Sioux Falls - Balancing ambient with on-camera flash

[IABoomer]

We went to Sioux Falls, SD this weekend. While hanging out at the falls with the family, I saw this spot and thought it could make a fun portrait. I asked my sister-in-law if she wanted to hop up on this wall and she did. I have no experience shooting portraits and didn't try to pose her in any way.

I popped the flash up, framed, shot, and realized I wasn't quite paying attention and forgot that the shutter speed slowed to 1/200 as opposed to the 1/640-1/800 I had been shooting at. Silly me. So, sitting at ISO 200, shutter speed 1/200 so it can't go faster, I dialed down the aperture to knock down some of the ambient and get the flash to fill her in. Now, knowing that I'd be better off with a strobe/diffuser, does the lighting work okay here?


On the rocks by IABoomerFlickr, on Flickr

Camera Nikon D5000
Exposure 0.005 sec (1/200)
Aperture f/5.0
Focal Length 35 mm
ISO Speed 200
Exposure Bias 0 EV
Flash On, Return detected

[SusanH1970]

No offense, but it's not working for me, Boomer. The flash is just too harsh and flat. When I can't go off-camera, I try to see if there's something white I can use to bounce my flash (even my husband wearing a white shirt has done the trick nicely!).

ETA: Just re-read your post - you were using the popup flash? That's always tough to work with. There's a homemade bounce card you can make using a white index card that works like a charm. I'll see if I can find a link.

[IABoomer]

Thanks, Susan. I've seen some of the DIY diffusers for the popup flashes, but I haven't taken the time to try building one then experimenting with it.

One of these days, I'm sure I'll find myself getting some speedlites, wireless triggers, etc., but for now, I'll keep futzing with what's available.

[Ambrosia76]

I actually made a bounce card using the glossy side of some left over photo paper and it works better than the index card. I just cut a rectangle slightly bigger than a business card,popped up my flash and marked on the back where I needed slits and cut 2 slits and bend back the center to insert it.

[JFSanders]

Do you have a polarizing filter? It would help you out here. And tell her she is beautiful. What a smile! Jim

[sk66]

What mode were you working in? The camera will want different *importance* of illumination from the flash based upon the mode...(i.e. it's "fill" in aperture priority).

Generally, when working with a dumb camera (i.e. full auto program everything P&S) I can get much better flash exposure just by setting a negative exposure compensation. In this case I think you could have done the same as everything is quite bright.

[IABoomer]

Originally Posted by Ambrosia76

I actually made a bounce card using the glossy side of some left over photo paper and it works better than the index card. I just cut a rectangle slightly bigger than a business card,popped up my flash and marked on the back where I needed slits and cut 2 slits and bend back the center to insert it.

I've been seeking out some DIY solutions. I'm sure I'll setup a controlled experiment (camera, tripod, stuffed animal) to see if I can get something softer and figure out how the camera adjustments apply.

Originally Posted by JFSanders

Do you have a polarizing filter? It would help you out here. And tell her she is beautiful. What a smile! Jim

With the sky being overcast, I'm not sure how much effect a polarizer would have, unless you're saying it could add some dimension to the flash lighting. Yes, the girls are all pretty. They take after their mother.

Originally Posted by sk66

What mode were you working in? The camera will want different *importance* of illumination from the flash based upon the mode...(i.e. it's "fill" in aperture priority).

Generally, when working with a dumb camera (i.e. full auto program everything P&S) I can get much better flash exposure just by setting a negative exposure compensation. In this case I think you could have done the same as everything is quite bright.

I'm sure given some time I could have tinkered with the flash compensation. I'm also kind of thinking, and someone please correct me if I'm wrong, but if I bumped the aperture up a bit to knock down less of the ambient, the camera would have applied less flash to fill in.

Thank you all for the feedback so far. I think posting your mistakes makes for a much better learning experience.

[tyasa81]

Hi IABoomer... in my experience... if you are at aperture priority mode... it doesn't fill less if you bumped up the aperture... what you need is to use the +/- compensation if you want to lower the ambient... basically it's like this

assuming everything is at 0 at first
whatever aperture value - normal metering (ie in your case sky blown out...) so if you want the sky and water not to blow out
reduce +/- compensation... (maybe -1?) so sky is not blown out...BUT subject which is flash lit also becomes dark... this compensation also effect flash value in ttl...
increase flash compensation to taste if subject is too dark (because of above +/- comp setting)... to get it lit better...obviously i agree with susans critique that off camera is better, but with on camera, i think this is your only option without any diffusers / attachment @ that time...


another way is what i usally do if i have such a scene... manual mode 1/200 shutter, set aperture to 0 compensation... flash in ittl... take one shot... give it a rough eye ball... increase aperture if ambient is too bright, while lowering flash value if the person in front is too nuked... take 2nd shot... and leave before wife nags at me :P ... i can change aperture much faster than exp comp as i dont need to hold a button down for that... flash in ttl is independant (i find in personal experience) of aperture value that i used as a test shot... if i like the subject light, then i leave it alone... so you get minimal interaction between the foreground (flash compensation) and background (aperture)..

hope that helps

I think posting your mistakes makes for a much better learning experience.

But i want to see your best shot so i can be inspired too!!!

[JFSanders]

Yes, the polarizer is to help lower the ambient so that the flash doesn't have to work so hard to fill the shadows. By using a rotating polarizer you can reduce the light as needed up to a stop or two. And it will also help to reduce background clutter. Jim

[sk66]

I A/S(TV) modes the camera is always in balance fill mode.

In A it will change SS and flash output to accommodate the desired aperture. In S(TV) it will change flash output and aperture (and may require High speed sync) in order to balance at the selected SS.

In A/S(TV) modes, doing anything to the adjust the ambient light intake (aperture/ND/Extra light) will not change the ratio of fill to ambient. Reducing the exposure comp pulls both the fill and the ambient down together.

In P (dummy mode) the assumption is you need light in order to handhold the camera (too much of a novice to use one of the other modes or own a tripod). It will expose for the subject and let the background fall where t will.

In P mode, adjusting the ambient will change the ratio (flash still powers for "correct" subject exposure but background exposure changes) and exposure comp also adjusts the ratio ("over/under" exposure of subject w/ background staying "the same")

In manual everything does what you tell it to.

With external camera flash these limitations for A/S modes can be overcome by setting exposure comp separately on the unit itself (in A/S modes)....and some more advanced cameras have separate flash exposure comp adjustments for the built in (my D300 did).

In this case you would need to go P or M to get the controllability you needed (or have separate flash exposure comp control). Yep, sometimes Program mode really is better.

However, part of your problem may have been the large black sweater and metering mode since her face and the BG are "overexposed" a bit. In this case basic exposure comp will reduce the exposure of both the subject and BG evenly.