Lowlight Photography with and without flash

[Shadowman]

f/11, 1/3 sec, ISO 3200, 6:45AM, handheld-use of slightly stable surface-no flash. I was getting up to photograph the sunrise, these partygoers were just leaving the clubs.

[rpcrowe]

In the introduction to his "Flash Photography Techniques" (http://neilvn.com/tangents/flash-pho...hy-techniques/ ) he wrote,

"As photographers we’re always looking for perfect light.
And yet, the quality of available light isn’t always ideal. It is rarely perfect.

But I feel that in using flash wisely, I’m able to enhance or over-ride the available light. With careful use of flash, I am more in control of light, and hence the way my photos will look – than if I had just accepted the existing ambient light.

Instead of waiting for perfect light, I use what I have …
and add flash to make the best of the situation."

And he additionally writes,

"These pages were originally written to help other photographers who struggle with on-camera flash. But they were also written as a reaction against the snobbery of the purists who insist on using available light only – even when it looks terrible."

My aim is to use flash so that it is not evident that flash was used in an image. This image, for example, looks like it was shot with just available light but, was filled using a single flash with a Joe Demb Flash Diffuser Professional...

[lukaswerth]

With regard to my first answer, admittedly short and perhaps feeling somewhat abrasive, I assure you it was meant as a personal statement and not as a normative one.

Let me explain (and due to some difficulty I am experiencing here with uploading pictures, I will just provide links to pictures of mine which you may check out at your will):
My own photographic endeavor is about finding themes, and rendering them such as I feel fit. I couldn't be less interested in using a studio. I once upon a time experimented with fill-in light/flash, light painting and such like, but it didn't work out for me.
I am a relative newcomer to digital for my expressive photography, and I still use - or plan to use - film - for pinholes, for instance, and for my large format camera which has been for many years my most favorite photographic tool. I made many night shots with it:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/lukaswerth/4574501809/
This one was taken at late dusk, but includes even persons:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/lukaswerth/4568186548/

I have always tried to make full use of the monochrome negative to get as much detail in shadow and highlight as possible. While digital is still not quite there, I was fortunate enough to get a camera (Nikon d800) whose sensor's capabilities of recovering shadow detail is nothing short of amazing, and which has, to the best of my knowledge, the highest dynamic range of any DSLR. I try to make use of this, and whenever possible, I expose with 100 ISO and a tripod:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/lukaswerth/8911382857/
This is a combination of two exposures (no HDR) in order to preserve full highlight detail:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/lukaswerth/8664694563/

For better or worse, I have tried to show a few features of what I consider my photographic style as well as my search.

Lukas

[Shadowman]

Lukas,

Nice images and quite a few were examples of what prompted me to start this thread, such as:
"Waiting for the Pir, Sindh Hotel in the Night 2668, Night at the Shrine, Kamal Chishti Shoes Night 1163".

However, in most these were static shots, no movement from the subjects-except for Sindh Hotel and Kamal Chishti and could be achieved using natural light and the capabilities of the camera. For moving subjects and very low light, sometimes additional lighting is needed or you accept some motion blur which can be rendered very artistically.

My use of flash, when needed; is for those moments when I have pushed the camera/lens to its limits and I either have to accept some blur or just have to put the camera away for the day. And as a few others have stated, flash is not limited to just night time use, it can even be used during the day to imitate the night time hour.

[lukaswerth]

John,

your approach is perfectly acceptable to me, it is just not mine. I am certain a skilled use of flash may produce fascinating images - I recall Weegee's pictures which were regularly produced with flash. But I do admit I quite liked your night hawks picture for which you used the available light.
What matters for me is developing a vision.

By the way, it's true I mostly end up with static shots, and also that I don't mind motion blur, but rather try to use it. In this case I asked the man in the center to stop for my picture (there were people moving through the exposure who got not or hardly recorded):
http://www.flickr.com/photos/lukaswerth/8852689605/
And this is a rare shot with people in motion which I couldn't blur, still shot at 100 ISO, f8, 1/500 sec, ruthlessly exposed for the highlights - I guess the correct exposure as measured by the camera would have been 1/15, perhaps longer:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/lukaswerth/8728669556/

Lukas

[RustBeltRaw]

If I like the quality of existing light, and I can live with noise in the shadows, I will cheerfully shoot ISO5000.



If I don't like the quality of existing light, or I want to really freeze action, I will break out my flashes.



The short version is that I believe you should bend to the circumstances, not just walk away if you see a shot that takes a technique you're uncomfortable with. It's taken me quite a while and a lot of strife to get halfway decent with low-light work, but now it's practically my raison d'etre. I go into most situations with my flashes handy, since they remove a lot of guesswork. But using them a lot should never blind you to using pleasing available light.

[Shadowman]

John,

your approach is perfectly acceptable to me, it is just not mine. I am certain a skilled use of flash may produce fascinating images - I recall Weegee's pictures which were regularly produced with flash. But I do admit I quite liked your night hawks picture for which you used the available light.
What matters for me is developing a vision.

By the way, it's true I mostly end up with static shots, and also that I don't mind motion blur, but rather try to use it. In this case I asked the man in the center to stop for my picture (there were people moving through the exposure who got not or hardly recorded):
http://www.flickr.com/photos/lukaswerth/8852689605/
And this is a rare shot with people in motion which I couldn't blur, still shot at 100 ISO, f8, 1/500 sec, ruthlessly exposed for the highlights - I guess the correct exposure as measured by the camera would have been 1/15, perhaps longer:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/lukaswerth/8728669556/

Lukas

Lukas,

Your response to the use of flash is understandable considering your shooting style. I started attempting lowlight photography only a few years ago, the static scenes are a challenge but usually achievable provided I have the right equipment. I like being able to freeze the action sometimes with lowlight photography and started this thread to solicit methods from others, so your ideas are just as welcome. And thank you for the comments on my style and images.

[Ken MT]

This was a shot taken at midnight of a dairy processing factory, showing the reflected light on low cloud. ISO 5000, f 4.0, 1/6 sec. The factory is 5 km from home, so flash was not an option.

[Shadowman]

f/5, ISO 3200, 1/320s handheld, no flash, 7:40pm Sept.

[AB26]

John, to be honest, I am still learning how to switch on my camera and you want images, shot in low light.

The D200 is pretty useless on high ISO in low light. My flash skills are as useless as my cameras high ISO but I am working on that. (Trying to learn from Neil van Niekerk) There is a saying in Photography: “If you insist on shooting in natural light only, you don’t know how to use flash”. The more I study what Wildlife Photographers do the more I realise the truth of that.

Improving my low light skills, I will have to spend a fortune on a D3s/D4 or change brands to a 6D. (In both cases my wife will kill me.)

Living in this part of the world does not offer many opportunities practicing low light photography. It is safer to get out of your car in the Kruger Park to get a close up of a Lion than it is for me leaving my home at night to get good night shots.

I have tried some tests shooting in low light (artificial light) but I am not satisfied with the results.

I am posting this shot to illustrate to you what I mean by the D200’s low light capabilities. This was shot in my “office” at home. Full manual mode, ⅓ sec, F4.5, ISO 1600, spot metering, manual WB. As you will see, the image is very “noisy”. I wanted that “natural” look and did not use flash.



If I could have my way I would like a new SB700 added to my collection. Using a good powerful flash when the light gets low to freeze movement is the only way for me to go. Natural and artificial low light I use a tripod, if the subject is stationary. If it is beyond my reach with the equipment I’ve got, I drop it.

[Shadowman]

Andre,

I totally understand where you are coming from, gear capability is a large part of the equation (achieving sharpness, low noise) however post processing plays a major role also; as well as camera technique. Also, final format or image size dictates what you can accomplish (again sharpness and noise) with your current gear.

Regarding your experiments with lowlight, try some interior shots lit totally by candlelight and add some spill light from another room. Also, one portrait photographer, Christian Waeber, used multiple shots merged together using different camera settings. One shot would include the subject at highest ISO the camera was capable of and the next without the subject at longer exposure/low exposure.
The shot I'm referring to is titled "Michael" and it is a photo of a man smoking a cigarette while leaning over a car. It is within this slideshow:
http://cwaeber.com/

[Shadowman]

f/11, 1/200s, 70mm, ISO 200 flash used, Jul. 6:41pm.. I had to or else their faces would have been thrown into the shadows.

[Shadowman]

When to Use Flash in Low Light
Reasons for…
1. To increase working shutter speed
2. To increase depth of field (by
allowing a smaller aperture)
3. To help freeze subject movement
4. To reduce the time between
successive shots (assuming the flash
can charge fast enough)

Reasons against…
1. When a tripod and slow shutter speed could be used
2. Subject out of flash range
3. Changes the atmosphere of the ambient lighting
4. Draws the subject’s attention to camera’s presence

Taken from “Mastering Digital Flash Photography:the complete reference guide”, by Chris George 2007, Lark Books

Of the listed reasons against, I wholeheartedly agree with #4. I will not use flash if it puts a performer in danger, such as a fire dancer, or if flash would be annoyingly irritating such as in a very dark venue.

[Shadowman]

I'll add a fifth for against...
5. When it produces a cruddy looking image.

[Shadowman]

Another flash photo. 24mm, ISO 200, f/4.5, 1/100sec, Aug. 9:45pm. Did I need to use flash, probably not but I wouldn't have gotten the neat star burst on the plate.

[rpcrowe]

I'll add a fifth for against...
5. When it produces a cruddy looking image.

John, I totally agree. But a corollary to that statement might be, when the photographer has not learned to use flash correctly and creatively.

IMO, it is the Indian, not the arrow at fault when a photographer's efforts result in cruddy looking flash images. Just as it is the Indian not the arrow at fault when the photographer's efforts result in cruddy looking available light images...

Learning how to use your flash (as well as when to use it and when not to use it) is a very necessary requirement to prevent "cruddy looking" flash images.

My Joe Demb Flash Diffuser pro allows me to get very decent images, even outside at night, when there is nothing off which to bounce the flash. As in these shots done in a Yangshuo, China Open Air Market:





I certainly agree with your #4 above. I don't use flash where I deem it to be inappropriate such as the shot I did of the man praying in the Istanbul Blue Mosque Prayer in the Blue Mosque or when it might interfere with athletes either human and animal (such as during dog agility events).

Another time I will not use flash is when is is specifically prohibited as in some museums and some wedding ceremonies...

However, I tend to carry a flash on my camera at almost all shoots. It is not always used but, it is used far more than many photographers do.

However, there are times when it is use a flash or don't get the shot at all. Like in this shot of the Quing Ming Ceremony in Xian China. There was virtually no ambient light except the burning offerings...



I captured this with a Canon 30D in 2010, using ISO 800. I preferred not to go above ISO 800 with that camera...

[Shadowman]

Richard,

As with most of my photography, low light, flash, macro I am in the learning stages and there will be some cruddy images produced. As in your statement "there are times when it is use a flash or don't get the shot at all", should be added if you get the shot and its cruddy either make changes to your setup or don't get the shot at all.

Your indoor shots look as if no flash was used, do you attempt to tone down the effects of flash in your outdoor shots, for example in the Quing Ming ceremony image?

[Shadowman]

Here's one where I probably should have used fill flash but didn't and glad I didn't as it would have probably rendered the diners as darkened shadows.



f/3.2, 1/100 sec, ISO 6400, 40mm, handheld, 7:14pm, Oct.

[ajohnw]

Fill flash is usually regarded as more or less removing shadows and particularly curing things like side light problems. One common instance can be a wedding where shots have to be taken at certain places such as at the church door. Most cameras now offer a very wide range of flash powers as well as the make the light up option and these should be able to create all sorts of effects in various dark situations.

Take John's shot for instance a very low power should just light up the front figures a little more. Not an easy option as some judgement will be needed.

John
-

[lukaswerth]

Richard,

Once again a personal statement:
There once lived a photographer whose work I quite admire: Leonard Misonne. He once stated about his way of taking pictures: "The motive is nothing, the light is all." I would certainly not go so far, but Misonne probably just wanted to drive home a point. Many photographers see themselves on the hunt for a motive: you get it or you miss it, just like the rare animal in the jungle, or the elusive pop singer letting her hair down: let's call this the Paparazzo-motivation (as an homage to Frederico Fellini).
I suppose for someone hunting images of the snow leopard or of Beonce in the bathroom this works fine, but it also means potentially flattening pictures to the curiosity of the act, leaving ambiance, atmosphere, context completely out of consideration. I am afraid your picture of the Quing Ming ceremony is for me a very good example of this. You wanted to get the action, but there is nothing left for me of any original attraction of the scene. I honestly think a picture showing more or less only blurred shadows would have worked much better. But again, it all depends on the motivation...

Lukas