-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
Flash is becoming absolete ...
- Thread starter arizonadesertrat
- Start date
CraigBennett
Leading Member
Does not take care of Fill Flash when needed.
Regards,
--
Craig Bennett
http://www.craigbennettphotography.com
Last edited:
Robin Casady
Forum Pro
Looks very interesting, and means that camera technology has not max'ed out. Excellent for available light shooters, but if you want to control lighting, it will be LEDs that obsolete strobes, not sensors.
absolete: a Japanese contraction of the English phrase absolutely obsolete. Pronounced: absoreet
--
Robin Casady
http://www.robincasady.com/Photo/index.html
"The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts."
— Bertrand Russell
Last edited:
mmmmmmmm
Veteran Member
Flash will never be obsolete. there are many times when flash is needed. For instance, creating a light direction, fill lighting, and defining shadows. What separates the average photographer from a great photographer is the use of light to create shadows or light direction when needed. So many pictures posted today are really bland that are taken without flash or reflector fill. try getting your flash off camera and then look at the quality of picture that can be taken.
respectfully,
David Miller
respectfully,
David Miller
reginalddwight
Senior Member
A CLS set up by someone who knows what he is doing, will outfperform this new technology any day.
falconeyes
Senior Member
[No message]
t.c. marino
Leading Member
Not so fast. The article is obviously written by an engineer not a photographer. Photography is all about light. The spectral content shot at EV1 with availble light, for example, is totally different than the same scene shot at EV8 using a flash no matter how sensitive the sensor is. You have to use flash (or other lighting) for certain effects under some situations regardless of camera or sensor.
S
Schroedingers_cat
Guest
So is corect speling
--
One day long ago, a sorcerer and a warrior did battle, as such things were commonplace in that age. Sometimes the sorcerer won, and the sum value of human abilities was improved some trifling amount. Sometimes the warrior won, and again the human race improved by some insignificant amount, for a sorcerer who can't defeat one miserable warrior is a poor sorcerer indeed.
--
One day long ago, a sorcerer and a warrior did battle, as such things were commonplace in that age. Sometimes the sorcerer won, and the sum value of human abilities was improved some trifling amount. Sometimes the warrior won, and again the human race improved by some insignificant amount, for a sorcerer who can't defeat one miserable warrior is a poor sorcerer indeed.
Last edited:
B
BackInTheGame
Guest
What an idiot I must be. I have flash and I am trying to find good deals on more. WTH?
ScottnLaguna
Leading Member
As I use many of my photos for reference material for painting, I do not like flash for light. Or even fill. Give weird and un-natural shadows. I have good cameras and lenses to avoid using a flash.
Last edited:
dwight3
Veteran Member
Photography means "writing (or drawing) with light". A flash is a source of light you can use to do the writing or drawing. The advent of the D3 issued in an era of really high sensitivity sensors, but did not cause the demise of the flash.
I would be more likely to state that on-camera flash is becoming obsolete.
I would be more likely to state that on-camera flash is becoming obsolete.
Just Having Fun
Veteran Member
Film makers often shoot night/dark scenes in bright light (then reduce the exposure), not because the cameras don't work in lower light, but because it is easier to control lighting that way. You don't want ugly shadows, bad backlighting, etc.
Try taking a picture of someone on the beach with a sunset behind them without flashes or reflectors. Even with the best camera it is nice to have a good flash setup available.
Try taking a picture of someone on the beach with a sunset behind them without flashes or reflectors. Even with the best camera it is nice to have a good flash setup available.
pavi1
Veteran Member
No camera how ever good will ever be able o turn bad light into good light. Flash is not the only means to good light. You have chosen to shoot in good light not created by flash, and certainly not created by your good camera
CraigBennett
Leading Member
Perhaps, I bet most of us learned about light and flash use by studying the great painters. They knew how to paint "light" on their subject.
I have good camera, good lenses, and good flashes. Nowadays, I try my best to use flash every chance I get. Technology simply cannot replace the correct placement of flashes (or light source). And it will take time before non-flash lights can delivery the high output needed for overcoming the sun economically.
In any case, I simply don't care how sensitive a sensor is, it does not replace or cover for good lighting techniques.
Regards,
--
Craig Bennett
http://www.craigbennettphotography.com
Last edited:
ScottnLaguna
Leading Member
ScottnLaguna
Leading Member
MikeInIndy
Senior Member
For snapshots and in some uses with post processing, sure. But flash isn't going extinct over this. What interests me more is the potential to "warp" a graphene sensor to account for field curvature could potentially make lens design simpler/cheaper.
tundracamper
Senior Member
The title to that article could have just as easily read "Newest technology makes it even easier to take a crappy photo."
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum