Why do pros use light meters?

[The Sage Knows]

With a wireless digital CyberCommander, the process is even faster and automatic - simply pick the strobe channel, set desired aperture on the handheld, hold the dome at the subject facing the light and pop the light - poof! the strobe is automatically and wirelessly set exactly to the f-stop (yes, f-stop!) you set on the remote. Repeat once for each strobe and final overall meter reading. Shoot.

Oh yah, and if you want to change the shooting aperture after, just click ALL and the entire group of lights (or subgroup) instantly adjust to the new desired taking aperture. CyberCommander and Einsteins are revolutionary - no more meter-adjust-remeter cycling.

So no, I don't want no stinkin' flash meter ever again - old tech; only a CyberCommander will suffice now.

Mike

Glad that the system works for you . For those of us who prefer to work with Ellinchrom, Profoto, or Broncolor lights, the Cybercommando appears like it would do absolutely nothing. On the other hand Pocket Wizards (with radio trigger) and a basic flashmeter work with pretty much anything with a sync connection - including my various assortment of hot shoe style strobes (Nikon SB900) not just Alien Bees.

no more meter-adjust-remeter cycling

Knowing your apertures forwards and backwards means that if the meter says f7.1 but you want the flash output to require f5.6, (2/3 stops wider) then you just click the power setting on the strobe for 2/3 stops less light output. No need to remeasure - unless your equipment doesn't perform as consistently as an Elinchrom of Profoto- or you need reassurance.

hold the dome at the subject facing the light and pop the light - poof!

So you are not actually arguing against the use of an external light meter since one is built into the product. You just like your particular external light meter.

--
Robert

 

[Michael Firstlight]

Yes, having the Einstein strobes is a dream in conjunction with the CyberCommander. I was being a little tongue in cheek - yes, light meters are invaluable - I do prefer the CC which fully integrates one with rest of the system.

But I am curious - in which way would you suggest the Einsteins are not every bit as consistent and reliable if not more so - and at a fraction of the cost?

Mike

 

[MajorNikon]

A light meter was an essential tool for pros back in the day of film when the only other instant indication you might have is a polaroid back.

I'm sure a lot of pros still use them, but many no longer do. Built in light meters work much better than in years past, digital TTL uses preflash to meter before the shutter is opened, histograms provide a lot of information, and many pros have their cameras tethered to a laptop so they can instantly view exposures after they are taken.

I was going to talk TTL but had to leave for work. TTL is a great tool but since is it is a computer it is figuring it out for you. Exposures will vary to some degree. With strobes and camera on manual the exposures are consistent.

Exposures aren't consistent on manual when you're dealing with subjects and/or lights that move. TTL is very consistent given situations in which it works well. However there are situations in which it doesn't work well. The key is to know what the technology is doing for you and know when to use it and when not to use it. I can handhold my camera outside, use the sun as my ambient light, my pop up as fill, and hold my speedlight with the other hand for my key light. I can set the whole thing up in seconds with TTL and not even have to think about it too much. Even if I'm moving and my subject is moving, I can still get consistent exposures. I can't do that in manual. On the flip side, if I have a subject with a strong backlight, I know TTL is going to be very inconsistent and I'm not going to use it.

 

[MajorNikon]

The reason why your non-meter method doesn't work efficiently is because you didn't have a methodical approach that works well for NOT using a light meter. You're basically using the same order you use with a lightmeter. Instead of building your light from the bottom up which works much better in that situation, you're trying to build it from the top down which is always going to be hit and miss.

Set up your ambient first, then your fill, then your key, then your accent light(s). It works extremely well and you can do it all with the histogram.

Your ambient sets the bottom end of your contrast. Your fill builds on top of that. Your key sets the top end of your contrast. Your accent gets adjusted as necessary to your key. Works great. Doesn't take long. No light meter required or even useful.

 

[The Sage Knows]

Yes, having the Einstein strobes is a dream in conjunction with the CyberCommander. I was being a little tongue in cheek - yes, light meters are invaluable - I do prefer the CC which fully integrates one with rest of the system.

But I am curious - in which way would you suggest the Einsteins are not every bit as consistent and reliable if not more so - and at a fraction of the cost?

Mike

The premium brands traditionally had brighter modelling lights that adjusted to match the strobes output, pebbled reflectors that provided a very even light pattern and in some cases zoomed, a very complete line of modifiers, consistent light and color output from shot to shot and from head to head, and are supported by any rental house so you can rent some pricey modifier only when needed.

Profotos, Ellinchroms, and Pocket Wizards are like Nikon and Canon. You can find pro rental outlets that carry all types of accessories for these brands. Perhaps you only need a pair of 8ft octagonal diffusers, extra lights and 3 more remote triggers for one job in ten years. Makes more sense to rent these to augment your system for a week at $60 than buy have to buy them all for $800 because you chose to go with a proprietary solution.

At their price point, AB Einsteins are about the best there are. I looked at getting them myself but too many posts about misfires on early units – although this may have been fixed since. And I know you’ll find anecdotal evidence of failure from every manufacturer. It’s nice that when AB’s fail, Paul C Buff does try to make customer service actually mean something. Ellinchrom used to make all their lights in Switzerland, now they come from India. It may or may not make a difference but the whole Swiss craftsmanship and in the case of Broncolor, German engineering reputation are based on long history of quality. I’m glad I got the older models.

AB developed a reputation for inconsistency of light output. Then there was the consistency from strobe to strobe. One for example might put out more magenta than the other. This makes multi light setups hard to white balance. Many AB owners will dispute this and there is no reason to doubt their lights are working just fine. But the perception is still there. It’s OK if you’re just shooting for fun but not if your career depends on it. Who wants to fine tune every single shot in Lightroom because the exposure or white balance is off by different amounts. John Deere “green” has to be consistent. Marketing directors will spot even the slightest off hue.

I drive a VW. It’s responsive, safe, and efficient. And I can buy two or three of them for the price of a BMW. But one is still just a fun “people’s car” while the other is considered the Ultimate Driving Machine.

--
Robert

 

[The Sage Knows]

Set up your ambient first, then your fill, then your key, then your accent light(s). It works extremely well and you can do it all with the histogram.

So can you elaborate on that. Let's skip the ambient for a second and assume all significant exposure results from the strobes alone.

How do you set your fill light with only the histogram. Which peak on the graph represents the light reflected from the person's face? If you can identify the exact peak, how far must it be right or left in order for it to be a correctly rendered shadow? Does it tell you in f stops. No, do you need to fire another burst and see if it moved far enough. Then another? For me, a reading at the face from the fill light will tell me exactly how much I need to adjust the light and I could go on to the next step.

To add the key light, do you now try to get the histogram to fill up to the right? How do you know the right end of the graph actually represents the subject's right cheek and not their shirt? Then there is the fact that a camera's histogram is a crude approximation of the pixels in a jpeg and not the actual raw file you're creating. There is more headroom than the graph will lead you to believe. But we can't be sure how much - so that's another issue to deal with. Here again, a flashmeter reading from the right cheek tells you without any doubt exactly what intensity of light is hitting that spot and you can adjust precisely in stops to correct it.

Your ambient sets the bottom end of your contrast.

Not sure what is meant by that rather general statement. In some cases, like a studio, ambient contributes nothing significant to the exposure and can be ignored. In other cases, it is the primary light source (ex. the sun), and the strobe, used for fill, is the "bottom end of the contrast" . Still other cases, there is ample ambient in the background only. In that case, the shutter speed would be set for a correct exposure at the desired foreground shooting aperture.

Works great. Doesn't take long. No light meter required or even useful.

So far, I'm not convinced.
--
Robert

 

[balloonchasers]

Hi,

I'm a relative newcomer, and I have no idea what the use a light meter is today when every camera has one built in...

I'm obviously oblivious to their usage. Could someone explain the benefits of using one, or what it allows me to do that I wouldn't be able to do without one?

Well Mike you may be a newcomer but you sure do know how to pick a topic to stir the crowd up. LOL!!!

Welcome to the forum world!

Hope we helped give you some ideas of why a light meter can come in handy. Even if some of us can't agree why or how to use a meter ourselves. ;-)

John

--

Feel free to use any of these additional letters to correct the spelling of words found in the above post: a-e-t-n-d-i-o-s-m-l-u-y-h-c If you find any extra letters, please place them here for future use...

 

[Michael Firstlight]

No question, it did take PCB about a year from initial release to shake the bugs out of the Einsteins; I waited and have late model units - perfect, not a single flaw and the color consistency from 2.5WS variable all the way to 640WS is simply amazing - each individual head and across multiple heads and with 250WS tracking modeling lights.

I can't speak to modifier rentals here in the US South East - I own all of my modifiers - a wide variety of them, so that's not an issue for me as it might be for some others. I think the modifier rental is benefit especially for those in or near larger cities such as Manhattan where I used to work, but when I need a modifier I need it on the fly - I can't go wait for a rental.

The key is knowing your gear well - all of its function and behavior and focusing on technique and style; I just wanted affordable workhorses with a very wide power range, high color consistency and total integrated wireless automation so I could spend more time shooting and less time adjusting - the Einsteins have delivered all of that and more.

The Einsteins come from the same PCB as the AB line, but let me say that there is no comparison with the base AB line which I owned only as utility/backups to my PG DRs - the Einsteins are in a much higher league in price/feature/build/performance class all by themselves.

Regards,
Mike

 

[The Sage Knows]

Well Mike you may be a newcomer but you sure do know how to pick a topic to stir the crowd up. LOL!!!

For your next question, be sure to Ask a Pro whether it's a good idea, or not, to put a protective UV filter over your lens.
--
Robert

 

[Jay Kilgore]

I'd love to take you up on that challenge!

The problem with the CC is the same thing with light meters in my case; Just because it says one thing, doesn't mean that's what the reading is!

It's nothing against them, but like I said, unless you want to shoot pre-formatted, you're going to have to putz with your settings. I do it with my remote wireless.

See my post below - you don't have to do the process you describe with a CyberCommander which integrates a flash meter meter with an intelligent digital remote control. With a CC I can beat anyone hands down using a traditional flash meter or chimping and get exactly what I want the first time using any arbitraty lighting setup.

My ratios and exposure are simply dialed in by f-stop and I never have to touch a strobe unless I am repositioning one.

Then again, few people really understand just how radically the CyberCommander changes this entire discussion.

Mike

--
Cheers,
Jay Kilgore
http://www.jaykilgore.com

 

[MajorNikon]

Set up your ambient first, then your fill, then your key, then your accent light(s). It works extremely well and you can do it all with the histogram.

So can you elaborate on that. Let's skip the ambient for a second and assume all significant exposure results from the strobes alone.

You don't really skip the ambient. Even if you're going to shoot at f/4 & 1/250 inside and the room ambient is going all black, that's still the lower end of your contrast scale. If you use artificial light to build your ambient, it's still your ambient.

How do you set your fill light with only the histogram. Which peak on the graph represents the light reflected from the person's face? If you can identify the exact peak, how far must it be right or left in order for it to be a correctly rendered shadow? Does it tell you in f stops. No, do you need to fire another burst and see if it moved far enough. Then another? For me, a reading at the face from the fill light will tell me exactly how much I need to adjust the light and I could go on to the next step.

Usually I have my fill either on axis or close to on axis, or it will come from either the same direction or nearly the same direction as my key. Either way makes it much harder to get wrong. If the fill comes from on axis, it will be low contrast and easy to set up. If it comes from nearly the same direction as the key, you just about never get warmer spots created by the fill that won't be that way with the key anyway. This method also has the added benefit of creating a safety net for your key, especially if the fill completely overlaps the key which is typical of how I use fill.

Rarely do I go just by the histogram. If I have wi-fi available, my eye-fi card transfers to my iPad almost instantly (with the next eye-fi firmware update, I won't need a wi-fi network which will be nice). If I can't use my iPad, I'll pop my 2nd card in my laptop and evaluate what I have before I make final adjustments.

A light meter isn't a fool proof device either. Even if you manage to get the skin tones right, you can always have everything else askew. If you wait to check everything until after the shoot is done, you stand a good chance of having something screwed up anyway, unless you're just using the same lighting setups over and over.

To add the key light, do you now try to get the histogram to fill up to the right? How do you know the right end of the graph actually represents the subject's right cheek and not their shirt? Then there is the fact that a camera's histogram is a crude approximation of the pixels in a jpeg and not the actual raw file you're creating. There is more headroom than the graph will lead you to believe. But we can't be sure how much - so that's another issue to deal with. Here again, a flashmeter reading from the right cheek tells you without any doubt exactly what intensity of light is hitting that spot and you can adjust precisely in stops to correct it.

If I have a subject with a white shirt, I'm not going to use a key light that has a lot of spill. If you use an umbrella on a subject that has a white shirt, even if you get the exposure right on their face, the shirt is going to be overexposed. I'll use a small softbox on their face, or a snoot, or a hard light with a grid, or some other highly directional key, and let the fill take care of the shirt.

Your ambient sets the bottom end of your contrast.

Not sure what is meant by that rather general statement. In some cases, like a studio, ambient contributes nothing significant to the exposure and can be ignored. In other cases, it is the primary light source (ex. the sun), and the strobe, used for fill, is the "bottom end of the contrast" . Still other cases, there is ample ambient in the background only. In that case, the shutter speed would be set for a correct exposure at the desired foreground shooting aperture.

As I said, you always have some ambient level, even if you are creating it yourself. If you are letting the ambient fall off the end of the scale, you still have an ambient level, it's just not contributing any light to the scene and your shadows will fall to black. Ambient is whatever is on the left side of the scale. It doesn't matter where it's coming from. To the ambient, you will always add more light (assuming more than one light source).

Works great. Doesn't take long. No light meter required or even useful.

So far, I'm not convinced.

None of this is my invention. I've just adapted it to my own style and methods. It's all spelled out in David Hobby's Lighting in Layers DVD set.

 

[Sailor Blue]

Whew! Cats and dogs discussion.

A few points I'll add.

First off, a good flash meter allows you to adjust your studio strobes to an accuracy of 0.1 stop while using only the camera to set the exposure only allows an accuracy of 0.3 or 0.5 stop. With digital the more accurate your exposure the better off you are - it just doesn't have the latitude that color negative film had.

One good example of where 0.1 stop accuracy is important is in setting up a white background. It should be evenly lit to 0.5±0.2 stops over the entire area that will be in the image if you don't want light from the background to bleed around the edges of your subject.

Second, light meters read 12% gray, not 18% gray. If you meter off a gray card you are about 1/2 stop off the correct exposure. That can be enough to cause your image to be underexposed. If you meter off of a gray card be sure to open up an additional 1/2 stop.

http://www.bythom.com/graycards.htm

Third, camera histograms are from JPG images generated within the camera, regardless of what file format you are shooting in. All JPG images have some exposure correction applied to them, thus the camera histogram is NOT accurate. Using it to judge exposure is not an good way to judge exposure.

If camera histograms were generated from the RAW data then they would be an excellent way to judge exposures, but none of the DSLR's do this - they all use histograms from internally generated JPG's.

The Highlight Alert (the little blinkies) is a more accurate way to judge exposure so you expose to the right to capture the maximum dynamic range in your images.

It is worth noting that there is a small safety factor built into the Canon HA, and I'm sure that Nikon has one too. This HA safety factor means is that if something is just barely overexposed according to the HA, it "may" actually be correctly exposed. For safeties sake I still back off 1/3 stop for the exposure when the HA just starts to show overexposure of the lightest object I want to show texture.

I should add that most meters are only so-so accurate and will drift with age. You really need to test any light meter you use to determine its accuracy. One good way to do this is the FaceMask Histogram. It was developed for flash meters but will work equally well for non-flash images metered by your camera or an external meter. It will even help you find out how far off your "advanced" TTL system is. I showed me that my E-TTL II system is off by about 1 full stop.

You can find out how to do a FaceMask Histogram at ShootSmarter.com Registration is free.

http://www.shootsmarter.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=116&acat=16

You can also calibrate your camera meter by taking photographs of an 18% gray card. In Photoshop it should have a value 119 for all Red, Green, and Blue. Test at varying exposures to find the amount of correction, if any, is needed. You can calculate the Photoshop value for any % reflectance with the Bruce Lindbloom calculator.

http://www.brucelindbloom.com/index.html?ColorCalculator.html

 

[Michael Firstlight]

That my friend, would be an ill-advised bet. Let me illustrate a real life scenario.

I did a fresh, arbitrary lighting setup using 4 Einstein 640s - a key, a fill, a hair and a kicker - all set to my desired ratios - final exposure f11. I never left my subject position once or touched a head to set the flash output to the desired fstop output of each strobe. You see, the CC permits the operator to set the flash output measured in fstop. I don't have to think in watt seconds anymore- but I can if I prefer. Excluding the original light placement it took me between 5-10 seconds each to set each individual strobe the exact output fstop I wanted. I wanted that precision to be within a 1/10th stop margin or better of error and got each of them dead on instantly with the CyberCommander the very first time. The net is that I can do a cold setup, excluding light placement and set the exact exposure of 4 strobes accurately and independently in under a minute - no exaggeration and no fixed/formula lighting placement.

Try doing he same. How long does it take you with 4 monolights?

Now here's the real challenge - once you have your 4 lights all set for f11 change your taking exposure to f5.6 and maintain identical light ratios while doing so. Change your power settings for all 4 lights and maintain precision within 1/10 or better between heads. Using my CyberCommander and Einsteins I make that proportional adjustment FOR ALL 4 STROBES without ever leaving the camera position in under FIVE seconds - simply by dialing CC to F5.6 for the whole group and bang, I am already shooting while you are still walking to the rear of your first strobe to make your first of several adjust-meter-adjust-meter cycles per light. For me, the CyberCommander automatically adjusted all 4 lights instantly, proportionally and precisely to f5.6 remotely. How long does it take to adjust and re-meter all 4 of your strobes when changing the taking aperture and while maintaining the exact ratios and precision?

Yes, it really is that accurate, that fast, and that cool. Just for kicks I went back and rechecked all of the readings with a different flash meter (a Gossen Digital F) - every head dead on.

For 12 years I did studio strobes and metering the traditional way - I even had a nice IR remote to change power settings of my 4 Photgenic 1250DR units (which I sold off). With the CC and Einstein there is no comparison in terms of convenience, speed and accuracy.

I rest my case

 

[Jay Kilgore]

Here's what I find funny;

You act as if PCB is the first person to come out with a remote controlled device to control lights.

You take your P 4CB Einsteins and I'll take my 3 Photogenic PLR500DRC as fill and one PLR1000DRC as key and my wireless remote system.

As I said, I'll take that offer ANY day of the week, and twice on any day that ends in "Y"

The problem with Buff fans is you act as if everything he does is soooo innovative and new. Sadly, he copies everything that's out there, but credit for him for making it affordable.

So you can rest your case, problem with the prosecution going first and resting their case? They think they have it in the bag and they're 90% always wrong. If the glove don't fit...

And really, if I wanted to be an ass, I could just connect it all to the pc and have the pc control everything while reviewing captured images. Everything you can do with your CC, I can do with Photogenic, Profoto, Elinchrome, Broncolor and everything else.

Guess it comes down to preference.

Cheers

That my friend, would be an ill-advised bet. Let me illustrate a real life scenario.

I did a fresh, arbitrary lighting setup using 4 Einstein 640s - a key, a fill, a hair and a kicker - all set to my desired ratios - final exposure f11. I never left my subject position once or touched a head to set the flash output to the desired fstop output of each strobe. You see, the CC permits the operator to set the flash output measured in fstop. I don't have to think in watt seconds anymore- but I can if I prefer. Excluding the original light placement it took me between 5-10 seconds each to set each individual strobe the exact output fstop I wanted. I wanted that precision to be within a 1/10th stop margin or better of error and got each of them dead on instantly with the CyberCommander the very first time. The net is that I can do a cold setup, excluding light placement and set the exact exposure of 4 strobes accurately and independently in under a minute - no exaggeration and no fixed/formula lighting placement.

Try doing he same. How long does it take you with 4 monolights?

Now here's the real challenge - once you have your 4 lights all set for f11 change your taking exposure to f5.6 and maintain identical light ratios while doing so. Change your power settings for all 4 lights and maintain precision within 1/10 or better between heads. Using my CyberCommander and Einsteins I make that proportional adjustment FOR ALL 4 STROBES without ever leaving the camera position in under FIVE seconds - simply by dialing CC to F5.6 for the whole group and bang, I am already shooting while you are still walking to the rear of your first strobe to make your first of several adjust-meter-adjust-meter cycles per light. For me, the CyberCommander automatically adjusted all 4 lights instantly, proportionally and precisely to f5.6 remotely. How long does it take to adjust and re-meter all 4 of your strobes when changing the taking aperture and while maintaining the exact ratios and precision?

Yes, it really is that accurate, that fast, and that cool. Just for kicks I went back and rechecked all of the readings with a different flash meter (a Gossen Digital F) - every head dead on.

For 12 years I did studio strobes and metering the traditional way - I even had a nice IR remote to change power settings of my 4 Photgenic 1250DR units (which I sold off). With the CC and Einstein there is no comparison in terms of convenience, speed and accuracy.

I rest my case

--
Cheers,
Jay Kilgore
http://www.jaykilgore.com

 

[Michael Firstlight]

Really? You can walk up to your subject, take your PG IR remote, dial in the exact desired output of the light you want specified in f-stop, hold it up to the subjects face and it will remotely set the light output instantly based on an integrated dome? Wow, I am impressed there is any other manufacturer that can do that. Surely not innovative at all, right?

Sure, I did the same with my PG IR remote and a flash meter taped back to back - still no match - not by a longshot.

 

[eNo]

I've considered getting a light meter, but for my kit, all Nikon and YN speedlights, metering each light will require firing each of my flashes independently (or together), and I just figure I might as well estimate, then adjust based on the histogram (i.e., the histogram acts as my meter). If you have constant lights, metering makes way more practical sense... but I'm probably just being cheap.
--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Seeking the heart and spirit in each image



Gallery and blog: http://esfotoclix.com
Flickr stream: http://www.flickr.com/photos/22061657@N03

 

[UKphotographers]

Hi,

I'm a relative newcomer, and I have no idea what the use a light meter is today when every camera has one built in...

I'm obviously oblivious to their usage. Could someone explain the benefits of using one, or what it allows me to do that I wouldn't be able to do without one?

I've used a flash meter / ambient meter for over 30 years, occasionally, I still use one when I need to change and relight a set to match in the future. I have 2 Incident/Flash meters and a spot meter.

I have flash equipment ranging from 80ws - 6000ws including 80-100-160-200-400-800-1000-1500-3000-6000ws and mix it all the time.

What I do mostly is look at the subject, set my light levels and aperture and shoot, taking into consideration reflectance, ratio, output requirements and modifiers. 95% of the time I'm right in what I set. You wouldn't be able to do that. Without training with a lightmeter you wouldn't have a clue what level of light is incident on your subject from any direction or it's resultant effect or comparative brightness and you wouldn't be able to set those levels from experience learned, because you wouldn't have learned. Without shooting with a flash/lightmeter you would always just be shooting in the dark and guessing.

...and cameras don't have flash meters built in

--
Ian.

Samples of work: http://www.AccoladePhotography.co.uk
Weddings: http://www.AccoladeWeddings.com
Events: http://www.OfficialPhotographer.com

Theres only one sun. Why do I need more than one light to get a natural result?

 

[Michael Firstlight]

My point being is that it is quite an innovation to have not simply a remote -that's old hat - the innovation is the intelligence of an integrated incident sensor to read the flash output and then set the power of the strobe output to a desired aperture. Now please tell what other system in the world does that? I am not being snarky or a fan boy; I swore by my Photogenic system for years (yes, I had the remote, the receivers and the software) - but I don't know of ANY other manufacturer that tightly integrated a wireless flashmeter/remote combo like that with total individual and group control - the benefit of that kind of integrated logic eliminates all meter-adjust-re-meter, adjust, re-meter repetitive tasks in a fast moving studio.

So before you make an assertion that there is something even remotely similar out there (excuse the remote pun), tell me who has that other than PCB?

Mike

 

[eNo]

...and cameras don't have flash meters built in

So how does TTL work? Your explanation also ignores the histogram, which in an indirect way is an equivalent meter we can use to gauge flash power.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Seeking the heart and spirit in each image



Gallery and blog: http://esfotoclix.com
Flickr stream: http://www.flickr.com/photos/22061657@N03

 

[UKphotographers]

...and cameras don't have flash meters built in

So how does TTL work? Your explanation also ignores the histogram, which in an indirect way is an equivalent meter we can use to gauge flash power.

If you're only using speedlights then you'll be ok.. dial in 'give me the correct exposure' and you'll be fine, the camera can compensate for your lack of control, except the next one will be different, the one after it will be different again, the next...

If you think a histogram works like a flashmeter - shoot a shot of a black wall and tell me the Guide Number of your flash at any setting, or what setting you will use when your blond model arrives in white clothing

--
Ian.

Samples of work: http://www.AccoladePhotography.co.uk
Weddings: http://www.AccoladeWeddings.com
Events: http://www.OfficialPhotographer.com

Theres only one sun. Why do I need more than one light to get a natural result?