The Blue Hour (C&C)

.Longshanks.

Its been a while since I tried a C&C thread....

I picked up a 430ex flash last autumn and it was followed by a radio trigger closer to Christmas. In March I got an old manual 430ez, another trigger and have been busy messing with them all ever since.

Last night I set myself a challenge ....at 9.25pm I had an idea for a shot, but Lost was on TV at 10pm (no spoilers please!). I wanted to see if I could get from the house to my location (5 minute drive), get set up, adjust the lights, get a picture, pack all my gear back up and get back to the house by 10pm.

....& I did it. Over the past few months it would have taken me an hour just to set up the gear, focus and then adjust (and then tweak over and over again) the lighting. I guess all my practice is starting to pay off.


Click for much larger

Strobist
-430EX camera light, 35mm, 1/4 CTO gel, 1/4 power with stofen diffuser into shoot through umbrella
-430EZ behind subject, 50mm, 1/4 CTB gel, 1/16 power bare for rim light

Appreciate your comments. Tear it to pieces if you feel its justified - its the only way I'll learn . Its also a self portrait because the other half wasn't available!

AnimalRights

Right, I'm nowhere near an expert on flash but when I read in the title 'blue' I was thinking it'd be way over done on some garish picture.
The previous pictures/framing you had been putting up has prepared me for this type of shot after seeing it, I would've liked to see this shot for the 1st time but I'm sure others will like it as part of the set.

From my PoV only thing I don't like about it is your eyes, in the small pic here it looks like the blue PP seeped thru to it but on the larger picture it just looks like too much work was done on the eye via PP, unless of course the flash caught it too much?
I could be totally wrong on all of the above.
I'd also crop a wee bit more to the left but then again thats just my style of cropping....

.Longshanks.

^ Thanks for all that.

AnimalRights wrote: »

Right, I'm nowhere near an expert on flash but when I read in the title 'blue' I was thinking it'd be way over done on some garish picture.
The previous pictures/framing you had been putting up has prepared me for this type of shot after seeing it, I would've liked to see this shot for the 1st time but I'm sure others will like it as part of the set.

Only 1 shot im afraid from last nite. It not exactly a great model . This kind of thing usually takes me 30-45 minutes just to get up. My main reason was to see if I could get it done quicker (and still come back home with half decent).

From my PoV only thing I don't like about it is your eyes, in the small pic here it looks like the blue PP seeped thru to it but on the larger picture it just looks like too much work was done on the eye via PP, unless of course the flash caught it too much?
I could be totally wrong on all of the above.

Catchlight from the flash. No PP on my eyes at all. In fact its almost straight from the camera. Developed the RAW file, unsharpened mask and crop with border. I like the catch light, but of course everybody has their own opinion. If we didn't then we all have pics of swans :P:pac::pac::pac::pac: (joke!!!)

I'd also crop a wee bit more to the left but then again thats just my style of cropping....

Cheers

AnimalRights

I know it's only 1 shot I referred to the style, blueish and heavy borders.

Catch highlights it is then, happened to one of my recent pictures....obviously I assume I'm not a fan of it. yet?

superflyninja

I quite like it.nice and atmospheric. Though the left and right hand sides of the photo dont seem to balance.The blue on the right seems to overpower the left hand side's more muted tones.....though i could be talking ****e.

.Longshanks.

superflyninja wrote: »

I quite like it.nice and atmospheric. Though the left and right hand sides of the photo dont seem to balance.The blue on the right seems to overpower the left hand side's more muted tones.....though i could be talking ****e.

Somebody doesn't know their left from either right....:D:D:D
Thanks for comment

oshead

In all I do like the image.

It can be difficult to do this when the only model you have is yourself. I find it's easy to you loose any objectivity you may have.

Just a couple of things that came to my attention as soon as I looked at this. First is the exposure. It looks a little underexposed. Drop your aperture down a little. If your ambient messes up, you could lengthen the shutter speed to balance up. Or maybe up the power of the main flash. If you can afford it, get a light meter. It takes a lot of the guessing out of all of this. On the bottom of the image you have a lot of stray light hitting the ground. The eye is drawn there.

The skin tones are a little off. You could try and mess around with camera settings, ie. white balance to the CTO gel to get the skin tones right.

One final tip. Get a TV recorder, Sky plus or Chorus digital plus.

.Longshanks.

oshead wrote: »

In all I do like the image.

It can be difficult to do this when the only model you have is yourself. I find it's easy to you loose any objectivity you may have.

Just a couple of things that came to my attention as soon as I looked at this. First is the exposure. It looks a little underexposed. Drop your aperture down a little. If your ambient messes up, you could lengthen the shutter speed to balance up. Or maybe up the power of the main flash. If you can afford it, get a light meter. It takes a lot of the guessing out of all of this. On the bottom of the image you have a lot of stray light hitting the ground. The eye is drawn there.

The skin tones are a little off. You could try and mess around with camera settings, ie. white balance to the CTO gel to get the skin tones right.

One final tip. Get a TV recorder, Sky plus or Chorus digital plus.

:D:D

Cheers Dave, was hoping you would comment. A light meter would definitely take the guessing out but then i half enjoy trying to figure it all out.
Will try to take all of the above onboard....

oshead

I have one you can borrow if you like.

.Longshanks.

oshead wrote: »

I have one you can borrow if you like.

Thanks a million Dave! Might give you a shout sometime...

oshead

Longshanks100 wrote: »

Last night I set myself a challenge ....at 9.25pm I had an idea for a shot, but Lost was on TV at 10pm (no spoilers please!).

You're obviously/probably a Lost freak. :rolleyes: Well I am... Sad to say.

I just found out tonight, after watching the latest episode for the second time, that the Finale will be broadcast simultaneously to the world on Sky 1 at 5am this Monday morning the 24th.

I just set the recorder...

Thecageyone

Ok, shoot me down, but I know little about flash photography [always prefer natural light, or long exposures at night] - but this seems very underexposed [as already mentioned] for a flash shot. I see nothing in it that couldn't be achieved from a couple of seconds exposure and sitting dead still. Apart from the lighting behind you, that serves no purpose. You'd even have gotten some star-light from the street lamps in the distance on long exposure.

.Longshanks.

^ Appreciate the honest comment. Upon reflection the background could be better exposed (1/30 sec exposure too short).

However I'm happy with the exposure of the subject (if not the WB). IMO the trick is to balance the exposure of the subject vrs background so the shot doesn't scream of having a flash(s) being used.
Guess I need to try again when lost finishes up & take more time!

I honestly don't think the above is possible without a flash & sitting very still

The pupose of lighting behind is to provide seperation between the subject and background that didn't get any light from the main light source from camera right


Oh & Dave, RTE are showing the final episode on Monday night now instead. I'm thinking Monday might need to be an Internet free day at work to avoid any spoilers

Thecageyone

Longshanks100 wrote: »

I honestly don't think the above is possible without a flash & sitting very still

I'm glad you realise I was just being honest I did say I know little about flash use. But I think I might take that challenge up - even though I realise it wasn't exactly meant as one

I have managed to stand still for 15 seconds before -


http://pix.ie/cagey75/1610712/size/800


Pretty sure I could sit for longer

.Longshanks.

^ Cool shot!

Back to my original concept. If done correctly, the background and subject are nicely exposed BUT the subject is correct and the background us slighly under. This makes the subject stand out without 'trying too hard'

I'd post links to examples that explain what um after better but I'm on phone & just writing this is hard work :pac:

Thecageyone

Thanks

Don't get me wrong [so many do on here ] - I was just initially wondering what benefit from having the flash guns. As I don't yet have one myself. Hence why I dabble more in natural/external lighting.

AnimalRights

Longshanks100 wrote: »

I love the blue tint from all of pint's photo's. Its very distinctive. That and the gorgeous brokeh in all of them!

I've just reliased where you got your "blue" influence from!

.Longshanks.

AnimalRights wrote: »

I've just reliased where you got your "blue" influence from!

Ain't you the proper !