Off Camera Shoe Flash Sync Cord

herbie_53

herbie_53

Suspended / Banned
Messages
60
Name
Chris.
Edit My Images
Yes
Good Evening all,

I now realise I need to mount my flash (Canon 430EX Mk11) off the camera for portrait shots I take indoors. I can get fairly good results IMHO in landscape by bouncing the flash off the ceiling, but of course turning the camera 90 degrees for portrait shots means I can no longer bounce the flash from the ceiling with the flash mounted on the hot shoe. As the ambient light is usually fairly low I just end up with unwanted shadows if I try using a wall for bouncing the flash instead.

What would any of you more experienced people recommend as in an off camera flash shoe cord? unless you have any better ideas of course.

Thanks in advance,

Chris.
 
Last edited:
dosnt the 430 swivel,surely its easy enough to swivel the flash so it is bouncing off the ceiling etc when in portrait mode :thinking:
 
Brendan Mulachy said:
dosnt the 430 swivel,surely its easy enough to swivel the flash so it is bouncing off the ceiling etc when in portrait mode :thinking:
Click to expand...

You are right in the sense it does swivel, and I have tried that, but how do I explain this exactly:thinking:

Right here goes, if you take the flash head of being approx. 65mm wide and 35mm in depth to start with. When taking a shot in landscape the 65mm width is facing the subject(s), so even with it facing the ceiling the most light from the flash is being bounced down in front and behind of the camera. By swiveling it for portrait shots the most light is now being bounced down to the left and righthand side of the camera as only the 35mm depth of the flash is facing my subject(s), does that make any sense?
 
it does make sense chris...ive just got my flash out and took a couple of shots in landscape and portrait and to be honest i didnt see that much difference even in the histogram between the 2 to worry about
 
Thats a relief Dave, I suppose to simplify it I could have said, the difference being from landscape to portrait mode is, one your subject(s) get the full width of the flash and the other mode you don't.

It's probably more than anything to do with the available ambient light that's causing the problem.

Thanks for your reply anyway.

Chris.
 
beeje25 said:
how far off camera do you want the flash if its close you can use a ttl cable, if you want to put it a light stand you might want to look at a cheap radio trigger something like this http://www.cameraworld.co.uk/ViewPr...T_CODE=&SUBCAT_CODE=&MANU_CODE=&Minisitetype=
Click to expand...

Thanks for your reply. I was hoping to fit the flash onto a tripod. I was looking at a genuine Canon ETTL off shoe cord, but these will be to short for that, a longer 3rd party cord would most likely do the job, I just wondered if anyone could recommend one, rather than taking pot luck.

Thanks for the link, that is something else to also consider.

Chris.
 
Thanks Bob and Richard for your input:thumbs:

HoppyUK said:
But seriously, when you're bouncing the pool of light on the ceiling becomes a large oval. It makes no difference to the result. There are 101 other more significant variables to worry about ;)
Click to expand...

That's very interesting Richard. May be then it's more to do with the flash being to the side of the lens in portrait mode, whereas in landscape it's above the lens.

What's been happening is this. I nearly always use the flash (in portrait mode) on my lefthand side, I then end up with a shadow from the subject(s) (on my righthand side) on the wall behind them.

The next time I take some more photo's of the family I'm going to try the flash on my righthand side to see if the shadow has moved over to the left of my subject(s).

How would an expert get over this problem where a flash would be required if they didn't have their subjects in a photographic studio I wonder?

Chris.
 
Of course it will be on the left hand side, because the light source has moved to the right.

Soften the light, because what you have is essentially a small hard light source hitting them it creates a harsh shadow, if you was to shoot say through a good softbox then you create a larger softer light source which then softens the shadows (and makes the subject look better too).

Have you tried getting someone to hold a reflector high up behind you and bouncing off that instead. That will soften shadows behind the subject if done right.

And to answer the original question, i know it's an american company but www.ocfgear.com do good ettl cords.

And you could do a lot worse than buying a copy of 'The Speedliters Handbook' by Syl Arena.
 
I got a good curly ittl cord for the Nikon from 7dayshop, works a treat, but being who I am, I chopped it in half and fitted two ethernet sockets, now I can extend using cheap ethernet cables to any length I like.
 
herbie_53 said:
Thanks Bob and Richard for your input:thumbs:



That's very interesting Richard. May be then it's more to do with the flash being to the side of the lens in portrait mode, whereas in landscape it's above the lens.

What's been happening is this. I nearly always use the flash (in portrait mode) on my lefthand side, I then end up with a shadow from the subject(s) (on my righthand side) on the wall behind them.

The next time I take some more photo's of the family I'm going to try the flash on my righthand side to see if the shadow has moved over to the left of my subject(s).

How would an expert get over this problem where a flash would be required if they didn't have their subjects in a photographic studio I wonder?

Chris.
Click to expand...

What may be happening with the shadows is if the flash is tilted slightly forward, some of the hard light can go directly to the subject. Take a closer look and see if you've got a soft shadow from the ceiling, and a second harder shadow created by the flash head direct. The first one will hardly have changed, the second will have moved.

I use a Lumiquest QuikBounce for this sort of thing. Brilliant device. The first user review in this link explains it well http://www.lumiquest.com/store/products/LumiQuest-Quik-Bounce.html
 
Richard, I think you are very much spot-on there about the hard light hitting my subjects as I know I did have the flash tilted forward slightly for some of the shots (and it looks like Mark Anthony came to a similar conclusion as well). The reason being I was trying to get more light on my subjects rather than increasing the ISO or opening up the aperture further. I've had a closer look and it does appear it is a second harder shadow that I'm trying to avoid. Perhaps increasing the ISO say to 200 or so might have been a better option? I was shooting in manual.

The Lumiquest QuikBounce seems like a very handy piece of kit, thanks for the link. May be this would be a better option for what I'm trying to achieve.

Mark, The suggestion about trying a reflector next time sounds a good idea. Thanks also for the recommendation of "The Speedliters Handbook" by Syl Arena, and the link for the cord. I had a look on Amazon for "The Speedliters Handbook" I see it has excellent feedback. Funny you should mention about the use of a softbox as I had been looking at the Lumiquest Softbox III, but that was as far as I got, as I was not sure if it was big enough for the job.

John, thanks also to you for the tip on extending a cord.

------------------------------------------------------

Thanks to all for your help and advice, it's been very much appreciated :thumbs:
If there is one thing that has stood out here, it has to be I have a lot yet to learn, but I won't be giving up ;)

Chris.
 
Last edited:
herbie_53 said:
Mark, The suggestion about trying a reflector next time sounds a good idea. Thanks also for the recommendation of "The Speedliters Handbook" by Syl Arena, and the link for the cord. I had a look on Amazon for "The Speedliters Handbook" I see it has excellent feedback. Funny you should mention about the use of a softbox as I had been looking at the Lumiquest Softbox III, but that was as far as I got, as I was not sure if it was big enough for the job.
Chris.
Click to expand...

I think the Lastolite Ezybox's are amongst the best softboxes you can get for speedliting, and get the biggest one you can (bearing in mind where you'll be using it of course), the bigger the light source the softer the shadows, as long as the light source is close enough of course.
 
Mark Anthony said:
I think the Lastolite Ezybox's are amongst the best softboxes you can get for speedliting, and get the biggest one you can (bearing in mind where you'll be using it of course), the bigger the light source the softer the shadows, as long as the light source is close enough of course.
Click to expand...

Mark, thanks for the info. I did wonder if the softer the light the closer it would need to be,

Chris.
 
herbie_53 said:
Richard, I think you are very much spot-on there about the hard light hitting my subjects as I know I did have the flash tilted forward slightly for some of the shots (and it looks like Mark Anthony came to a similar conclusion as well). The reason being I was trying to get more light on my subjects rather than increasing the ISO or opening up the aperture further. I've had a closer look and it does appear it is a second harder shadow that I'm trying to avoid. Perhaps increasing the ISO say to 200 or so might have been a better option? I was shooting in manual.

The Lumiquest QuikBounce seems like a very handy piece of kit, thanks for the link. May be this would be a better option for what I'm trying to achieve.

Mark, The suggestion about trying a reflector next time sounds a good idea. Thanks also for the recommendation of "The Speedliters Handbook" by Syl Arena, and the link for the cord. I had a look on Amazon for "The Speedliters Handbook" I see it has excellent feedback. Funny you should mention about the use of a softbox as I had been looking at the Lumiquest Softbox III, but that was as far as I got, as I was not sure if it was big enough for the job.

John, thanks also to you for the tip on extending a cord.

------------------------------------------------------

Thanks to all for your help and advice, it's been very much appreciated :thumbs:
If there is one thing that has stood out here, it has to be I have a lot yet to learn, but I won't be giving up ;)

Chris.
Click to expand...

Speedliter's Handbook is excellent for Canon users :thumbs:

There are dozens of flash accessories out there, but they all work in basically the same way. If you want softer shadows, you need to make the light source bigger - much bigger.

Bouncing the light off the ceiling does that, because the big pool of light up there becomes your new light souce. If you want to avoid getting any direct light on the subject from the gun, point it straight up instead of tilting it forward.

But actually, for the best results, you do need a dash of direct light to lift the shadows under eyes and chins that are naturally cast from ceiling bounce. But it only needs to be very little, and the best way to control that is with some kind of accessory.

A basic Soften-type diffuser cap works well (fiver, Amazon) or a bounce-card attachment. See www.abetterbouncecard.com for the basic idea, all you need is a small piece of card the size of a cigarette packet and a rubber band. Many guns have something similar built in, but your 430EX is one that doesn't.

The LQ QuikBounce is just a more sophisticated variation on the same theme, as are most attachments. Don't believe all the marketing bull that often goes with these things, as 90% of the result is entirely dependent on the environment and the bounce surfaces (walls, ceiling etc) that are available.

Final touch is to reduce the shutter speed to allow some ambient light in to brighten the background - if you just shoot on Av, Canon's default setting will do that for you automatically. Then cover the gun with a light orange gel (known as a CTO) to match the colour of the ambient light (assuming it's tungsten bulbs) and you have all the tricks :)
 
Last edited:
HoppyUK said:
Speedliter's Handbook is excellent for Canon users :thumbs:

There are dozens of flash accessories out there, but they all work in basically the same way. If you want softer shadows, you need to make the light source bigger - much bigger.

Bouncing the light off the ceiling does that, because the big pool of light up there becomes your new light souce. If you want to avoid getting any direct light on the subject from the gun, point it straight up instead of tilting it forward.

But actually, for the best results, you do need a dash of direct light to lift the shadows under eyes and chins that are naturally cast from ceiling bounce. But it only needs to be very little, and the best way to control that is with some kind of accessory.

A basic Soften-type diffuser cap works well (fiver, Amazon) or a bounce-card attachment. See www.abetterbouncecard.com for the basic idea, all you need is a small piece of card the size of a cigarette packet and a rubber band. Many guns have something similar built in, but your 430EX is one that doesn't.

The LQ QuikBounce is just a more sophisticated variation on the same theme, as are most attachments. Don't believe all the marketing bull that often goes with these things, as 90% of the result is entirely dependent on the environment and the bounce surfaces (walls, ceiling etc) that are available.

Final touch is to reduce the shutter speed to allow some ambient light in to brighten the background - if you just shoot on Av, Canon's default setting will do that for you automatically. Then cover the gun with a light orange gel (known as a CTO) to match the colour of the ambient light (assuming it's tungsten bulbs) and you have all the tricks :)
Click to expand...

I am intending to get a copy of The Speedliters Handbook, even better with another recommendation.

No laughing mind ;) but I do have a basic Soften-type diffuser cap, it never occurred to me that it would allow a small percentage of light to hit my subject with the flash pointing straight up towards the ceiling :bonk: I just assumed it was only intended to be used where the flash is facing directly to the subject. So that is something else I can try.
As you suggest, I'm also going to try a piece of card attached with a couple of rubber bands. I now understand more of what you mean about lighting the areas under the chin and eyes with a small amount of direct flash.

I did try shooting in Av originally, but I found the problem was (most likely due to the lack of ambient indoors light) the shutter speed was so slow (around 1/15s even when going up to ISO800) that a lot of my shots were not in focus. To counteract that I tried using a tripod, but the problem was young children don't stay still very often. Once I'd purchased my 430EX flash, I then used manual instead, this meant I could set the shutter speed to 1/60s and use ISO100/200 with the WB set to flash. Is 1/60s shutter speed really to fast for what I'm trying to do?

Many thanks for your help and advice Richard, plus the link and tips. This reply has been most helpful :thumbs:

Chris.
 
herbie_53 said:
I am intending to get a copy of The Speedliters Handbook, even better with another recommendation.

No laughing mind ;) but I do have a basic Soften-type diffuser cap, it never occurred to me that it would allow a small percentage of light to hit my subject with the flash pointing straight up towards the ceiling :bonk: I just assumed it was only intended to be used where the flash is facing directly to the subject. So that is something else I can try.
As you suggest, I'm also going to try a piece of card attached with a couple of rubber bands. I now understand more of what you mean about lighting the areas under the chin and eyes with a small amount of direct flash.

I did try shooting in Av originally, but I found the problem was (most likely due to the lack of ambient indoors light) the shutter speed was so slow (around 1/15s even when going up to ISO800) that a lot of my shots were not in focus. To counteract that I tried using a tripod, but the problem was young children don't stay still very often. Once I'd purchased my 430EX flash, I then used manual instead, this meant I could set the shutter speed to 1/60s and use ISO100/200 with the WB set to flash. Is 1/60s shutter speed really to fast for what I'm trying to do?

Many thanks for your help and advice Richard, plus the link and tips. This reply has been most helpful :thumbs:

Chris.
Click to expand...

You're welcome Chris :)

Your Stofen type diffuser cap works well in a typical situation and they're popular with press guys as they so simple and robust, just a bit basic and lack control, but you can adjust things slightly with the angle of tilt, and tweak the up/forward ratio a little by zooming the flash head. Don't point it straight foward though, always up or slighly forward. The effect is similar to using a bounce card, or the LQ QuikBounce.

As I say, most of these things follow the same basic principle of putting most of the light up to the ceiling (it needs a lot, like 80-90%) with a splash of foward direct light. Difference with the Lumiquest is the forward component is also made quite a bit bigger and softer, plus you have a lot more control and it also works outside with the flaps closed. Stofen is useless outside, as there's no surface for it to bounce off.

You're doing the right thing by dropping the shutter speed to bring up the ambient light, but as you've discovered there's only so far you can go when it's dim. If your subjects are still, say sitting around a table, then you can get a way with quite a long shutter speed as the flash will freeze movement and a little ambient blurring is acceptable.

You just have to make a decision on that and maybe decide it can't be done, so let the background go dark. One of the benefits of bounce flash is it spreads the light more evenly over a much larger area (one of the reasons it uses so much power). It will pretty much fill a small room, but not a large function hall.
 
HoppyUK said:
You're welcome Chris :)

Your Stofen type diffuser cap works well in a typical situation and they're popular with press guys as they so simple and robust, just a bit basic and lack control, but you can adjust things slightly with the angle of tilt, and tweak the up/forward ratio a little by zooming the flash head. Don't point it straight foward though, always up or slighly forward. The effect is similar to using a bounce card, or the LQ QuikBounce.

As I say, most of these things follow the same basic principle of putting most of the light up to the ceiling (it needs a lot, like 80-90%) with a splash of foward direct light. Difference with the Lumiquest is the forward component is also made quite a bit bigger and softer, plus you have a lot more control and it also works outside with the flaps closed. Stofen is useless outside, as there's no surface for it to bounce off.

You're doing the right thing by dropping the shutter speed to bring up the ambient light, but as you've discovered there's only so far you can go when it's dim. If your subjects are still, say sitting around a table, then you can get a way with quite a long shutter speed as the flash will freeze movement and a little ambient blurring is acceptable.

You just have to make a decision on that and maybe decide it can't be done, so let the background go dark. One of the benefits of bounce flash is it spreads the light more evenly over a much larger area (one of the reasons it uses so much power). It will pretty much fill a small room, but not a large function hall.
Click to expand...

I think it was the press guys on the TV that gave me the impression my Stofen type diffuser was only really suitable for facing the subjects, but of course they're normally outdoors ;) I'm pleased I now know different.

Thanks for the tip on the up/forward ratio adjustment of the flash head, I had the manual adjustment of the flash output in my mind plus the camera adjustments for the flash output, but I hadn't got as far as that one :thumbs:

I've been trying out your suggestion of a bounce card attachment (home made just to see what difference it would make). I was amazed at how much more light was directed forward by using that method, although I think my card was most likely to large even with the adjustments I made. I then reduced it's size (to cigarette packet size as you suggested) and got better results. I'll have to wait now until we visit the grand children again to see how things go for definite, as for some reason our home has more ambient light in it than theirs has. Plus I want to try out my Stofen type diffuser too.

The LumiQuest Quik Bounce sounds really good (even better it's suitable for both indoors and outdoors use), and I'd like to try one sometime, but at the moment I think the Speedliters handbook is first on the list.

Many thanks for your follow up post Richard,


Chris.
 
Last edited:
Just a thought, I have a speedlite and the OC-E3 lead. It's too short to do anything with except connect the flash to a flash bracket. Had you tried the Lastolite flip flash bracket? It's about £60, but allows you to keep the flash in one place, while rotating the camera (horizontal or vertical). You can also extend the flash quite high up too, so you can get it nearer the ceiling if you need. You'll still need the hefty-priced lead too (about £50), but you do get the advantages of having the flash communicate with the camera (not sure you'll get this with a radio sync, like a Pocket Wizard).
 
Thanks Dayve for your thoughts on this matter. I had looked into a flash bracket, although none of the ones I had been looking at were quite as sophisticated as the Lastolite flip flash bracket. The one that caught my eye was made by Lvshi if I remember correctly, it looked fairly straight forward to switch from landscape to portrait position. The only problem I found was I couldn't seem to see any for sale in the UK.

I would really prefer not to use a flash bracket or a flash stand if I don't have to, so at the moment I am going to try out the advice and help I've already received, then see where that takes me. In my home it has already made a noticeable difference. The main test (as I mentioned in an earlier post) will be when I'm photographing our grand children next, their home seems to have less available ambient light than ours, but we're not due there for a few weeks yet.

Chris.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top