 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| PhotoKB HomeDiscussion Groups Digital Photography Digital PhotoDSLR CamerasZLR CamerasPoint & Shoot CamerasFilm Photography 35 mmLarge FormatMedium formatDarkroomFilm and LabsOther EquipmentPhoto Technique Nature PhotographyPeople PhotographyTechnique GeneralGeneral Photo Topics General TopicsAustralian PhotographyUK PhotographyDirectoryPhoto Clubs |
Photo Forum / Photo Technique / People Photography / November 2004Newby back...need help for next step
Hi all Ok...I have an alien bee on order...but have my flash meter now. As mentioned...its a cheapie, but shooting digital I just didn't see the need for a good one that I don't expect to use that much. Its a learning tool. I have come to expect little by way of documentation now-a-days but what came with this meter was pathetic. It merely shows what the buttons do. So...If I use 2 or 3 monos do I meter them one at a time? Crap...I don't even know enough to know which questions to ask. How do I get started?  SignatureThanks, Gene Palmiter (visit my photo gallery at http://palmiter.dotphoto.com) freebridge design group www.route611.com & Route 611 Magazine >So...If I use 2 or 3 monos do I meter them one at a time? Crap...I don't >even know enough to know which questions to ask. How do I get started? I don't know what type of meter you have but if it has a hemishperical dome you should meter one light at a time. If it has flat disk or a dome that retracts into the meter you can meter each light while the others are on, by aiming the meter at the light source. The meter is from that famous high-tech company ...interfit. Got it from B&H. It does have a dome...and from metering one at a time I can come to some sense of the ratio.,..ok...that's a place to start. An I point the meter at the camera. Makes sense. Thanks > >So...If I use 2 or 3 monos do I meter them one at a time? Crap...I don't > >even know enough to know which questions to ask. How do I get started? [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > dome that retracts into the meter you can meter each light while the > others are on, by aiming the meter at the light source. > Hi all > [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > don't even know enough to know which questions to ask. How do I get > started? You can check individual output of each light to establish a desired lighting ratio but your final reading should be with all lights... A. from subject toward camera (if reading incident light) B. of subject (if reading reflected light) In the case of incident (which I preferred) you can vary the reading depending on goal or effect desired. For example, toward camera will give you an average; pointing toward main light will give you an exposure favoring the highlights (more low key effect); toward the fill will favor the shadows (more high key effect). -- dadiOH ____________________________ dadiOH's dandies v3.05... ...a help file of info about MP3s, recording from LP/cassette and tips & tricks on this and that. Get it at http://mysite.verizon.net/xico > You can check individual output of each light to establish a desired > lighting ratio but your final reading should be with all lights... Exposure should be determined by the fill light. >> You can check individual output of each light to establish a desired >> lighting ratio but your final reading should be with all lights... > > Exposure should be determined by the fill light. Say what? Not the main? If taken at face value this seems to me be guaranteed to produce exposure more than a stop off. SignatureDavid Dyer-Bennet, <mailto:dd-b@dd-b.net>, <http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/> RKBA: <http://noguns-nomoney.com/> <http://www.dd-b.net/carry/> Pics: <http://dd-b.lighthunters.net/> <http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/> Dragaera/Steven Brust: <http://dragaera.info/ > Say what? Not the main? If taken at face value this seems to me be > guaranteed to produce exposure more than a stop off. Exposure is based on the fill light. That's the foundation you start from, then add the main to achieve whatever lighting ratio you're after...and then add whatever accent lights are desired. Now, I should probably qualify this. With film, you did densitometer tests to determine where the shadows should fall on the curve. With digital, it would be different. I haven't used my studio stobes with digital yet so I can't say. >> Say what? Not the main? If taken at face value this seems to me be >> guaranteed to produce exposure more than a stop off. > > Exposure is based on the fill light. That's the foundation you start > from, then add the main to achieve whatever lighting ratio you're > after...and then add whatever accent lights are desired. But the main is generally a stop brighter than the fill, yes? So doesn't this give rather burned out highlights? > Now, I should probably qualify this. With film, you did densitometer > tests to determine where the shadows should fall on the curve. With > digital, it would be different. I haven't used my studio stobes with > digital yet so I can't say. Not really different, I think, except in fine details. SignatureDavid Dyer-Bennet, <mailto:dd-b@dd-b.net>, <http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/> RKBA: <http://noguns-nomoney.com/> <http://www.dd-b.net/carry/> Pics: <http://dd-b.lighthunters.net/> <http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/> Dragaera/Steven Brust: <http://dragaera.info/ >>> Say what? Not the main? If taken at face value this seems to me >>> be guaranteed to produce exposure more than a stop off. [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > But the main is generally a stop brighter than the fill, yes? So > doesn't this give rather burned out highlights? It gives overexposed film. If the ratio is high it gives *grossly* overexposed film. -- dadiOH ____________________________ dadiOH's dandies v3.05... ...a help file of info about MP3s, recording from LP/cassette and tips & tricks on this and that. Get it at http://mysite.verizon.net/xico > >> You can check individual output of each light to establish a desired > >> lighting ratio but your final reading should be with all lights... [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > Say what? Not the main? If taken at face value this seems to me be > guaranteed to produce exposure more than a stop off. Don't place too much clearance in Randall. > > You can check individual output of each light to establish a desired > > lighting ratio but your final reading should be with all lights... > > Exposure should be determined by the fill light. This is the first time something here didn't sound right. The fill is usually less than the main? Oh...maybe you mean its determined by the fill....and adjusted from there. No...that can't be right...maybe you mean....if the main is the light by the camera then it fills the face...the fill then lights up the shadows....not....it must be brighter than the main....and casts the shadows? So by metering off the fill you are metering off the brightest light....is that how you mean it? > This is the first time something here didn't sound right. The fill is > usually less than the main? Oh...maybe you mean its determined by the [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > shadows? So by metering off the fill you are metering off the brightest > light....is that how you mean it? In a basic two-light setup, you have one light (generally large and soft) that is the fill light - or the shadows if you will. The main light is what provides direction. For a basic 3:1 ratio, the main should be one stop brighter than the fill and both are on the same side of the camera. Short lighting is preferable for most people - where the side of the face to the camera is in shadow. > > This is the first time something here didn't sound right. The fill is > > usually less than the main? Oh...maybe you mean its determined by the [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > Short lighting is preferable for most people - where the side of the > face to the camera is in shadow. OK...I will try to rephrase to get it down... http://palmiter.dotphoto.com/CPViewAlbum.asp?AID=1928329&IID=60176348&Page=1 This is an uneducated shot using two strobes....mug shot set up. I have 2 low-powered strobes now...and have a higher power one coming. I have brellas for all. So I set my best one near camera position...it's 800Ws...with a belle. Set another (just 120ws I think) 30 or so degrees to the side away from the camera...just out of frame...for some shadows to shape the face with shadows. The third light (120ws) can be behind the model and light the backdrop and bounce back to light hair (until I get a light with a snoot to light just the hair). Number 1 (main) should have a brella...the other two should not. Is that about right? Once I get this part right...then we discuss metering....I meter off the one to the side? The fill? And adjust the main to not over power the fill? > I have 2 low-powered strobes now...and have a higher power one > coming. I have brellas for all. So I set my best one near camera [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > light just the hair). Number 1 (main) should have a brella...the > other two should not. Is that about right? There *is* no "right". The right setup is one which does what you want it to do. A simple, normal situation is to use a large source (umbrella/soft box) for the fill as doing so will just about preclude distracting/conflicting shadows from the fill. But that doesn't mean one *has* to; hell, I've used spots for fill...true spots, totally collimated light. What you are looking for is a set of rules: do this and you will always be safe. Such exist (check PPA) and it doesn't hurt to know them, just don't treat them as gospel as they are creativity stiflers. Much better to try various things, assess the results and figure out *why* you like or dislike an effect. ____________________ > Once I get this part right...then we discuss metering....I meter > off the one to the side? The fill? And adjust the main to not over > power the fill? No. Meter as I told you. "Draw" with the main, use the fill to lighten shadows to the extent desired. You can even use NO fill. Or you can use two fill lights. Or more. When you know more, you can use fill lights both to fill and create additional highlights and/or shadows. -- dadiOH ____________________________ dadiOH's dandies v3.05... ...a help file of info about MP3s, recording from LP/cassette and tips & tricks on this and that. Get it at http://mysite.verizon.net/xico > There *is* no "right". The right setup is one which does what you > want it to do. True....I am just looking for some place to start. I don't use rules when I shoot without lights....I expect to be breaking them soon enough with lights. I am just looking for some place to start. With natural light I can see it....with flash....not so much. Heck...its digital....I can see....I can fix. But, I want to learn what those who came before discovered. >> > You can check individual output of each light to establish a desired >> > lighting ratio but your final reading should be with all lights... [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > shadows? So by metering off the fill you are metering off the brightest > light....is that how you mean it? Yeah, I'm confused too. But Randall sounds like he's talking from long experience making it work, which is a good indication he knows something :-). So I'm querying and trying to understand, and I imagine I'll end up learning something one way or the other. SignatureDavid Dyer-Bennet, <mailto:dd-b@dd-b.net>, <http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/> RKBA: <http://noguns-nomoney.com/> <http://www.dd-b.net/carry/> Pics: <http://dd-b.lighthunters.net/> <http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/> Dragaera/Steven Brust: <http://dragaera.info/ >>>> You can check individual output of each light to establish a >>>> desired lighting ratio but your final reading should be with all [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > something :-). So I'm querying and trying to understand, and I > imagine I'll end up learning something one way or the other. Randall is talking PPA (Professional Photographers of America) standard. What he is saying is partially right inasmuch as it will give a printable negative under the limited lighting conditions used by the vast majority of portrait photographers. But it will also result in denser than necessary negatives and limits creativity. Moreover, the PPA "standards" flip flop. I used to have an article from the PPA magazine...an article extoling the virtues of the portraits illustrated in the article. The portraits were just about the worst i ever saw and I saved the article to remind me that the PPA is full of sh.t much of the time. -- dadiOH ____________________________ dadiOH's dandies v3.05... ...a help file of info about MP3s, recording from LP/cassette and tips & tricks on this and that. Get it at http://mysite.verizon.net/xico > Randall is talking PPA (Professional Photographers of America) > standard. What he is saying is partially right inasmuch as it will > give a printable negative under the limited lighting conditions used > by the vast majority of portrait photographers. But it will also > result in denser than necessary negatives and limits creativity. This method does not stifle creativity. On the plus side, it gives you consistent, repeatable results every time. You can't recreate the wheel every time a customer walks in the door. > Moreover, the PPA "standards" flip flop. I used to have an article > from the PPA magazine...an article extoling the virtues of the > portraits illustrated in the article. The portraits were just about > the worst i ever saw and I saved the article to remind me that the PPA > is full of sh.t much of the time. Yeah, let's see some of your work. >Yeah, I'm confused too. But Randall sounds like he's talking from long >experience making it work, which is a good indication he knows >something :-). He just said in another post that his experience with studio lights is film-only. That should tell you something right there. Signature<>>< ><<> ><<> <>>< ><<> <>>< <>>< ><<> John P Sheehy <JPS@no.komm> ><<> <>>< <>>< ><<> <>>< ><<> ><<> <>>< > He just said in another post that his experience with studio lights is > film-only. That should tell you something right there. I haven't hooked up my Flashmasters to the 10D yet because I don't want to blow out the electronics. I've got a Quantum radio slave the would isolate the two quite well but need a PC-PC cable which I don't have. Also, what used to be my photo studio is now a recording studio filled with drums, amps, PA stuff, and guitars. > > He just said in another post that his experience with studio lights is > > film-only. That should tell you something right there. [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > Also, what used to be my photo studio is now a recording studio filled > with drums, amps, PA stuff, and guitars. I don't know your strobes or how old they are, but most, if not all, modern strobes are safe with digital cameras. I actually used a volt meter to measure mine before I hooked them to my 10D. They put out a nice steady 8 volts, no problem. I did have problems with a home-made PC cord when I inadvertently reversed the polarity. The thing still worked, but inconsistently, often not flashing. The electronic switches some modern cameras (digital and film) are sensitive to polarity. Only very old flash packs designed to work with purely mechanical cameras put high voltages on the PC cord. Marc > I don't know your strobes or how old they are, but most, if not all, > modern strobes are safe with digital cameras. I actually used a volt > meter to measure mine before I hooked them to my 10D. They put out a > nice steady 8 volts, no problem. I think I bought these in 1977. Looked it up on the Net at one time and the voltage was close but I'd rather not take a chance. >I haven't hooked up my Flashmasters to the 10D yet because I don't want >to blow out the electronics. Three words -- Wein Safe Sync. SignatureMichael Benveniste -- mhb-offer@clearether.com Spam and UCE professionally evaluated for $419. Use this email address only to submit mail for evaluation. >>Yeah, I'm confused too. But Randall sounds like he's talking from long >>experience making it work, which is a good indication he knows >>something :-). > > He just said in another post that his experience with studio lights is > film-only. That should tell you something right there. Not an early adopter? I wouldn't take much more than that from it. I've been shooting mostly digitally since 2000, shooting film seriously before that from 1969. I wouldn't say they're terribly different; not more than negative vs. chrome, say. SignatureDavid Dyer-Bennet, <mailto:dd-b@dd-b.net>, <http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/> RKBA: <http://noguns-nomoney.com/> <http://www.dd-b.net/carry/> Pics: <http://dd-b.lighthunters.net/> <http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/> Dragaera/Steven Brust: <http://dragaera.info/ >> You can check individual output of each light to establish a >> desired lighting ratio but your final reading should be with all >> lights... > > Exposure should be determined by the fill light. So says you and that idiot Texan, Criccio. Other people understand light/exposure. -- dadiOH ____________________________ dadiOH's dandies v3.05... ...a help file of info about MP3s, recording from LP/cassette and tips & tricks on this and that. Get it at http://mysite.verizon.net/xico > So says you and that idiot Texan, Criccio. Other people understand > light/exposure. I've met and studied with Frank, along with a number of other well-known portraitists from across the country. His system worked very well for film. As I said earlier, I haven't done any multi-strobe work in digital yet so there's probably some adjustment in order. Frank's method is technically sound and produces repeatable results every time. > Hi all > [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > So...If I use 2 or 3 monos do I meter them one at a time? Crap...I don't > even know enough to know which questions to ask. How do I get started? The most common way to meter flash is to take an incident reading firing all the heads at once. I imagine your units have built-in slave sensors that are active whenever a wired trigger isn't connected to them, so that's the easiest way to read the light; the flashes all *want* to go off at once anyway. SignatureDavid Dyer-Bennet, <mailto:dd-b@dd-b.net>, <http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/> RKBA: <http://noguns-nomoney.com/> <http://www.dd-b.net/carry/> Pics: <http://dd-b.lighthunters.net/> <http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/> Dragaera/Steven Brust: <http://dragaera.info/ do. > > So...If I use 2 or 3 monos do I meter them one at a time? Crap...I don't > > even know enough to know which questions to ask. How do I get started?> [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > to them, so that's the easiest way to read the light; the flashes all > *want* to go off at once anyway. Right ...all have work as slaves. I plug one into the camera. I cannot see doing all this with a model present....just seems it might take awhile. OK....if I meter with them all going....then how does that show the relationship between them? > do. >> > [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > OK....if I meter with them all going....then how does that show the > relationship between them? In the metering? It doesn't. That's what the modeling lights are for (but only trust them if the room is otherwise dark), or after a while for ordinary setups you just know how they're supposed to me. SignatureDavid Dyer-Bennet, <mailto:dd-b@dd-b.net>, <http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/> RKBA: <http://noguns-nomoney.com/> <http://www.dd-b.net/carry/> Pics: <http://dd-b.lighthunters.net/> <http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/> Dragaera/Steven Brust: <http://dragaera.info/ >Right ...all have work as slaves. I plug one into the camera. I cannot see >doing all this with a model present....just seems it might take awhile. >OK....if I meter with them all going....then how does that show the >relationship between them? It doesn't. It is almost impossible to set up your lights by firing them all at once unless you have a flat disk or retractable disk. Most portrait photographers will do exactly the opposite of what has been suggested here. Generally, the main light is metered by aiming the flashmeter at the main light itself. It isn't aimed at the camera position. This will give you the light falling on the subject. The fill light is metered next and the meter is usually pointing back to the camera (since a fill, by definition is usually as close as possible to the subject-lens axis) and is set to give you the ratio you want to shoot at. Which one you meter first isn't important. If you are using a reflector you meter the fill pointing back to the reflector because it usually isn't in line with the subject-lens axis. For portraiture with negative film I have almost always got better results by simply setting my camera aperture to the fill light setting. Negative film has much more latitude overexposed than underexposed and will usually give you a more printable negative if that's how you shoot it, rather than setting it for the main light or halfway between them. > Ok...I have an alien bee on order...but have my flash meter now. As > mentioned...its a cheapie, but shooting digital I just didn't see the need [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > So...If I use 2 or 3 monos do I meter them one at a time? Crap...I don't > even know enough to know which questions to ask. How do I get started? a paint brush doesn't come with instructions on how to paint... first off, learn to light with one source, to get an image with detail in the highlights down to the shadows, once you can do that, well if you only have one light that the exposure is based on your question is answered. conflicting advice you might hear is because there are two systems of exposure, in the early days everything was based on fill light or a base threshold exposure, you exposed for a fill light by the old maxim, the minimum exposure to get a maximum black. the key was added and the strength adjusted for the desired dramatic effect. modern exposure systems are based on the key light exposure for a couple reasons, many lightings only have a single light, whether its a large softbox, scrim curtain or other northlight/wall of light concepts, or open shade, twilight etc. also digital requires accurate highlight exposure more than negative film stock required shadow/threshold exposure. |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.