Dalai Lama, M8 and SF-20

[fotografr]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Thought I'd post a couple of the strobed shots for comparison with the ISO 2500 image in the earlier thread. The top image was made with the 50/1.4 ASPH and the bottom one with the 35/2 ASPH.

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[blakley]

Brent, I don't know how you feel, but I like the no-strobe shot better. Seems more intimate somehow.

[fotografr]

I agree absolutely. Unfortunately, most magazine editors don't agree with us and would either use the strobed shots or want the high ISO shot cleaned up. Even so, I think the little SF-20 dies a pretty decent job.

[charlesphoto99]

Just don't show the editors the strobed shots and they'll have to go with the better (IMO) available light shots. By doing what you do best, and not pandering to the middle of the road, is the only way to raise the visual awareness of the culture we're living in now. It's the reason you've invested in both the equipment you have and your career. Make them run the best. My two cents....

 

Btw, I'm totally jealous. One of my dreams is to photograph the Dalai Lama. Check out the book by Manuel Bauer "Journey For Peace" on Scalo. Amazing pics of several years worth of HH travels.

[Guest guy_mancuso]

Rule of thumb , solve your clients needs than solve yours. Whatever it takes. Good job Brent and your client will be happy and that is what counts

[robertwright]

There was no camera data so I am assuming iso160, about 5.6, 1/60th?

 

It is interesting from the tests I have been doing, I really think the M8 is two-speed camera, 160/640. In other words you have two choices, low or hi iso. For example in this shot, if you want a hi percentage of strobe, choose 160, if the camera is set to flash lens dependent it will set 1/30th for the sync with the 35cron, and you are free to shoot at 5.6 for example set on the sf20. This will give you what you see here in this thread more or less. And even if it is underexposed, later in C1 you can drag it up to effective iso 640 and see no penalty in grain.

 

The other way to see it is to think for more ambient, like the previous thread, set the iso to 640, the flash will still pick 1/30th with the 35cron for example, and at 5.6 you are bringing in two stops more ambient but no more strobe, and chances are the flash and ambient are now about equal. Again, shoot away, even if it seems dark, later in C1 you can drag it up to effective 2500 if needs be and not have it look like you shot it at 2500. The bonus being the flash will open up the shadow a little.

 

I think the key is really not to pick 2500 if at you can help it, shoot dark at 640 or 1250 and fix it later in C1. The bonus is, for example, if there are bright lights in the frame, a window, you can hold detail there. Going in to a dark area and exposing for the subject, which is what I would do on the 5D for example, and recover hilights later, is not what the M8 is good at. Underexposing or "under-iso-ing" you could say is what this camera is good at.

[Jamie Roberts]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Robert, I find it's fine at 1250 too, but you can't underexpose then--the M8 becomes just like any other digital above 640 and you must expose "to the right" (and lower in post, if you need to) to get good results.

 

ISO 2500 is too noisy for my liking, but even it's salvageable when exposed properly.

[larry]

I agree absolutely. Unfortunately, most magazine editors don't agree with us and would either use the strobed shots or want the high ISO shot cleaned up. Even so, I think the little SF-20 dies a pretty decent job.

 

Brent,

 

I'm one magazine editor who would agree with you. The available-light shot in your other thread would be the one I'd choose.

 

Larry

[carstenw]

Brent, there is one gadget you might want to add to your arsenal, if you don't have it already, to assist with handheld shots in situations like this one: the Leica tabletop tripod. I will post separately about this little wonder.

[mat_mcdermott]

I'll cast my vote for the available light shot--which is quite nice and shows that although undeniably noisy, ISO2500 is perfectly usable. The strobe shots have taken ever bit of good light out of the room.

[fotografr]

Brent,

 

I'm one magazine editor who would agree with you. The available-light shot in your other thread would be the one I'd choose.

 

Larry

 

That's great to hear. Anytime you have shoots in my area..... ;-)

[fotografr]

There was no camera data so I am assuming iso160, about 5.6, 1/60th?

 

 

Sorry I didn't include that. Both shots were done at ISO 320 using an aperture of f2.8. The top photo was 1/45th and the bottom one was 1/60th.

[fotografr]

Brent, there is one gadget you might want to add to your arsenal, if you don't have it already, to assist with handheld shots in situations like this one: the Leica tabletop tripod. I will post separately about this little wonder.

 

I actually do have one but never think about pulling it out unless I'm below 1/15th. I like to test myself (not always the smartest course).

[robertwright]

Sorry I didn't include that. Both shots were done at ISO 320 using an aperture of f2.8. The top photo was 1/45th and the bottom one was 1/60th.

 

So in other words, you had to go to iso2500 and f2 for the ambient shot, correct? the existing was 4 stops below what the strobe exposure was? Or something like that? A difficult choice.

 

This is where the limitation of the sf20 comes into play-no f2 setting, although I do find on mine it shoots a least a stop under what I set it to, like it was fill.

 

I think if you really want to be brave in the future, you could try iso 640, f2, 1/60, maybe even use the sf20 with some diffusion to cut it, and then in C1 pull it up +2. It is going to look very underexposed on the lcd, but the information is there.

 

I'm not saying there is anything wrong with how you did this, I am just interested in exploring the limits of the M8 vis a vis high iso work. Everything we know from other dslr's is wrong when applied to this camera. And I think the benefit of the M8, say compared to the 5D, is that on the 5D you turn it up to 1600 or 3200 and then canon's noise reduction is applied per pixel, and you get some pretty mushy pixels out. There is no way around this. And all the early comparisons of M8 noise were done iso to iso, which I am beginning to see is not the advantage. I think knowing you have +2 in your backpocket in C1 or Lr (not as good) gives you an advantage perhaps, if you can live with not seeing the final on the lcd.

 

But there are a lot of variables in this, certainly if the predominant color of the ambient is very warm for example, like restaurant lighting, it becomes very difficult no matter what you do to avoid the noise. I have little rectangles of CTO, 1/8, 1/4, 1/2 cut out in the sf20 bag to help me in these situations, a little balanced fill can make a big difference. Even tho the sf24D has not been recommended on this forum, I might get one anyway just for the added f-stop choices, and the little bit larger guide number overall. And I hope it might actually deliver it's advertised f-stop.

 

(edit) the more I look at the original post, the more I am falling in love with it.., not just the fact that it is ambient, but just the whole moment, and how the existing light works, the blue of the light in the rear against the warmth of the light on his face is perfect.

[wparsonsgisnet]

To horn in, here, one reason the available light shot might seem more intimate is that it's from the side of the face, rather than straight on.

 

The issue of the strobe can be taken serarately. A strobe will give sharpness and often wash out the details.

 

The intimacy of the earlier image derives from the photographer's approach. It is more open and appealing.

 

And what a gas to photo this guy. Congratulations.

[robertwright]

well strobe is like any other light, you have amount, direction, quality and color to think about.

 

you can blend strobe and ambient very successfully but you have to contol one or more of those factors.

 

taking amount, thinking in percentage terms, 50% is about where you begin to notice the strobe more than the daylight. the Sekonic meter, L358 is great for this, it tells you what percentage the strobe exposure is of the total exposure. You can then alter the shutter speed on a reading and see the different combinations of ambient/daylight for a given flash output. Harder to describe than to do. But 50% is where you have both the flash and ambient set to -1 of the total, the total then being a good exposure.

 

taking direction, it is more difficult for our eyes to accept frontal flash, so we tend to want less of it. When it is coming from an angle we can accept more of it in percentage terms, since it seems to imitate a practical source. this is why an off-shoe cord does such a nice job sometimes, you can even have 100% flash and it produces a nice modeling, a strong key light. The ambient can then form the fill light.

 

taking quality, you have either hard (point source) or soft (broad source) and a lot of sub genres in there also. With camera flash usually it is hard or less hard, most of the on-camera diffusers don't really do much to soften the flash since in relation to the subject, they still are a point souce. You almost need to get up to a medium chimera to start to see any real softness. what the on camera diffusers do mostly is scatter the light so that you get bounce off of nearby walls and ceilings, this is really what changes the look of the flash. A stofen is a good example of what used to be thought of as "bare bulb" approach, where you put an omnidirectional source in an average size room and shoot away. It is pretty much 360 degree light. Bill Owen's Suburbia is a good example of this, but he didn't have ttl and a stofen on a 580EZ,but if he did, same thing.

 

Since we can't really soften on camera flash too much, it comes down to the other factors to mitigate it. This is where color plays a big role, on camera flash is usually bluer than daylight, so a little CTO (color temp orange) in 1/8th helps a lot to blend the flash and usually warmer interior lights. Outdoors you do not really want to do this, if the strobe is too warm when you color balance you may make the surroundings bluer than you like.

 

I think you can shoot with strobe on camera, and if it is the right color, ie not too cold, a little bounced with some sort of s-fill or stofen, and a stop or two under the main, it can coexist with ambient gracefully. It will not look that way on the lcd, but when you get it into post, you will appreciate the fill. It will also provide a catchlight in the eyes that helps too.

 

And I think you can shoot with all strobe too, 100%, but it usually works best if it is entirely axial, that is very close to the lens, like a ring flash, or how the paparazzi have it, one on top and one below, set equally, or off camera like a spot light. The qualities that make this "light" nice are the strong shadows, detail, and high contrast it provides. There is nothing wrong with a "strong" statement of flash.

 

The big difficulty with strobe is that many people come to it through on-camera units, and there is no modeling light. So it becomes a big mystery, whereas professional units have modeling lights that allow you to see what you are doing. IMO portable flash units are harder to understand than seemingly more complicated studio units just because of this, plus all the menus and buttons. With studio gear you turn it on and adjust the output, that is it, it just becomes another source like the ambient.

[Guest guy_mancuso]

Myself i would have probably used a metz 54 and dialed down the output just so i had a nice balance between ambient and strobe but dial down enough that the strobe is not obvious , this would have taken about two shots for me to nail that down than go from there. chimping works and anyone that critizes people for doing it are really being stupid. This is your Polariod now, the LCD is your friend and helps make you successful.

[charlesphoto99]

Rule of thumb , solve your clients needs than solve yours. Whatever it takes. Good job Brent and your client will be happy and that is what counts

 

 

Hi Guy,

 

You seem to be contradicting your signature here: "It's not always about what the client will accept but about what you want to deliver to your client."

 

Yes, one needs to be beholden to the client (they're paying you) but one shouldn't second guess their needs (like oh they will only use a flash shot even if it looks like crap). Give your best. Otherwise we're just in the biz of representation (something anyone can do with a disposable p&s) and not truly "photographing."

 

And yes, once Brent got down to (and below) HH's level, the pics are more intimate, flash or not. Personally, I would have shot a few frames of b&w 3200 film as well. How often does one get that chance? But that's me....(and the film M body would have been along as back-up most def!)

 

I'm curious how the shutter noise of the camera affected how much Brent was willing to shoot? I know how nerve-wracking this can be. One wants/needs to compress a full shoot into minutes yet doesn't want to disturb the subject or their audience.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[Guest guy_mancuso]

Yes i sort of am. You still need to do what they want but i always try to improve on that my own way and really that is what there paying you for too. yes you need to be a machine sometimes but also need to throw your flare in there too. than even after that try something completely different. I like to call this creatively covering your ass or CCYA. LOL

 

Honestly going the extra mile pays off even if they never use it but you willing to do it too makes you look good. Unfortunetly we are salesman too and have to sell yourself for future work. It's all a balance.

 

I like what Brent did here , he did his job than tried something completely different and as Larry pointed out as a editor he would go with the alternative approach. So say Larry was the client he would more willing to hire Brent on the next gig because his idea worked. CCYA

[Guest guy_mancuso]

Charlie i am going to quote you here becuase this is a great comment

 

One wants/needs to compress a full shoot into minutes yet doesn't want to disturb the subject or their audience.

 

This is a big factor that many do not realize . i shoot a lot of executives from huge CEO'S down to the bottom ranks and time is the biggest issue. If your lucky and i mean this seriously you get 30 seconds and this has happened to me more than i care to want to talk about, you really gotta be on your toes armed for bear. This is were the M8 comes to be a really important tool, it is so much less intimatating to the subject. Think about this for a second. You are a stranger to your subject and you have this monster gear stuck in his face at 6 paces, and all he see's is that big gear with the huge Canons and Nikons ripping away at him. That is pretty tough to swallow for a subject, i find the M8 a much more personal camera and your subject can actually see the face behind the gear. It's not so damn big and intimidating. So yes besides the quietness of the M8 the holy crap big monster gear in my face stuff goes away and your success rate hopefully goes up.