Flash Silhouettes - How I Took It
In the popular How I Took it section of the Digital Photography School Forums Sana posted about how they took this ‘flash silhouette’ shot. It’s a striking technique and one that I thought more DPS readers might enjoy experimenting with. Sana’s done a great job but feel free to stop by the thread on the forums to make comments and suggestions on how they could improve it.
Where I took it: in eastern outskirts of Belgrade, Serbia, 2 min walk from my apartment.
Gear: just Canon Powershot S3 IS
Settings:
Exposure: 0.017 sec (1/60)
Aperture: f/2.7
Focal Length: 6 mm
Exposure Bias: 0/3 EV
Flash: Flash fired, auto mode, red-eye reduction
Post processing: none, this is straight from the camera.
Canon S3 IS does not decrease the DOF on larger apertures much, so f/2.7 worked well here – all branches are pretty sharp. There could be no focusing, it was too dark (one more reason for increased DOF). Shooting this in auto mode and even without focusing makes it as simple as it can possibly get!
So, this isn’t about an interesting technique – it’s more about the idea. I’ve been drawn to trees as long as I can remember. I also photograph it often, but they rarely come out as interesting as they are in the nature. Here, the high contrast between illuminated branches and the black background maximizes the structure and the spreading of the branches, giving the tree the vivid impression of movement. All disturbing elements in the background visible in the daylight (street, buildings, cars, other trees) are eliminated.
All the branches are almost equally illuminated, and there isn’t much depth in the photo. It’s all about the pattern here. I needed to choose the branch that is not too busy with smaller branches, also the one that is not too close to the ground or other elements in the background that could be illuminated by the flash. Also, I made sure that the closest branches are approximately at the same distance from the flash.
There are also interesting post processing tricks that can be done later with this kind of photos. When I lowered the midtones in some of them, the further branches appeared darker, and the colors came up stronger. That added the depth to the photos, and also defined the structure of the branches closer to the camera, undisturbed by the branches in the background.
The cloning of the unwanted branches is very easy. Also, playing with curves, changing the tones of illumination can give interesting results.
On this photo for example I lowered mid tones; I also darkened few overly exposed spots, cloned some branches off and increased saturation a bit.
You can see some more of these of photos on my Flickr: http://www.flickr.com/photos/99114645@N00/. I really had a great time taking and editing the photos. Also I’ve been wondering if this ‘flash silhouettes technique’ can be applied to something else than just trees… Any idea?
Any C&C of the photos are welcome too. Thanks!
Read more posts like 'Flash Silhouettes - How I Took It'
Digital Photography School is Digg proof thanks to caching by WP Super Cache!
I just don’t see the point. What’s so “striking” about harsh flash lighting? That unnatural light completely washes out the bark’s natural color, and dulls the reds and greens. There is nothing redeeming in the photo other than the naturally beautiful shape of the branches, which would have been better represented against the dawn or dusk sky.
I agree with Raoul. This technique does nothing for me at all. Maybe if it were in black and white?
I guess the key idea is the “silhouette”. Often you lose detail in shadow, while this method loses detail in light. It’s about the pattern and shape.
IMHO, yes, but still, the idea behind it is a good concept, I don’t believe this is the maximum expression of inverse silhouette, there is way much more work to be done, so far I see a tree with very harsh lighting
couldn’t this entire article have been summed up as “see tree at night, use camera”?
these last few How I Took It posts have been a bit of a stretch imho.
raoul, that’s the exact same thing i said. it’s an overexposed picture of a tree branch.
and it’s not ’silhouettey’ enough to really be a reverse silhouette.
The first shot works better than the second one. In the first photo there’s some symmetry that looks nice and everything is uniformly bright. The second, to me, just looks like a mistake where the light from the flash illuminated the wrong thing. This is something I’ve done accidentally many times.
I love the technique and could see a large print of such a shot hanging above my fireplace - thanks, I’m going to give it a go.
I prefer to use this technique in daylight. Expose the foreground for the flash effectively turning the background black. That way you don’t have to sacrifice the foreground detail.
LIke this photo
I like these. I am tempted to play around with the technique because using the flash to illuminate a tree can give you a much better idea of how the branches are arranged in 3D space. It’s effectively drawing a depth map on whatever you are photographing. It would be fun to try this on something with a dense network of branches, maybe shooting straight up from underneath.
as the comments here reflect - this isn’t a technique for everyone (nor is it one that I think anyone including the author says is perfect). I guess it shows us yet again just how much personal preferences play a part in determining what is good photography.
thanks everyone for the comments.
Guys, these photographs are what this person finds appealing. Photography isn’t always about accurate reproduction of an object. As much as one painter uses his brush one way, another uses it completely different and yet both can produce interesting art.
As my friend and teacher Christopher Grey say’s ” other than the law’s of physics..there are no rules to photography” I think it’s a nice shot. But then photography is a subjective artform to everyone….except photographers.:)
Interesting technique. People talk about “reverse silhouette” but what is this? A pure white object against a black background?
I’ll give it a go. Something different from the black on white sillhouette.
Don