ON-Camera flash, yes you read that correctly...

J

Jamie H

Suspended / Banned
Messages
98
Edit My Images
No
I know that off-camera works best, I really do. If I have to use flash at all I will always try to get it off it's perch on the pentaprism but can we please stop making the assumption that on-camera lighting is inherently terrible? It isn't; especially if you bounce it.

I say again for the sake of clarity - off camera is better but it is not necessarily the case that if the 'tog has to resort to sticking the flash onto the camera hotshoe the outcome will be an affront to the eyes.
 
it depends what you are using the flash for.
Flash close to lens axis throws its shadows backwards from the subject so you don't see the shadow it throws on the image. Off camera flash throws it shadow sideways so you see it in the image except for some subjects where the flash is directly above the lens axis.
So the question is whether you want to see the flash shadows in the image and sometimes you do and sometimes you don't.
Yes you do want to see them if you want to give three dimensionality to the subject(increase its contrast range). But no you don't want to see them if all you are trying to do is add some fill lighting to lighten shadows already in the image(reduce the subject contrast range).
So for a little fill lighting (where you are trying to reduce subject contrast range) on camera flash is actually better but that's about the only time.
 
If your flash is on camera and you're bouncing it off a wall / ceiling, then you're effectively using an off camera light source - it's just more convenient as you flash stays fixed to the camera. Truly, I think it's a compromise between time / quality, sometime there just isn't the time to be throwing it off camera.

As for fill, I agree with the above on camera is great for this (ring flash is even better ...)
 
uck Bounced light can be so flat though. its nice to bounce if you have a key light to add some shape
 
I use on camera flash when I'm tight for time. It's easy to bounce off walls ceilings, behind you and get quite pleasing results, although you do risk unwanted colours on your image depending where you are bouncing from so requires more work in post
 
Are you sure that reference to 'on camera flash' is not regarding the cameras pop up flash :shrug:
 
If you bounce it it's not on camera flash. It's only terrible if it's DIRECT flash.
 
Jo said:
Are you sure that reference to 'on camera flash' is not regarding the cameras pop up flash :shrug:
Click to expand...

That was my first thought, then I re-read this bit:


Jamie H said:
off camera is better but it is not necessarily the case that if the 'tog has to resort to sticking the flash onto the camera hotshoe the outcome will be an affront to the eyes.
Click to expand...

Mention of hotshoe makes me think it's about an external flash unit, but on the camera not using a TTL cord or triggers.

Chris
 
Chaz Photos said:
So why do anyone use a Ring flash then ?
Cant get more direct that that........
Click to expand...

Ring flash is quite different in effect to a direct flashgun. If it wasn't nobody would use one. A ring flash as merit in certain circumstances, but generally direct flash equals flat and zeroxed looking light.
 
The23rdman said:
Ring flash is quite different in effect to a direct flashgun. If it wasn't nobody would use one. A ring flash as merit in certain circumstances, but generally direct flash equals flat and zeroxed looking light.
Click to expand...

But it is direct light can't get away from that....:shrug:
 
Chaz Photos said:
But it is direct light can't get away from that....:shrug:
Click to expand...

Are you being deliberately contrary, Chaz? Ring flash is only ever really useful as key light on skinny little models with perfect bone structure. Use it on anyone else and they'll look nasty. It's also much softer and more diffused than direct bare flash, which looks horrible all the time. If you'd like to argue that point further you'll have to pick someone with more time to talk nonsense.
 
The23rdman said:
Are you being deliberately contrary, Chaz? Ring flash is only ever really useful as key light on skinny little models with perfect bone structure. Use it on anyone else and they'll look nasty. It's also much softer and more diffused than direct bare flash, which looks horrible all the time. If you'd like to argue that point further you'll have to pick someone with more time to talk nonsense.
Click to expand...

You still can not say it is not Direct light It sites on the same axes as the lens cant be more direct then that can it?

That is all I have said nothing more nothing less.......

As for the light being soft well All I can say is you get minimal shadow, due to the light being on the same axes as the lens, so making very flat light.
 
Chaz, where did I say it's not direct light? It's not very exciting, interesting or flattering to anyone in the real world...just like any form of direct light. what it is is SAFE and BORING light, and I would only ever use it as part of a lighting set-up where other sources of off camera light provide contrast and sculpture.

Seems I do have time to talk nonsense.
 
I was watching a Lovegrove DVD last night - in several shots he just bunged his model against a wall and pinged them with direct flash (no bounce, no nothing). In one case he even stuck his camera on green-P mode, shock horror. The pictures were stunning. Nothing wrong with direct on-camera flash if the shot calls for it.

The NvN link above is also brilliant. This guy's use of bounced flash is just amazing. The thing is he rarely bounces of a ceiling, he usually bounces off a wall to get directional light, not trhe flat boring light bounced flash usually gives. He also usually half-snoots/flags his flash so there is no direct flash on the subject. He can replicate window light in many circumstances which is something I appreciate.
 
ianmarsh said:
I was watching a Lovegrove DVD last night - in several shots he just bunged his model against a wall and pinged them with direct flash (no bounce, no nothing). In one case he even stuck his camera on green-P mode, shock horror. The pictures were stunning. Nothing wrong with direct on-camera flash if the shot calls for it.

The NvN link above is also brilliant. This guy's use of bounced flash is just amazing. The thing is he rarely bounces of a ceiling, he usually bounces off a wall to get directional light, not trhe flat boring light bounced flash usually gives. He also usually half-snoots/flags his flash so there is no direct flash on the subject. He can replicate window light in many circumstances which is something I appreciate.
Click to expand...

Yes, but how often does the shot ever really call for it? It might work with beautiful models on occasions, but as a guideline direct = bad.

I did mention earlier in the thread ( I think it was this one) that bouncing works so much better off a wall than the ceiling. The ceiling behind you often works pretty well too.
 
The23rdman said:
Yes, but how often does the shot ever really call for it? It might work with beautiful models on occasions, but as a guideline direct = bad.

I did mention earlier in the thread ( I think it was this one) that bouncing works so much better off a wall than the ceiling. The ceiling behind you often works pretty well too.
Click to expand...

Agree, takes away nasty shadows and can give it some nice direction if done correctly. As mentioned before Neil Van Niekerks book - On Camera Flash goes through all this. Very worthwhile read and not technical apart from I think one diagram
 
The23rdman said:
Yes, but how often does the shot ever really call for it? It might work with beautiful models on occasions, but as a guideline direct = bad.
Click to expand...

That's the issue really, isn't it. Some people take a lot of shots where direct harsh flash is absolutely what they want - often fashion pictures of beautiful people. And there are loads of people who take shots where this is the worst sort of lighting for the pictures thay want. To say on-camera direct is bad is then completely wrong for a (possibly small) subset of people but correct for another group.

In my view, you have to think about the light you want and then think about how to generate it It is wrong to have a default position that light generated in a certain way is bad. If the light you want is best generated by direct on camera flash then go for it.
 
I guess I just don't shoot beautiful enough people. ;)
 
Ooo, Ian, you say the nicest things. That's a self portrait. :D

Smilies are added by clicking the "go advanced" button instead of the quick reply. :)
 
this is a thread of fail on camera flash has a look, this look is usally ****, sometimes it is not

up to you to decide which you want, and the other photographers present to rip the **** if you choose on camera flash and it looks anything but awesome
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top