New SB-600 -- self-portrait

[toriaj]

I just got my SB600 and Demb Diffuser, love it, feel like I did when I first got my DSLR, so much to learn :)

I tried some more window light SPs to try it out. I experimented (and learned) a lot with bouncing, diffusing, direct, etc. But when I looked at the pics on the computer, I realized my favorites actually had very little effect from the flash.

Here's one that did use a little flash:
50mm, 1/5, f/8, ISO 200
34153

And for proof, here's a 100% crop of my eye. You can see the tiny flash reflection (and my camera up on the tripod.) I noticed when the flash was not bounced, and it was brighter, the flash reflection was very unattractive. So it seems that we want to avoid that harsh "pinpoint" reflection in the eye, right?
34154

And just to show you how little flash there really was, here's one where I didn't use flash. They are so similar. And in fact, the main differences between them are not due to the flash, but to the much larger aperture on this one (unnecessary, I changed the settings rashly :rolleyes:)
50mm, 1/80, f/1.8, ISO 200
34155

As always, I appreciate your critiques and suggestions. Note to self: next flash experiments will be in a darker room :rolleyes:

[Rooz]

outstanding tor. you look stunning.

[jcon]

With such long shutter speeds, the flash wont be as prominent. It will allow more of the ambient light to fill the photo, which is good. I prefer the first photo, where the flash was hardly noticeable, but yet very effective.

I almost always use bounce flash, as you mentioned, straight on will leave harsh shadows, unless you have a flash bracket.

Well done Tori, and I will say it again, you have amazing eyes!

BTW, did you do any PP to the skin? It looks perfect.

[Rooz]

looks like you used the light meter in your shots which dragged the shutter speed down.

[toriaj]

Thanks, guys! It's great to hear praise from you when I respect your work and opinions so much.

jcon, yep I did some skin smoothing :) so can you actually see a difference in the lighting in the flash photo compared to the ambient only?

Rooz, I used manual on both the camera and the flash. I like the way the shots turned out, they were the way I wanted them, but now I realize that if I wanted to utilize the flash more, then I wouldn't have let in so much ambient light. I just chimped the LCD to see if they looked well-exposed, and tried lots of combinations (but all of them had lots of ambient light.) The ones that had more flash just didn't look as good ... probably because there was too much ambient light (lol.)

By the way, I tried some bounce flash, and it seemed like bouncing it from the side looked more interesting, more natural, than bouncing off the ceiling or wall behind me. Is that normal? Is it just because there was so much ambient light? Or am I crazy? :D (Rooz)

[jcon]

Yes, I can see a difference in the two. Mainly in the eye area and chin area.

Depending on the source of the ambient light, I will often bounce from the side. It also depends on how close structures are to bounce off of. Side bouncing can provide a much more artisitc look and sometimes, be more benefitial than ceiling bounce.

Just imagine if you had 2 or 3 flashes :eek:;)

[TNB]

outstanding tor. you look stunning.
Agreed. Very nice. My "self portraits" are scary enough when someone else takes them.


Just imagine if you had 2 or 3 flashes :eek:;)
Hair, shoulder, background...

[herc182]

Stunning photo. Both the picture and the model.

Great effort with the flash. Well done. I too have just started using mine and am slowly getting to grips.

In case you havent seen the post from acord yet, see here:

http://www.dcresource.com/forums/showthread.php?t=37998

[Lilchilichoco]

WOW! BEWITCHING!!!!!

Beautiful girl....gorgeous....just gorgeous.......I so love the specs of gold in your grey-green eyes......are they grey-green, or grey.....? They are amazing......And how it matches with the dark gold-brown of your hair.....beautiful....You look like a mermaid out of water.:)

were these taken on a tripod or were they handheld?

Once again, you look elfish and ethereal.....angelic!!!.....my...I gotta learn the flash now.....



Take care beautiful girl, and keep more coming. You inspire me always.






Best Regards

[aparmley]

I just got my SB600 and Demb Diffuser, love it, feel like I did when I first got my DSLR, so much to learn :)


Congrats on the new arrival!


Note to self: next flash experiments will be in a darker room :rolleyes:

You can make that room darker if you want. Take the settings you used (50mm, 1/5, f/8, ISO 200) speed up the shutter speed. Changing the SS to 1/25 would be two stops darker. Now, your flash exposure (which is your aperture, ISO, and flash power) needs to allow more flash, i.e. stronger. So you can either use FEC to up it 2 stops or you can shoot in manual and dial in the appropriate amount of flash.

And now that you have an external flash get that baby off the camera! Check these sites out:

www.strobist.com (http://www.strobist.com)
www.flickr.com/groups/strobist (http://www.flickr.com/groups/strobist)

These SPs are lighted really well, nicely done.

[aparmley]

Rooz, I used manual on both the camera and the flash. I like the way the shots turned out, they were the way I wanted them, but now I realize that if I wanted to utilize the flash more, then I wouldn't have let in so much ambient light.

Well, it seems you are already ahead of me (my previous post). Sorry about that.


The ones that had more flash just didn't look as good ... probably because there was too much ambient light (lol.)


Nope, I think you nailed the exposures with mostly ambient with a touch of fill flash. Just a note to help keep it straight, flash becomes fill flash when ambient dominates the scene. I struggled with that concept early on. Some situations calls for flash to over power ambient and others call for it to compliment ambient. I think you chose wisely.



By the way, I tried some bounce flash, and it seemed like bouncing it from the side looked more interesting, more natural, than bouncing off the ceiling or wall behind me. Is that normal? Is it just because there was so much ambient light? Or am I crazy? :D (Rooz)

When I think of bouncing light off a wall I think of a large window. Softboxes are modeled after of these as well. If you sit far way from the window the light is more harsh, more direct. but if you sit the subject close to window the light will be very soft because it wraps around the subject.

[T06]

If I could get my head in the frame I might try that but alas I try to take pics of visually pleasing things. Nice shots mate, we need more smiles around here.;)

[toriaj]

Thanks for the comments guys, I really appreciate it :)

jcon, now that you mention it, maybe I can tell the difference in the lighting of the two pics. My eye will get trained little by little ...

Lil', the camera was on a tripod. I couldn't have handheld it at the f/8 setting without camera shake. I like my tripod :D Sitting on a stool and using the remote shutter release also makes for more comfortable, consistent shots. I'm so glad you liked them. My eyes are green, with warm brown/almost orange around the pupils. You really should get a flash, you would work magic with it!

aparmley, (is your name Adam?) thanks for the tips on using the flash in a well-lit room, I hadn't really thought about it. It seems that the relationship of light sources to each other makes more difference in the outcome than the objective light level. Meaning that I could use a little flash in a dark room, or a lot of flash in a brighter room (to overpower the ambient light) and come out with roughly the same look. Am I on the right track here?

And thanks for the info about softboxes, I'd never really thought of them like soft window lighting, but it makes sense. But in my experience with window lighting, I get harsher light right next to the window (see my original window SP (http://www.dcresource.com/forums/showpost.php?p=290939&postcount=4105)) but if I move away from the window, more light gets bounced around inside the room, resulting in more even lighting, as in pic #2 above. (in my original window shot, I did a LOT of PP work to even out the lighting. My cheek was just about blown out. :eek: lol)

Despite all the PP, there's still quite a difference in the lighting effect between the two shots, no? So in my experience, the light is harsher if you are closer to it. I really want to figure this out, can you show me a shot where being close to the light source resulted in softer lighting?

[PHeller]

The lighting is pretty much perfect however, I feel that pink background draw a little from your perfect complexion. The backlighting works with your pose, as it give a twinkle to your forward eye. It'd be great if you could light the front of your face as well, again, maybe with a darker background.

You're in the same boat I'm in. The D50 really limits all-around ability to run cheap remote lighting, which is what I'm looking for.

You look very similar to a friend of mine, and careful with exposing those shoulders too much, the guys will go wild.

[toriaj]

lol ... the pink background is the paint on the wall. It was a baby girl's room before we bought the house :) My dh says he is going to paint it red and yellow ... somehow I don't think that will be any better :D

So far I don't feel limited by the D50 in any way. I'm so new to lighting I don't notice any problem. Is the issue that the remote lighting isn't *cheap*? Or it isn't available? P.S. Remote lighting means lighting that's not on-camera, right?

[Viky]

Lovely self portrait there tori! You sure look amazing!

And congrats for the Flash! It will open up a whole new world of creativity:)

[PHeller]

Remote Lighting is that which is off camera.

The D50 does not have a flash controller, so it unlike the D80, you can't fire a flash remotely with the shutter release. I do however, think there are ways around this as shown here. (http://photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00JQN0)

The other ways are using Pocket Wizards or DIY wired trigger off the hotshoe.

Basically, I wish I would've sprung for the D80!

[LR Max]

I echo what everyone else says, check out strobist.com and also get a light stand with an umbrella. Check out www.mpex.com for some strobing equipment.

The D50 is an excellent choice if you decide to do more flash stuff. It can sync up to 1/500th, possibly higher with some extra work. Why do you want this? It helps when using strobes outside.

And yes, CLS and opticals work outside. I do it all the time, you just gotta be smart about it.

Lastly, practice practice practice. Thats the only way you'll get good with speedlights. Do a setup, then look at the results and then think of ways you can make it better. I spent a lot of time figuring out strobes. Most of the time I was asking myself, "Why isn't this working??" But once it clicks, you are good to go.

[XaiLo]

Sweet Tori ;) no touch up here :)

[aparmley]

Thanks for the comments guys, I really appreciate it :)

jcon, now that you mention it, maybe I can tell the difference in the lighting of the two pics. My eye will get trained little by little ...

Lil', the camera was on a tripod. I couldn't have handheld it at the f/8 setting without camera shake. I like my tripod :D Sitting on a stool and using the remote shutter release also makes for more comfortable, consistent shots. I'm so glad you liked them. My eyes are green, with warm brown/almost orange around the pupils. You really should get a flash, you would work magic with it!

aparmley, (is your name Adam?) thanks for the tips on using the flash in a well-lit room, I hadn't really thought about it. It seems that the relationship of light sources to each other makes more difference in the outcome than the objective light level. Meaning that I could use a little flash in a dark room, or a lot of flash in a brighter room (to overpower the ambient light) and come out with roughly the same look. Am I on the right track here?

And thanks for the info about softboxes, I'd never really thought of them like soft window lighting, but it makes sense. But in my experience with window lighting, I get harsher light right next to the window (see my original window SP (http://www.dcresource.com/forums/showpost.php?p=290939&postcount=4105)) but if I move away from the window, more light gets bounced around inside the room, resulting in more even lighting, as in pic #2 above. (in my original window shot, I did a LOT of PP work to even out the lighting. My cheek was just about blown out. :eek: lol)

Despite all the PP, there's still quite a difference in the lighting effect between the two shots, no? So in my experience, the light is harsher if you are closer to it. I really want to figure this out, can you show me a shot where being close to the light source resulted in softer lighting?


Close! My name is Andy.

RE: that window - was it a bare window or was it evenly covered over by a curtain that diffused the light?

[toriaj]

Ok, Andy :) It was bare. I removed the curtains for my window shot last time and they're still off. It's an east window and I took the shots around 1 p.m., so there wasn't any direct sunlight coming in.

[AdamW]

Great shots, Tori. Amazing for a flash beginner. I'm finding flash confusing, but I'm slowly getting my mind around it. I like the fact that the flash isn't noticeable. Usually, subtle is good!

[toriaj]

Thanks, Adam!

[Wesan]

I just got my SB600 and Demb Diffuser, love it, feel like I did when I first got my DSLR, so much to learn :)

I tried some more window light SPs to try it out. I experimented (and learned) a lot with bouncing, diffusing, direct, etc. But when I looked at the pics on the computer, I realized my favorites actually had very little effect from the flash.

Here's one that did use a little flash:
50mm, 1/5, f/8, ISO 200
34153

And for proof, here's a 100% crop of my eye. You can see the tiny flash reflection (and my camera up on the tripod.) I noticed when the flash was not bounced, and it was brighter, the flash reflection was very unattractive. So it seems that we want to avoid that harsh "pinpoint" reflection in the eye, right?
34154

And just to show you how little flash there really was, here's one where I didn't use flash. They are so similar. And in fact, the main differences between them are not due to the flash, but to the much larger aperture on this one (unnecessary, I changed the settings rashly :rolleyes:)
50mm, 1/80, f/1.8, ISO 200
34155

As always, I appreciate your critiques and suggestions. Note to self: next flash experiments will be in a darker room :rolleyes:

Very nice self portraits, toriaj. And you don't look that bad yourself either. ;)

Yes, the different apertures in the pictures make the biggest difference between them. But I also notice that the light is different. Also there's a slight variation in the colours between the pictures. I think I like the second one better overall.

But this was an experiment with flash that you did. Sorry I said the last one, without flash, was the best. :p Now, you know how your flash works during those lighting conditions and the particular camera (and flash) settings you used. Next, keep experimenting with different lighting and flash and camera settings.

I've noticed on my Canon Powershot S3 (with slave flash) that the exposure varies a lot when using the flash(es), depending on whether I use Program mode or Manual mode, for example. Is it the same way with a DSLR? I'm still practising getting the hang on how to use the flashes on my camera. I think it's more difficult using a slave flash, like I do. Am I right?

A flash is a very useful tool, I think. But it can be hard to learn how to use it right in different situations. So keep playing and experimenting, toriaj! And please share your experiences with us, so we can learn too. :)

Nice to see you, BTW. :D

[dxrocnxj]

a little late to this thread but this is great work tor.

[Prospero]

Beautiful selfportrait, Tori. You look great!
I think you used your flash well, I think it gives the image just a little extra pop. I'm looking forward to seeing more of your work with the flash.

[toriaj]

Thanks for looking, Dennis, Dylan, and Wesan, I'm glad you like it. Wesan, I don't know about the differences modes make with the flash on a DSLR, still figuring it out :) but I don't use Program anyway. I haven't figured it out yet :rolleyes:

[aparmley]

Ok, Andy :) It was bare. I removed the curtains for my window shot last time and they're still off. It's an east window and I took the shots around 1 p.m., so there wasn't any direct sunlight coming in.

Ah, there you go, no direct light. It probably wasn't as diffused as it could be, but it appears to be fairly soft for a bare window (the east facing window past noon may have a lot to do with it).

[Esoterra]

Tori, that is a really nice image of yourself. Your husband must be VERY happy with that one hehe!

Keep up the awesomeness!

[toriaj]

If you sit far way from the window the light is more harsh, more direct. but if you sit the subject close to window the light will be very soft because it wraps around the subject.

Thanks, Chris! Andy, do you have any examples of this effect? Even with direct sunlight coming in, it seems like the light would be harsher the closer you were to the window. Thanks for helping me figure this out --