RE: Fill flash in low light - balancing natural and flash

[M D Giess]

Hi all

First off, many thanks to those who offered advice.  Apologies if this reply 
is misplaced, I am subscribed to the digest and it sometimes gets a bit 
confusing as to who replying and whee I should be replying to.

I have one quick question to Tom, who kindly went through quite a bit 
regarding flash:
 I understand that I can manually set the 
 camera 2 stops underexposed and set the flash exposure to 2 
 stops over, 

Well, you could do that, but your shots would have 2 stops too much flash.

I'm confused as to why I'd be exposing incorrectly on this - if I deliberately 
ask the camera to underexpose ambient by two stops,  and after that simply ask 
the flash to take this setting and add two stops to it (at least that's my 
assumption of what +2 flash comp would do), wouldn't that therefore be the 
correct exposure?  The only way I can see this not being the case is if the 
flash TTL exposure takes absolutely no notice of the camera exposure settings, 
and simply works out what it thinks is best, in which case my two stops flash 
compensation would indeed be two stops overexposure.  If anyone can fill me in 
on this (pun not intended) I'd really be very grateful.

I think, on the balance of it, I may just have to go with ambient light as 
it's patently obvious I don't really understand how flash works, and I'd 
rather have slightly soft, grainy pictures (ISO 3200 film) than shots of 
drummers looking like startled bunnies in car headlights.

After having seen how Frank's shots came out, I'd be more than happy with 
anything looking like those (http://www.photo.net/photodb/folder?
folder_id=383331 for those who haven't got the link from the previous 
message).  Unfortunately I have a student lighting engineer who seems to enjoy 
using rear lighting a bit too much for my liking, so there are few (if any) 
kickers lighting the face.  That would be one area where I might just have a 
crack with some standard fill flash - in which case I'll just turn on the 
flash with no compensation and leave it entirely to it's own devices.

Someone suggested a Pz-1 and 500FTZ combo, well I can borrow a Pz-1 but I'm 
stuck with the 400FTZ unfortunately - limited funds mean everything is bought 
used as and where it turns up.  Is it reasonable to suggest that Pentax have 
made this balancing ambient and flash thing unnecessarily difficult to do with 
the MZ series (to recap, I have an MZ-3 and 400FTZ)?

By the way, what's PUG and PAW?

Thanks for all your comments, the battle of the bands is tonight and I've just 
realised I'm down to 2 fast films.  I'll let you know how I get on, and will 
try to get the photos up somewhere.

Cheers

Matt

RE: Fill flash in low light - balancing natural and flash

[M D Giess]

Hi Morgan, many thanks for reply.

 
 I think there's something you're might be missing here...
 
 I shot a band for the second time under very similar circumstances two weeks
 
 ago.  It was my first attempt at using a flash at all, and so I found and 
 read everything I could about it (which BTW is not a lot).
 
 I think you should really look at and try to figure out the Guide Numbers 
 for your flash.  I'm trying to infer information from your post, but it 
 sounds like you want a very high level of detail on the film.  I think you 
 want a.) everything in focus -and- b.) everything well lit.  If you were 
 outside in bright sunlight, this would be no problem.  Just close the 
 aperture down for a big depth-of-field, and you can use all that available 
 light to create a great high-detail negative.
 
 Unfortunately, those are not the circumstances you are working with.
 
 It took me a while to wrap my brain around how the throw distance of my 
 flash works.  Basically, as the aperture opens up, you can use your flash to
 
 expose a greater distance of space.  As your aperture closes down, the total
 
 distance that you can effectively expose with the flash will decrease.
 
 So basically, you could use a relatively fast shutter speed and a small 
 aperture (which would produce big depth of field in normal lighting), but 
 you would get a very short throw distance from your flash.  Thus, your 
 fast shutter, small aperture combination would result in a black background 
 because the aperture wasn't open enough for the flash light.
 
 Likewise, you could open the aperture up and get small depth of field, but 
 everything illuminated.
 
 I'd be willing to bet there's a way to get what you want, but I'm not sure 
 without knowing a.) the distances between you, the subject, and the 
 background -and- b.) the length of your lens.
 
 Hope I could help and not exacerbate the problem...
 
 -m
 


You're partially right in deciphering my question, having reread what I have 
written I didn't perhaps phrase it as well as I could, so I'll try again now.

I really want to do away with flash, and shoot as I would in daylight.  I can 
do this with certain compromises, as in fast film, slow shutter and wide 
aperture.  However, I'd like to improve pretty much all of these but only by 
very slight amounts.  The real problem is shutter speed, as I am getting 
blurred hands etc., and the lighting really is not that great so I am stuck 
with it.  What I want to be able to do is to get as close to being able to 
take the photo WITH THE APERTURE AND SHUTTER AT SETTINGS I WANT, NOT THOSE 
REQUIRED FOR THE CORRECT EXPOSURE (apologies for caps, I don't know how to 
italicise in this email package!).  All I want the flash to do is to bring the 
exposure up to what it should be, thereby using the absolute bare minimum 
amount of flash for my needs.  I have use full auto flash before and it just 
flooded everything - the flash has a guide of 40, it's quite powerful and the 
stage isn't that big.  I also much prefer the effect of stage lighting, and 
would like to keep some idea of this in the photo.

I hope this clarifies, thanks again for your commnets

Matt.

p.s. If I reply in this way, does it fit into the thread structure of PDML 
properly?

RE: Fill flash in low light - balancing natural and flash

[M D Giess]

Tom, many thnaks for your reply.

My apologies for labouring the point slightly, but I've another question 
regarding the use of flash.

 
 The compensation dial always measures compensation from the meter. In other
 words, the compensation isn't measured in relation to your settings, it's
 set in relation to what the camera sees through the lens.
 
 Basically, shifting to manual mode shifts the compensation calculation from
 the ambient meter to the ttl flash meter.
 
  

If this is the case, then if I manually set the camera to underexpose by two 
stops and just turn the external flash on with no compensation, would this 
balance the ambient and flash light correctly?  In other words, the ttl flash 
side of things would just use the camera meter and decide, for itself, how 
much flash to use for correct exposure, and the fact I'm underexposing would 
just cause the background to be slightly underexposed and the areas reached by 
the flash would be fine?

I'm a bit unsure of what is meant re. shifting to manual (the second paragraph 
I've quoted), does this mean I can only ever use flash compensation in 
manual?  I was under the impression that, even in aperture priority, when 
flash was used the dual purpose exposure dial became flash compensation (and 
actual exposure compensatio is no longer possible).  Just to clarify, I take 
it now from your comments that I can only use flash compensation in manual 
mode, is this correct?

Sorry to lumber you with so many questions, I hope I'm slowly iterating 
towards actually figuring out what the hell is going on with flash


Matt

Re: My own DOF confusion

[M D Giess]

Lasse (and, for that matter, Collin)

Your point(s) is/are made, now can we move on please?

thanks in advance

Matt

Quoting Lasse Karlsson [EMAIL PROTECTED]:

 From: William Robb [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  From: Lasse Karlsson
  Subject: Re: My own DOF confusion
   Who's spewing now?
   Being compared to Kirkland Ramsey, being called a Scandinavian
  twit as well as getting my posts characterized as childlike
  extreme and spewing puss by you only confirms my good case in this
  matter.
   Now you are calling everybody who doesn't want Collin's American
  political preachings on the list to enter a sig. file flame war on
  U.S. domestic and international politics!
   That's not only highly irresponsible, it may also mean a
  devastating blow to the PDML as such.
  
  Only in your mind, my dear little man
 
 I'm 184 cm:s tall. You may be fatter, but I am still a man.
 
 does my reply confirm your case.
  I am just calling it like I see it.
 
 As am I right now.
 
  What you are doing by continuing this little diatribe on list may be
  far more devastating to the PDML than any sig files may do.
 
 Who entered and is now continuing this diatribe, while complaining about
 others doing the same? You are a hypocrite.
  
  Your best bet is to try to stay on topic, and if you have issue with
  an off topic post, or portion thereof, take it up off list with the
  person in question.
 
 Given your record of on list entering and continuing off topic posts as well
 as demeaning personal attacks, you're a hypocrite and you know it (as does
 everybody else who's been on PDML for a while).
 I reserve off list communications for friendly contacts.
 
  At the moment, both you and Collin are close to hitting my auto
  delete, which is something I don't do lightly.
 
 As if I'd give a rat's ass about who hits your auto delete.
 If you want to killfile my posts, please do. I'm perfectly fine with whoever
 will be left.
 
 Lasse
 
 
 

Re: My own DOF confusion

[M D Giess]

Lasse, moderate it please.

Not agreeing with someone isn't an excuse for wild insults, and I personally 
don't appreciate receiving such mail.

As others have asked repeatedly, please keep your comments on this matter 
outside of the mailing list.

Thanks in advance

Matt

p.s. can the others involved perhaps not respond and let this thread die?

Quoting Lasse Karlsson [EMAIL PROTECTED]:

 From: graywolf [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  Q: What is the difference between Lasse Karlsson and a terrorist?
  A: A terrorist has guts.
 
  I have to admit I have been waiting for him to tell us that Spain got what
 it 
  deserved as he did about the US after 9/11.
 
 You scumbag of a liar - you present the list proof of what your saying or
 apologize, you little creep!!
 Do you have the guts for it, slime bag?
 
 Lasse  
 
 
 
 

Fill flash in low light - balancing natural and flash

[M D Giess]

Hi all

This is my first post, so hello to everyone.

I have a question regarding flash I'd like to ask.  I am taking photos of a 
band in quite a small, dark venue and I usually just use a fast lens with high 
speed film without flash.  I'm after a bit more quality (i.e. smaller aperture 
and slower film) and would like to experiment a bit, but unfortunately I have 
to print a few photos for band members so I can't mess up too badly!

I have got an MZ-3 with a 400FTZ flash and when I use flash in normal 
situations I simply shoot in aperture priority and let the camera work out the 
shutter and TTL flash, and if I only want a bit of fill flash I take 1 to 2 
stops off using the Exposure Compensation dial which doubles as the flash 
compensation dial.

The problem I am facing is using flash to supplement low light levels, in 
effect how to balance natural light and flash.  I have always considered fill 
flash as something that simply lights up a few shadows, where the exposure 
would be correct without the flash but that little burst just puts a bit more 
light where the scene is a bit dark.  I am confused as to how to set the 
camera to automatically use flash to supplement low light levels, where I can 
shoot off aperture priority but underexpose by two stops and use the flash to 
bump the light back up these two stops.  I can't figure out how to do it, as 
on the MZ-3 the exposure and flash compensation are done by the same dial.  If 
I set the flash compensation dial to take 2 stops off, I assume that the 
camera will (under aperture priority) simply set the shutter speed 
for 'correct' exposure and use the flash for fill only, which hard-won 
experience shows is too slow ('soft' hands and drumsticks etc.).  I understand 
that I can manually set the camera 2 stops underexposed and set the flash 
exposure to 2 stops over, but there's so much going on I always miss shots if 
I have to manually balance exposure - poor AF doesn't help, and the shutter 
speed dial is a pig to turn with the flash mounted (little camera and big 
fingers!)  I would hence like to automate the process, does anyone know if 
this is possible?

As you can probably see, I'm quite new to the flash area, any advice or 
comments would be greatly appreciated.

Many thanks

Matt