In article <32DC080B.644E@mci.com>, ronald.frank@mci.com says...
>Allen wrote:
>> In article <5b4h6u$jls@newsstand.cit.cornell.edu>,
>> Bob Neuman
>> >Um, nothing, and nowhere - at least during the ceremony...
>> >Flash is usually acceptable during the processional and recessional
>> >(and an on-camera [or on-bracket, if you can stand those dark shadows
>> >under chins...;-] [.....]
>> Huh? I hope you're joking . . . since when does a flash bracket
>> used with a professional grade flash (120-J, Quantum Q-Flash) give you
>> dark shadows under the chin? I know the poster was asking about his 285,
>> but if you're gonna start talkin' brackets, why go halfway? Even with a
>> fresnel lens flash (285, 622, etc) shadows are really minimal with a
>> bracket. Unless you like red-eye :-)
>> Regards,
>Allen is correct!
>I don't think the shadows under the chin (or eyes, etc) will be more
>pronounced when using a bracket vs. using on camera flash.
>And the biggest mistake a rookie can make at a Wedding is Failing to use a
>bracket! Those rabbit eyes are a dead give away that the job was botched.
>To reduce shadows without the aid of off-camera lighting, try a diffusion
>technique such as a small soft-box, or reflector. I don't usually use one for
>candids, but have on occasion and they work OK. But be prepared to wait on
>recycle times, and reduce batter life.
(You deleted my answer to Allen, complicating things, since I can't find
a copy, so I will reuse some of an earlier post of mine on flash, and include
a bit from someone elses post on the subject...)
Hmmm, I feel like someone assigned to turn over each and every grain of
sand on the beach...;-) - often as I have posted about this, the message
is STILL not out, I guess... The little secret is that flash "diffusers"
do not work except under limited conditions, and then only a bit. We
would all like to add a $25 miniature gizmo to our flashes, and suddenly
have all the benefits of an umbrella or large soft-box flash system, but,
alas, we can't (contrary to popular opinion, bolstered by the blatherings
of the perveyors of those mini flash add-ons...;-). The facts: shadow
edge sharpness is determined by the relative light source size, period.
Shadow depth is determined by how much light you can fill it with, period.
"Diffusion" as a concept that somehow allows for a softening of the light
is a myth, period. Unless you can seriously enlarge the light source size
(the add-ons can enlarge it only slightly, which helps a little when
shooting close to the subject, but can do little else except broaden the
light to cover wide-angles or reduce the light output [both can be useful
at times]), either by bouncing off a large area, or using a true (big!)
soft-box, little is usefully changed by adding tidbits to an on-camera
flash (though I have been known to use a medium Styrofoam cup over an
up-turned flash head to reduce light for close-in TTL wide-aperture
fast-film shooting, to get the light source above the lens in verticals,
to cover super-wides and fisheyes, and to soften the light SLIGHTLY
when shooting very close to a subject ;-). BTW, you can use available
light as a fill for the flash to lighten shadows (yuh, it's usually done
the other way around, but this does work...;-).
To add to the above, the shadow width is determined by the distance the
flash is from the lens, and by the relative angles involved with the
light source, illuminated subject, part of the subject upon which the
shadow is cast, and the lens (Fresnels, "diffusers", etc. on the
flash do NOT generally help) - all else being equal, placing the light
further from the lens widens the shadow (the reverse is the using of
a ringlight, which removes all shadows...).
What follows is what Mel Brown said on the subject:
In article <32AA69B0.1773@iamerica.net>, melbrown@iamerica.net says...
[most of a nice post deleted for space reasons...]
>It is not commonly understood that the ONLY difference between harsh and soft
>lighting is the SIZE of the light. Small lights are harsh; large lights are
>soft. To prove this, hold your hand, with fingers outspread, about a foot
>from, and parallel to, a white wall. Have someone shine a small lamp toward
>your hand from about 10 feet away. Your fingers will cast distinct (harsh)
>shadows upon the wall. Now, while you remain motionless, ask your accomplice
>to move the light much nearer to your hand. As the light source approaches,
>it becomes relatively larger to your hand, abd the shadows will melt away,
>almost disappearing.
I don't know why flash is such a mystical/myth-filled subject, but it
seems to be...
Hope This Helps