# HSS. Why?



## wfooshee (Nov 6, 2014)

I would like someone to explain to me what good it is to have HSS.

I understand what it is, I understand being able to use flash with shutter speed faster than your normal sync speed. I've played with it on my D7000 and SB-600 just to see it work, both on-camera and off-. I shot my living room in the dark at 1/8000, and it works, although it was underexposed.

So what I don't understand is what good the flash does when the power is so much reduced as it is to make HSS possible in the first place.

I've heard people say that they might need fill flash but the ambient light is too high to be able to use the normal sync speed on the shutter. But if your ambient is so much that your need fill-flash or auxiliary lighting at say, 1/500 or 1/1000 second shutter speed, then it seems to me that the reduced lighting power available in HSS would make it pretty much useless.


----------



## Overread (Nov 6, 2014)

This video might help you :







In short highspeed sync gets around a limitation on the hardware of the camera and flash unit which would otherwise mean you couldn't use flash at all at shutter speeds faster than the sync speed (at least not without black bands appearing). 

When the ambient light is too strong and you have to use a faster shutter speed (or the shot requires it for creative effects) then the flash is putting out much less light. However it is typically often enough to take the edge off shadows. This can mean; as an example; that you can get softer shadows even in midday sunlight; rather than dark, hard shadows. 

Note also that the video above shows some additional creative uses of highspeed sync.


----------



## pgriz (Nov 6, 2014)

You're shooting something in daylight at f/1.8 (for thin DOF) and 1/2000 sec.  You need some fill.  How else are you going to get it if you don't have something like HSS?


----------



## Derrel (Nov 6, 2014)

FILL flash is often shot at Minus 2 to Minus 3 EV below the ambient light exposure. The loss of effective Guide Number of a typical GN 110 flash (for example, Nikon SB 800,SB 910, Canon 580 EX-II,etc,etc) is really NOT much of a factor in typical fill-flash work done at normal outdoor people photography distances. In even more plain language, fill flash requires only the very tiniest little bit of flash power. The loss of effective GN is not really a significant "problem" in actual use.

Consider a typical Sunny 16 Rule scenario. At ISO 200, the daylight exposure is f/16 at 1/200 second. LOTS of pepper specks on the pictures from even the slightest dust on the sensor...skies LITTERED with crisp, dark, BLACK specks on every single image!!!! Hooray!

With High Speed Synch, you could elevate the shutter to 1/6400 second and f/2.8 for an equivalent exposure. That means you've just increased the actual aperture value by FIVE full EV compared to the tiny hole that is f/16. Annnnnnd....since the fill-in light needs to be about 2.7 EV below the daylight exposure, you have seven and two-thirds EV "more power".

ANother way of looking at it: when shooting flash at f/stops like f/2.8 or f/4 or f/1.8, any of the wider stops, it takes very little flash power to expose a frame; it takes even LESS power to just fill-in the shadowy areas.


----------



## 18.percent.gary (Nov 7, 2014)

pgriz said:


> You're shooting something in daylight at f/1.8 (for thin DOF) and 1/2000 sec.  You need some fill.  How else are you going to get it if you don't have something like HSS?


A $22 three-stop ND filter.


----------



## Village Idiot (Nov 7, 2014)

18.percent.gary said:


> pgriz said:
> 
> 
> > You're shooting something in daylight at f/1.8 (for thin DOF) and 1/2000 sec.  You need some fill.  How else are you going to get it if you don't have something like HSS?
> ...



And poop quality.


----------



## Overread (Nov 7, 2014)

18.percent.gary said:


> pgriz said:
> 
> 
> > You're shooting something in daylight at f/1.8 (for thin DOF) and 1/2000 sec.  You need some fill.  How else are you going to get it if you don't have something like HSS?
> ...



Except that won't work

The ND filter blocks light entering the camera evenly over the whole frame. So sure your bright sections will have less light coming in, but in equal measure so too will the darker shadows. So you are still there with dark shadows that you can't lift. 

The only way is to add light to those areas - a reflector or a flash for fill lighting are ideal and commonly used options. A flash has the bonus that its quick to use (just turn it on and off as you need it) plus you can do it solo - reflectors oft require someone or something to hold them.


----------



## pgriz (Nov 7, 2014)

18.percent.gary:  Just in case I didn't undertand your answer, can you explain how your solution will help with fill in the shadows if you're shooting in bright conditions, AND you're going for a thin DOF?


----------



## runnah (Nov 7, 2014)

pgriz said:


> 18.percent.gary:  Just in case I didn't undertand your answer, can you explain how your solution will help with fill in the shadows if you're shooting in bright conditions, AND you're going for a thin DOF?



Magic...


----------



## KmH (Nov 7, 2014)

Nah... Smoke and mirrors...


----------



## 18.percent.gary (Nov 7, 2014)

pgriz said:


> 18.percent.gary:  Just in case I didn't undertand your answer, can you explain how your solution will help with fill in the shadows if you're shooting in bright conditions, AND you're going for a thin DOF?


In your example of f1.8 and 1/2000 conditions, a three stop ND filter will reduce your shutter speed three stops to 1/250, your sync speed. So now you can use your regular flash at the appropriate power level (without HSS wizardry and associated limitations) and keep your skinny f1.8 DOF without busting the sync speed.

Since this thread is regarding flash photography I thought it would be obvious that I was talking about using a ND filter in conjunction with a flash for fill.


----------



## Overread (Nov 8, 2014)

Most of the time highspeed sync is enough for fill on a typical sunny day. I think you're going for something more extreme if you need to keep the shutter speed within sync speed. 

The only  time I can think that you'd need fill light like that is if you're shooting something very fast moving (and thus you'd not want a series of flash bursts in highspeed sync because it would blur). However if you are shooting something fast moving and lowering your shutter speed chances are that means that your shot must be only flash dominated otherwise you'll get blur from areas exposed from the ambient light at 1/250sec.


----------



## Village Idiot (Nov 10, 2014)

Overread said:


> 18.percent.gary said:
> 
> 
> > pgriz said:
> ...



I took it as he meant an ND filter with fill flash and no HSS.


----------



## Rick50 (Nov 10, 2014)

Informative thread. Lots of good stuff here.


----------



## 18.percent.gary (Nov 11, 2014)

Village Idiot said:


> I took it as he meant an ND filter with fill flash and no HSS.


Yep, that's what I meant to imply. I was just making the point that there are simpler and less expensive options than HSS flashes.

Heck, we did just fine with ND filters long before HSS technology recently came about.


----------



## Braineack (Nov 11, 2014)

OR just use HSS and no ND filters...


----------



## Derrel (Nov 11, 2014)

The problem with using neutral density filters when you need fill-flash with most d-slr cameras is that the view through the viewfinder is seriously compromised. For hand-held work, where you're shooting people, having that welder's glass on the front of the lens is a f***** joke. It's really a crappy solution, and it's the main reason that HSS flash exists: high speed flash synch outdoors is a dream! it took many decades before the idea of high speed focal plane shutter flash synchronization became a reality. Now that it exists, outdoor high-shutter speed flash fill lighting for "social photography" is a Godsend. Using a 3-stop ND filter is a technically rational issue that's basically not worth a tinker's damn if you need to shoot anything that's fluid, and not locked down on a tripod and slow-paced.


----------



## Braineack (Nov 11, 2014)

I took this shot at something like 1/500 or 1/800 with fill flash.







That was extremely harsh noon sun.  Those shadows would be pure black otherwise.

If I had to keep screwing and unscrewing on an ND filter due to the changing light conditions I'd just give up on life.


----------



## runnah (Nov 11, 2014)

18.percent.gary said:


> Heck, we did just fine with ND filters long before HSS technology recently came about.



Define "fine"?

We also used to have to crankstart our cars and kill our supper.


----------



## Derrel (Nov 11, 2014)

I shot this this weekend in very bright (for November in Oregon) late afternoon sunlight conditions. Thank goodness for fill-flash. SB 800 right in the hotshoe. Unretouched proof file, crop for Instagram. [  _D3X0310_web-3.jpg photo - Derrel photos at pbase.com  ]


----------



## runnah (Nov 11, 2014)

ND filter?


----------



## Derrel (Nov 11, 2014)

runnah said:
			
		

> ND filter?



I don't even carry ND filters these days, not since I got a camera that can do FP Synch flash with TTL metering and easily-adjustable Minus flash compensation right on the back...this is Minus 2.7 EV of fill...just enough to lighten the shadows and get some eye-sparkle.


----------



## runnah (Nov 11, 2014)

We do live in a wonderful time for photography.


----------



## Derrel (Nov 11, 2014)

runnah said:
			
		

> We do live in a wonderful time for photography.



For sure. We now have d-slr cameras that give Kodachrome 64 Professional quality at ISO 400 to 640. When I was in high school, Kodak made the world's very first ASA 400 color negative film, Kodacolor 400. It was not very good; for the following 10 years, color in 35mm cameras really had to be ISO 100 or slower in order to have LESS THAN the quality we get now from a Canon 5D Mark II or anything newer in the FF arena. The first AF camera I ever saw was a Nikon N20/20...wow...it was not very good autofocus. This is truly a Golden Age in photography, it really,really is. Digital SLR cameras eclipsed the technical image quality of 35mm film some time ago, and I think the newer cameras are delivering medium format film-level image quality, or better, at low ISO settings that were comparable to medium format rollfilm of the 1990's. At ISO 400, or higher levels, digital sensors left the old Kodak high-speed films in the DITCH, rolled over and wrecked, years ago now.


----------



## 18.percent.gary (Nov 11, 2014)

I don't understand the antagonistic nature of some members here...  I gave a simple answer to:


pgriz said:


> You're shooting something in daylight at f/1.8 (for thin DOF) and 1/2000 sec.  You need some fill.  How else are you going to get it if you don't have something like HSS?


I said "a ND filter". And then out come the pitchforks. 

Obviously HSS is a far better solution, and I use it all the time. I just wish my monoblocks had it though...


----------



## Mach0 (Nov 11, 2014)

18.percent.gary said:


> I don't understand the antagonistic nature of some members here...  I gave a simple answer to:
> 
> 
> pgriz said:
> ...




Right triggers and mono's can if you use supersync or hypersync.


----------



## Village Idiot (Nov 11, 2014)

18.percent.gary said:


> Village Idiot said:
> 
> 
> > I took it as he meant an ND filter with fill flash and no HSS.
> ...



And HSS is only so powerful.


----------



## Village Idiot (Nov 11, 2014)

Mach0 said:


> 18.percent.gary said:
> 
> 
> > I don't understand the antagonistic nature of some members here...  I gave a simple answer to:
> ...



I posted about this in another thread. I use Pocket Wizards and the 5d MkII only works up until 1/250 before the black bar starts showing when you turn it up.


----------



## Mach0 (Nov 11, 2014)

Village Idiot said:


> Mach0 said:
> 
> 
> > 18.percent.gary said:
> ...




Not sure about canon but the slower the flash duration at full power the better it works. I haven't used it above 1/4000s.


----------



## Derrel (Nov 11, 2014)

Another thing to try is a DIRECT, PC-cord connection to the monolight flash, to see just how fast you can go. Paul C. Buff himself did some tests years ago, and got VERY fast speeds using the ALien Bee units and a PC cord connecting the flash to the camera, shooting on the rather long "tail end" of the flash burst. As I recall, 1/2500 to 1/4000 were no problem, although there is some loss of effective flash power, since the "tail" is lower in intensity than the peak flash is. But still...

DIfferent cameras and different flashes can give different results. Last week I saw somebody's test shots at 1/400 with only a very,very small black band across the bottom of the frames; I wanna say he was shooting the new D810.


----------



## Braineack (Nov 11, 2014)

At 1/1 I can sync to 1/4000sec


----------



## Village Idiot (Nov 12, 2014)

Mach0 said:


> Village Idiot said:
> 
> 
> > Mach0 said:
> ...



It’s not brand specific, its shutter specific.


----------



## Mach0 (Nov 12, 2014)

Village Idiot said:


> Mach0 said:
> 
> 
> > Village Idiot said:
> ...




Sorry, I re read it and realized I typed a half assed response. I have never shot canon and have heard people have issues with the 5d2 and sync speed. I shoot nikon. But I will also say that smaller sensors are supposed to be better. I have had no banding with a d90 and with the same wireless and flash set up on a d700 I will have some. So I opted for a couple I flashes with longer flash durations and problem solved. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Village Idiot (Nov 12, 2014)

Mach0 said:


> Village Idiot said:
> 
> 
> > Mach0 said:
> ...



And there’s ways to cheat this. I posted it earlier in this thread or another thread on a very similar topic. But shutter type also matters. Older DSLRs (mainly Nikon, as IIRC Canon only had one like this) had electronic hybrid shutters (D70?) which even though they were rated with an x-sync, would be able to shoot at their max shutter speed without getting the black bar.

I’ve always wondered why this technology wasn’t continued, especially since a company like Fuji would instead opt for a built in ND. I know it was for different reasons, but x sync is something that photographer constantly try to work around even though x sync today is much greater than it apparently was in the past. 1/60 used to be an actually maximum sync speed for some SLRs from what I remember reading.


----------



## Mach0 (Nov 12, 2014)

Village Idiot said:


> Mach0 said:
> 
> 
> > Village Idiot said:
> ...




Yes, I have an older d40 that can sync at whatever speed you are able to get your wireless set up too. It's a hybrid electronic shutter . I know it's a CCD sensor and not sure if that affects it but I wouldn't mind a higher resolution camera with the same cheat. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Braineack (Nov 12, 2014)

honestly, sometimes I look at old pictures I took with my d40 and come away still impressed.


----------

