Poor portrait - help appreciated

dinners

dinners

In Memoriam
Suspended / Banned
Messages
15,745
Name
Phil
Edit My Images
Yes
Just after some advise really.

I was sat on the sofa going through some shots and just for the hell of it I fired off a sneaky shot of my two youngest.

The camera / lens / ISO / Aperture combo was out of the bag so loads of obvious issues
  • ƒ/4.0
  • 100.0 mm (100-400 lens)
  • 1/8
  • ISO 100
  • Flash (off, did not fire)
Ryan & James 2 out of focus test by dinners85, on Flickr

The same day I'd bought a speedlight so I quickly swapped the 100-400 for the 24-105 used flash and realised how things can be better.

  • ƒ/4.0
  • 67.0 mm
  • 1/13
  • ISO 100
  • Flash (on, fired
Ryan & James 1 speedlight test by dinners85, on Flickr

Despite the faults I prefer the first but the second (which also isn't that good) has got me thinking that I could actually get some half decent casual portrait pics now if I learned a bit more about flash.

As I shoot landscapes / wildlife I fully understand juggling ISO / shutter speed / depth of focus but the use of a speedlight is new to me.

With that in mind - any advise is welcome for casual flash based portrait / snaps.
 
Last edited:
Hi Phil. I prefer the second as it is better lit and much sharper.

If you're just looking for candids but want to use the flash then try bouncing it over your head to a neutrally coloured wall/surface so not to pick up any colour to the light.
 
I had trouble with low shutter speeds with my flash at things like school plays, were you obviously cant keep doing loads on manual to get the settings right. So ive set my camera (with a bit of help from peeps on here) so it fires at a minimum shutter speed leaving the flash to brighten it for you. So my camera set on av won't go below 1/250. I fire a pre flash to get the exposure lock then shoot. I've found it very helpful. Also I use a diffuser and bounce of the ceiling.

Here's the link to the post regarding flash I posted. https://www.talkphotography.co.uk/threads/flash-set-up-question.571887/
 
minnnt said:
Hi Phil. I prefer the second as it is better lit and much sharper.

If you're just looking for candids but want to use the flash then try bouncing it over your head to a neutrally coloured wall/surface so not to pick up any colour to the light.
Click to expand...

Thanks David - I'll have a play with bouncing off the ceiling. I've also got a diffuser which I'll experiment with.

Raptor Mike said:
I had trouble with low shutter speeds with my flash at things like school plays, were you obviously cant keep doing loads on manual to get the settings right. So ive set my camera (with a bit of help from peeps on here) so it fires at a minimum shutter speed leaving the flash to brighten it for you. So my camera set on av won't go below 1/250. I fire a pre flash to get the exposure lock then shoot. I've found it very helpful. Also I use a diffuser and bounce of the ceiling.

Here's the link to the post regarding flash I posted. https://www.talkphotography.co.uk/threads/flash-set-up-question.571887/
Click to expand...

Thanks Mike - that sounds handy as shooting AV is what I'm used to.
 
When I'm shooting with flash as the primary light source I always shoot Manual, it allows me freedom to still have automaticc exposure (the flash ETTL looks after it) whilst having enough control to know I'll get a result.

I could add loads more but...
Buy the speedlighters handbook by Syl Arena.
 
Phil V said:
When I'm shooting with flash as the primary light source I always shoot Manual, it allows me freedom to still have automaticc exposure (the flash ETTL looks after it) whilst having enough control to know I'll get a result.

I could add loads more but...
Buy the speedlighters handbook by Syl Arena.
Click to expand...

Cheers Phil - I'll check out that book.
 
I stopped using a diffuser and would bounce of a wall behind me or if far enough from subject and with a low enough ceiling i would point the flash head straight up and use built in bounce card to help lighten any shadows and catch the eyes.
Direct unmodified flash works best when it is complimenting ambient light so that the background has detail and is not black/ dark .The flash lifts away the shadows/ fill in flash.
I am always fiddling with FEC.
 
Stowfords34 said:
I stopped using a diffuser and would bounce of a wall behind me or if far enough from subject and with a low enough ceiling i would point the flash head straight up and use built in bounce card to help lighten any shadows and catch the eyes.
Direct unmodified flash works best when it is complimenting ambient light so that the background has detail and is not black/ dark .The flash lifts away the shadows/ fill in flash.
I am always fiddling with FEC.
Click to expand...

minnnt said:
See if you can get a copy of Zack Arias One Light Workshop and or 2.0 or Joe McNallys Language of Light dvds. They'll get you hooked before you can say Off Camera Flash. ;)
Click to expand...

juggler said:
I used to but now find it much easier and more reliable to go fully manual, flash power and all. But then I rarely use flash in fast moving situations.
Click to expand...

Thanks folks
 
minnnt said:
Hi Phil. I prefer the second as it is better lit and much sharper.
.
Click to expand...
At the risk of being a bother causer David...
This is what's wrong with critique on forums (the tendency to go for the technical rather than creative). The first image has lovely modelling (it's not sharp - makes it a binner) but its a 'better' portrait (it might be slightly underexposed, not seriously).
The 2nd image is sharper but just terrible from the use of on camera straight on flash (probably as overexposed as the first is under).

The OP should be aiming for a sharp version of the first.
 
Phil V said:
The OP should be aiming for a sharp version of the first.
Click to expand...

Agreed

That's exactly what I thought.

minnnt said:
Just so happens that it was MY personal preference and opinion. There are no rules set in stone so i completely disagree with you I'm afraid. :D
Click to expand...

I also agree even though I prefer the blurry first one.
 
minnnt said:
Just so happens that it was MY personal preference and opinion. There are no rules set in stone so i completely disagree with you I'm afraid. :D
Click to expand...
You're perfectly entitled too David, but if Phil is going to get as good as you, he'd be better off trying to work out what to improve on the first than 2nd (IMHO) :D.
 
dinners said:
Agreed

That's exactly what I thought.



I also agree even though I prefer the blurry first one.
Click to expand...


I also prefer the first one for all the reasons which Phil gave. The subjects are engaged with the photographer, and I love the subdued lighting and the pose - they look at ease and very natural.
In the second shot the lighting has highlighted too much detail (a seam) on the sofa in the background, and the pose is less natural IMO.
 
Leaving aside the technical issues, ( I'm always doing that as a rank amateur:) ) they're both charming pictures of your children, frozen moments in time which you will always treasure
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top