At 10:40 4/8/02, Walt Wayman wrote:
---------- Original Message ----------------------------------
From: "John A. Lind"
Date: Sun, 07 Apr 2002 23:36:13 -0500
>The use of on-camera flash for "nature" macros is obvious in the
>photograph. It creates a harsh, very direct frontal
>lighting "look" to them.
I most respectfully and humbly feel I must register a mild
disagreement, and I would reference my TOPE 8 submission as an
example of on-camera flash that produces results I wouldn't
exactly describe as either harsh or direct frontal lighting. It's
a technique in progress, and I'm getting better at it.
Walt Wayman
Walt,
My definition (others may vary in how to describe it):
On-camera = in the prism hot shoe, or a ring-light around the lens.
Read the description of your setup. If I understand it correctly, it is an
approximation of what portraitists would call "loop" lighting. Even though
the rig was all tied together, it is not the direct frontal lighting that
"on-camera" (by my definition) produces. Furthermore, you paid attention
to balancing the light you provided with ambient background. It's how you
were able to achieve something that looks much more natural.
If you had mounted the flash heads directly on each side of the lens filter
ring (approximating a ring light with two flash heads), or used one of them
in the camera hot shoe, and set up the flash level to overwhelm the
ambient, I would bet money the photograph would look much, much different
(the "black background" you wrote about avoiding).
I've recently found some of the lighting angles that look OK from pure
lighting angle, but need to work more on attaining sufficient diffusion and
perhaps provide some fill. I may try a bounce scheme next using a flat
reflector (versus an umbrella).
-- John
< 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 >
|