5/22/01 11:33:15 AM, Winsor Crosby <wincros@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>Acer,
>
>I am not a flash expert, but I have read several articles that
>explain that the harshness of light is dependent on the size of the
>source and its closeness to the subject. If your source is the same
>size and at the same distance, diffuse or not, there will be little
>or no difference in the lighting of the subject. A couple of these
>articles have been illustrated with photos that demonstrate what they
>say. That is why pros use those big umbrellas and light boxes and put
>them so close to the subject. The light comes from a wide angle. The
>best you can hope for with something like that is that light will be
>deflected to walls and ceiling which will reflect some light onto the
>subject if the surfaces are near. You might take a more direct
>approach that would put more of the light on the surfaces that will
>reflect onto the subject.
Bounce flash you mean. I could try that (as i've done before with pleasing
results), but i don't know what the inside of the venue looks like right
now. Depending on size/location I might have to abandon all this and go
straight flash (using 160 film rated 125) to avoid opening up beyond
f5.6.
/Acer V
--
dum spiro, spero
note new email address & webpage location
http://users2.ev1.net/~wesiddiquis/siddiq/
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|