Fill Flash at the Beach?

We are on vacation in sunny SC. Went to the ocean beach today. Not a cloud in the sky. Had my D90 with me.

A women was near us taking posed pictures of three young girls. I notice they stayed after the picture session, so they might have been her girls. Whatever.

The first thing I noticed was her equipment. I could not tell the brand (I am guessing Nikon), but it was definately professional stuff. The camera body was twice the size of my D90.

The second thing I observed was she was using flash. She had one of the deli container size diffusers on the flash and had the flash directed to the sky. It is hard to believe that the diffuser would give enough fill in direct sunlight to make a difference. She was shooting at a distance of 10' or so. But then again, she seemed to know exactly what she was doing so I have to believe it would make a difference.

Can this be?
--

Nikon D60, D90, SB-400, SB-800, Nikkor: 60mm Macro, 70-300mm, 50mm 1.8, 18-55, 55-200, 35 1.8

A diffuser like a Stofen Omnibounce? If so it was doing nothing other than making her batteries work harder as far as I know (noob alert - I AM a noob so take this with a pinch of salt). My understanding is that the diffusers only soften the light by spreading it out so that when it bounces off the walls in all directions it forms a fill light and therefore creates the soft effect. However, since there were no walls to bounce off this was a fairly pointless exercise and all she managed to do was reduce the amount of light hitting the subject - something more efficiently done just by turning the flash power down...

I could be wrong but thats what i think - you often see pro's running around outdoors with omnibounces on their flashes - my understanding is that its a waste of time based on reading at strobist.com.

Yes I believe it was an Stofen Omnibounce. She kept adjusting the flash head, so she, I would think, did believe the flash was doing something. I still can't believe it was.
--

Nikon D60, D90, SB-400, SB-800, Nikkor: 60mm Macro, 70-300mm, 50mm 1.8, 18-55, 55-200, 35 1.8

Up, down, sideways; something like the omnibounce is putting soft, round, wrapping light out there. I might differ with her approach of aiming it up but she was still getting fill in strong sun through her milk jug adapter. She was obviously making ISO, shutter speed, aperture, strobe adjustments while using it.

It all works if you understand the principles.
--
BigPixel / Hawaii

That's not the issue. The issue is, was the flash + Stofen effectively adding fill flash. Flash head pointed up + Stofen + no ceiling to bounce off + 10' = she was wasting batteries.

I'm curios to know how BixPixel thinks she was "wrapping light". I wasn't aware that a flash attachment could caused light to travel in a curved line.

BigPixel said:

Up, down, sideways; something like the omnibounce is putting soft,
round, wrapping light out there. I might differ with her approach of
aiming it up but she was still getting fill in strong sun through her
milk jug adapter. She was obviously making ISO, shutter speed,
aperture, strobe adjustments while using it.

It all works if you understand the principles.
--
BigPixel / Hawaii

Click to expand...

Please explain the principles then because i can not see how a diffuser with nothing to bounce light off can soften anything. Light travels in straight lines for all practical purposes. AFAIK the omnibounce sends light in all directions. If that spread out light is not bouncing off anything it disappears in to the distance. So, all the omnibounce does at the beach is cut down the amount of light hitting the target since it is diverting some of the light away from the target. This is not SOFTENING the light. It is simply REDUCING the light - something much more efficiently achieved by lowering the flashes output of light.

Softening only occurs if there is something for the diffused light to bounce off back in to the subject area. This bounced light provides a softening effect by acting as a fill light. Something not available here as light was not being bounced.

Have i got this wrong? If so please explain why.

Dood,

A light adapter like the omnibounce sends light out in all directions. Aim it up and its still sending a small amount of light forward. That wraps and adds volume, shape. Was she wasting power? Perhaps, but she still got the job done.

--
BigPixel / Hawaii

Its still sending SOME light forward towards the subject. The quality of this light would be softer than hard light from a strobe with no modifyer on it. It would still act as fill light if she had her camera dialed in correctly.

Even if you shoot a shoe mounted strobe with NO modifyer, its still sending out light omnidirectionally. The amount might be less than if the photog really knew what she was doing, but there was some forward light nonetheless.

If she had used a gobo to block forward light outdoors what you mention might be true. Apparently, she didn't. You people need to do a little more shooting, a little less reading perhaps.
--
BigPixel / Hawaii

tmozer said:

We are on vacation in sunny SC. Went to the ocean beach today. Not
a cloud in the sky. Had my D90 with me.

A women was near us taking posed pictures of three young girls. I
notice they stayed after the picture session, so they might have been
her girls. Whatever.

The first thing I noticed was her equipment. I could not tell the
brand (I am guessing Nikon), but it was definately professional
stuff. The camera body was twice the size of my D90.

The second thing I observed was she was using flash. She had one of
the deli container size diffusers on the flash and had the flash
directed to the sky. It is hard to believe that the diffuser would
give enough fill in direct sunlight to make a difference. She was
shooting at a distance of 10' or so. But then again, she seemed to
know exactly what she was doing so I have to believe it would make a
difference.

Can this be?
--
Nikon D60, D90, SB-400, SB-800, Nikkor: 60mm Macro, 70-300mm, 50mm
1.8, 18-55, 55-200, 35 1.8

Click to expand...

OK So based on your comment "She had one of the deli container size diffusers on the flash and had the flash directed to the sky."

I'm going to GUESS that she probably had a Gary Fong Lightsphere equipped with a Chrome-dome. That fits inside the Lightsphere and is designed to blow light forward, while the inverted bowl reflects more light into the bowl, brightening the bowl. Its supposed to double the power output and is recommended in areas where there's no ceiling.

But basicly she was using fill flash in the sun which was a smart thing to do. From a distance of 10 feet - I really don't think power loss would have been an issue to worry about.

There were some comments that implied that she knew what she was doing, and a few that implied that she was wasting her time. There's also the possibility that she just got a new piece of equipment and was giving it a road test before deciding how to best use it professionally.

Without seeing some actual photographs - this is really all speculation anyway.

I have Sto-fens myself, but outside at a distance of 10 feet in the sun, using fill-flash - I personally wouldn't bother to use them. I have used them at closer distances - partly because they do eat power and I have a couple flashes that I can't reduce the Manual Power Output far enough any other way.

A lightsphere is a larger item than a Sto-fen with more surface area and might have a slightly different effect, but in fill-flash, the difference might be very subtle. Maybe someone should do some tests and post some actual photos??

BG
--
Feel free to disagree with me any time as long as you can do it politely!!

That's when you take them off, dial in 105mm (SB800) or 200mm (SB900). You can effectively shoot from 40 feet this way.
--
BigPixel / Hawaii

BigPixel said:

Its still sending SOME light forward towards the subject. The quality
of this light would be softer than hard light from a strobe with no
modifyer on it. It would still act as fill light if she had her
camera dialed in correctly. (...)

(...) You people need to do a little more shooting,
a little less reading perhaps.
--
BigPixel / Hawaii

Click to expand...

BigPixel,

"softness" of ligh is a function of the relative size of the light to the subject. A light modifier only "softens" the light if it transforms a small lightsource into a big lightsource, like softboxes and umbrellas.

The "omnibounce" (think about the name) CAN do that if you are inside a room with white walls, as it sends the light OMNIdirectionally to BOUNCE on the walls, making the entire room a big lightsource.

Outside, with nowhere to bounce the light, it will waste the most part of it and the small amount still hitting the subjetc will remain a small lightsource. Weaker, but no less "hard".

I really don´t want to sound rude or arrogant, but you should not write what you did in your last paragraph. I think everyone, specially you, need to do a little more shooting AND a little MORE reading.

Best regards.

--
Geraldo Garcia

Light is light, it goes everywhere at the speed of, well....light.

I live in one of the most vivid places on the planet, Hawaii. We have torrid sun almost every day. I am often called upon to shoot at a beach in mid-day sun. I often use the Stoffen diffuser supplied with my SB800s (omnibounce) to soften the light on a nearby subject. It makes the light larger by being projected in 360 degrees and therfore softer.

Have you never considered the design and physics? A milky box that sits on top a flat strobe head. Light goes up....but also all around in 360 degrees through the sides. Wider, larger light. Its like a tiny lightbox or shoot through umbrella really. (I know....tiny)

You ought to try it sometime, that is if you actually shoot.

BigPixel / Hawaii

geraldogarcia said:

Outside, with nowhere to bounce the light, it will waste the most
part of it and the small amount still hitting the subjetc will remain
a small lightsource. Weaker, but no less "hard".

Click to expand...

For the most part, this is true. Certainly an Omnibounce type diffuser pointed straight up at the beach is going to waste a LOT of light. But then again, it's just as likely she was using some sort of larger Fong Dong contraption which, depending on how it was set up, might at least have been somewhat more efficient.

Without the benefit of bounce surfaces, save for maybe a tiny bit of sand skip, neither of these are going to provide the kind of large light sources that we associate with softness. Still, even a small amount of diffusion can make a bit of difference for the same reason most of us prefer using frosted light bulbs around the house over clear light bulbs. Also they do help a bit to provide a slightly larger light source than that of a bare flash head alone (admittedly, not so much when aimed improperly). Finally, either of these devices will help to get the light source a bit higher over the lens axis than a bare flash mounted in the hotshoe.

At 10', none of this is likely to do a whole lot of good, but if she somehow did manage to have enough power left over to throw a visible amount of fill onto her subjects, she probably came out ok. She at least recognized a need to add some fill, even if perhaps, she underestimated her power requirements.

Not the best approach, but not necessarily a recipe for disaster either.

--
'Here, look at the monkey. Look at the silly monkey!'

Tom Young
http://www.pbase.com/tyoung/

Thank you. A kiss of fill, adding a catch light to the eyes, that makes all the difference outdoors.
--
BigPixel / Hawaii

That was rude of me.
--
BigPixel / Hawaii

BigPixel said:

A milky box that sits on top a flat strobe head.
Light goes up....but also all around in 360 degrees
through the sides.

Click to expand...

Yes, exactly!

BigPixel said:

Wider, larger light.

Click to expand...

No! Not at all!

The light that does not go directly towars the subject is wasted because there is nowhere for it to bounce back to the subjetc. So, the only light that the subject "sees" is the small amout directly going to it through the front of the difuser, a lightsource about the same size of the bare flash, wich means "hard".

Do the test! Middle of the street, 10 feet from subject, TTL. One picture with direct flash dialed down for fill and other with the stoffen pointing up. You may find differences on the light intensity, but not on it´s softness.

BigPixel said:

Its like a tiny lightbox or shoot through umbrella
really. (I know....tiny)

Click to expand...

"Tiny lightbox" means hard light. There is no way around it.

Best regards.

--
Geraldo Garcia

--
Geraldo Garcia

BigPixel said:

That's when you take them off, dial in 105mm (SB800) or 200mm
(SB900). You can effectively shoot from 40 feet this way.
--
BigPixel / Hawaii

Click to expand...

I'll take your word for it.

Personally if I'm outside in bright sunlight - at ISO 100 I'm looking at f5.6 or f8.0 and my flash isn't really going to be effective for much more than 25 ft.

And I guess it might be possible in theory to shoot fill from 40 ft - I'm just not sure I'd want to myself. Why wouldn't you want the subject closer?

BG
--
Feel free to disagree with me any time as long as you can do it politely!!

B Gavin said:

I'm going to GUESS that she probably had a Gary Fong Lightsphere
equipped with a Chrome-dome. That fits inside the Lightsphere and is
designed to blow light forward, while the inverted bowl reflects more
light into the bowl, brightening the bowl. Its supposed to double the
power output and is recommended in areas where there's no ceiling.

BG

Click to expand...

They look a lot like tupperware.
http://store.garyfonginc.com/licl.html

I have two.
--
Phil Agur

50D - Full equipment list in profile.

BigPixel said:

The quality
of this light would be softer than hard light from a strobe with no
modifier on it.

Click to expand...

No, it would not be softer.. well, not at 10 feet distance it wouldn't. This is because an Omnibounce is not really larger than the head it fits on.... you need increased size to get increased soft, light spreading (diffusion) doesn't do it. However, you would see a difference in macro photography, but that's about it.

BigPixel said:

Even if you shoot a shoe mounted strobe with NO modifier, its still
sending out light omnidirectionally.

Click to expand...

That is not true, either. Shoe mounted flash guns are Reflector/Fresnel lens optical devices with minimal spill outside the focused/illuminated area.... and there's nothing falling outside that is worthwhile photographically. This rapid drop-off can be checked quite easily by shooting a wide-angle picture of a white wall with the flash set to one of the longer f-lengths.

BigPixel said:

The amount might be less than if
the photog really knew what she was doing, but there was some forward
light nonetheless.

Click to expand...

The point is she was wasting power and delaying recharge by being unaware of how her equipment actually functioned.

BigPixel said:

You people need to do
a little more shooting, a little less reading perhaps.

Click to expand...

Hmmmm ....That's a bit strong, considering you own knowledge is a bit hazy on the details mentioned above.

She was probably getting 20% of the flash light she could have had....That's 80% of a mistake by anybody's reckoning.

Truth is, most of the fill light hitting her subjects would have been natural light bouncing back from the beach. Indeed, light levels on beaches and on snow are known to be double what they are in the same conditions in gardens and on the street. All that extra stop's worth of light is coming back up from the light toned-ground...
--
Regards,
Baz