help, semi dark party photos

[MrJones]

Hi
so I photographed my first party last night and it was a blast.
had a really good time and got a lot of great photos.
one thing bothered me at the beginning though, at first I was taking photos with my 24-105mm f/4 L with a EX580 directed at the ceiling (high ceiling).
photos I took in portrait orientation were dark at the lower half of the photo as you can see in the example.
after I've noticed that, I switched to my 50mm and shot at f/2.5 most of the time and the photos came out great.
I know the example is not a good photo, but I just want to understand the lightning issue. is the extra stop that necessary when taking photos in such low light.
if so.. I'll be running to switch my 24-105 f/4 to the 24-70 f/2.8

any other tips regarding party photography will be appreciated!
and in case you're wondering.. it was a costume party

[tyasa81]

Hi mrjones,

i dont know about the lighting that you have at the party place... and your setup.. but the half body lit picture looks really like a dome diffuser is on your flash pointed at the ceiling, and a lot of spill from the dome is actually doing the lighting on the subject and not the light bounced off the ceiling... i can't see the shadow direction but based on the catchlight on the ball and lack of shadows on the neck, i'm guessing that's what happened... so it's more like on board -on axis flash... the bottom being dark is because the light of the dome is blocked somewhat (it's pointed towards the ceiling right?) hence the uneven-ness of the light on the upper body and lower body... if you do use a dome diffuser, try taking it off and bouncing off the ceiling bare and zoomed so very little direct light spill onto the subject...

btw i'm just deducing here based on my previous experience with half subject flashed (usually the head) and mostly it's due to zoom of the flash being wide and using a 16 on crop (like your 24 on 5d)... so much light spill onto the subject since you're shooting from below the subject and you being very close to the subject as well... with a 50 you're not as close to the subject and you might get better light since the light bounced from the ceiling is the one lighting the subject and not the spill... hence the difference...

f4 to f2.8... you have to look at your photos...i find my 2.8 isn't doing quite well in dark places like you have in your pict... and need even wider aperture... just check your shutter speed in iso... is one stop going to make a big difference? like a 1/30 on max tolerable iso... then it might help to get you 1/60... however if it is 1/10... 1/20 isn't going to make much of a difference... my 2 cents...

hope that helps... since i've seen you helping others so much... hope i'm not talking out of place here..

[MrJones]

thanks for the broad explanation
actually I'm not using any kind of diffuser on the flash since I'm bouncing it off the ceiling (there is no reason to use both).
I get your explanation regarding the distance but the funny thing is that photo was taken at focal length of 47mm, so it's basically 50mm as well.
the full exif for the above shot is f/4.0 1/25 and ISO 1600.

here is another example taken with the 50mm at f/2.5 1/30 and ISO 1600, same flash pointed at the ceiling.
you can see it's much much better.

[tyasa81]

Hi MrJones,

sorry i must have misinterpreted the flash... now i'm stumped... the 2nd one shows a well lit from top to bottom... i can see the effect of the flash on the subject... if both are 50 and the working distance are the same, then the result should be similar... i never experience changing aperture to influence the uniformity of the distribution of light other than just needing less power...

is the ceilings flat? is there like banners/flags/rafters to block the light partially... i'm sorry but i think this is out of my league to analyze the lighting... i hope someone else better knowledgable is able to help you...

[autofocus]

I can't say if this will help with your problem, but we use a diffuser dome on our speedlights and we'll often angle the flash head to about 45 degrees so some of the light bounces off the ceiling and some will fill the lower body area off the diffuser...seems to also help with the raccoon under eye shadows with a little extra fill. Just a thought...

[MrJones]

Originally Posted by autofocus

I can't say if this will help with your problem, but we use a diffuser dome on our speedlights and we'll often angle the flash head to about 45 degrees so some of the light bounces off the ceiling and some will fill the lower body area off the diffuser...seems to also help with the raccoon under eye shadows with a little extra fill. Just a thought...

thanks, can you post an example or two so I could see how it turns out?
if that's the solution - I'll just purchase that dome diffuser.

[MrJones]

Originally Posted by tyasa81

Hi MrJones,

sorry i must have misinterpreted the flash... now i'm stumped... the 2nd one shows a well lit from top to bottom... i can see the effect of the flash on the subject... if both are 50 and the working distance are the same, then the result should be similar... i never experience changing aperture to influence the uniformity of the distribution of light other than just needing less power...

is the ceilings flat? is there like banners/flags/rafters to block the light partially... i'm sorry but i think this is out of my league to analyze the lighting... i hope someone else better knowledgable is able to help you...

actually, now that I think of it, the ceiling was flat but there were those disco balls hanging from the ceiling here and there as well as decorative balls.. maybe they got in the way of the bouncing light...

still.. can't really count on a bare white ceiling everywhere

[autofocus]

Originally Posted by MrJones

thanks, can you post an example or two so I could see how it turns out?
if that's the solution - I'll just purchase that dome diffuser.

Had to do some digging...here's one shot at ISO 100, F/5.6 @ 1/250. I know this was bounced flash, most likely as I described above being that I'll rarely do a bounce straight up off the ceiling. You also have to consider the ambient light conditions too...obviously, this shot had better ambient than what your shots looked like. However, most of the direct ambient was back lighting behind the bride through the windows


C_036f by vmontalbano, on Flickr

[autofocus]

You know there's a handful of other variables you'd have to consider, none least of which are:
-Height of ceiling
-Color of ceiling and walls
-Crowds restricting the light
-Dark colors absorbing light
-How close you are to the subject(s)...you could be blocking some of that light
-Ambient light in the room
-Your shutter speed
-Something, blocking the light

[DelCan]

I normally bounce my light off of the ceiling. When I get a bad pic I can usually think back to a ceiling light or a ceiling fan blocking it. I get pretty decent results using that little white bounce card on my 580EX II.
Just FYI!