Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
New profile posts
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Learning
Flashes
Some basic questions on the SB-700
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="WayneF" data-source="post: 229899" data-attributes="member: 12496"><p>I like the one on the right too. I'm wondering if it was a bit too close to the camera (perspective, might be her complaint?), but the color is better, esp the hair is a lot better. Camera should stand back 6 or 8 feet, for perspective, and to better allow 75 or 90 degree bounce fill the frontal face (eye sockets). Zoom in all you want, but just always stand a bit back with the camera. At least try it.</p><p></p><p>Bounce needs a lot of power, direct flash not much at all. High power makes the speedlight more red, and low power makes it more blue. Left one needs a little more red, color is really not good, not as healthy looking. You mentioned having Lightroom, and it has a great white balance tool. So to use it, try adding a white card to the first test shot in a situation, then select all in that same session (with same lighting), and click the white card, and presto, all are corrected, and it's as good as it gets. WB becomes a trivial problem, no problem at all. My subjects here just know to reach for the white card for first shot, I don't have to say anything. <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite1" alt=":)" title="Smile :)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":)" /> You might can use the gray background for that? (but I'd get the card). Raw would be best (greater range), but it works with JPG too. Raw is sort of a philosophy in itself, there is a little to it, but its all advantage, vast advantages.</p><p></p><p>I'd suggest <a href="http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/300868-REG/Porta_Brace_WBC_White_Balance_Card.html" target="_blank">this WB card</a> also as good as it gets (plastic, accurate, durable, washable, and inexpensive, and all you can possibly need to do the job first class). But until available, just use a sheet of cheap plain white copy paper (or could be an envelope or letter from an envelope) to add the scene (have her hold it under her chin for the first test shot - in the same light). That will be 90 or 95%, vastly better than nothing.</p><p></p><p>Direct flash ought to stand the subject farther from the background due to the shadow back there. A few feet instead of a few inches. It will easily disappear with a soft umbrella. Off-camera direct will aggravate that, then the shadow will be 45 degrees to the side, very visible, and terrible if it shows that much. Greater separation of background moves that 45 degree shadow sideways too, out of frame with just slight planning.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="WayneF, post: 229899, member: 12496"] I like the one on the right too. I'm wondering if it was a bit too close to the camera (perspective, might be her complaint?), but the color is better, esp the hair is a lot better. Camera should stand back 6 or 8 feet, for perspective, and to better allow 75 or 90 degree bounce fill the frontal face (eye sockets). Zoom in all you want, but just always stand a bit back with the camera. At least try it. Bounce needs a lot of power, direct flash not much at all. High power makes the speedlight more red, and low power makes it more blue. Left one needs a little more red, color is really not good, not as healthy looking. You mentioned having Lightroom, and it has a great white balance tool. So to use it, try adding a white card to the first test shot in a situation, then select all in that same session (with same lighting), and click the white card, and presto, all are corrected, and it's as good as it gets. WB becomes a trivial problem, no problem at all. My subjects here just know to reach for the white card for first shot, I don't have to say anything. :) You might can use the gray background for that? (but I'd get the card). Raw would be best (greater range), but it works with JPG too. Raw is sort of a philosophy in itself, there is a little to it, but its all advantage, vast advantages. I'd suggest [URL="http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/300868-REG/Porta_Brace_WBC_White_Balance_Card.html"]this WB card[/URL] also as good as it gets (plastic, accurate, durable, washable, and inexpensive, and all you can possibly need to do the job first class). But until available, just use a sheet of cheap plain white copy paper (or could be an envelope or letter from an envelope) to add the scene (have her hold it under her chin for the first test shot - in the same light). That will be 90 or 95%, vastly better than nothing. Direct flash ought to stand the subject farther from the background due to the shadow back there. A few feet instead of a few inches. It will easily disappear with a soft umbrella. Off-camera direct will aggravate that, then the shadow will be 45 degrees to the side, very visible, and terrible if it shows that much. Greater separation of background moves that 45 degree shadow sideways too, out of frame with just slight planning. [/QUOTE]
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Learning
Flashes
Some basic questions on the SB-700
Top