# Why are people with DSLRs not using flash?



## Vinny (May 2, 2010)

I went to a party today and saw at least 4 people with DSLRs taking photos without using their flashes. I do understand that the pop up flash isn't the greatest but it is a light source and can help in taking better photos.

Is there some kind of problem with using flash other than possible harshness? I didn't take my camera but certainly would have used the flash in all the photos that I saw people taking (indoors with large windows on one side, kind of dark otherwise).

BTW, these were just shots of individuals or groups and were probably on Auto. Back in the day of film a flash certainly would have been used; are people in digital now relying on their ISO so much as to not bother with flash?

Inquiring minds want to know (OK, just me!).


----------



## Goontz (May 2, 2010)

If they were in Auto, then the camera clearly thought there was enough light to not need the flash. Auto is quick to pop it up.

Aside from that, the pop-up flash simply sucks. I would choose bumping the ISO up over using the pop up flash any time. I never use my pop-up, but I also have speedlights available.

Edit: I must add that, if this is casual users with DSLRs (as it sounds with many of them being at a party), they were most likely in Auto. Like I said, Auto is very quick to pop the flash up from what I've noticed so the light must have been decent. I helped shoot a wedding just yesterday and there was a guest snapping away with their own DSLR, popup flash firing even outdoors under great light.


----------



## Alter_Ego (May 2, 2010)

Yeah im not much of a fan of the pop up flash unless its at night (im a beginner obviously) Id sometimes rather not take the picture at all if i have to use the pop up flash.


----------



## D-B-J (May 2, 2010)

im with alterego.  If i am forced to use the popup flash, i normally give up on the photo.  Its just not worth the effort, because its too harsh.


----------



## mrpink (May 2, 2010)

The pop up can be used as a light fill flash if in a pinch (somewhere around 1/4th power and lower).  As a main light source, I am with the others- pass on the snap.


----------



## Scatterbrained (May 2, 2010)

I shoot indoors plenty and hardly ever mount my flash. Fast glass helps.


----------



## Big (May 2, 2010)

Scatterbrained said:


> I shoot indoors plenty and hardly ever mount my flash. Fast glass helps.


+1 I'm able to (usually) run around on ISO 1000 or slightly higher with the 1.4. It's just hard to focus sometimes. If it's really bad I'll use my flash and just drop the power all the way.


----------



## Vinny (May 2, 2010)

My very limited experience with the pop up flash is quite different than what is being said. My D90 seems to give OK (not great) results with the pop up flash. Yes it's a bit harsh but any direct fire flash would be harsh vs bounce or a studio umbrella. Here's an example:







I do not have a flash unit any more and eventually do plan on buying one but can someone tell me the difference between a camera mounted flash firing straight at the subject vs the pop up flash? My last flash unit was mounted onto a flash holder bracket to the left of the lens and was tethered to the camera by a sync cord. I had to manually calculate the distance and f stop being used along with the ISO of the film to get good results and I did get good results. I would think with the TTL on auto the results would be about the same for either type of flash except if one had a zoom flash then a wide angle shot may not have light that is cut off. The way I look at it, before bounce flashes became popular everybody had a straight firing flash (heck, I remember single use bulbs and 4 shot instamatic flashes). I personally don't understand why you would give up a shot because the flash was a little harsh; same as I don't understand why you would give up a shot because you need to use a higher ISO because you can't use flash - a lot of missed memories.

Now as far as auto not using a flash ... my D90's flash will pop up often if it's somewhat low light and we were in somewhat low light, I can override the flash not to fire and it will compensate for no flash - I imagine all DSLRs do that. 

I guess everyone has their own techniques!


----------



## Vinny (May 2, 2010)

I see a couple mentioned fast glass ... these people were probably NOT into photography as others are ... looked like all kit zoom lenses from afar.


----------



## xstepone (May 2, 2010)

I find that my popup flash makes my pictures look blown out, and not as high quality.
But, I do use it if that's the look I'm going for.


----------



## Big (May 2, 2010)

I'm looking to invest in a really good, simple, and relatively small sized diffuser. I'm leaning towards the lumiquest series.


----------



## Scatterbrained (May 2, 2010)

Foward facing flashguns (speedlites) are higher up from the lens than pop up flashes and therefore reduce/eliminate red-eye. You can also mount a diffuser easily to soften the light.  Besides that, a hotshoe mounted flash lets you bounce!


----------



## burstintoflame81 (May 2, 2010)

Lumiquest makes a handy little velcro diffuser thing that you can place over your pop up flash. Just info for everyone. I rarely use mine but as others said, if I do I lower the setting. There is a button on Canon rebels that you can program to a specific function in the menus. Mine is set for the flash comp, so I can easily jump into that menu with the press of one button.


----------



## Goontz (May 2, 2010)

Big said:


> I'm looking to invest in a really good, simple, and relatively small sized diffuser. I'm leaning towards the lumiquest series.


For pop-up or your 430? 

OMEW Sto-Fen Omni-Bounce for the Canon 430EX & 430EX II Flashes #EW


----------



## Scatterbrained (May 2, 2010)

Vinny said:


> I see a couple mentioned fast glass ... these people were probably NOT into photography as others are ... looked like all kit zoom lenses from afar.


I'm always amazed at the number of people with P&S cameras that are masters of PS, meanwhile I don't even know how to open PS. 
  Maybe they have some software and just add a few stops of light in digital.


----------



## fokker (May 2, 2010)

D-B-J said:


> im with alterego. If i am forced to use the popup flash, i normally give up on the photo. Its just not worth the effort, because its too harsh.


 
Quite ironic given the quote in your signature.

("You miss 100 percent of the shots you never take.")


----------



## Vinny (May 2, 2010)

I've owned a hot shoe mounted, bounce flash 30 years ago, only flash I ever owned. Did shots all manually as I said in a previous post and understand the dynamics of this. I even offset the flash to not be in the same plane by using the flash bracket that I mentioned. Try bouncing off a 12 foot ceiling to a person 30 feet away and you'll propbably will go to direct fire. Or how about a colored wall or ceiling? I never had a TTL metered auto everything SLR as I do today, it seems that it controls the flash fine enough for non professional photos. Other than red eye and power what's the difference between the two types of flash firing directly at a subject? 

I posted a photo that used the D90 pop up flash and the exif data I see is that it used an ISO of 800, 1/60th (flash speed that my D90 is set at) & f 5.6. Photo hasn't been retouched and I don't deem it's too harsh. If it was taken for a family gathering I see it as totally acceptable ... I've seen worse from so called professional photographers.



Scatterbrained said:


> Foward facing flashguns (speedlites) are higher up from the lens than pop up flashes and therefore reduce/eliminate red-eye. You can also mount a diffuser easily to soften the light. Besides that, a hotshoe mounted flash lets you bounce!


----------



## ghache (May 3, 2010)

if i bring my camera to a indoor party, sb-600 is on!


----------



## Village Idiot (May 3, 2010)

Did anyone have a $2500 camera? that would explain it.


----------



## Aye-non Oh-non Imus (May 3, 2010)

> *Why are people with DSLRs not using flash?*



Typically, it's due to ignorance.  The argument that "I only shoot natural light" is bogus as well.  Without proper lighting, the camera is just a box that will capture an underexposed or poorly exposed image.  Yes, some of today's higher end cameras with high ISO capabilities will render shots that were previously unattainable, but they can't necessarily balance the ambient and also get the subject looking as good as a well lit scene.  That usually requires controlling the light of the scene by additional lighting.  I won't hesitate to use my external flash on bright sunny days outside.


----------



## NateS (May 3, 2010)

Good chance that some of them are like me.

I'd rather shoot at ISO 3200 and no pop up flash than to shoot at ISO 200-400 and use the pop up.  I can handle grain a lot better than horribly harsh/flat lighting...and if you convert to b&w, the grain is often times a nice touch anyway (in my opinion and tastes).


----------



## BRIANxJDM (May 3, 2010)

The pop up flash does, really suck. I hate taking pictures in the house when there is hardly light because the pop up flash doesn't get the job done for me.


----------



## Gaerek (May 3, 2010)

Personally, I'm amazed people will say they'd rather not make a shot than to make a shot with the pop-up flash. Granted, I agree that the light it generates is harsh and flat, and I to, would rather crank the ISO and open the aperture than use the pop-up flash. However, if I am in a situation where the only way to get the shot is with the pop-up, then I won't hesitate to use it.

In the end, the most important thing is making the shot. If you make some blanket rule of, "I _*never*_ use the pop-up flash!" then I question you as a photographer.

A bad shot due to equipment limitations is better than no shot at all.


----------



## rufus5150 (May 3, 2010)

> "I _*never*_ use the pop-up flash!"



I never use a pop-up flash!

Question me all you want, but the 580exII mounted on the hot shoe keeps the pop up flash from opening.


----------



## Goontz (May 3, 2010)

Gaerek said:


> In the end, the most important thing is making the shot. If you make some blanket rule of, "I _*never*_ use the pop-up flash!" then I question you as a photographer.
> 
> A bad shot due to equipment limitations is better than no shot at all.



"As a photographer," I'm going to hate the end-result with the pop-up flash,  which likely means the photo would end up in the trash anyways. I never  use the pop-up flash (but, again, I have speedlights available -- this  is more for discussion's sake). 

If a speedlight is not an option, then I can agree with you if we're talking about a snapshot/family event/once-in-a-lifetime type of shot, etc.


----------



## Big_Pink_Snapper (May 3, 2010)

I just picked one of these up and it works quite well. 

Gary Fong Pop-Up diffuser


----------



## myfotoguy (May 3, 2010)

I would rather use the pop-up than get no shot at all. (I actually would use my speedlight). But, if my speedlight were broke, I would still use my flash if there was not enough light to get the shot without it.

The pop-up can give you harsh results sometimes, but adjusting camera controls can help overcome some of the harshness:

*Over-exposed/blown* - use flash exposure compensation or FV Lock (flash exposure lock, if avaialble on your camera). Also, understand where your flash meters for exposure. If your camera meters for flash in the center of the frame (many do) and your subject is off center, and whatever is in the center is quite a distance back, you likely will see overexposure from the flash. In this situtation the camera meters the background (in the center of the frame) and adjusts flash power for that instead of your subject which is closer.
*Red-eye* - Fix it in PP
*Flat and "harsh" looking* - Drag the shutter (Explanation: 03 &#8211; dragging the shutter Neil vN &#8211; tangents). Balance flash with the ambient light using slow-rear sync. Results vary with this method, but going to full manual and adjusting your ISO, Shutter Speed, and Aperture and Flash in TTL Slow Rear you can get some good results. *EDIT TO ADD*: If you're really unfamiliar with all the settings to adjust, and your camera has "scene modes" you might try "night portrait" (it might be called slightly different on diffferent models). It essentially does the same thing, but without any refining control. If your subject is moving too much this won't work real well. If they are moving in a constant direction (dancing?) you could try following them (panning) using this method.
In some situations I used my on-board flash and I was actually surprised at the result in aperture priority and making no other flash adjustments like mentioned above. I have not always gotten harsh results, though I understand you often do, if you make no other adjustments (again, some ideas are listed above).

Most of this assumes the subject isn't across a large room and they are within "normal" flash range. 

I agree, there are situations where no flash and bumping the ISO might be the better way to go. But I personally wouldn't skip a shot opportunity if my only option was to add light with a flash, even if all I had was a pop-up.


----------



## NateS (May 3, 2010)

rufus5150 said:


> > "I _*never*_ use the pop-up flash!"
> 
> 
> I never use a pop-up flash!
> ...



:thumbup: Same here....except I can't say _exactly_ the same.  I use my pop up flash a lot actually....it's just that it's used to remotely fire the SB-600 off camera.

I never use the pop-up for a light source...that's why I have an SB_600 for bouncing.


----------



## tsaraleksi (May 3, 2010)

I haven't got a pop-up flash! 

That said, a nice bounce flash for a group photo can do a lot for it.


----------



## Gaerek (May 3, 2010)

Goontz said:


> Gaerek said:
> 
> 
> > In the end, the most important thing is making the shot. If you make some blanket rule of, "I _*never*_ use the pop-up flash!" then I question you as a photographer.
> ...



So in other words, we're in agreement. There is a time and a place where the pop-up flash could be used. I hate the thing too, but if that's the only way I can get a shot, I will use it, and apparently you will to. I'm going to Disneyland next weekend for my daughters birthday. Since I'm already going to have to carry a backpack full of stuff for us, I'm in a situation where I need to limit what I bring in. I will likely bring only my camera body and a lens. My strobe just takes up too much precious space. If I need to make a shot, I'll use the pop-up because I need the shot. It would be stupid of me to miss a shot, simply because the lighting is too harsh and flat. People like to make these absolute, blanket statements about photography (I always, or, I never) when all that's doing is limiting themselves.

If I am doing a model shoot, and I forget to bring my lights, am I going to use the pop-up flash? No way. I'll likely get fired for being an unprofessional, unprepared photographer. But if I'm out shooting for my own sake, and I don't have a particular piece of equipment to make a great shot, I'll make do with what I have. It is foolish to say that you'd rather not make a shot than have to use the pop-up. You could miss the photo of a lifetime.

This goes along the lines of the people who will say to "never go above ISO 800 because of noise!" or "you always need to follow the RoT!" You simply cannot make absolute, blanket rules when it comes to photography. We, as photographers need to be able to adapt and use whatever equipment and skills we have on hand to make the shot, and not resort to ignorant, absolute statements that end up stifling our creativity.

I don't use my pop-up all the time, and actually, I rarely use the thing, but I'm also not afraid to use it if it's the only way to get a shot. As was in someone's signature, who actually made the statement they would rather not take the shot than to use the pop-up, "You miss 100 percent of the shots you never take."

EDIT: I just want to make it abundantly clear, I don't really agree with the OPs premise. If I saw a bunch of people at a party using DSLR's without the pop-up flash, I would likely shed a tear of happiness to know that they are doing what they can to make their photos look nicer. I don't like the pop-up flash, and I will shoot at max ISO and down to a shutter speed as low as 1/15 sec before popping up that flash. My point is that if you need to use it, use it. Don't make absolute statements that end up killing off your creativity. A missed shot can never be re-taken.


----------



## dyyylan (May 3, 2010)

My radio trigger blocks the popup flash from opening 


But yeah, I do use it sometimes, TTL on the d90 is really good and I never get those awful harsh photos that you used to get a few years ago where it looks like you're just blasting them in the face with a laserbeam or something


----------



## Vinny (May 3, 2010)

I love the comments about speed lights or stuff attached to the hot shoe and not using the pop up flash ...  I don't use the pop up flash on my D90 when I use some else's camera but that doesn't count either. 

The question of the difference between a speed light vs pop up shooting straight on wasn't answered so I guess it really isn't known *IF* there is a difference. Don't have a speed light to run that test but thought someone here might know the answer but obviously nobody knows the answer. IMO and it strictly an opinion - it will be be the same level of harshness but the speed light can reach further than a pop up. Forget about whatever diffuser or bounce or whatever is being used to soften the light. Flash is flash with the only differences being how far away from the lens the flash head is and the amount of power the flash can generate. A person standing 10 feet away with a forward firing flash without anything to soften, diffuse or anything else to stop 100% of the light from reaching the subject (trying to be as exact as possible) using the camera's TTL metering should look almost identical with either a pop up or speed light IMO. 

I find it hard to believe that for most of you - if the most important day of the most (or maybe 2nd or 3rd)loved person in your life is ready to be photographed by you (not a professional type event) and you need to use flash; your $1000 flash unit just glitched out so its not working and you didn't bring your camera bag with the other 200 flash units you own and want to photograph the event that you would refuse to use the pop up flash and miss photographing the event because you hate using the pop up flash.

I posted a photo using the D90 with it's pop up flash. As I have said, I don't find it bad at all. Is it that the D90 is far superior than the rest of the DSLRs - I doubt it. Would the photo look amazingly better with a top of the line front firing flash unit - I doubt it.

As far as shedding a tear - yes I did but it is because people buy expensive items and don't learn how to use them. If someone can master the dreaded pop up flash imagine what that person can do with a real flash unit!


----------



## fokker (May 3, 2010)

The speedlight will be slightly less harsh than a popup flash - it is further off-axis and also has a slightly bigger face whgich will help. Whether the difference will be that noticeable in reality.... I dunno.


----------



## dyyylan (May 3, 2010)

In my experience, a popup flash is great if you're looking add light to something to brighten it up. If you're using it TO light something, it generally just nukes it and looks sort of like you expect.


----------



## Dominantly (May 3, 2010)

My wife and I were on a hike one later afternoon when we say some really awesome colors in the sunset in the mountain range behind us. SO I figured I would give the shot a try so I adjusted the exposure for the sunset and then lit her with the pop up flash. I wasn't too displeased with the mini-flashes results.


----------



## rufus5150 (May 3, 2010)

> Don't have a speed light to run that test but thought someone here might know the answer but obviously nobody knows the answer. IMO and it strictly an opinion - it will be be the same level of harshness but the speed light can reach further than a pop up.



The pop up flash doesn't have a directional tilt/swivel for bounce flash. And seriously, bounce it off anything -- a napkin, someone's cleavage, whatever, will be better light than a pop up flash. 


> I find it hard to believe that for most of you - if the most important day of the most (or maybe 2nd or 3rd)loved person in your life is ready to be photographed by you (not a professional type event) and you need to use flash; your $1000 flash unit just glitched out so its not working and you didn't bring your camera bag with the other 200 flash units you own and want to photograph the event that you would refuse to use the pop up flash and miss photographing the event because you hate using the pop up flash.



Yes, you'll eventually hit on the ONE situation that we may use it.

Truth be told, I have used it and was merely being facetious with the reply, but the only time I've ever used pop up flash in the past was during broad daylight as fill.

But, I can get decent shots at ISO 6400 and I'm completely capable of focusing my fast glass wide open so those few times where the only savior is a pop up flash just keep getting more and more rare.


----------



## manaheim (May 3, 2010)

Vinny said:


> I went to a party today and saw at least 4 people with DSLRs taking photos without using their flashes. I do understand that the pop up flash isn't the greatest but it is a light source and can help in taking better photos.
> 
> Is there some kind of problem with using flash other than possible harshness? I didn't take my camera but certainly would have used the flash in all the photos that I saw people taking (indoors with large windows on one side, kind of dark otherwise).
> 
> ...


 
I can't think of a single thing you can do to your image worse than using a pop-up flash in it. It's like throwing a steaming bucket of fail all over your subject. Seriously. It's horrrrrrrrrrible.

In truly desperate moments I either crank up the ISO or I absolutely and summarily skip the shot.  I do not EVER use the built-in flash.


----------



## Dominantly (May 3, 2010)




----------



## Gaerek (May 4, 2010)

Vinny said:


> The question of the difference between a speed light vs pop up shooting straight on wasn't answered so I guess it really isn't known *IF* there is a difference. Don't have a speed light to run that test but thought someone here might know the answer but obviously nobody knows the answer. IMO and it strictly an opinion - it will be be the same level of harshness but the speed light can reach further than a pop up.


 
This statement is akin to saying that the only difference between a DSLR and P&S camera is that you can change lenses on a DSLR. If you want to try to minimize the differences, then try again. Even with bare, direct flash, the hot shoe flash will look better. It's a larger light source and it's off axis. It is inherently softer light than the tiny pop-up flash. Beyond that, you have more control over the flash, it's easier to add light modifiers, you can bounce it (not just off the ceiling!, try a wall, piece of paper, friends white shirt, just about anything!), if you have a sync cord, you can bring it even further off axis, it won't drain your batteries as fast (since they have their own power), do I need to go on?

You're right, there might be very little difference between an un-diffused hot shoe flash, direct on, and a pop-up flash, but most people don't use their hotshoe flash like this. Stop with the straw man argument!



> Forget about whatever diffuser or bounce or whatever is being used to soften the light. Flash is flash with the only differences being how far away from the lens the flash head is and the amount of power the flash can generate. A person standing 10 feet away with a forward firing flash without anything to soften, diffuse or anything else to stop 100% of the light from reaching the subject (trying to be as exact as possible) using the camera's TTL metering should look almost identical with either a pop up or speed light IMO.


 
There's a third difference that you conveiniently forgot to mention. Size of the light source. Bigger light source = softer light. I don't have my equipment with me at the moment, but the flash head on my 430EXii is at least 7 or 8 times as large as the flash head on my pop-up flash. A large hot shoe flash has inherently softer light than a pop-up flash, given the same distance and flash power.



> I find it hard to believe that for most of you - if the most important day of the most (or maybe 2nd or 3rd)loved person in your life is ready to be photographed by you (not a professional type event) and you need to use flash; your $1000 flash unit just glitched out so its not working and you didn't bring your camera bag with the other 200 flash units you own and want to photograph the event that you would refuse to use the pop up flash and miss photographing the event because you hate using the pop up flash.


 
Straw man again? If it was such a dire situation, I doubt very many people would refuse to shoot in this situation. However, I can pretty much guarentee that a good photographer would still do anything in their power to not have to use the pop-up flash. Adding more light to the scene, cranking ISO, putting on a fast lens, shooting wide open, etc. I'm sure if the pop-up were absolutely needed in this VERY unlikely situation (because, afterall, if it was that important, you wouldn't bring just one strobe, or something for backup, that's just stupid) most people would do what they have to do to get the shot.



> I posted a photo using the D90 with it's pop up flash. As I have said, I don't find it bad at all. Is it that the D90 is far superior than the rest of the DSLRs - I doubt it. Would the photo look amazingly better with a top of the line front firing flash unit - I doubt it.


 
Not to be the bearer of bad news, but that shot really isn't that great. I can assure you that with a hot shoe flash, I could have made it about 10 times better. If all I ever wanted to do was shoot my hot shoe flash un-diffused and direct on, you're right, it would be a waste of money. However, that's the great thing about that piece of equipment, that's not only way, or best way to use it.



> As far as shedding a tear - yes I did but it is because people buy expensive items and don't learn how to use them. If someone can master the dreaded pop up flash imagine what that person can do with a real flash unit!


 
Yes, it's a waste of money to buy a piece of equipment that will make your flash photographs better. By the way, you haven't mastered the use of the pop up flash. And even if you have, you've the proven to me that the $250 I spent on my 430EX II was well worth it, since a non-master of flash (me, apparently) can get better shots with a hot shoe flash than a master of flash (you, apparently) with a pop-up. Assuming of course, that the photo you posted, at least twice now, is showing your masterfulness.


----------



## Dallmeyer (May 4, 2010)

rufus5150 said:


> > "I _*never*_ use the pop-up flash!"
> 
> 
> I never use a pop-up flash!
> ...



:thumbup:


----------



## Vinny (May 4, 2010)

First, these people did not have another flash to use otherwise they would have used it. 

Second, I never said not to use a better flash but if that is the only flash available to use, why not use it.

Third,  The "straw man argument" that you say I'm doing is not an argument it was a question as to why if someone *only* had the pop up flash why they wouldn't use it and you yourself said there would be no difference in a direct fired flash vs a pop up flash. I am in 100% agreement with all of you that a better flash unit is the way to go - I am not saying not to use it and only use the pop up. I asked this question originally and a lot of people came on and said what they own and why THEY wouldn't use it - not the question I asked. Remember that bounce flash came into existence about 30 years ago ... before that the only flash photographers had were direct fired flash unless in a studio setting and they took flash photos.

Fourth, I didn't say my photo is great but acceptable - there is a difference. It was only a shot taken like a point and shoot and again it's acceptable for a family photo situation.

Fifth, most of the people I know buy a camera and if it happened to be a DSLR like was at this party they are using it like a point and shoot. I'm in a different mindset than the people I know but probably would use a DSLR as a fully automatic DSLR if in a family situation vs wanting to be "artistic." Obviously, I'm in a different mindset than the majority here in that I would prefer to get a photo than not taking it even if I didn't have the optimal equipment to get the greatest photo.

Finally, you answered something that I didn't know about a flash that a larger head is a softer light - that was information that you just gave - nobody else gave this information until then. Had I had a flash unit, I might have found this information out myself.



Gaerek said:


> Vinny said:
> 
> 
> > The question of the difference between a speed light vs pop up shooting straight on wasn't answered so I guess it really isn't known *IF* there is a difference. Don't have a speed light to run that test but thought someone here might know the answer but obviously nobody knows the answer. IMO and it strictly an opinion - it will be be the same level of harshness but the speed light can reach further than a pop up.
> ...


----------



## Dominantly (May 4, 2010)

If you put a blanket statement out saying you would never use your pop up, or that the results of using it correctly were completely unworthy of being accepted, then you're far too close minded.


----------



## SushiWarrior (May 4, 2010)

I never use a pop-up if I want to take an artistic shot. For a snapshot, sure! But if I want to do anything good looking I would never use it. Only situation I would CONSIDER using it is as a fill light.


----------



## Scatterbrained (May 4, 2010)

Dominantly said:


> If you put a blanket statement out saying you would never use your pop up, or that the results of using it correctly were completely unworthy of being accepted, then you're far too close minded.


  I would _never_ use a pop up flash, but then again my camera doesn't have one.


----------



## manaheim (May 4, 2010)

Dominantly said:


> If you put a blanket statement out saying you would never use your pop up, or that the results of using it correctly were completely unworthy of being accepted, then you're far too close minded.


 
Guilty!


----------



## patrickt (May 5, 2010)

Really? I usually wonder why people with point-and-shoots are using flash from a distance of 200 feet. 

I rarely ever use the pop-up flash. I occasionally use it for fill flash but not often.


----------



## magkelly (May 8, 2010)

My Fuji's (not a DSLR) built in flash isn't bad if you tame it via the settings panel. Factory is a bit too harsh sometimes, but anything shot at high iso settings without it is definitely not ideal. I got a shoe flash when I got the camera. That's decent but not expensive and I'm really glad I did that overall. Even with the shoe flash though I'm always putting a piece of cheese cloth or my finger over the flash though to get the exact light I want half the time. High iso settings on this camera just don't cut it unfortunately. 

Forgive me if I sound dumb here, but I haven't really shot much with a DSLR except for a couple of quick sessions playing with a friend's. Not nearly enough to get an idea of what it was really capable of. (Nice Pentax, drool!) I want to see if I am getting this right.  

I am reading the posts above correctly DSLR cameras have less noise at higher settings than say a more complex point and shoot like mine and that means not using a flash at all is often possible or even better for indoor work?

Higher ISO with DSLR doesn't automatically mean horrible grain levels, I take it?

I can't go much further than a medium ISO level with mine before my pictures start looking like they were taken in a hot humid jungle in Vietnam in the 60's or something so that sounds very nice to me. Just one more reason to keep saving my pennies for my own DSLR!


----------



## Vinny (May 8, 2010)

Depending on the DSLR, yes the higher ISO settings will produce images that may not be too noisy. Having a faster lens (larger aperture) may also be needed to not push the ISO too high. But the problem with a faster lens at it's largest aperture is a shallow depth of field.

IMO, using a flash, any flash, will open up the possibilities of taking more and possibly better photos. The people I was observing were not professionals, didn't have different lenses that I could see, didn't seem to have a hot shoe flash unit and weren't using any flash. Quite strange for me as I have a 1970's film SLR (now have a DSLR) and would have needed to use flash back then and would have used flash now.

As far as using cheese cloth for your flash ... Back when I had a hot shoe flash (film camera) and couldn't bounce it because of colored walls, too high ceiling or what ever and needed to fire it directly I would put a white tissue in front of the lens to diffuse the light to get rid of the harshness. I also had an argument with a professional photograher back then about it, today they sell diffusers for the same reason. Keep using that cheese cloth!


----------



## table1349 (May 8, 2010)

Dominantly said:


> If you put a blanket statement out saying you would never use your pop up, or that the results of using it correctly were completely unworthy of being accepted, then you're far too close minded.



I would never use a pop up either.  Not closed minded. Some of my bodies don't have one and I ain't retrofitting them. :mrgreen:  

As for the one body with a pop up flash, I find it a lot more closed minded or just plain lazy to not have basic gear with you when ever you are shooting.  I always have 1 580 EX with me no matter what the situation.


----------



## Dominantly (May 8, 2010)

gryphonslair99 said:


> Dominantly said:
> 
> 
> > If you put a blanket statement out saying you would never use your pop up, or that the results of using it correctly were completely unworthy of being accepted, then you're far too close minded.
> ...


Well, I'm sure if we all had free access to equipment, we'd all have bodies with no flashes, and numerous speedlights (among other things).
But it all costs, and some may not be able to make additional purchases.


----------



## Derrel (May 8, 2010)

My belief is that some people prefer photos where the existing light is the light used to make the photo--no matter what that existing light looks like, some people want a photo where there is no flash added, so that the moment is preserved without flash. For those people, the "moment" seems to be what they want captured, even if that means dark shadows under chins, and badly-lit faces,and so on...to those people, the "moment" includes the available lighting of the scene, even if it's dark or dim or contrasty lighting.

Other people prefer their photographs to have brighter lighting, with frozen motion and crispness that flash can bring. These people prefer their shadows filled, their strong backlighting augmented with fill-flash, and so on. These people have no problems with letting a pop-up flash do its thing, or insist on using a shoe-mount flash.

Some people like rare steaks, others like 'em cooked till they are done all the way through, and then some. Who is to say who is "right"? It's a big, big world.


----------



## magkelly (May 8, 2010)

Vinny said:


> As far as using cheese cloth for your flash ... Back when I had a hot shoe flash (film camera) and couldn't bounce it because of colored walls, too high ceiling or what ever and needed to fire it directly I would put a white tissue in front of the lens to diffuse the light to get rid of the harshness. I also had an argument with a professional photograher back then about it, today they sell diffusers for the same reason. Keep using that cheese cloth!



Thanks for the info, very interesting to me and I will remember what I have read here. As for the flash thing, I use all sorts of weird things when I photograph. I have some of those old colored gel squares and I actually like those better than some of my modern filters. I actually find myself using those far more often than I do the ones I bought with the darned camera!


----------



## table1349 (May 8, 2010)

Dominantly said:


> gryphonslair99 said:
> 
> 
> > Dominantly said:
> ...



Been there, Done that and I have the t-shirt.  After 35 years, i have managed to put together some gear now so I can shoot in ways that I would like.  I make no apologies for it.  I know the sacrifices I have made to get some of the gear I wanted.    

Far too many times however I hear photographers bemoaning the fact that they left a basic piece of equipment at home because they didn't want to carry it.  I feel the same way and would agree when hiking up a mountain, but it amazes me the number of people that drive to the door, get out at some location and start shooting only to find that they don't have some simple piece of gear that they already own.  

If you don't own the gear, then you do the best that you can and do your best to achieve the results you are tying to get.  Been there and done that, for several years.  As much as it might be a disappointment there are times when you might not be able to shoot at all.  It happens.  It's life.  
This isn't brain surgery, and what we are doing isn't life and death.


----------



## Vinny (May 8, 2010)

When I originally posted the question, I found it odd coming from film that somebody wouldn't use a flash if one was available considering that the pop up flash on my D90 made acceptable photos. As I posted, these people were not professionals and I will assume they had lower end cameras (not that mine is top of the line) with whatever lens came with the camera (just like me). I made the assumption that they had a pop up flash since mine does. DSLRs bring a new dimension to photography since you can dial in an ISO and not be stuck on a single film speed but again the noise vs possible better picture quality using a flash stuck in my mind.

My mindset is learn how to use what you have available if you don't have a lot of equipment, I'm still learning what the D90 can do. Since a lot of photographers here seem to have more than basic equipment (basic = camera & kit lens(es)) it seemed obvious to them to use a faster lens or a bounce flash or flash with a diffuser. For me without either a faster lens or a hot shoe flash I would need to learn the best way to take photos indoors with less light and that would be with flash, in my case a pop up flash.

So after all the discussion about this I can see that some photographers would rather use a higher ISO than use a flash unit. Unfortunately what I have found talking to some not so serious "photographers" (none of the people at this p[arty) is that whatever they take is just good enough and don't care to learn more or take better photos which brought the initial question


----------



## Vinny (May 8, 2010)

Some of us have sacrificed for whatever we want in life. Others are born with a silver spoon in their mouth. Both are the realities of life, personally I believe sacrificing and getting what you have makes it more appreciated but that is just my opinion.

Indoor photography pretty much stopped the day my Vivitar 283 broke. We had point and shoots for a long while and I would break out the old Nikon whenever I needed the extra range of the zooms but film processing is horrible where I live so I only broke it out occasionally.

Yup, sometimes you have to do without!




gryphonslair99 said:


> Dominantly said:
> 
> 
> > gryphonslair99 said:
> ...


----------



## Vinny (May 8, 2010)

I was never into studio photography but if I recall they used to mount the gel squares onto "studio" lights to project the color, they may still do that.



magkelly said:


> Vinny said:
> 
> 
> > As far as using cheese cloth for your flash ... Back when I had a hot shoe flash (film camera) and couldn't bounce it because of colored walls, too high ceiling or what ever and needed to fire it directly I would put a white tissue in front of the lens to diffuse the light to get rid of the harshness. I also had an argument with a professional photograher back then about it, today they sell diffusers for the same reason. Keep using that cheese cloth!
> ...


----------



## ivomitcats (May 8, 2010)

The pop-up flash makes my pictures look worse than if I don't use a flash at all.

Pretty basic answer I think.. I've TRIED the popup flash, but I've never actually kept a picture I've taken with it. They just always look better if I take the same shot without it.


----------



## table1349 (May 8, 2010)

ivomitcats said:


> The pop-up flash makes my pictures look worse than if I don't use a flash at all.
> 
> Pretty basic answer I think.. I've TRIED the popup flash, but I've never actually kept a picture I've taken with it. They just always look better if I take the same shot without it.



An even worse look than pop up flash was what you used to get from those crazy flash cubes on the old Instamatic cameras. :lmao:   But you were stuck with it.  There was no way to use any other flash bulb light source.


----------



## magkelly (May 8, 2010)

Vinny said:


> I was never into studio photography but if I recall they used to mount the gel squares onto "studio" lights to project the color, they may still do that.


 
One of my teachers at school told us they used to combine them a lot for fashion photography to create some moody art effects but I can't say I've seen them used like that. Most people just use filters in Photoshop these days, shrug.  

I just happened to get these with a bunch of film related photography stuff someone dumped on CL. Most of it I just passed on to someone I knew who had a film camera but those I kept because they interested me. Sometimes I use them directly as filters over the lens, other times I will experiment using them taped to a piece of glass that I have set just under my small spots. I have a rather makeshift lighting assembly, nothing too professional as yet. 

I've often thought of taping them on directly as I think that's the way they originally used them, but I only have the new kind of energy saving bulbs and they get so hot I'm afraid I'll melt them if I place them directly. These gels are pretty old and they're a bit fragile. The box they came from looked like was from the 70's and I don't want to ruin them.


----------



## Vinny (May 8, 2010)

Yes the gels will melt, you need air space to keep them from melting.

For "professional" lighting I have to question exactly what does anyone really need. In another thread somewhere here a poster was asking about a light setup that a certain photographer used. It looked like just a couple of painters drop lights on a pole. If photos come out looking good then it works!



magkelly said:


> Vinny said:
> 
> 
> > I was never into studio photography but if I recall they used to mount the gel squares onto "studio" lights to project the color, they may still do that.
> ...


----------

