nicolas claris
OPF Co-founder/Administrator
No Fill flash:
Fill flash:
Fill flash:
So using the fill flash makes a difference even when deployed at such distances under harsh daylight. Just look at the rocks accross the bay entrance, impressive!
Which flash dit you use, the 580EX? At what power level?
Cheers,
The flag on that ship is either Spain, Portugal or Italy...not that anyone asked - I think Portugal.
But, why do I like the no fill flash better - it looks more realistic to me. Something is off.
Indeed! I tend to forget the effects of a 24mm or wider. Only yesterday I was shooting subjects which were only a couple of feet away from me using my 12-24mm, the end results look as if they were many meters (x3 feet approx.) away.You've all been fooled by the 24 mm, boat and island are not far at all...
The flag on that ship is either Spain, Portugal or Italy...not that anyone asked - I think Portugal.
But, why do I like the no fill flash better - it looks more realistic to me. Something is off.
PS: I can't help but notice that you use the "flourish"panel end marks in LR! A renaissance man with a feeling for flair, indeed <big grin>
Hi Nicolas,Hi Cem
what do you mean? I don't get it, what is "flourish"panel end marks?
Re. you playing nasty exposure tricks on us…
Sorry for my tongue-in-the-cheek style, sometimes I assume that all can follow my somewhat dry humour. Prior to your explanatory reply, others such as Asher and Ron have "hinted"at the possibilty that the exposure of the second image was much higher thus it could not have all been caused by the fill in flash only. So I saw a joke in there, about the possibility that you were playing tricks on us just to test our powers of observation <smile>. Hence my reference to a non-existant trick.Why that? no trick there!
Hi Nicolas,
I mean the ornamental looking marks that are at the bottom of your LR screen captures, just above the words Fill Flash. You can get rid of them in the LR: Edit > Preferences > Interface > Panel End Marks > Set to None, box or flourish.
Cheers,
Sorry for my tongue-in-the-cheek style, sometimes I assume that all can follow my somewhat dry humour. Prior to your explanatory reply, others such as Asher and Ron have "hinted"at the possibilty that the exposure of the second image was much higher thus it could not have all been caused by the fill in flash only. So I saw a joke in there, about the possibility that you were playing tricks on us just to test our powers of observation <smile>. Hence my reference to a non-existant trick.
I hope I've made myself clear now, phew! <big smile>
Cheers,
It is possible that the fill flash exposure have been overexposed as we're at 1/250 (which is max speed for fill flsh) this would explain the sky.
Perdu!
Italy!
Isn't Cala Galera on the beautifull east coast of Sardegna?
Meanwhile "Li" on the yacht looks being Liguria to me.
Nicolas,
I'm not sure but IMHO, Jeff (Schewe) was showing that on ACR 2.x....
BTW; How do you like LR?
Vers 1.1 should be pretty improved.
Nicolas,
next time you may wanna use High Synch Speed mode of 580.
That way you can both dim the light (it's said to be 30% dimmer) and use whatever shutter speed you want, thus avoiding overexposure..
Just a thought.
Nicolas,
next time you may wanna use High Synch Speed mode of 580.
That way you can both dim the light (it's said to be 30% dimmer) and use whatever shutter speed you want, thus avoiding overexposure..
Just a thought.
Hi Nikolai,
Good to see your post. There's a choice here. One could, and there's no reason not to, adding a neutral density filter or using ISO 100 to get correct exposure for the sky at 1/250th sec or else close that 2.8 to 4.0 if the planned composition allows it.
So where would you decide on using high speed flash under these circumstances. IOW, Nikolai, why would you use it when the over-exposure of the sky, for sure (and likely the rocks too) is nothing to do with the flash.
I do not use the fast synch flash, so I'd appreciate hearing your own decision tree.
Asher
My humble answer would be: to provide frontal lighting and to descrease the shadows and the contrast, thus to avoid having to retort to "fill light" in LR or "highlights and shadows" in PS. But obviously, you knew this already so I assume you must have another reason for asking this question??...why would you use it when the over-exposure of the sky, for sure (and likely the rocks too) is nothing to do with the flash...