[mr__j5]

Inspired by a number of things to finally ask this question.

From the current conversation around:

http://ukbouldering.com/board/index.php/topic,8834.msg305869.html#msg305869

and pics like this: http://www.flickr.com/photos/39660023@N03/5504564192/# from PaulB

and most of Alex Messanger's stuff that you see in the mags.


I wanted to ask about whether it is a growing trend that people are exposing these photos so that they look like they are shot in a cave because it seems arty or whether there just isn't enough info in the darker areas to produce a shot that looks more like how the scene was in reality. Or at least you'd need too long a shutter speed to achieve this.

I can understand that it looks maybe a bit more interesting than if it was exposed to look like reality, you just have some guy on a bouldering wall, but it's also not really an arty effect, if every shot looks the same way. The main aim in these situations is to capture the sporting event isn't it ?


Anyway, not trying to be critcal here, just wondering about the reasoning that this seems to be the norm for these photos.

[Johnny Brown]

exposing these photos so that they look like they are shot in a cave because it seems arty or whether there just isn't enough info in the darker areas to produce a shot that looks more like how the scene was in reality. Or at least you'd need too long a shutter speed to achieve this.

In short, yes. I've not done much comp photography, but I'd imagine its pretty hard to pack enough flashpower to light the whole room. The alternative is to use high ISO and slower shutter speeds to use the ambient lighting, but it being pretty low its likely to result in blurred subjects or hideous noise. The compositional challenge indoors is usually getting rid of the clutter in the background, and I guess when using flash with a limited spread anyway it makes sense to drop it into darkness.

[Paul B]

In short, yes. I've not done much comp photography, but I'd imagine its pretty hard to pack enough flashpower to light the whole room.

Its not that hard, I had two on the go, running at 1/8th power and 1/4 to 1/2 (1/2 in that shot), the latter zoomed to the max to get enough punch through the grid. These were picked after having them set higher for the Semi's and suffering from long (4 sec) recyle times.


C.W.I.F.F. 2011 by travelswithmyt4, on Flickr

Without the grid it was pretty easy to get enough extra light from the key to flood the comp wall completely [it eats a lot of light], I had another two in my bag as well so had it been desired I'm fairly sure I could nuke the comp wall in its entirety. Its not as if it completely needs to be flash lit either, even at F/4 ISO 400, reducing the shutter to that of 1/100th gave plenty to give the flash exposure a helping hand without getting into dangerous territory without IS.

I can't remember off hand what the EXIF is on this:

C.W.I.F.F. 2011 by travelswithmyt4, on Flickr

that's mainly flash and the shutter was dragged a little to add some fill (I was a bit wary of doing this too much as it seems the joy of Canon is that rear curtain sync and radio triggers don't play together yet and it results in some messy motion blur, optical slaves would have been madness).

Were you at the comp? If you weren't, there were lots of bodies even on the hard side of the railings. By using ambient or lighting everything it was quite hard to get rid of the clutter such as judges/brushers/fluffers and the rest. To start with I was stood up by the windows so I didn't have a lot of choice in composition to eliminate, anything. Adam put this more succinctly.

Anyway, not trying to be critical here, just wondering about the reasoning that this seems to be the norm for these photos.

No offence taken.

To answer the OP, the original shot quoted, I intended it to look like that. When I'm using them outside I tend towards a more subtle approach, mixed, at its heaviest (so far) but I'm relatively new to all of this so I'm just playing. If I hadn't done it, there'd be a Simmonite in it, a lightstand and somebody who I'm guessing is from Outcrop films.

I shot some of the Semi's using available light (from the roof glazing) and a few shots I managed to cut out all of the clutter using shallow DOF but there were a hell of a lot more that ended up in the recycle bin.

Adam and I had a discussion at the Plantation where he was saying that recently he'd generally shot the problems in question in better light already. I haven't but when its absent my bag packs enough punch to salvage something (I hope) which gives you an option rather than not bothering.
 
Are OCF shots becoming jaded already?

(can I just point people towards the Strobist blog if they're interested at learning about OCF in any shape or form, its a hell of a resource and quite impressive that its all given for free).

/woah that's a geeky post if ever I wrote one 

[Paul B]

Regardless of the discussion, this video is well worth a watch although I'd be happy if there was some way to view these for longer than the split second in the video (pause doesn't cut it).

[mr__j5]

Were you at the comp? If you weren't, there were lots of bodies even on the hard side of the railings. By using ambient or lighting everything it was quite hard to get rid of the clutter such as judges/brushers/fluffers and the rest. To start with I was stood up by the windows so I didn't have a lot of choice in composition to eliminate, anything. Adam put this more succinctly.

I was actually sat next to your missus, so I know where you were shooting from and where the flash was

I think the OCF gives a much better effect that flash from the camera, it's all the really dark shadows that put me off. Even more so than the black backgrounds.

I think that if you could take a shot with just the climbers on the wall, the judges on the mat and the crowd behind the railings, then you'd have a good capture of the sporting action, but I'd agree that having all those other 'more priviledged' photographers swarming all over the mat probably wouldn't make a great shot. You can't really DoF them out like you could if it was some scruffy climbing wall scene that you were trying to blend away.


BTW. I should also say, how good it is to see quality shots taken and posted online so quickly for the rest of us to see. I've been to far too many comps, where the place is swarming with photographers and afterwards you see nothing online apart from a few just about acceptable shots from people in the crowd with a compact or phone.

[Paul B]

I think the OCF gives a much better effect than flash from the camera, it's all the really dark shadows that put me off. Even more so than the black backgrounds.

Agreed, even more so when you get more than one shadow, or a shadow that goes upwards (IMO).

I was actually sat next to your missus, so I know where you were shooting from and where the flash was

Apologies for all the frenzied gesturing, hope it didn't piss you off too much.

You can get rid of the hard shadows by using a softer more diffuse light source but that hardness is dictated by size, so the softer you go the bigger (or closer) it needs to be. The bigger it gets, the more light the modifier tends to consume.

So its certainly possible to get rid of them, whether or not its practical would be another thing.

The Works were very accommodating. Sam and Lu suggested up by the decks and Graeme was kind enough to let me shoot from the mats nearing the end, it was completely understandable that they'd want to limit the number of people getting in the way of the actual competition and the spectators not to mention people getting in the way of photographers there for an actual purpose.

I'm just amazed we didn't have any RF clashes with the amount of triggers in the room.

[David S]

Soz Paul  It's difficult to keep out of everyone's way. i had a Messenger cropping up in my pics.

nice shots BTW - you've got the off camera flash pretty dialed. keep it up.

David

[Paul B]

Soz Paul  It's difficult to keep out of everyone's way. i had a Messenger cropping up in my pics.

Ditto, and I'm probably sure we all managed to get in the way of people filming. Thanks for the positive comments.

[David S]

No worries Paul - The positiveness is justified given the stuff I've seen from you so far. In fact I'm gong to wad you (oops that doesn't sound right does it). OCF is an art in it's own right and not easy to get just right. It takes a fair degree of paitence but I guess you're aware of that.

BTW it was the first time I'd used the T5's. The boxes were still in the boot of the car as I been to Focus that morning and should have left the credit card at home. They seem to perform okay but I need to read up more on them and try a few things to see how to get the best from them.

[Johnny Brown]

You can get rid of the hard shadows by using a softer more diffuse light source but that hardness is dictated by size

What about on-axis fill? Should take some of the harshness out of the shadows, though I'm guessing second set of shadows might be a problem, unless you've got a ringflash...

[Paul B]

One of the niggles of the current cheaper triggers is a lack of hot-shoe pass through so I couldn't use an on camera as well. I stuck my third next to me but its kissed the conrete one two many times and it was also on optical slave so it was firing unecessarily a lot of the time so I turned it off.

I've wanted to get an Orbis for a while now (for portraiture mainly) but can't really bring myself to spend that much on what is essentially a load of plastic. They also seem to consume an enormous amount of light from what I can gather. The cheaper copies don't work too well either as they're an incomplete ring.

All of the above would probably be best closer in to control spill on unwanted areas(I'm guessing?). You can imitate ringflash pretty well with a suitably sized reflective umbrella directly behind, again back to practicality?

F*ck it, we all clearly need a D3s.

[Control freak]

Plus a portable version of this lot

[Paul B]

on second thoughts maybe we all need to get phase ones just to be sure.

[Paul B]

http://www.facebook.com/album.php?aid=105083&id=1500104389

http://www.facebook.com/album.php?aid=105072&id=1500104389

The Works have put up some others from the CWIFF (From Nick Brown and DR [Gingerninja?])I think. Particularly like a few of Sam and Ned.

[gingerninja]

yep thats me, glad you like. good work on your part too dude.

[tomtom]

:D Messenger looking dead shifty in that set!