# Family Christmas lights photo (at night)



## Mr. J (Nov 21, 2014)

Struggling with making this work. Fairly new to photography, but very new with flash and off-camera flash. I took this at night in my garage. Lighting is continuous modeling lights on either side of family, an off-camera flash is positioned to camera left shooting through an umbrella. Using 6D with 70-200 / 2.8. 

This one shot at 1/4, 7.1, 400 ISO, 87mm.

Obviously very slow shutter speed (really did not want to raise ISO). I assume this is the term "dragging the shutter?" Is that correct? 

I will be doing more of these for friends, but it has to be done at night, so I am trying to get this squared away. 

Any help or input is appreciated!


----------



## tirediron (Nov 21, 2014)

Okay... just so I understand, you used both continuous and strobed light to create this image?  Why?  A single speedlight & umbrella could easily provide all the necessary light, and your long shutter speed has caused a LOT of ambient light in the image meaning that your Christmas lights in the background are blown out. 

What specifically do YOU feel are the issues with the image and with what would you like assistance?


----------



## Braineack (Nov 21, 2014)

I'm assuming you want to do something like this:




Merry Freakin&#x27; Xmas by The Braineack, on Flickr


----------



## tirediron (Nov 21, 2014)

What?  Take a picture of a cranky kitty?


----------



## JustJazzie (Nov 21, 2014)

Braineack said:


> I'm assuming you want to do something like this:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


(Sorry to hijack OP) That is AWESOME! How in the world did you get swirls in the bokeh balls?


----------



## Braineack (Nov 21, 2014)

JustJazzie said:


> (Sorry to hijack OP) That is AWESOME! How in the world did you get swirls in the bokeh balls?



Buy a lens with aspheric glass elements.


----------



## JustJazzie (Nov 21, 2014)

Braineack said:


> JustJazzie said:
> 
> 
> > (Sorry to hijack OP) That is AWESOME! How in the world did you get swirls in the bokeh balls?
> ...


*Blank stare* What the heck does that mean??? :headscratch:


----------



## Designer (Nov 21, 2014)

JustJazzie said:


> Braineack said:
> 
> 
> > JustJazzie said:
> ...


JustJazzie; the bokeh that you see in the cat shot is called "onion bokeh"  or "onion-ring bokeh".  What Braineack is referring to is the construction of his lens which is what contributes to that type of bokeh.

Read about it here:  The end of onion-ring bokeh? Panasonic beats the curse of aspheric lenses


----------



## JustJazzie (Nov 21, 2014)

Designer said:


> JustJazzie said:
> 
> 
> > Braineack said:
> ...


Awesome! Thanks!


----------



## Braineack (Nov 21, 2014)

Designer said:


> Read about it here:  The end of onion-ring bokeh? Panasonic beats the curse of aspheric lenses



this is exactly the link i was about to post.  I meant to say aspheric.  It's a "flaw" in the construction.


----------



## Designer (Nov 21, 2014)

You mean I've finally done something right today?  Whoo-Hoo!


----------



## Designer (Nov 21, 2014)

Mr. J said:


> Any help or input is appreciated!



The composition here is very good except for the mother's arm being so central.  

tirediron has asked why the mix of lighting.  Me too now.  1/4 second exposure is quite long, IMO.  

Seems to me that you could use large white reflectors for fill and forget about using those continuous lights.


----------



## Mr. J (Nov 21, 2014)

Sorry, should have been more specific on the feedback. Just wondering if the lighting looks okay?

Regarding the mixed lighting, not sure why! Noob move I suppose. I started out with the continuous lighting during my test shots and then added the flash and kept them. I really have a hard time wrapping my mind around the idea of flash freezing motion. The shutter speed of 1/4 is so slow and it seems okay with the flash. At some point though, it's going to show motion if it's slow enough I suppose. 

Designer, you are right about the arm, it now stands out to me like a sore thumb! 

Thanks much!


----------



## Braineack (Nov 21, 2014)

the final result actually doesn't look half bad.  I would like to see the xmas lights more as bokeh balls for effect.


----------



## Forkie (Nov 21, 2014)

When using off camera flash, your shutter speed and aperture have slightly different functions to when you are using natural light.  The flash "takes over" the freezing of motion and you use you shutter speed to control ambient light.  A slower shutter speed will allow more ambient light into the camera and your aperture will [appear to] alter the intensity of your flash.


----------



## Mr. J (Nov 21, 2014)

Thanks Forkie, perhaps I'm just missing something easy, but with my shutter speed of 1/4 in the shot I posted, this seems so slow and just can't see how the flash freezes motion when the flash duration is a fraction of that 1/4 shutter speed! (I usually keep shutter speed same as focal length like the rule of thumb goes). 

At any event, it appears 1/4 worked because I don't see camera shake and don't see motion blur, just would like to grasp the concept! 

Thanks again!


----------



## Derrel (Nov 21, 2014)

Braineack said:
			
		

> the final result actually doesn't look half bad.  I would like to see the xmas lights more as bokeh balls for effect.



I agree: at ISO 400 and 1/4 second, even at a smallish f/7.1 aperture size, I think the continuous lights are adding some light to the family, perhaps some warmth from the modeling lights. The people look a bit yellowish, which is probably com,ing from the modeling lamps' color temp. The whiotes of their eyes look good and white, so the slightly warm hue on the skin tones is from the modeling lights. Also, RE: the Christmas lights...if you want them to render as warmer, yellower, then a daylight WB is the right one to set. I've done a few test sessions on lights + flash. Here's one test session gallery that has captions with information.minilights gallery 2 Photo Gallery by Derrel at pbase.com

If you want bigger "bokeh balls", you'd want to use a longer focal length lens, one that will literally magnify the size of background objects. A 200mm length from, 30 feet away from the group, at a MUICH bigger aperture, like f/2.8, would be about right. With 400 ISO, the speed needed would be faster than 1/4 second.

You WILL need to drag the shutter somewhat to get the lights amply bright; to get big bokeh balls you'd want a long lens and a big aperture, so some distance from camera to subject is a needed thing. At 30 feet, f/2.8 will have adequate DOF with careful posing.


----------



## Designer (Nov 21, 2014)

Mr. J said:


> Thanks Forkie, perhaps I'm just missing something easy, but with my shutter speed of 1/4 in the shot I posted, this seems so slow and just can't see how the flash freezes motion when the flash duration is a fraction of that 1/4 shutter speed! (I usually keep shutter speed same as focal length like the rule of thumb goes).
> 
> At any event, it appears 1/4 worked because I don't see camera shake and don't see motion blur, just would like to grasp the concept!



Mr. J; I would like to learn more about your setup.  Do you have a lens such as Derrel has described?  How much space do you have in your garage?  Do you have the camera on a tripod?  You probably should.

That rule of thumb regarding the shutter speed is for hand-held in ordinary daylight conditions.  Besides; your figures are off, because I know of no lens that will allow a 1/4 second hand-held shot.

For people (who move, fidget, blink, look off camera, etc.) you should not go slower than about 1/60 second even with a fairly wide lens.

The reason the flash "freezes" motion is because the flash duration is MUCH shorter than 1/60 second and probably shorter even than your standard flash sync speed, which is probably about 1/200 second.


----------



## Mr. Innuendo (Nov 21, 2014)

I think it looks fine, save for two things: The mother's arm and the fact that there's a lot of real estate in the top portion of the photo. I'd crop it differently, moving the family "up" in the frame.


----------



## Mr. J (Nov 21, 2014)

Thanks Derrel. This is very helpful to me. I originally used 2.8 in some of my shots so I could increase the bokeh, but I had a hard time with the thin DOF with more than 2 people. Just FYI, in the shot attached, the background (lights) to subjects was 15 feet and camera to subject was 10 feet.

Part of my issue is the backdrop is only about 10 feet wide and that's hard to keep everyone framed inside.

Designer, I was using a Tamron 70-200 / 2.8 (Non VC). And yes it's on a tripod. As for the 1/4 second shutter speed, I'm getting that info from Lightroom. 1/4 second, 7.1 and 400 ISO.


----------



## Derrel (Nov 21, 2014)

Couple of issues: When the background of the set is narrow and hard to work with without the edges of the backdrop showing, the FIRST priority is to LENGTHEN the focal length, so that the angle of view that extends behind the subject becomes more-narrow (go to a longer lens, from farther away!). I know this from studio work.

Your 10-foot camera to subject distance (and the commensurate lens focal length required) is KILLING YOU!!!! You need to go about this absolutely the opposite way: move the camera farther back, and lengthen the focal length, and the background problem (being too narrow) will magically go away. Same for the DOF issue: at 30 feet or so, at 200mm, the backdrop will be plenty wide--and the DOF will be ample...Again, *the 10 foot camera-to-subject distance is KILLING YOUR shot...*

Of course, you need enough room to get the camera 30 feet away: that might not be possible in every house, but if possible, I would try to arrange the shooting set-up so that is is possible. Alternately a compromise might be feasible, say 135mm from less than 30 feet; again...when the background is "too narrow" or the "DOF is too shallow" the first priority is to increase distance to narrow the background angle of view, and that distance increase also alters the DOF toward being more in your favor. The focal length and f/stop are what controls the SIZE of the bokeh balls; there ***is*** an optimal range of focal length/distance, and f/stop to do this type of photo.


----------



## Mr. J (Nov 21, 2014)

Thanks Derrel. I am glad you mentioned this because last night when I was trying these shots out, I was trying to figure out what was best-- if anything--with the narrow backdrop--closer or further away. I am shooting in my garage so I have tons of room to back up out of the garage and into my driveway. Btw, I just did a test shot 30 feet out at 200mm and it was perfect. The backdrop fit right in the frame! Thanks much! I am going to do some shots tonight with some family friends so we'll see how it goes!


----------



## Mr. J (Nov 21, 2014)

One more question that I forgot to ask. Regarding WB. I assumed because of the tungsten Christmas lights (and the modeling lights) that I should use an orange gel on my flash and set WB in camera to Tungsten for proper color. Is that not correct?


----------



## Bluffkin (Dec 11, 2014)

So glad I read this thread. Learnt a lot.

Can we see the finished product?


----------

