Correct exposure, flash or no flash?

[irenep]

Here is one of my pictures I took yesterday of our friends with Nikon D700 in manual mode at about 4:22pm.
ISO-250
1/250s-F/8
I did not use any flash since I prefer to use natural lighting for majority of my pictures. I measured my exposure just above the horizon recomposed and took the photograph. However, I do not like that fact that person's eyes are dark, I like the background (how I can actually see gray clouds, cause I took this picture overexposed and was able to see person's eyes but the sky was washed out) It tried many times and couldn't get it right. What advise can anybody give to improve my exposure cause I know I'll be taking more similar pictures outside of my friends and my family. And a weather in WA state has recently been cloudy, little sunshine, overcast, in general.
My husband tells me you should use flash but I am just not in favor of flash especially when taking photos outside during daylight.

[SusanH1970]

Using a reflector would have filled in the shadows and put light in their eyes nicely.

[irenep]

Thanks, I have to look into it.

[JFSanders]

With either flash or reflector if done wrong is alarming. You know you done it right when you can't tell it from the ambient light. Making that photograph work without a fill light is one of the most difficult things to do and requires that many aspect come together at the same time and this almost never happens in the real world.

Jim

[irenep]

Wow, I guess I have to learn more about using a flash (I bought a nice one, but never used it) I don't like the build-in flash at all. I guess learning to use reflectors will require some time and lots of practice. Another challenge but also an opportunity for me. Thanks all for your replies.

[inkista]

An example of fill flash...


Canon 5D Mark II, EF 24-105 f/4L IS USM.
@105mm, iso 50, f/8, 1/100s bare, direct, off-camera flash (YN-560), held in my left hand, triggered with RF-602s.

Shot RAW, and converted to JPEG in Lightroom, with no adjustments. Didn't touch one damn slider. No saturation or sharpness was added. This is, essentially, a SOOC shot.

See why we like fill flash? It can increase the contrast and saturation by helping squeeze down the dynamic range. And you can separate the exposures of your subject from the exposure of the background, and balance the two to get a good combination. In this shot, if I hadn't added the flash, you'd only see a silhouette of the flower. If I'd exposed for the flower, the sky would have been white. By underexposing the ambient by two or so stops, and then adding the fill, I got a bright colorful flower, and a blue sky together.

If you want to learn how to use that external speedlight you bought, my recommendation would be to check out Neil van Niekerk's Tangents blog, and his section on flash photography techniques. It's a good place to get started with on-camera lighting. Once you hit the limits on that, it's time to go Strobist.

[kalashluvr]

with a hot-shoe style flash, you could have enough fill light to light up the eyes, and fast enough shutter speed to keep from blowing out the sky behind them. Probably harder than it sounds, but I'm sure I have the theory part correct!

Reflectors, like have been mentioned, work great....gotta have an assistant or a stand though.

[irenep]

Thank you guys very much, very interesting and love the picture of your flower. I will definitely check out the links tonight before I take anymore pictures. I shoot in RAW process in Camera RAW and Photoshop but edit very little. I don't like much editing at all. I guess I have to learn flash photography.