[clgladiator]

I was wondering how important flash guns are climbing photography. is it going too be limiting if i dont have a flashgun, if so how by how much?

[dave]

Flash is great for some shots and useless for others. A decent flash in general is a good investment for all-round photography. An equally important investment is in the time spent learning to use it right.

[SA Chris]

Wot dave said. If you are going to buy, buy a decent one and some capability to use it off camera.

[Paul B]

I found the Strobist blog a week ago, its pretty good and might be a good place to start. I haven't had chance to implement much of it but I'm keen when my equipment arrives. There seems to be some pretty reasonably priced Manual and TTL flashes made by a Chinese manufacturer if you don't want to spend too much. Originally these appear to have had a bad rep but now they've sorted that out. I hope.
The other thing I stumbled upon was One Light DVD by Zack Arias, explains a lot and is easy to follow, the price tag however is huge at $250...
Most of it is portrait stuff so I'm concerned at how easy it'll be to use with a climber who may or may not be able to do the problem over and over while I get everything right.

[JamesD]

I would say pretty important, but thats considering that 85-90% of all of my photography involves a minimum of 1-2 flashes.

Pretty much the only time I allow myself to be at the mercy of the ambient light, is when shooting at really high iso's at Dark events, E.G. the dance at the wedding, or a live gig etc, but generally I use a lot of flash in varying forms, from hotshoe on camera flashes with really lightweight portable modifiers (rayflash ringflash adapters, baby softboxes, light spheres etc) at weddings/events, to lightweight studio lighting when shooting on location (including location portraits at weddings).

Although looking at the portfolio shots on my wedding/events site, its a fairly even split, but thats just the current shot choice I guess.

20 using one on camera flash or multiple off camera units

15 ambient only.

Every flash used was fitted with a modifer of some kind, not a single bare flash was used.

[dave]

Lets be clear, the original guy was on about climbing not wedding/studio etc.

[Johnny Brown]

I don't think flashes are 'important' for climbing photography at all. Fun to play with sometimes, but it certainly won't limit to you not have one. I can't think of any of my published shots which have required flash.

Perhaps the most liberating thing of all can be to carry nothing but a body and a single prime lens.

[Yossarian]

Perhaps the most liberating thing of all can be to carry nothing but a body and a single prime lens.

Johnny Brown's Photographic Masterclass (Additional Equipment)

1x handgun / stout knife / tincture of strychnine
1x guide to the caves of the North Welsh coast
1x bottle of amyl nitrate
1x single prime suspect

[Johnny Brown]

Yeah, the body does get heavy but I'm done with live models - bloody primadonnas.

[Stu Littlefair]

What Johnny said. Flashes are a fun toy; and very fashionable in bouldering photography at the moment. Totally unnecessary, as indeed is most kit. What's more, heading out with one lens and a camera will help you focus on composition and timing - both of which are more important than the ability to operate lots of fancy kit.

OTOH, playing with fancy kit is a motivating factor for lots of photo nerds, including me. So if you do get a flash make sure you've got a way to get it off the camera, otherwise it's a bit of a waste...

[Yossarian]

On the subject of flashes, my girlfriend and I spent over two hours last night doing portraits of yours truly for a new project - messing with angles, relative flash powers, isos, etc, etc, and the best picture out of the whole lot (of about 500 images) was the one where the bloody background fill flash had miraculously not recharged enough to catch up with the main octabox thing.

My advice to anyone considering getting properly anal with flash or strobes would be that life's too short...

[cofe]

The simpler you make things, the richer the experience becomes.

[Johnny Brown]

Exactly! Add it all up, and the sum IS zero.

[Norton Sharley]

Go and take a look at some of the mountain bike mags, e.g. WMB.  To me they are at the point where the bike shot could have been done in a studio and then superimposed over a heavily Photoshopped background.  It looks ridiculous compared to a good old fashioned well composed shot that is then fully worked in the darkroom computer.  I don't see why climbing shots should be any different unless they are taken in the back of some grovelling cave in which case they shouldn't be published anyway. 

[cofe]

Good point. A lot of mtb stuff now is bullshit.

[dave]

Hopefully the current fad of unsympathetically executed off camera flash in all genres will pass, (probably HDR IR circular fisheye will be the next thing) so that it can remain a useful tool in the box, as it was for years before it got trendy. Fuck, galen was doing this shit back in '94 better than most today.

[Bubba]

Surely even mediocre off-camera flash is better than most on-camera?

[Johnny Brown]

Usually, yes. But not always better than no flash.

For fill reflectors are worth considering first, and under-used in climbing photography.

[Paul B]

anyone care to share some good/poor examples of flash being used in climbing/MTB ing for reference?

Have to say Stu's point about the geekery rings true in my ears...Dicking around with new stuff is fun.

[clgladiator]

they are at the point where the bike shot could have been done in a studio and then superimposed over a heavily Photoshopped background. 

I guess this is an example of what you mean? To me, this is an excellent photograph, much more alive than something with flat natural lighting that would most likely be available in the situation.

[JamesD]

Lets be clear, the original guy was on about climbing not wedding/studio etc.

It is photography at the end of the day, it requires the same tools for you to make photo's whether you're in a studio/on location/wherever.
When I said shooting on location, I wasn't just talking about shooting at weddings or events, for instance you could quite easily liken shooting a someone climbing a boulder to a typical outdoor location shoot for advertising/commercial purposes they both require the same tools.
Speaking from experience, there are occasions when ambient only shots look amazing, but there also occasions when having the ability to tame the ambient, knock it down, and add back in your own precisely controlled light is invaluable.....like anything, it all depends how it is done, however 9 times out of ten, i'd take the added control that flash lighting offers over "ambient only" any day of the week.
There are pro's such as Joe Mcnally, who blend flash so seamlessly and beautifully with the ambient, that its almost difficult to tell where the ambient ends and the flash begins, some people prefer that.... others prefer a completely artificial/heavily staged, almost cartoon like look to their photo's more akin to an incredible piece of graphic art, like Dave Hill for instance.
Whatever "style" you're into I would say that flashes like any other photographic piece of equipment, are an essential tool in the box, of course they are not the be all and end all of photography, but they give you the ability to capture shots that just might not be possible with only ambient light.

[Johnny Brown]

it requires the same tools for you to make photo's whether you're in a studio/on location/wherever

That's not the approach I take. I use tools that fit the location, rather than making the location fit the tools. No flash can light a landscape, most climbing takes place in a landscape, therefore unless you want to ignore that the sun/ sky will always be your most important light.

[JamesD]

  Well done for completely inventing a statement based on an assumption rather than what I actually said.....
To elaborate further on my point, I said that by saying it requires the same tools I was simply implying that just because you're shooting someone climbing it doesn't suddenly mean that all the normal items, E.G. A Camera, flashes, reflectors, poly boards etc etc, could not be applied to shooting climbing, just as you would shoot on location professionally or as an amateur, the techniques and applications of said techniques don't suddenly change because the subject matter is different.
Undoubtedly the style in which you shoot may change, but that varies according to the photographer, and thats a different debate.
At no point did I come out with any crap about the flash lighting a landscape, or state that flash was more important than the ambient, and for the record, shooting someone within a landscape, is worlds apart from shooting a landscape on its own, assuming you actually want to control how the subject looks within the landscape, so comparing the two is about as redundant as comparing photographing a mountain, and photographing a snowboarder boosting a huge kicker on a mountain.

[JamesD]

Well...

[cofe]

well...he's at work.

i think he'll argue, and i'll agree, that very often shooting someone within a landscape is hugely comparable to shooting a landscape. it's all about context, and therefore composition, and that's how you control how the subject looks. you did imply flash was more important than ambient, by stating you'd use it on 9/10 occasions.

i tried to find one of JB's pics online to illustrate the point, but couldn't find one. If you've got the current Stanage guide on the bookshelf, regard the front endpaper.