The point for this exercise is to pick a "known" distance that you can use to calculate the guide number of your strobe. You might find it convenient to use a distance of 4 or 5 meters, especially if one of those numbers is listed on the distance scale on your lens. If you chose a distance that is listed on the scale of your lens, then it makes it easier to consistently setup you flash at that distance for future events. (Just estimate the distance, measure using your autofocus, check the scale on your lens and then adjust as necessary.)

So now let's calculate the guide number for a specific power setting. I'll use the following numbers for an example: ISO = 100, Aperture = f8, distance = 5 meters, power setting on the strobe = 1/4 power. Let's say we get lucky, and these settings provide the perfect exposure on your test subject. That means that the guide number for your strobe at 1/4 power is 8 x 5 = 40. Next time you go to set up your strobe, you can calculate the appropriate settings, because now you know the guide number.

Let's say the distance to the altar is now 10 meters from where you are allowed to photograph the ceremony, and you want to determine the appropriate settings for your camera and strobe. You know the guide number (at 1/4 power) is 40, so dividing the guide number by the distance will give you the aperture you need to use to get a "normal" flash exposure. 40/10 = 4, so that is the aperture you should use. If you decide that you need to use an aperture of f8 instead (2 stops smaller) then you can compensate by increasing the power by 2 stops (going from 1/4 to full power on the strobe, since a "stop" of exposure is equal to doubling the amount of light), or by increasing your ISO to 400 (doubling the ISO twice = 2 stops). Does this make sense? Once you know the guide number, then you can always use your ISO and aperture to determine the "effective distance" for a normal flash exposure. The math might seem intimidating at first, but it becomes intuitive with practice.

One more key point to make. If you double the distance to your subject, you need to quadruple the power of your flash to compensate. Let's go back to our examples again. At our initial settings of ISO 100, aperture f8, and distance of 5 meters we were able to set the strobe at 1/4 power. If the subject is 10 meters away (double the distance) then we needed to increase our power by four times (from 1/4 power to full power) in order to use the same aperture and ISO.

Please try this out and see if it makes sense to you. Please let me know if you have any questions and I will try to clarify this explanation.

Have fun! :)

Keith

P.S.
I wouldn't worry about using a cable. It won't provide any additional capability for the camera to meter the flash, and as you said it will just get in the way.
Title: Re: "Zone VI," Weekly Photography Assignment for 8 - 14 March 2010
Post by: Michele on March 11, 2010, 01:36:58 AM: Thank you so much. This information is golden. I am going to try it out as soon as I can.

Here is the church. See the windows that line both sides? How do you handle such uneven lighting? Ceremony is at 9:00 - 10:00 in the morning, so on the right side has these beams of light coming through at an angle that almost reaches the middle aisle. The center is always in the dark.

By the way, I am not sure I am allowed to use a strobe in the church. I know I can use my dinky flash (which never works out for me). I wonder if the priest would allow the strobe. I am going to ask.
Title: Re: "Zone VI," Weekly Photography Assignment for 8 - 14 March 2010
Post by: keithsnell on March 11, 2010, 09:48:47 AM: Hi Michele,

In a situation like this, where you have mixed light from sunlight and flash, you will need to treat the flash as "fill flash." You should set your ambient exposure (without the flash) to ensure you don't over-expose any sunlit areas, and then use the flash for "fill."

If you cannot use the strobe in the church, you can try your "dinky flash" :) using the same concepts. (Determine the guide number, and use that to determine your future settings, etc.) Given the lower power of your flash, you will have to modify your settings to try to maximize the range of the flash. You will want to use the fastest shutter speed possible given the sync speed of your camera (1/250th of a second) and then determine what aperture is required to control the ambient exposure. If your subjects are directly in one of the shafts of light from the windows, it will be a real challenge, since this will require an aperture in the f11 to f16 range (for an ISO of 100) which will limit the range of your flash. Depending on how powerful your flash is, you might be able to get effective "fill" light out to 3.3 meters or so. If you are using the flash for "fill light" instead of as the primary light source, then you can normally extend the range by 1.4 times the range for a "normal" flash exposure where flash is the primary light source. (The flash just needs to fill in the shadows, and can do so effectively without being "full power.") For example, if your normal range for "full power" flash is 4 meters, then you can expect to get good "fill" flash at 4 x 1.4 = 5.6 meters. Make sense?

If you are allowed to use even your "dinky" flash, I suspect that doing so will improve your images, and help to even out the contrasty light in the church. Just be careful about changing distances from the flash to your subject once you have determined a good flash exposure. Keep the distance from flash to subject about the same, and use zoom if you need to change the framing, etc.

Does this help?

Keith
Title: Re: "Zone VI," Weekly Photography Assignment for 8 - 14 March 2010
Post by: Michele on March 11, 2010, 11:19:09 AM: Yes, it helps. And I just bought a Speedlite 430 EX II EOS today. Hopefully it is as good as the reviews say. You really are gold, you know. This helps sooo much. I don't know how many times I can say thank you, but you know, thank you. X 1000000 etc.
Title: Re: "Zone VI," Weekly Photography Assignment for 8 - 14 March 2010
Post by: Michele on March 11, 2010, 11:23:28 AM: By the way, my mother wants to say thank you as well. She is so happy that I finally have people I can ask questions to about photography. She specifically said on the phone to be sure and thank them.
Title: Re: "Zone VI," Weekly Photography Assignment for 8 - 14 March 2010
Post by: keithsnell on March 11, 2010, 01:13:58 PM: Quote from: Michele on March 11, 2010, 11:19:09 AM
Yes, it helps. And I just bought a Speedlite 430 EX II EOS today. Hopefully it is as good as the reviews say. You really are gold, you know. This helps sooo much. I don't know how many times I can say thank you, but you know, thank you. X 1000000 etc.

Thanks. :)

I suspect the 430 EX will make a tremendous difference in your flash photography. The nice thing is that the camera and flash will now calculate the appropriate flash power automatically. This will be great for those flash photos where you are on the move, and constantly changing distances to your subject. For "static" subjects where you can control the distance, I still prefer using manual flash since I can eliminate "surprises."

Have fun with the new flash.

Keith
Title: Re: "Zone VI," Weekly Photography Assignment for 8 - 14 March 2010
Post by: Michele on March 11, 2010, 02:20:32 PM: I expect I can change it to manual too, I hope.
Title: Re: "Zone VI," Weekly Photography Assignment for 8 - 14 March 2010
Post by: Michele on March 12, 2010, 05:06:32 AM: Hi Keith, I just got the flash today. Yup, it changes to manual. Yup, I am excited. I will try to use it today at my daughter's ballet class.

I better read the manual after lunch. I have to say, I wish you lived in Switzerland. ;)

Michèle
Title: Re: "Zone VI," Weekly Photography Assignment for 8 - 14 March 2010
Post by: keithsnell on March 12, 2010, 07:05:27 AM: Hi Michele,

I'm sure you will enjoy the flash. I'll try to help if you have any questions.

Keith
Title: Re: "Zone VI," Weekly Photography Assignment for 8 - 14 March 2010
Post by: Michele on March 12, 2010, 07:40:13 AM: Do you think that the flash would be enough in the church? Can one set up a strobe and the flash if the strobe in not Canon? (I have a trigger for the strobe that attaches to the camera, would it trigger off the flash too, or does it have to be a Canon? I am just asking instead of taking everything out to test it.
Title: Re: "Zone VI," Weekly Photography Assignment for 8 - 14 March 2010
Post by: keithsnell on March 12, 2010, 08:45:51 AM: Hi Michele,

From what I have read, the 430 EX II has a guide number of 43 meters when the camera is set to ISO 100 and the flash is zoomed to 105mm (it will zoom automatically when you zoom your lens). If there is no direct sunlight in your scene, the flash will be plenty strong enough, since you will be able to adjust your ISO and aperture to increase the flash range if needed.

The most challenging situation will be if there is direct sunlight in the scene. If there is direct sunlight, then your ISO and aperture will have to be set to keep the areas in sunlight from being overexposed, and you will have to use a lot of flash power to "fill" the shadows.

A good guide to estimate the exposure settings required to control the direct sunlight is the "sunny sixteen" rule. This "rule" says that in bright sunlight, if you set your aperture at f16 (thus the "sixteen" in the "sunny sixteen" title), your required shutter speed will be the inverse of your ISO. So if your ISO is set at 100, the shutter speed required to provide a properly exposed scene in bright sunlight will be 1/100 sec. Since the sync speed of your 50d is 1/250th of a second, you will be able to adjust your shutter speed faster, and open up your aperture by a corresponding amount in order to keep a balanced ambient exposure while extending your flash range. By setting your shutter speed to 1/250th of a second, you can reduce the ambient exposure by 1 1/3 stop. This gives you the ability to "open up" your aperture by a corresponding 1 1/3 stop, from f16 to f10. Since you will be adding a bit of light from the flash to the ambient exposure, it is probably a good idea to underexpose ambient by about 1/3 stop, so I would recommend only opening your aperture up to f11.

So now we've calculated what ISO and aperture you will need to control the ambient (sunlit) portion of the scene, and now we can determine if your flash will have enough range at that aperture/ISO setting. Using the guide number of 43 (meters) we can determine the range by dividing the guide number by the aperture. 43/11 = 3.9 meters. So the range at which your flash will be able to provide the proper amount of light on the scene as a primary light source is 3.9 meters. If you will be using the flash for "fill" (assuming your are using the flash to fill in shadows from the direct sunlight) then you only need the flash to be about 1 stop less than "full" exposure; therefore you can extend the range by a multiplier of 1.4, knowing that the flash will have an intensity of one stop less at 1.4 times the distance. So for fill flash, your flash will have an effective range of 3.9 x 1.4 = 5.46 meters. So, although I don't know the layout of the church, I can say that you should be able to get good exposures as long as you can be within 5.46 meters of your subject.

As long as you can get within 5.46 meters of your subjects, and the on-camera flash will provide sufficient power, I wouldn't complicate matters by trying to use the strobe too. You will have to be careful that you give the flash enough time to fully recycle between exposures, since you will need almost all the power the flash can provide. (Watch the "ready" light in the viewfinder or on the flash to determine when the flash is fully recycled and ready to fire again.) If you can get closer than 5.46 meters, then the flash won't need to use full power, and the recycle times will be shorter.

Does this help?

Keith
Title: Re: "Zone VI," Weekly Photography Assignment for 8 - 14 March 2010
Post by: Michele on March 12, 2010, 03:22:15 PM: Hi Keith,

Here is where I am at... For all those interested in some icky pictures with my new flash, you are welcome to visit www.michelebollhalder.com and look at my daughter's dance class. (although my son (in the corner playing Nintendo) and my daughter are beautiful)). :) I obviously have a lot to learn. It is very uneven and I have some strong, strong shadows. Also, I thought when I meter, the flash would be included, but it really isn't. Many of those bright shots are on -2. I fiddled with the camera and with flash, but it doesn't seem to meter. At least to me. By the way, the last two circles with the girls are without the flash.

It is very strong even when I brought it down by half. Or maybe it's my position. Of course, whatever is closest to me will be lit much brighter than farther back. But it seems so odd as a photo, like the light is wrong. I know it is just the first series, but I need to get a handle on this.

I would post the photos here, but I don't know where. Any suggestions on how I can really get the metering to work?

Thank you again.
Title: Re: "Zone VI," Weekly Photography Assignment for 8 - 14 March 2010
Post by: Michele on March 12, 2010, 04:01:03 PM: It's under Testing Flash. Do you think a diffuser for the flash might cut down on the harsh shadows?

M.
Title: Re: "Zone VI," Weekly Photography Assignment for 8 - 14 March 2010
Post by: keithsnell on March 12, 2010, 04:16:19 PM: Hi Michele,

Do you mind uploading a few of your "testing flash" photos into a personal gallery on this site? To set up your personal album, click on the "Albums" link in the top center of the Gallery page, Select the "My Gallery" option in the drop down menu, click on the "New" button in the bottom of the dialog, Highlight the words "new album" that appear in the bottom of the window and type in the name for your new album, then click on the apply modifications button.

Once you have started a new personal album, you can upload images to that album with the "upload" button you use to upload images into the weekly assignments albums. Just select the name of your personal album when you get to that step in the upload process.

I know this is a nuisance, but it will allow me to look at the exif data in your images so that I can try to help you determine what might be wrong with the flash settings.

Thanks!

Keith
Title: Re: "Zone VI," Weekly Photography Assignment for 8 - 14 March 2010
Post by: keithsnell on March 12, 2010, 05:01:24 PM: Quote from: Michele on March 12, 2010, 04:01:03 PM
Do you think a diffuser for the flash might cut down on the harsh shadows?

M.

I was surprised that the flash didn't come with a "dome" type diffuser in the package, or at least with a small reflector panel built into the flash. Hmmm, I guess I've been spoiled by the flashes that I have bought in the past.

You might want to consider something like this: http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/602483-REG/LumiQuest_LQ_122_Quik_Bounce_Light_Modifier.html This reflector appears to be very versatile, and I would probably use it with the "barn doors" open most of the time in order to bounce a portion of the flash off the ceiling and provide semi-directional lighting that has softer shadows. (I haven't used one like this, since my flash has a built in reflector panel, but I'm guessing that it would work well.)

When I'm doing "serious" flash work, I use a pair of flashes bounced into a white umbrella (or two), but that is a whole different ball game, and much more hassle. I'd try the Lumiquest diffuser that I linked to and see if that works for you.

Keith
Title: Re: "Zone VI," Weekly Photography Assignment for 8 - 14 March 2010
Post by: Michele on March 12, 2010, 05:10:24 PM: Tomorrow morning I will set up my own gallery on the site. I welcome all your input. I followed your link, What the heck is that thing and how does it work with a flash? It looks like a flash glove or something. But I don't think it is the shape of my flash. Really, no clue. More explanation is necessary here.

I spy with my little eye... Tee hee.

Michèle
Title: Re: "Zone VI," Weekly Photography Assignment for 8 - 14 March 2010
Post by: keithsnell on March 12, 2010, 09:27:35 PM: Quote from: Michele on March 12, 2010, 05:10:24 PM
I followed your link, What the heck is that thing and how does it work with a flash?

Michèle

Hi Michele,

You can click on the following link to see how "that thing" :) works with a flash like yours: http://www.video.bhphotovideo.com/?skin=oneclip&autoplay=true&fr_story=bd2ac48359c3cdd9f302282bce63f5236379e352 (http://www.video.bhphotovideo.com/?skin=oneclip&autoplay=true&fr_story=bd2ac48359c3cdd9f302282bce63f5236379e352)

I wasn't sure your flash had the ability to swivel/rotate the head in order to use the Lumiquest, but after looking in the manual again, I see that it does.

Did the video help explain?

Keith
Title: Re: "Zone VI," Weekly Photography Assignment for 8 - 14 March 2010
Post by: Michele on March 13, 2010, 02:20:12 AM: I love it, I love it, I love it. I want one! Amazing. I am going to try and order it right now.
Title: Re: "Zone VI," Weekly Photography Assignment for 8 - 14 March 2010
Post by: Michele on March 13, 2010, 02:26:37 AM: Ok, I can't order it right now, the site is down until Saturday night. But I am going to get it. I hope they ship to Switzerland.
Title: Re: "Zone VI," Weekly Photography Assignment for 8 - 14 March 2010
Post by: Michele on March 13, 2010, 08:18:25 AM: I was also looking at that big bounce diffuser. I would assume the moment you bounce the light, it is softer, but you lose some of the light so the source needs to be stronger. Can one not use the diffuser by not attaching it and use just the bounce? Or is it the surface material itself that bounces. See, wouldn't you have two options in one with this? And the one you recommend I like as well. Can a suppliment diffuser be added on this too?

Tee hee, cool site that it. I would spend lots and lots if I could.

Michèle
Title: Re: "Zone VI," Weekly Photography Assignment for 8 - 14 March 2010
Post by: keithsnell on March 13, 2010, 11:28:32 AM: Quote from: Michele on March 13, 2010, 08:18:25 AM
I was also looking at that big bounce diffuser. I would assume the moment you bounce the light, it is softer, but you lose some of the light so the source needs to be stronger. Can one not use the diffuser by not attaching it and use just the bounce? Or is it the surface material itself that bounces. See, wouldn't you have two options in one with this? And the one you recommend I like as well. Can a suppliment diffuser be added on this too?

Tee hee, cool site that it. I would spend lots and lots if I could.

Michèle

Hi Michele,

It looks like the Big Bounce would provide nice soft light when you don't have the ability to bounce the light off a ceiling. However, the Big Bounce also reduces the effective power of your flash considerably. I see from reading the specifications that the Quick Bounce results in a loss of about 1 1/3 stops, while using the Big Bounce results in a loss of about 3 stops of light compared to direct flash. You can assess how much this will affect your flash power by recognizing that a 2 stop reduction in light will cut your flash range in half, and a 1 stop reduction in light will reduce your range by about 30% (divide the guide number by 1.4).

You can calculate the effective range of your flash with the Big Bounce by dividing the guide number by 3.4 and using this as your "adjusted" guide number. Instead of having a guide number of 43 (meters) your flash would have an effective guide number of 43/3.4 = 12.65. If you use an ISO of 100 and aperture of f8, the range on your flash would be 12.65/8 = 1.6 meters. You could double this range by increasing your ISO to 400. (But wouldn't be able to bump up the ISO and still control your ambient exposures if you were also contending with bright sunlight as your "ambient" light source.)

Another consideration is that you will always have to contend with "light fall off" when your light source is positioned directly over your camera. The intensity of light on your subject is reduced by one stop for every 1.4 times increase in distance. For simplicity let's use an example where the distance from your flash to your primary subject is 1 meter. If you have another subject 1.4 meters away (0.4 meters behind your primary subject) then the light on that subject will be 1 stop less, and if you have a third subject that is 2 meters from your flash, then the light from your flash on that third subject will be 2 stops less. This effect is easy to see in some of your test photos.

So somehow we need to solve this problem with "light fall off," and bouncing your flash off the ceiling is one of the best ways to do this. Not only does bouncing the light off the ceiling soften the light (because the ceiling is acting as a big, diffused light source) but it also increases the effective distance from your flash to your subjects, and therefore helps minimize the effect of "light fall off." For example, if you are bouncing your flash off a 10 foot (3.048 meters (sounds funny)) high ceiling to a subject about 2 meters in front of you, then the distance to that subject (for the light from your flash) is really about 3.65 meters away (the math is an approximation), since the light travels from your flash, up to the ceiling, and back down to your subject. If you have a secondary subject that is 4 meters away, then the distance from the flash to the ceiling and back down to this subject is approximately 5 meters. Since 5 meters is slightly less than 1.4 times 3.65 meters, we can calculate that the exposure difference between the subject that is 2 meters away and the subject that is 4 meters away will be slightly less than 1 stop. This is much more acceptable than the 2 stop difference caused by light fall off if we use direct flash (when the subjects are 2 meters and 4 meters away). (I need someone to draw a nice diagram to illustrate this. :) ).

Does any of this make sense? My point is that if you are able to bounce the flash off the ceiling (assuming it is close enough, and a neutral white) then you not only get a soft diffused light source, but you also minimize the problem of light fall off from the flash. It is because of this that I would tend to prefer the Quick Bounce over the Big Bounce, since 80% of the light is bounced off the ceiling with the Quick Bounce (when the doors are open).

Another way to minimize the effect of the light fall off is to try to balance ambient and flash exposures as much as possible. If your ambient exposure is only 1 stop less than your flash exposure (for example) then even the areas furthest away from your flash in the scene will only be one stop darker, which is certainly acceptable.

OK, please ask questions if I didn't explain any of this adequately.

Keith
Title: Re: "Zone VI," Weekly Photography Assignment for 8 - 14 March 2010
Post by: Michele on March 13, 2010, 12:35:52 PM: Sold. I have to wait until tomorrow morning to purchase it, but I am convinced. Thank you, Keith. Once again. I took some more shots today with the flash. So powerful. The priest came to my house as I was practicing with the flash to confirm that I would be doing the communion. My dog goes insane when he comes over in his robes. I put the camera down to put the dog in the washroom and he made a joke (for him that is something, very serious dude) that he never sees me without a camera. I think he was trying to butter me up because last year I caught him doing something that I felt was not right. I give the families a CD of all the photos so they can pick which ones they wanted to print for themselves. (private use) I included some of the church, inside, outside and in the dark (they light up the church at night, very pretty.) He took a couple to a printer and made postcards. They were selling them two bucks a pop and five for the large card format for the church. They never once asked me nor told me about it. When I saw the cards in the back of the church, I was fuming. When I spoke to him, he thought I would be happy and flattered but I told him that it was for family and private use only. He said that he was family to everyone at the chuch. I then replied that anyone can print as many as they would like out but they should not sell them because that would be for commercial use and that included him too. Well, in the end I donated those shots to him (I said that because it was pretty much too late to do anything about it) but that in the future I have the right to be asked. You know, not that it matters because it is a church but I only get 200 for all of it and I consider that a donation as well. It is a mighty cheap price for all the hours I put into it. I see it as practice for the big stuff though on my side, but to sell the stuff... Anyways. I am off track again, the flash is mighty powerful... I forgot my question. I will write again, I am sure.

Have a great day.

Michèle
Title: Re: "Zone VI," Weekly Photography Assignment for 8 - 14 March 2010
Post by: keithsnell on March 13, 2010, 02:25:14 PM: Hi Michele,

Yes, I have had problems in the past with "non-profit" organizations thinking they could use my photos for whatever they wanted. I've learned to handle this by including "unlimited" but non-transferable rights to the images for non-profit organizations in my contract/invoice, as long as they include the information with the photos that I request (typically my name and a link to my website, so at least I get free advertising out of the deal). If they don't follow those guidelines then our contract says they will owe me triple the original price, and I will retroactively revoke their right to use the photos (which means they can no longer legally sell the cards, calendars and books they have used the images in). At least in the US, the law would be firmly on the side of the photographer in this case, and would help to reinforce the "penalties" against the organization. (Not that I would ever actually bring a non-profit to court. :) )

I mainly included the "unlimited rights" for my own sanity, since I have found that "non-profits" think they don't need to play by the same rules as a for-profit organization. It keeps me from having to be the bad guy and constantly police the use of my photos. Even so, we have to "remind" non-profit groups to include our contact information when they publish the photos. We've managed to make our relationship with non-profits into a win-win situation, but it takes a little more tolerance on our part, and an understanding of the "mindset" of non-profit organizations. I've found that educating people on the copyright laws is a constant task, and my relationship with non-profit organizations always includes "education."

Anyway, I hope your flash works out for you. There's definitely a lot to learn in order to effectively use flash, but once you master it your photography will be taken to a whole new level. (Just wait until you try to "balance" three or four strobes with ambient light for architectural photography. :) )

Have fun with the new toy,

Keith
Title: Re: "Zone VI," Weekly Photography Assignment for 8 - 14 March 2010
Post by: Michele on March 13, 2010, 02:47:04 PM: Right. I forgot. I also bought a second strobe. Biggggg purchases this week. I figured I need a balance and I can work with two. Three would be ideal, back lighting, side lighting, and main light, but ehhh, what are you going to do? Two is good enough for me for now.

As for the priest, had I been asked, I would have said yes but (I forgot to tell you this part), I would want the credit. The kicker was that in the back of the postcard it had the year the church was build, the architect, the window designer, the floor maker, the alter maker and some other stuff about the renovation. Sadly no room for the photographer's name. Ok, I did not design the church, but even though anyone could of taken a picture, they took mine.

When people use my stuff, meaning my paintings, for their stores, I am asked and I loan them out if they are not sold. They credit me on a small card next to the painting. So, I feel it should be the same.

But I am not a pro like you so I don't have contracts. Although I may make one in the case of the school. I make contracts for the websites.

Thank you for all your help again. I may bug you still about how to meter with this flash. I read everything you gave me and the manual, but then why would it meter so low and have such a bright outcome?

Have a great day and please say hello to Rebecca. I looked at all the photos in the galleries. Tell her that she looked amazing after Mac was born. I looked like a truck ran over me and she looked beautiful.

Michèle
Title: Re: "Zone VI," Weekly Photography Assignment for 8 - 14 March 2010
Post by: keithsnell on March 13, 2010, 03:35:55 PM: Quote from: Michele on March 13, 2010, 02:47:04 PM
I read everything you gave me and the manual, but then why would it meter so low and have such a bright outcome?

Michèle

Hi Michele,

What flash mode were you in when you got these results (negative exposure compensation but flash too bright)?

Were you setting negative exposure compensation on the camera, the flash, or both? Although the Nikon cameras have the ability to "link" camera and flash exposure compensation, I don't see that option with the 50d. It appears to me that camera and flash exposure compensation are always kept separate, so that even though you might be underexposing for the ambient, if you don't have negative exposure compensation set on the flash as well, then the flash will fire for a "normal" exposure.

Can you try setting negative exposure compensation on both the camera (with the quick control dial) and on the flash itself?

Thanks,

Keith
Title: Re: "Zone VI," Weekly Photography Assignment for 8 - 14 March 2010
Post by: Michele on March 14, 2010, 11:52:19 AM: The negative exposure was on the camera. I did nothing to the flash, I even had it in the ETTL mode (which I assume is automatic) Then I tried the flash in Manual and brought it down to half, then even lower. I can't wait to try that bouncing tool you recommended. But I still need to practice with this flash. I appreciate all the comments with the photos, they make so much sense.
Title: Re: "Zone VI," Weekly Photography Assignment for 8 - 14 March 2010
Post by: keithsnell on March 14, 2010, 12:07:13 PM: Quote from: Michele on March 14, 2010, 11:52:19 AM
The negative exposure was on the camera. I did nothing to the flash, I even had it in the ETTL mode (which I assume is automatic)

Yes, ETTL mode is automatic; however you can still apply negative exposure compensation to ETTL if you think the flash is consistently too bright. My preferred way of using flash is to try my best to balance the ambient and flash exposures, and to use flash as a "supplement" to the ambient lighting. In other words, the ambient lighting might not be bright enough (or of good enough "quality") to provide pleasing images by itself, so adding a "supplement" of light from the flash might be capable of putting enough light on the scene (with the right qualities) to create a pleasing image. This means that I normally "dial back" the flash exposures a bit (using negative exposure compensation of about -0.7 on the flash, or setting the power manually) in order to prevent that "over flashed" look that is so prevalent with flash photography.

When you use flash, the camera "defaults" to an exposure calculation that assumes flash will be your primary light source. You will need to consciously modify the flash and exposure settings in order to overcome this "default" assumption and instead use flash as a "supplement" or "fill" for the ambient light.

Does this make sense?

Keith
Title: Re: "Zone VI," Weekly Photography Assignment for 8 - 14 March 2010
Post by: Dave on March 14, 2010, 12:19:38 PM: Sorry guys, apparently I don't have the exact 'before and after' shots that I thought I did, I guess I shaded most of the shots I took, as I saw early on that I didn't like the direct sun much. Anyways, here are a couple of frames to illustrate my point. As you can see, other camera settings were changed in the two shots, so not a direct comparison unfortunately. The third shot I added just because I think that the direct sun in that shot actually added a lot to it, and made the subject really 'pop'
Title: Re: "Zone VI," Weekly Photography Assignment for 8 - 14 March 2010
Post by: keithsnell on March 14, 2010, 12:25:58 PM: Hi Dave,

Thanks for posting these examples. It's a great series to show the differences between direct sun and shading your subject. Sometimes using a diffuser gives you a "happy medium" that is the best of both worlds.

Keith
Title: Re: "Zone VI," Weekly Photography Assignment for 8 - 14 March 2010
Post by: Michele on March 14, 2010, 12:27:26 PM: That is beautiful. The third picture does pop, as you say, but no. 2 is really pretty as well. All three make me want spring to come faster. How do you "shade" exactly? Are you blocking out the sun by using a reflector or just slightly taking it off the subject?
Title: Re: "Zone VI," Weekly Photography Assignment for 8 - 14 March 2010
Post by: Dave on March 14, 2010, 12:31:26 PM: Yeah, I think you're exactly right Keith, I can't wait to get one and experiment. I think that most of the considerable number of shots I took that day lacked something because I was throwing a dark shadow over the subject. I have the feeling that I have many years of trying things, before I finally get in a photograph, what I see with my eyes!
Title: Re: "Zone VI," Weekly Photography Assignment for 8 - 14 March 2010
Post by: marilyn on March 14, 2010, 06:44:07 PM: Whew! I finally found your pictures, Dave! I agree that the 3rd (direct sun) really does create an image that pops. I also like the 3rd. Sounds like you didn't have the shading example though, huh? I look forward to seeing more images along this line if you get an opportunity to create some. Thanks!
Title: Re: "Zone VI," Weekly Photography Assignment for 8 - 14 March 2010
Post by: keithsnell on March 14, 2010, 09:13:05 PM: Hi Marilyn,

Sorry I wasn't able to provide much help with where to find the pictures. I was stumped trying to figure out how to provide a link. I finally figured out that I could have just typed in the link and told you to copy it and paste it into your web browser. That would have gotten you directly to the images you were asking about. I'll know better next time, and try to be more helpful.

(The last security update I did on the gallery disabled the ability to provide direct links in image comments, so I will have to figure out a new solution.)

Keith
Title: Re: "Zone VI," Weekly Photography Assignment for 8 - 14 March 2010
Post by: prairiedust on March 14, 2010, 09:30:45 PM: A diffuser, as Keith mentioned, can give a balanced light. Flower petals often show a cell structure that captures the light and adds a bit of sparkle. That gets obscured with shading, but hard direct light can overpower the subtlety of blossoms. The clear textured plastic diffusion panels made to go over ceiling flourescent light fixtures gives a very pretty light, and can be found in most hardware stores for a few bucks. It softens the light while still passing a specular quality that keeps definition in the fine details, especially the sparkle of the cell structure. They're not the handiest things to carry around and use, of course. I've even used'em to make ad-hoc light tents outdoors, on ground-level wildflowers. Just arch the plastic over the plant, and place a couple tent stakes on each side to hold it in place. That gives an extra benefit of providing a small wind break. Of course, to use it you'll be laying prostate in the grass open to chiggers and stares from passers by. I carry a foldable ground cover I throw down at times like that, since I really like nosing around in the weeds.
Title: Re: "Zone VI," Weekly Photography Assignment for 8 - 14 March 2010
Post by: Dave on March 14, 2010, 09:50:28 PM: Marilyn, the 'before and after sots are the comparisons that we talked about, you can see in the 'before' shot how the sun reflection is 'blown out' and that doesn't happen in the 'after' shot. But there was no direct comparison because I was adjusting many other perameters at the same time as shading/un-shading. Hmmmm, am I making any sense?
Dave, thanks for your ideas, I was thinking that the people that made my little reflector might have a diffuser that works the same. It's one of those flexible things that just pops into shape when you take it out the case. The reflector I have works really well, I can't wait to get a bigger one of those also.
Title: Re: "Zone VI," Weekly Photography Assignment for 8 - 14 March 2010
Post by: prairiedust on March 15, 2010, 04:55:14 AM: The folding reflectors have to be much easier to live with. Soon after that post I got this marketing email: Amazon.com recommends "Lastolite LL LR3696 33-Inch TriFlip Kit". The kit has a silver reflector, gold reflector, and a diffuser (all collapsable). Is it coincidence or food for the paranoid? They (Amazon) evidently think my plastic panel idea is pretty lame. I think I'll order it.
Title: Re: "Zone VI," Weekly Photography Assignment for 8 - 14 March 2010
Post by: keithsnell on March 15, 2010, 08:46:22 AM: Hi Dave,

Since you are thinking of ordering a kit...

I've been happy with my Westcott 1-stop diffuser. Most are 2-stops, and in my opinion the 2-stop diffusers cut back too much light. I also like the square diffusers (or triangles) better than the round ones, since they make better wind shields.

Keith
Title: Re: "Zone VI," Weekly Photography Assignment for 8 - 14 March 2010
Post by: Dave on March 15, 2010, 09:58:37 AM: Dave, lastolite is the one I have, only in the smallest 12 inch size. I'm very happy with it and would recomend it, only I have never had anything else to compare it to (this is the first I've bought). I like the idea of buying a kit as I've been layed off for a while and the chance of saving money is very appealing, also, I will at some time need a larger reflector I'm sure.
Keith, I need to research before I buy, thanks for the recomendation. On the stop value of the diffuser....I imagine the amount of ambient light making a difference as to how much light you'd need to hold back? Having said that, I'm thinking that a lighter diffuser as you said would be better than darker.This stuff is all new to me, so I'm happy for the time bieng to play with what I have and learn what I can from it :)
Title: Re: "Zone VI," Weekly Photography Assignment for 8 - 14 March 2010
Post by: keithsnell on March 15, 2010, 10:15:55 AM: Hi Dave,

I've found that the 2-stop diffusers put too much "shade" on the scene for my taste. Not only does this change the quality of the light, but it also changes the white balance of the scene (much like your white balance changes when you are in shade vs direct sunlight). Given the choice, I always find myself going for the 1-stop diffuser. That said, the 2-stop diffuser does double duty as a reflector, so it has some use too. :) I often use them together, with the 1-stop performing diffusion duties and the 2-stop "diffuser" used as a reflector to add a bit more soft light and "modeling" to the scene.

They are fun to play with, especially when photographing wildflowers.

Keith
Title: Re: "Zone VI," Weekly Photography Assignment for 8 - 14 March 2010
Post by: Michele on March 16, 2010, 12:51:59 AM: Hey Dave, is that you in the itty bitty little icon picture? From what I see, it looks like a rough life...
Title: Re: "Zone VI," Weekly Photography Assignment for 8 - 14 March 2010
Post by: Dave on March 16, 2010, 06:54:35 AM: I have no profile pic as yet Michele, there aren't many pics of me as I'm kind of camera shy, most of them are of my back lol. I guess I should upload one sometime soon.
Title: Re: "Zone VI," Weekly Photography Assignment for 8 - 14 March 2010
Post by: Dave on March 16, 2010, 07:18:34 AM: Well, I tried to upload a profile pic, all to no avail I'm afraid. Oh well :P
Title: Re: "Zone VI," Weekly Photography Assignment for 8 - 14 March 2010
Post by: Michele on March 16, 2010, 07:20:23 AM: Hi Keith,

Another flash question. Should I set my camera so that flash goes on the first or second window? (It is currently set for the second window.)

Michèle
Title: Re: "Zone VI," Weekly Photography Assignment for 8 - 14 March 2010
Post by: keithsnell on March 16, 2010, 08:42:43 AM: Quote from: Michele on March 16, 2010, 07:20:23 AM
Hi Keith,

Another flash question. Should I set my camera so that flash goes on the first or second window? (It is currently set for the second window.)

Michèle

Hi Michele,

I typically have my flash set for "first curtain sync," unless I am using the flash in conjunction with a very slow shutter speed. If I'm using a slow shutter speed, then "second curtain sync" often works better because it will show a soft motion blur following any subject that is moving, which looks more natural that having a motion blur in front of the object. If this doesn't make sense please ask questions and I will try to clarify.

Keith
Title: Re: "Zone VI," Weekly Photography Assignment for 8 - 14 March 2010
Post by: keithsnell on March 16, 2010, 08:44:55 AM: Quote from: Dave on March 16, 2010, 07:18:34 AM
Well, I tried to upload a profile pic, all to no avail I'm afraid. Oh well :P

Hi Dave,

I'll troubleshoot the software to see if there is an issue with uploading profile pics. I may have broken that function when I did the last security update. I'll test it out and let you know.

Keith
Title: Re: "Zone VI," Weekly Photography Assignment for 8 - 14 March 2010
Post by: prairiedust on March 16, 2010, 08:47:57 AM: I uploaded my profile photo since you did the security fixes and it worked okay for me.
Title: Re: "Zone VI," Weekly Photography Assignment for 8 - 14 March 2010
Post by: keithsnell on March 16, 2010, 08:50:29 AM: Quote from: Dave Leiker (prairiedust) on March 16, 2010, 08:47:57 AM
I uploaded my profile photo since you did the security fixes and it worked okay for me.

Good to know. Thank you.

Nice avatar. Sets a nice tone for your posts.

Keith
Title: Re: "Zone VI," Weekly Photography Assignment for 8 - 14 March 2010
Post by: prairiedust on March 16, 2010, 08:52:58 AM: I set my forum name back to "prairiedust" so it's less likely to be confusing with two "Daves" contributing.
Title: Re: "Zone VI," Weekly Photography Assignment for 8 - 14 March 2010
Post by: keithsnell on March 16, 2010, 08:55:42 AM: Quote from: prairiedust on March 16, 2010, 08:52:58 AM
I set my forum name back to "prairiedust" so it's less likely to be confusing with two "Daves" contributing.

Sounds good. Thank you.

Maybe I should change my forum name to "Photo Bear" to match my new avatar? :) (Actually just testing. Now I'll have to figure out how to delete the pic or find a more appropriate one to upload.)

Keith
Title: Re: "Zone VI," Weekly Photography Assignment for 8 - 14 March 2010
Post by: keithsnell on March 16, 2010, 08:59:25 AM: Quote from: Dave on March 16, 2010, 07:18:34 AM
Well, I tried to upload a profile pic, all to no avail I'm afraid. Oh well :P

Hi Dave,

I tested the ability to upload an avatar and it worked OK for me. Were you using the "I will upload my own picture" option?

Keith
Title: Re: "Zone VI," Weekly Photography Assignment for 8 - 14 March 2010
Post by: Michele on March 16, 2010, 09:06:14 AM: KEEP THE BEAR!!! I love it. And it reminds me that I need to find a great bear.
Title: Re: "Zone VI," Weekly Photography Assignment for 8 - 14 March 2010
Post by: keithsnell on March 16, 2010, 09:08:01 AM: Quote from: Michele on March 16, 2010, 09:06:14 AM
KEEP THE BEAR!!! I love it. And it reminds me that I need to find a great bear.

:) OK, I might keep it for awhile.

Keith
Title: Re: "Zone VI," Weekly Photography Assignment for 8 - 14 March 2010
Post by: Dave on March 16, 2010, 09:34:33 AM: Keith, yeah, I tried to upload a pic. I also uploaded the same pic to my gallery, but there's no way to get that as a profile pic. I don't know what an 'avatar' is sorry. It's not a big deal anyways, I'm not proud of any photos of me, I usually run when the camera comes out!
Title: Re: "Zone VI," Weekly Photography Assignment for 8 - 14 March 2010
Post by: keithsnell on March 16, 2010, 09:57:51 AM: Quote from: Dave on March 16, 2010, 09:34:33 AM
Keith, yeah, I tried to upload a pic. I also uploaded the same pic to my gallery, but there's no way to get that as a profile pic. I don't know what an 'avatar' is sorry. It's not a big deal anyways, I'm not proud of any photos of me, I usually run when the camera comes out!

Hi Dave,

Sorry, "avatar" is a nickname for "profile pic."

Do you mind if I try to upload the profile picture for you? (Cool picture by the way.)

Keith
Title: Re: "Zone VI," Weekly Photography Assignment for 8 - 14 March 2010
Post by: Michele on March 16, 2010, 11:45:32 AM: Do it! Please, now I have to see your "avatar". I must see it... As my kids would say (and it works on me) pretty please with sugar on top and marmalade and chocolate sauce with sprinkles and whipped cream with the cherry on the top! If you do it, I'll do it. You know you want to... Ok, I am out of peer pressure options...
Title: Re: "Zone VI," Weekly Photography Assignment for 8 - 14 March 2010
Post by: keithsnell on March 16, 2010, 12:20:24 PM: Quote from: Michele on March 16, 2010, 11:45:32 AM
Do it! Please, now I have to see your "avatar". I must see it... As my kids would say (and it works on me) pretty please with sugar on top and marmalade and chocolate sauce with sprinkles and whipped cream with the cherry on the top! If you do it, I'll do it. You know you want to... Ok, I am out of peer pressure options...

You make me smile. :)
Title: Re: "Zone VI," Weekly Photography Assignment for 8 - 14 March 2010
Post by: keithsnell on March 16, 2010, 12:34:31 PM: Quote from: Dave on March 16, 2010, 09:34:33 AM
Keith, yeah, I tried to upload a pic. I also uploaded the same pic to my gallery, but there's no way to get that as a profile pic. I don't know what an 'avatar' is sorry. It's not a big deal anyways, I'm not proud of any photos of me, I usually run when the camera comes out!

HI Dave,

I hope you don't mind but I uploaded your profile picture for you. Michele made me do it. :)

I also cropped the image a bit so we could tell what was in the image, and so Michele wouldn't think it was a picture of a dead body. :)

Keith
Title: Re: "Zone VI," Weekly Photography Assignment for 8 - 14 March 2010
Post by: keithsnell on March 16, 2010, 12:48:08 PM: Quote from: Michele on March 16, 2010, 11:45:32 AM
If you do it, I'll do it....

OK Michele, where's your avatar? :)
Title: Re: "Zone VI," Weekly Photography Assignment for 8 - 14 March 2010
Post by: Dave on March 16, 2010, 01:42:49 PM: lol. no problem Keith, Michele, I hope you're happy :)
Title: Re: "Zone VI," Weekly Photography Assignment for 8 - 14 March 2010
Post by: Michele on March 16, 2010, 02:04:44 PM: Wait a minute... That's his avatar? He climbs? man... I thought that was his "moment" picture. I have nothing like that. You know, considering I usually always have the picture taking device, there aren't many pictures of me. But I will find one. An itty bitty little version of me. But then Rebecca has to have one too.

Sorry I took so long to reply, I had to help someone out by proofreading. It's a good thing I had no explAnations anywhere in the essay. Tee hee.

KEEP THE BEAR! Or I am not finding one. Nahhhh :P
Title: Re: "Zone VI," Weekly Photography Assignment for 8 - 14 March 2010
Post by: Michele on March 16, 2010, 03:22:15 PM: I sent Keith pretty much the only photos I have of myself. I left Keith the responsibility of choosing my "avatar"... 8) But the bear stays around for a while, as you said. Have a great night everyone.
Title: Re: "Zone VI," Weekly Photography Assignment for 8 - 14 March 2010
Post by: keithsnell on March 16, 2010, 04:19:02 PM: Quote from: Michele on March 16, 2010, 03:22:15 PM
I sent Keith pretty much the only photos I have of myself. I left Keith the responsibility of choosing my "avatar"... 8) But the bear stays around for a while, as you said. Have a great night everyone.

Hi Michele,

You are very trusting (leaving me the responsibility of choosing your avatar). :)

It is nice putting a face to a name. I cropped the image I chose, but I wonder if the people are still to small to see? I chose this one because you had a great smile interacting with your children, and I think it best defines who you are.

Keith
Title: Re: "Zone VI," Weekly Photography Assignment for 8 - 14 March 2010
Post by: Michele on March 17, 2010, 02:33:13 AM: Yup, it's good. Thank you for your help. What nobody sees is how I keep them in cardboard boxes and let them out only to go to school or so that I can take their picture... Did I mention that I have a very unique sense of humor? Ba ha ha (evil laugh)
Title: Re: "Zone VI," Weekly Photography Assignment for 8 - 14 March 2010
Post by: RebeccaSnell on March 19, 2010, 06:31:20 AM: Dave, I empathize with you. McKenzie woke at 5:30 am to pee (she was dry!) and then went back to sleep and I didn't. So, I got up and finally had time to catch up on posts. Saw that an 'avatar' --new term for me too--- was requested and tried to upload one, but nothing. I tried uploading from my computer and then tried posting it in the gallery and tried the url link option and still nothing. Mac's up again, so when Keith wakes, I'll ask him.
Title: Re: "Zone VI," Weekly Photography Assignment for 8 - 14 March 2010
Post by: RebeccaSnell on March 19, 2010, 07:21:20 AM: Yea, we figured it out. Your profile image file cannot be bigger than probably 100k. My file was 122k and that is why it was error’ing out. By happenstance, we reduced it to 69k and it uploaded with no problem. I can see why you want a small image size for your profile pic as a forum page with lots of posts would take forever to load otherwise. So, mystery solved, keep your profile picture file size below 100k and it will upload.

Keith will have to add changing the documentation on the profile page to note the file limit -- unfortunately, that is not an easy fix as you have to go into the guts of the programming of the website to find that. Put that at the bottom of your list, though, Keith as now we can easily help people having trouble with it.

So, I picked the pic that Keith took at Christmas with my superheros giving me hugs. I was going to photoshop Keith in to complete the pic, but didn't have time. (Keith thanked me). :-)
Title: Re: "Zone VI," Weekly Photography Assignment for 8 - 14 March 2010
Post by: Michele on March 19, 2010, 11:32:47 AM: Love the hero picture. Such a cool "avatar". I put it in quotes because I keep thinking of the movie.