• Please use real names.

    Greetings to all who have registered to OPF and those guests taking a look around. Please use real names. Registrations with fictitious names will not be processed. REAL NAMES ONLY will be processed

    Firstname Lastname

    Register

    We are a courteous and supportive community. No need to hide behind an alia. If you have a genuine need for privacy/secrecy then let me know!
  • Welcome to the new site. Here's a thread about the update where you can post your feedback, ask questions or spot those nasty bugs!

Two pictures, same place, with and without flash

Antonio Correia

Well-known member
These 2 pictures are different because one has been shot with flash and the other has not.
I like best the one with flash. The balance is better transmitting the ambient of the place.
The model was cooperative. This was shot in the Republic of Ireland where people are nice and kind.
What do you think about these pictures, IYP ?
Without flash
119877921-M.jpg
119876367-M.jpg

Date Taken: 2006-05-23 13:51:53 Date Digitized: 2006-05-23 13:51:53
Date Modified: 2006-12-30 22:49:26 Make: Canon Model: Canon EOS 20D
Size: 2480x3661 Bytes: 2217314 Aperture: f/4.0 ISO: 400
Focal Length: 20mm Exposure Time: 1/80 Fash: Flash did not fire, compulsory flash mode
Exposure Program: Normal program Exposure Bias: 0 ExposureMode: 0
White Balance: auto With flash
119876588-M.jpg
119876886-M.jpg

Date Taken: 2006-05-23 13:52:02 Date Digitized: 2006-05-23 13:52:02
Date Modified: 2006-12-30 23:02:33 Make: Canon Model: Canon EOS 20D Size: 2480x3661
Bytes: 2265863 Aperture: f/4.5 ISO: 400 Focal Length: 18mm
Exposure Time: 0.0166s (1/60) Flash: Flash fired, compulsory flash mode, red-eye reduction mode
Exposure Program: Normal program Exposure Bias: 0 ExposureMode: 0
 

Asher Kelman

OPF Owner/Editor-in-Chief
HI Antonio!

The images are interesting. It's difficult to evaluate the picture, when the most important parts, perhaps, are not to big to see properly. It appears that the subject is made up of the man's head , the map, the hardly started beer and the newspaper waiting to be read.

Most important, the head is so small that one cannot see the lighting on the face sufficiently to judge between the two pictures.

Sure the second image is brighter, but which is better is difficult since we could increase the brightness of the first picture and it might very well have more soft but sculpted lighting because of the window and daylight on the left side of his face.

The flash makes everything brighter but interestingly the pattern of light and shadow from the beer (or is it iced tea? :) ) is hardly changed.

Asher
 

StuartRae

New member
Antonio,

I hope you don't mind me editing your pictures, but I'm posting three versions of your without flash shot.

The first has been processed by the Shadow illuminator plugin.

119876367-SI.jpg


The second has been processed by the Light Machine plugin, using the Shadow/Highlight control.

119876367-LM.jpg


The third has been processed by the Light Machine plugin, using the Virtual Studio control to place a spot light5 on the man and the beer.

119876367-VS.jpg


Happy New Year,

Stuart
 

Antonio Correia

Well-known member
The 2 photos are very similar indeed. They are a few seconds apart, in fact.
I like best the one where I used the flash because it gives a better understanding of the environment, mood, place where he is. It transmits better the ambiance and feeling of the place.
What I like most on the flashed one is the fact that this equipment is hardly noticed.
I can say that here, unwillingly, I have used the flash with good results.
What I am sure is that we have to shoot many pics to get results like this and learn with the practice.
Watch this one
119878230-M.jpg

In this picture we can see the presence of the flash because of its reflections in the wall and sofa. Meanwhile the Guard Dog at the right side, is under exposed ...

Watch how in all the pictures I got the outside of the window balanced with the inside.
I did well and that was intended.

As a matter of fact these photos here are a merge of the same RAW file with different calibrations in order to get the better from the inside and the outside, making the dynamic range wider.

These are reasons why I don't like the solution Stuart gave to the pictures... Anyway, thank you. You did well and finally you probably agree with me, after all...

And yet this (the one above) was not the final picture because of the visible presence of the flash.
I should have tried again placing myself to my right to avoid reflections.
At that moment - I was going to eat the good Irish soup bellow - I was not sufficient clever to see the reflection of the flash and move away.
120008503-S.jpg

Too late now. I can't go back there !

Today - last day of the 2006 - I have been looking at a travel magazine with photos from Morocco. Good gosh, my pictures are far better than those, even being humble (as I say I am and supposed to be).

I'm going to Brazil soon to the beach and I hope to do more and more, better and better pictures.
In March, South India is waiting for me ...
 

Asher Kelman

OPF Owner/Editor-in-Chief
Stuart,

Your effort is interesting to me. However, I'm not sure about the emotional result.

Now I'm going back to Antonio's first picture.

I'm asking myself is this the original image in toto ? The problem is that for me, at least, I wonder what the original image would look like large and whether or not it was actually a landacape format.

We can light this picture but the author's intent must be known. however, ony Antonio knows that.

For example, "I want to express such and such idea or feeling."

Now for your work Stuart I can see the changes but need some description in each image to say what you tried to achieve. I am not diminishing the value of what you have done. It is that I need guidance. This applies to both Stuart and Antonio. Why even change the first image? I have no idea what is wrong with it.

To my taste I'd darken further the area away from the window in order to attempt to increase the drama of the natural window light showing how needed it is and important the man and his private world is.

In a wedding, flash allows instant sunshine to follow the photographer. A window however, has light from heaven. I can see that Antonio, you, have been very careful to only use the flash at low intensity to just add a small amount of light to the image.

However, I need your own description of what you think the differences are according to your own creative intent.

Stuart, thanks for introducing some plugins!

Asher





I took too long writing this and so Antonio's post was being written and posted before I finished my carefully considered comments. So my intuition that Antonio took a larger and landscape picture to capture the ambience of the place was, in fact, what Antonio had decided on too. I also appreciate that during the time I as thinking about the pictures, you, Antonio, were trying to put down in words the true story of the picture.

This is what I mean by context. I appreciate knowing this. Asher
 

Antonio Correia

Well-known member
Asher,
I think I have answered some of your concerns above.

As I already told you somewhere:
When I photograph I have not an explicit intent, mood, context or whatever.
I look, I like what I see and I shoot. As simple as that.

But one thing is true:
I don't like that much the picture with the reflections.
So, I decided to crop and the result are the 1.st photos.

I like best the one with flash.

I think I will not write something else this year. I came from the port, the sun is going away and I made some pics. The last of 2006.

Have a Good, Healthy 2007 !
 

Asher Kelman

OPF Owner/Editor-in-Chief
Antonio Correia said:
Asher
As I already told you somewhere:
When I photograph I have not an explicit intent, mood, context or whatever.
I look, I like what I see and I shoot. As simple as that.

Yes, we do that as well in most cases because we are captivated by the image. We are lost in the moment and we don't have any idea often why we like and why we choose what we do, just that we do.

However, all this is really there in our minds deciding for us how to compose, select and exclude.

You use the word explicit and that is correct. However inderneath it, what's implicit is truly in charge.

Antonio said:
But one thing is true:
I don't like that much the picture with the reflections.
So, I decided to crop and the result are the 1.st photos.

I like best the one with flash.

Well since you worked hard on the window to increase the apparent dynamic range of the entire image, one might also consider using the wall from the unflashed image to replace the parts with distracting reflections.

This issue of non-wanted light from your flash BTW, is important and I thank you for reminding me. I don't but should carry the solution in my camera bag! There's a little simple device with tiny card barn doors for one's flash to keep that side effect from happening.

Antonio said:
I think I will not write something else this year. I came from the port, the sun is going away and I made some pics. The last of 2006.

Have a Good, Healthy 2007 !


Well you have posted a lot in 2006, so you are excused! Occaisionally, such here, I have been forced to examine some important aspect of photography.

Asher
 

StuartRae

New member
Now for your work Stuart I can see the changes but need some description in each image to say what you tried to achieve

Asher,

I was drawn to this image because it could have been me sitting there. When I'm on holiday I frequently find a quiet corner of a pub and sit with a map and a glass of beer, trying to plan next day's walk. So I used the tools at my disposal to try to see better what the man was doing and decided to share the results.
Having seen his map and newspaper I didn't much like the intrusion into his privacy, and thought it best to leave him in his dark corner.

Back to the plugins.

Shadow Illuminator is what I suppose you could call a tone mapper. It's sole purpose is to lift shadow details, and it has very limited controls. I use it quite a lot for landscape shots where I want to preserve the sky.

Light Machine uses a more traditional brightness masking technique and has a much more complex set of controls. Used carefully it can produce great results, but if overdone can create masking haloes. It also has a Virtual Studio mode which creates a spot-light - a bit like an on-camera flash.

And now it's 10pm here in the UK, and time to open my bottle of 12yo Highland Park malt whisky and prepare to welcome 2007. A happy and peaceful New Year to you all.

Best wishes,

Stuart
 

Asher Kelman

OPF Owner/Editor-in-Chief
Thanks Stuart,

Useful info on the plugins! I'm pleased that you worked on it to keep the provacy of the man. I felt that too and for that reason wanted to see more of the room and had the feeling that Antonio must have thought of composing with that in mind. Of course, he doesn't plan with these thoughts in mind, but they were there, I'm sure in the noggins-creativorum!

Asher
 

Antonio Correia

Well-known member
I post the 2.ed picture because it is a example of the use of the flash outside.
We can see that the flash is too present, too hard. It should be more soft.
The flash fills some shadows and make the photo to pop.

Yesterday - I mean last year - I shot dogs in the port and I was sorry I did not bring the flash.
As you can see it's obvious that with the flash it would be much better !
I was lazy enought not to go and get it, as it was in the car 150 meters away. Shame.

Now, I am doing something which is very good and useful: I have 2 cameras on me with two different lenses.
I should have carried one with the flash.
I did it this morning with the tree.

(Always use bigger font IYP. Much better for everyone I think)
120032901-S.jpg
120260476-S.jpg






This is an incorrect post. The font is all large, that is like all CAPS and implies shouting. The images are off topic. Anything like this belong a PM or one's diary. Please show restraint. :) Asher
 
Last edited:

Asher Kelman

OPF Owner/Editor-in-Chief
With subject by a window portraits the challenge is to have the light on the window side not over expose that side of the face and at the same time have sufficient detail in the rest of the picture to the extent needed by the design.

Here are some of the many tools possible:

1. Adding a reflector to use the natural light to open the shadows.

2. Adding diffused light with shaping with care to not ruin the apearance of a window-lit ambience.

This requires not making extra shadows or vbeing able to remove them and not adding bright area which are out of place.

3. Adding a dark card to the side away from the light to prevent light reflecting back to the shadowed side of the subject

4. Adding minimal hidden lights behind the subject to give some depth and context.

In this case, the highlights on the wall and sofa caused by ther flash can now be simply toned down or swapped out in CS2. Or else at the time of the picture, a black card to the side of the flash might have achieved the same purpose.

Asher
 

Asher Kelman

OPF Owner/Editor-in-Chief
Antonio,

Since you did post two options, I wanted to emphasize that to me the first picture is what I'd work with. It is natural so there can be little wrong to start with. It's adding light than can cause complications. Not to say thay your adding light is wrong, just that it's more challenging to compete with God.

Asher
 

Antonio Correia

Well-known member
Asher Kelman said:
With subject by a window portraits the challenge is to have the light on the window side not over expose that side of the face and at the same time have sufficient detail in the rest of the picture to the extent needed by the design.

Here are some of the many tools possible:

1. Adding a reflector to use the natural light to open the shadows.

2. Adding diffused light with shaping with care to not ruin the apearance of a window-lit ambience.

This requires not making extra shadows or vbeing able to remove them and not adding bright area which are out of place.

3. Adding a dark card to the side away from the light to prevent light reflecting back to the shadowed side of the subject

4. Adding minimal hidden lights behind the subject to give some depth and context.

In this case, the highlights on the wall and sofa caused by ther flash can now be simply toned down or swapped out in CS2. Or else at the time of the picture, a black card to the side of the flash might have achieved the same purpose.

Asher

Asher,
You are wright about all this.
But when we are in the field, sometimes it's hard to make a quick decision.
Mainly when the soup is getting cold ...

Anyway, it's good to think about it and read your - and every one else - posts as they improve our knowledge and know-how

Thank you. :)
 

Antonio Correia

Well-known member
Asher Kelman said:
Antonio,

Since you did post two options, I wanted to emphasize that to me the first picture is what I'd work with. It is natural so there can be little wrong to start with. It's adding light than can cause complications. Not to say that your adding light is wrong, just that it's more challenging to compete with God.

Asher

I like to use the flash in a so subtle way, that we don't almost know it is there.
(On the opposite of my dirty character !)

This is where the photo of the tree comes in... The flash is too present, too noticed. Not a good picture.
I should have shot 3 or 4 with different flash intensities.
And with the CPF !
 

Antonio Correia

Well-known member
Again

I am treating some of the photos I shot in the Republic of Ireland.
I would like you to have a look at this one.
The one in the left is straight from raw file with automatic adjustments.
The one on the right is after treatment. I melted 3 different pictures to get it.
I like it. Do you ? The flash is not that subtle I know, but here ...
I shot 3 different pictures on location with different measurements of light.
120315654-M.jpg
120312417-M.jpg
 

Asher Kelman

OPF Owner/Editor-in-Chief
Again, Antonio, is this the entire picture you framed?

That's important since this window must be judged in that context only!

As far as lighting is concerned, it is counterintuitive, an in fact against physics, to see more light proximal than distal when looking toward a souurce of light.

So this is where flash or other sources of light can degrade the drama of window light.

One would expect some subtle shadows from the peumbra caused by the opening.

Still, as far as the stones themselves are concenred the second image shows much improved color, tonality and reality than the first.

However, it has to remaining issues:

1. No shadows from the window penumbra.

2. No sky detail.

The garden, however, is beautiful.

Dealing with shadowed areas is somewhat like ehtics; it's not what you can do it more what you should do!

Here the stones have been very well shown with great detail. Adding back shadows would be wonderful, even if you didn't discern them.

It's possible that the flash abolished them.

Asher
 

Antonio Correia

Well-known member
Asher,

The photo on the left is the entire picture.

The sky was gray. It was raining and the sky was overcast.
In the picture the sky is washed out but I had no chance.

If I had not used the flash I would have nothing but a dark area, to get a proper exposition of the outside.

This picture is different from the other one.
Here I wanted to capture the window (it has a special name which I don't know the English for), the stones of the castle where it was built and the panorama.

In the pub I wanted to get the man, the ambience, the mood of the room and the window with a little bit of what it was outside.
And outside, it was a sunny day.

Thank you Asher. :)
 

Asher Kelman

OPF Owner/Editor-in-Chief
Now that I understand your intent, i'd suggest, if I may, that whenever one takes such pictures include an underexposed shot to get the scene outside the window and thewn its so simple to combine.

Since this is a retouch forum, I'd

1. add some shadows. There must have been some without the flash.

2. Add sky to the outside (clone from another image if needed)

3. use gradients, 4 in all alligned so that the light is dimmed near us, one gradient for each of the 4 stone sides of the window well or else use a lighting plugin to do the same. It must end up with the walls brighter near the window!

Asher
 

Tim Armes

New member
Asher Kelman said:
It must end up with the walls brighter near the window!
Asher

Hmmm...

This picture doesn't seem unnatural to me. While the above statement seems logical if we assume that the photographer is truely inside, it's more often the case with ruins such as these that there is no roof, so the daylight hits from the photographers side as well. This maybe why I'm not shocked...

Tim
 

Asher Kelman

OPF Owner/Editor-in-Chief
Tim Armes said:
Hmmm...

This picture doesn't seem unnatural to me. While the above statement seems logical if we assume that the photographer is truely inside, it's more often the case with ruins such as these that there is no roof, so the daylight hits from the photographers side as well. This maybe why I'm not shocked...

Tim

Tim,

Quite true! I hadn't thought of that. Yes it's possible. Still shadows and light gradient sculpt scenes and so bring more interest. Using flash one often risks abolishing delicate shadows (which can be realized with CS2 and judicious use of curves).

Unless one is documenting something for the police or the pathologist, one wants dimensionality generally not even lighting!

Asher
 

Michael Fontana

pro member
Asher Kelman said:
....... one wants dimensionality generally not even lighting!
Asher

Yep, that's it....
talking about the old castle's shot; in terms of space and dimensionality:

the left pict looks unnaturally to me in the sense, that one uses ONE light source only, which in that case would be the sun - behind the clouds - with a clearly visible backlight, as the trees show. The left shot has to much of added flash: a 2nd lightsource which challenges the main one - the sun. The flash not beeing a fill anymore, but becoming a 2nd main light. In my understanding, this is a nono, as everbody knows, that there is one sun only.

Sort of similar rule, as avoiding double- and cross-shadows for "naturally" scenes. For interiors with some artificial light sources these rules are not applied.

2nd, I like the right shot better, for the representation of the stone walls: showing its texture, with the green moos on it, its roughness (heck; its not evenly moulded concret), this all gives me a much better feeling, how the wall were.

In these situations, a tripod with bracket shots are be a big help; as it allows - with HDR or manually blending in PS - to generate a naturally looking photo.

Beeing a architecture photographer, since going digital, the studio flashes remain at the studio for 99.9 %, and I' m using available light only. I'm convinced that without strobes, the shots much show better the light quality of a building - and not my add-ons, the strobes.
 

Antonio Correia

Well-known member
The 2 photos of the stones and the window, are the same.
The one on the right was treated with 3 files together and a mask carefully done on the lights and shadows.

I agree that Architecture is better shown without lights.
After all, Architecture is about spaces and light :)

I saw your pictures on your site and both, the photos and the Architecture are very nice.
Thank you for commenting. :)
 

Michael Fontana

pro member
Antonio Correia said:
The 2 photos of the stones and the window, are the same.
The one on the right was treated with 3 files together and a mask carefully done on the lights and shadows.........

ooops, I see, now (and might look dull..)

So you did a good job, in editing, and you made a much more powerfull image.

I agree, architecture is about space and light - often space is best represented by shadows - the absence of light.

regards, Michael
 

Antonio Correia

Well-known member
Michael Fontana said:
ooops, I see, now (and might look dull..)

So you did a good job, in editing, and you made a much more powerfull image.

I agree, architecture is about space and light - often space is best represented by shadows - the absence of light.

regards, Michael

Thank you for the comment Michael :)
 
Top