On 2/11/2013 7:50 PM, Larry Colen wrote:
You don't need to invest a lot to get a strobe well worth learning with.
I'd suggest a dumb manual strobe. You can find them used for under $50.
You can pick up a cheap radio trigger pair for $20, or a hongkong strobe
extension cable for about the same.
ephotoinc has a strobe that screws into a lightbulb socket and will
trigger with either a PC cable or optically for about $20. I think you'd
be better off with a dumb speedlight with adjustable power, and ideally,
optical trigger, though you can buy optical triggers for about $10.
One of the biggest obstacles for me as it relates to using flash is my
complete and utter ignorance. I'm like Unfrozen Caveman Lawyer; your
world frightens and confuses me. My primitive mind can't grasp these
concepts!
I've lost track of the number of times that I've recommended light,
science & magic, probably a few of them to you. That'll help with either
ambient or artificial light. It will also help you understand the
difference between how a diffuser works and a fongdong (or a light grenade
as I call them, because they throw photons everywhere).
One of the few things I have learned about flash photography is the
absolute necessity of diffusers. Though, what makes a fongdong
preferable in some situations as opposed to others, I couldn't begin to
guess. All I know is that, when I use flash and the image doesn't have
the lighting I was looking for, it's because I wasn't standing in the
right place -- either too close, too far, or too far off to one side or
the other. My entire experience with flash photography amounts to, "OK,
well I don't have enough light, so I have use a flash." [Engage pop-up
flash, take photo] "Well, that was certainly enough light, but I really
didn't want it to look that way. Screw it."
The problems with using a flash are that they can be really
obnoxious/distracting and if you don't know what you're doing you are
almost more likely to ruin a shot than get it right. Heretofore there are
a whole bunch of shots that were just impossible to get without a flash.
With a K-5 and occasionally being able to get shots with ISOs up to
25,600, that set has gotten orders of magnitude smaller than in the film
era.
That's just about word-for-word my view on the matter. When I go
shooting, I want to carry as little gear as possible. If I can get away
with it, I'll carry two cameras mounted with two lenses representing a
fair focal range, and nothing else. Not even a tripod, as I find them
cumbersome. And the beauty of the K-5 is that it goes a long way toward
eliminating the need for flash in many situations -- though, admittedly,
there's a great deal to be said for the creative use of flash to
highlight certain elements of an image. I get that. It's just that I
find it easier to wait for the scene to present itself to me in a
pleasing manner than to force the scene to conform to my vision by
introducing more light, or changing the nature of the lighting. For
example, if I see a beautiful young lady who has striking eyes (or any
other part of her anatomy), I find it easier to just keep an eye on her
and wait until she's in a place where I can capture them, and then move
in. It just strikes me as less awkward than telling her, "Stop right
there! Don't move!" and then blasting light all over the place several
times until I get it just right.
There's a certain stylistic element beyond that, too. I love capturing
unguarded moments and expressions more than I enjoy creating flawless
exposures. Obviously, that's not an either/or proposition, but as a
matter of creative priority, I tend to focus on a particular element
that I find especially pleasing rather than trying to get the whole
thing *just right*. I suppose that's a flaw -- maybe even a cop-out
excuse for not learning one of the fundamentals of photography as well
as I should. But, that's just the kind of half-assed photographer I've
developed into. When I see someone who has features that cry out to be
photographed, be it a classically beautiful facial structure, a winsome
smile, or a front porch like the Taj Mahal, that's what I want to
capture. The overall lighting only matters to me to the extent that it
accentuates what I'm trying to capture. With available light, I know it
when I see it. With flash, I don't know what the hell it's going to do.
In other words, flash doesn't have to stupid expensive, and learning how
to use it can make a huge difference in your photos. It'll also help you
learn how to use available light better.
Now, that is an interesting point and a good reason to take it up.
Anything that will teach me how to better use available light is an
unvarnished good thing. Whatever results in less time spent fiddling
with the camera (or anything else) and more time pressing the shutter
button can only be beneficial. There's nothing I hate more than seeing a
great shot, asking someone to hold still while I take it, tripping the
shutter and saying, "Oops! Hold on a little longer. I need to adjust
this-or-that" and repeating the process until the spontaneity is
completely sapped.
Thanks for all the info and advice. I'm sure I'll get around to learning
all this stuff someday -- and will probably become obsessed with it once
I see the benefits of using it. Right now, I guess I'm sort of hidebound
by the familiarity of available light -- and maybe a little too insecure
to step out of the box I've placed myself in.
-- Walt
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
[email protected]
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow
the directions.
