Ringflash and red eyes

Alot of people mail me with this question.
When renting or loaning a ringflash they all have problems with red eyes.

This is correct.
The red eye problem is because of the ringflash is mounted very near the camera lens (just like those cheap build in flash units in P&S cameras) and thus you are very prone for the red eye problem.

It can be fixed quite easily however.

1. In photoshop (duh)
2. Use one studio strobe set on full modeling lamp power and aim this at the face of model, the iris will close and when the ringflash fires it will overpower the modelling lamp so you won't have problems with that and the irises are closed allready so no red eye (or very little) is in the final product.
Remember to set the strobe with the modelling light on NO sensor (so it won't flash).
3. An assistant can use a small light and shine it in the models eye, making the same effect.

Hope this helps a bit.

Greetings,
Frank

Frank,
because the models irises have contracted when you capture the image (options 2 & 3), doesn't it change the image to something you may have to mess with anyway in PS. Don't models look better when they have larger pupils?

Is there a point where the light from a torch or modelling lamp, makes the pupils too small?

Emotional Context

Sid Jervis said:

Frank,
because the models irises have contracted when you capture the image (options 2 & 3), doesn't it change the image to something you may have to mess with anyway in PS. Don't models look better when they have larger pupils?

Is there a point where the light from a torch or modelling lamp, makes the pupils too small?

Click to expand...

Part of the human hormal reaction to love/lust is a widening of the pupils. Hence, contracting the pupils will be likely to subconsciously generate a different response. Selling refrigerators this could be a good thing (or bad by showing distrust rather than love of the product). Selling smut it would be a negative. I think that solving one problem here could generate a new one depending on the goals of your image and what you wish to convey. It would definitely be a positive to constrict the pupils if going for a negative image.

That said, I got this piece of physiological behavior off the discovery channel or some such years ago at someone elses home as I do not watch much television left to my own devices I would rather grab the camera and have at it. In short, I could be wrong but do not think so.

some thoughts,

Sean

Sean DeMerchant said:

That said, I got this piece of physiological behavior off the discovery channel or some such years ago at someone elses home as I do not watch much television left to my own devices I would rather grab the camera and have at it. In short, I could be wrong but do not think so.

some thoughts,

Sean

Click to expand...

It is nice to know I am getting up to date information.
IMO I accept what you say, but maybe I am just gullible.

Thanks

angle of the flash is also important

Hi,
I've used a profoto ringflash with models and rarely gotten red eye images. I think the angle of the camera with flash also has a lot to do with creating the red eye. If you are getting some of this another thing to try in addition to what Frank has already pointed out would be changing the angle of the model or camera ever so slightly or change the distance to subject some. Certainly one would want the pupils to be open the proper amount for the scene being rendered. Humans unconsiously read an interpret eye dialation quite readily. When the pupil is constricted more than it should it is a sign of aggression.
Eric

sample images with big pupils and no red eye - profoto acute ringflash

Just to follow up with post from ages ago, here are two images taken with a profoto acute ringflash one close up and one a little further back. I did not have a problem with red eye on this shoot or any actually that I have done with this ringflash. Maybe its because I also used fill lights? Well have a look. You can see that the model's pupils are dialted since the room was fairly dark. The model was an amatuer and so was the photographer... well these are not the best photos of the set but just wanted to pull a few examples.

http://www.eh21.com/BFES8044-v2.jpg
http://www.eh21.com/BFES8131e1d-sm-v2.jpg

Eric

Erik,

It is so much better to have those wide open pupils.

I have changed my feelings and now find the ring light reflections in the pupils perhaps a little weird. I used to like them so much.

Asher

That's the first time I've ever seen them, and I think they're definitely weird. I don't like them at all.

Nill
~~
www.toulme.net

This is what I get with the catchlights, I really don't know how those rings appear.
Even with a softwide adaptor I'm not getting such rings, and I agree they are not very nice to see.

Here my examples:

Yes, I agree the catchlights are wierd

This is the reason that one can buy the softlight reflectors for the ringflash I think. I didn't have mine fitted and I think it would make a difference. Btw- I shot those pictures a little further out...if you shoot up close the ring is not apparent. All this picks up a piece of this thread about how such a small part of the image can make a big difference. The pupil dialation and the catch lights are definitely important to an image even if they are a tiny part of the geography.

I use both the softlight reflector and the bare flash.
The bare flash is my preference for contrast, the softwide for portraits.

With softwide and VERY close shooting you will see the ring a little bit, but much thicker than the examples shown here which are very thin.
I don't have a webbased sample because I hardly use it.

When shooting further away than 1.5 mtrs from the model even the softwide adaptor is nothing more than the same reflection as you get from a beautydish, the ring is not seen.
That's logical because when shooting close the reflection is captured larger (lightsource is larger), when moving away the lightsource gets smaller, thus the catchlight also shrinks.

Frank Doorhof said:

I use both the softlight reflector and the bare flash.
The bare flash is my preference for contrast, the softwide for portraits.

With softwide and VERY close shooting you will see the ring a little bit, but much thicker than the examples shown here which are very thin.

Click to expand...

Frank,

What do you mean by "softwide" versus "softlight"?

Asher

Sorry I meant the soft wide adaptor.

This is best seen as a sort of beautydish you connect to your ringflash, making the ring larger and more diffuse, it has a white coating.

Ringflash

Maybe I'm missunderstanding you but I think exactly the oposite is true. The closer you are to the subject with a ringflash the more apparent the ring-in-the-eyes effect becomes. Further away the ringflash becomes a hard light comparable to a point source - the reflection appears as a single point highlight.

The softlight reflector for the ringflash will just increase the size of the area. Therefor the reflection is the same just the area of light is bigger.

I don't remember a single shot with red eyes that I've done with the softlight reflector. Even without the softlight reflector it was very rarely present but then again I never shoot in dark rooms with the ringflash because they're REALLY annoying for the models. Don't believe it? Flash yourself close up with a ringflash directly into the eyes... when you're closing the eyes now you're seeing the donut shaped rings. I think medium sized pupils are optimal. Completely small or big pupils both look unattractive to me.

BTW:
These shots are all done with the Profoto Ringflash with the softlight reflector:
http://img-x.fotocommunity.com/86/4948086.jpg
http://img-a.fotocommunity.com/ram/new/7954291.jpg
http://img-b.fotocommunity.com/78/7881878.jpg
http://img-b.fotocommunity.com/49/7594149.jpg

Profoto Ringflash Bare bulb without a softlight reflector (off-camera)
http://img-a.fotocommunity.com/ram/new/8163044.jpg

Ringlight without flashing
http://img-a.fotocommunity.com/ram/new/8178863.jpg
http://img-x.fotocommunity.com/85/8253785.jpg
Making-of: http://www.model-kartei.de/bilder/bild/422520/

Cheers
Boris

Eric Hiss said:

This is the reason that one can buy the softlight reflectors for the ringflash I think. I didn't have mine fitted and I think it would make a difference. Btw- I shot those pictures a little further out...if you shoot up close the ring is not apparent. All this picks up a piece of this thread about how such a small part of the image can make a big difference. The pupil dialation and the catch lights are definitely important to an image even if they are a tiny part of the geography.

Click to expand...

Hi Boris,

can't see most of your images - 403-forbidden msg. only

Best wishes,

Ray

"The closer you are to the subject with a ringflash the more apparent the ring-in-the-eyes effect becomes"

and a small aperture makes it even more apparent because of the greater DOF. The light is at double the distance from the lens to the eye, right?

(I'll see if I can find a shot I took of a photographer's window display at Hollywood and Vine. He used a four light setup and lots of power and I could see each light in every eye, along with the ribs in the umbrellas, and parts of the power packs. Very strange looking, IMO.)

Eric Hiss said:

When the pupil is constricted more than it should it is a sign of aggression.

Click to expand...

It's also a symptom of opiate or barbiturate use.