Baby pics 6 - an i-TTL education

[Dave Humphries]

Chloe was about 10.5 weeks old on the day I shot these, she wasn't co-operative when I first arrived, so a feed, walk out (in the rain) and sleep was needed before we got these.

From last time's session, my "Lessons to self" were effectively:

Take the new flash; an i-TTL capable, remotely triggerable flash (Godox TT685N), the intention being to set that up on a stand or shelf, pointed at the ceiling, to get the weight off the camera and save having to re-point the bounce head when changing the camera from vertical/portrait to horizontal/landscape orientation.

I need to clean my sensor; I'm getting fed up spot healing dust bunnies in PP ~.

Consider using the prime lens(es) again, one of those bands has an annoying habit of slipping off ~.

Consider using a different room to get away from that pale blue wall, which doesn't come out so great in flash light

This session was my first with an i-TTL flash, used off camera, RF triggered - it certainly aided handling, the Godox X1-NT trigger (in hot shoe) is nice and light.

I did blower brush clean my sensor, which removed all but one speck, I have since obtained some sensor cleaning products and a loupe, but haven't dealt with that one speck yet. It is still there, but I never saw it during the PP of these.

I used a shutter speed of 1/200s. I was still bouncing the flash off the ceiling, but had a small Rogue Flash Bender fitted to provide a bit of frontal fill and (sometimes) catch lights in eyes.

We did shoot some in a different room, but liking the flexibility of a zoom, I just left one band on the lens and as I wasn't shooting vertically downwards very often, that was sufficient to prevent creep.


1.

Nikon D7100 + Nikon 18-200mm lens at 52mm and f/11, 1/200s, iso 200, Manual mode with bounced Flash (+1 FEC)(416-13288)
Hit Kbd F11 and click image to see at 722px × 950px (recommended)


2.

Nikon D7100 + Nikon 18-200mm lens at 52mm and f/11, 1/200s, iso 200, Manual mode with bounced Flash (+1 FEC) (416-13290)
Hit Kbd F11 and click image to see at 616px × 950px (recommended)


3.

Nikon D7100 + Nikon 18-200mm lens at 55mm and f/11, 1/200s, iso 200, Manual mode with bounced Flash (+1 FEC) (416-13295)
Hit Kbd F11 and click image to see at 634px × 950px (recommended)


4.

Nikon D7100 + Nikon 18-200mm lens at 56mm and f/11, 1/200s, iso 200, Manual mode with bounced Flash (+1 FEC) (416-13298)
Hit Kbd F11 and click image to see at 869px × 950px (recommended)


WB was set to flash and warmed a bit in PP, I think I used 6000/0 for shots 1 - 4 above, the flash was placed on a tall cupboard, with the top of the reflector actually touching the ceiling. I am only now, while writing about it, fully realising the consequences of this and subsequent actions and why things didn't behave as I'd expected!

Back to the story: as the afternoon progressed (and the rain really set in), we needed the room lights on, so (to avoid mixed lighting) I gelled the flash with a CTO and switched the WB to Tungsten (Incandescent), I think the values used in ACR were 2850/+6 for a good white.

However; we also changed rooms at this point and now the flash was much further from the ceiling, so (thinking about it now) the total flash to subject distance increased from say 3.5m (10 feet) to more like 5.5m (18 feet), which explains why I needed to increase the exposure so much (in addition to the CTO gel allowance). Around this time, the rechargeable cells ran out (no doubt due to a full discharge on each flash), so the flash became very unpredictable; a change of cells fixed that.

I'm not sure any of those made this 'final cut' for one reason or another, so the ones below may also be back downstairs (with flash and reflector on tall cupboard), but they are still Tungsten gelled. The better modelling of the light is because she's been sat up for these.


5.

Nikon D7100 + Nikon 18-200mm lens at 80mm and f/8, 1/200s, iso 800, Manual mode with bounced Flash (+3 FEC) (416-13356)
Hit Kbd F11 and click image to see at 820px × 950px (recommended)


6.

Nikon D7100 + Nikon 18-200mm lens at 135mm and f/8, 1/200s, iso 800, Manual mode with bounced Flash (+1.3 FEC) (416-13369)
Hit Kbd F11 and click image to see at 641px × 950px (recommended)

Comments and critique will be gratefully received.


Lessons to self for next time -

a) Check flash mode; I had inadvertently left it in HSS mode throughout; unnecessary at 1/200s, which probably didn't help with battery life.

b) Consider flash height and effect on subject distance and light spread on ceiling when bouncing (even shoot this for record purposes while learning). Keep better track of what/where I'm shooting.

c) Take something to shield worst colour cast contributing wall(s) from subject, not a problem this time, more something I learnt from another member here (say 'Hi' Simon). I am about to order a couple of large (but collapsible) straight edged reflectors for this purpose.

d) Try some changes of baby clothes during the shoot; we haven't done this on last two sessions and it all looks a bit 'samey' to me.

e) Try for better poses too, the last two above prove this is possible, I hope to have a shoot-through umbrella by then too.

f) Vignette as necessary in PP to deal with highlights near the edge of frame.

I have already set to "--" the unused groups in the flash commander, so this doesn't record random extraneous information in the EXIF data. The Godox purports to be an "SB-900", but I can live with that - it needs to pretend to be something Nikon recognises so the camera 'plays nicely'.

I may revert to manual flash control (still remote), i-TTL proved to be unreliable, although that's possibly because, due to lack of thought, I was asking too much of it. Never-the-less, in manual, this may become apparent sooner.


For anyone interested in the 'learning journey' so far:
Baby pics 1 - a learning experience begins,
Baby pics 2 - the learning continues,
Baby pics 3 - manual bounced flash and
Baby pics 4 - Easter Bunny,
followed by
Baby pics 5 - Expressions.

Thanks for looking, Dave (and Rebecca)

[Shadowman]

Nice series, lights in the eyes look natural, soft lights in some and nice pinpoints in others. I would predict a tear or two followed #6?

[Dave Humphries]

Nice series, lights in the eyes look natural, soft lights in some and nice pinpoints in others. I would predict a tear or two followed #6?

Yes John, it was the last shot of the day - she does look rather weary there, doesn't she.

Thanks, Dave

[rudi]

Hi Dave,
I have been looking to this gorgeous set on and off today.
But allow me to nitpick:
Love the eye contact in 3 and 6. With 6 being my favourite ! Shame about the the bright patch in the upper left corner.
In 1 to 4 there are some maybe too bright patches left and right from Chloe's face.
Nr 5 is also too cute. Maybe 'burning' a bit the white shirt?

Just my 2 cents.

[ionian]

Hi Dave - these are generally great, some real cute moments caught.

I find it interesting that you gelled your flash and shot under indoor lights - I would have thought that your flash would overpower the ambient significantly, so it wouldn't be needed, but you were in the room and will know better than me. The results are excellent so it's more an academic discussion than a nit-pick.

However, it sounds like your light source was just too far away from Chloe generally. I would be setting up with my brolly right next to the shooting area to provide better dispersion of light, and less power required from the flash. Get a cheap light stand from Amazon - fifteen quid will get a pair with cold-shoe attachments. No they won't last forever, but they'll do for what you need.
Edit - were you bouncing the flash with the brolly as opposed to shooting through direct? Is that why the flash was so far away?

The other thing is that the images are very bright - well within the limits of acceptable exposure of course, but I would try adding heavier vignettes, radial and graduated filters in post to lessen the brightness of the entire image and concentrate the eyes on her face. This is just my style, but it may be worth a try with some of these.

These really are cute pictures - she has an adorable smile and a glint in her eye that means trouble for mum and dad in the future. You can always give her back when the trouble starts of course...

[Manfred M]

Thanks for posting these images and your comments, Dave.

I do have somewhat mixed feelings about i-TTL. It does work and works well, but just like many of the other automated functions the camera has (AWB being one I have similar feelings about), I find that in "static" shooting situations, I prefer shooting with the flash on manual as the results are more consistent. This is especially true with off-camera flash and the light to subject distance is fixed. With my PocketWizards and remote adjustment capabilities shooting more like with studio lights seems to work better for me (better = more consistent), when I do something like you did with the flash on the tall cupboard. I expect that you can probably do something along those lines with the Godox as well? I have the FP-16 for use with the Godox AD 360, but is it is a "dumb" trigger only so manual remote settings are the only thing I can do with it. I suppose I could use Commander mode, but the radio triggers are something I've gotten used to and I only use Commander mode when I don't have the radios along.

When it comes to more ad-hoc setups and on camera flash (here I usually do what you have done and use bounce light); almost the run & gun approach, I find i-TTL's strengths really come out, in spite of a bit of inconsistency from shot to shot. The nice thing about the SB-900 is that it comes with a gel holder and gels for tungsten and fluorescent lights, so I tend to use these as a matter of course if I am shooting with mixed light and am dragging the shutter. When I shoot at synch speed, I find the flash overpowers the ambient light and I don't need to worry about the gels.

Regardless, thanks for the update. They make for interesting reading. One of these days, I might have the chance to do some baby shots, but with my daughter living in India, that won't be as easy as it is for you.

[rpcrowe]

Nice set...

[Dave Humphries]

Hi Rudi,

But allow me to nitpick:
Love the eye contact in 3 and 6. With 6 being my favourite ! Shame about the the bright patch in the upper left corner.
In 1 to 4 there are some maybe too bright patches left and right from Chloe's face.
Nr 5 is also too cute. Maybe 'burning' a bit the white shirt?

I think the gist of your 'nits' are that there are very often brighter things in the frame than the subject - and I agree, it worried me with this set that she seems to have more 'suntan' than previously, particularly on the initial (flash WB) set. The shirt having white sleeves, plus the pale pink blanket she was on in some, making matters worse.

Reading your comments made me realise that I should have tried a vignette on some or all these - something for 'next time', if similar issues arise. And/or 'burning' any overly bright areas - I think of these things when viewing other's photos here, but didn't when editing my own

I'll be adding this to my 'Lessons to be learned' list, in the hope of remembering.

Many thanks, Dave

[Dave Humphries]

Hi Dave - these are generally great, some real cute moments caught.

I find it interesting that you gelled your flash and shot under indoor lights - I would have thought that your flash would overpower the ambient significantly, so it wouldn't be needed, but you were in the room and will know better than me. The results are excellent so it's more an academic discussion than a nit-pick.

Thanks Simon,

You might be right about the tungsten ambient vs flash ratio, but I had the gel and thought I'd use it

However, it sounds like your light source was just too far away from Chloe generally. I would be setting up with my brolly right next to the shooting area to provide better dispersion of light, and less power required from the flash. Get a cheap light stand from Amazon - fifteen quid will get a pair with cold-shoe attachments. No they won't last forever, but they'll do for what you need.
Edit - were you bouncing the flash with the brolly as opposed to shooting through direct? Is that why the flash was so far away?

I don't yet have the brolly, that's still in transit as I type this. The flash was still being bounced off the ceiling, so the distance was OK in one location, but rather longer in the other.

The other thing is that the images are very bright - well within the limits of acceptable exposure of course, but I would try adding heavier vignettes, radial and graduated filters in post to lessen the brightness of the entire image and concentrate the eyes on her face. This is just my style, but it may be worth a try with some of these.

Yes, this thought occurred to me reading Rudi's comments above - but not when I was editing

I think all bar one didn't need any significant exposure adjustment in PP and (from memory) that odd one was a stop down.

Thanks for your feedback, Dave

[Dave Humphries]

I do have somewhat mixed feelings about i-TTL. It does work and works well, but just like many of the other automated functions the camera has (AWB being one I have similar feelings about), I find that in "static" shooting situations, I prefer shooting with the flash on manual as the results are more consistent. This is especially true with off-camera flash and the light to subject distance is fixed. With my PocketWizards and remote adjustment capabilities shooting more like with studio lights seems to work better for me (better = more consistent), when I do something like you did with the flash on the tall cupboard. I expect that you can probably do something along those lines with the Godox as well? I have the FP-16 for use with the Godox AD 360, but is it is a "dumb" trigger only so manual remote settings are the only thing I can do with it. I suppose I could use Commander mode, but the radio triggers are something I've gotten used to and I only use Commander mode when I don't have the radios along.

When it comes to more ad-hoc setups and on camera flash (here I usually do what you have done and use bounce light); almost the run & gun approach, I find i-TTL's strengths really come out, in spite of a bit of inconsistency from shot to shot. The nice thing about the SB-900 is that it comes with a gel holder and gels for tungsten and fluorescent lights, so I tend to use these as a matter of course if I am shooting with mixed light and am dragging the shutter. When I shoot at synch speed, I find the flash overpowers the ambient light and I don't need to worry about the gels.

I am coming to a similar conclusion regarding i-TTL vs Manual methods, from my own experience, views here, plus those in Lynda and YouTube training videos I have been watching much of recently.

I have a hot shoe RF trigger that puts the camera in Commander mode and allows control of TTL + FEC or Manual power very easily with its own display - all self contained, as is the RF receiver in the TT685N, so fewer batteries and connections to worry about. The TT685N also does HSS, but I had to buy the optical filters separately.

I noticed you use a Rogue Flash-Bender too (the Large), I got the small size, it seems quite a versatile and ergonomic bit of kit that looks a lot better than some, yet unfolds flat to be slipped down the side of a camera bag where it takes up (virtually) no space and provides a bit of added protection to whatever else is in the bag.

A 33 inch shoot-through brolly plus stand are in transit to me for the next shoot

Thanks, Dave

[Dave Humphries]

Nice set...

Thanks Richard,

Although I have yet to reach the level of your set up for shooting the dogs, I have a feeling it may only be a matter of time ....

[Manfred M]

A 33 inch shoot-through brolly plus stand are in transit to me for the next shoot

I find I use the reflective umbrella more than the shoot through. The shoot through scatters light all over the place, but the reflective tends to focus the light better. Shoot through I'll use for large scenes and reflective white for women and children (my reflective white is a convertible, so it also works as a shoot through). I also have reflective silver, and that pushes out a harsher light which is more suitable for images with men.

I tend to crowd the subjects with my light modifiers (i.e. they are usually just out of frame and when I'm not careful, I get them in frame and have a bit more retouching than planned). I find that I get the softest, most flattering light when the light source is close to the subject.

[Dave Humphries]

I find I use the reflective umbrella more than the shoot through. The shoot through scatters light all over the place, but the reflective tends to focus the light better. Shoot through I'll use for large scenes and reflective white for women and children (my reflective white is a convertible, so it also works as a shoot through). I also have reflective silver, and that pushes out a harsher light which is more suitable for images with men.

Thanks Manfred,

That's very useful to know about the types and their practical uses.

What about size?
I assume the bigger the better, as long as it fits in the room.

Would you advise 33, 40 or 43 inch?

[rudi]

Hi Rudi,



I think the gist of your 'nits' are that there are very often brighter things in the frame than the subject - and I agree, it worried me with this set that she seems to have more 'suntan' than previously, particularly on the initial (flash WB) set. The shirt having white sleeves, plus the pale pink blanket she was on in some, making matters worse.

That's it !!

-... I think of these things when viewing other's photos here, but didn't when editing my own ...

Sounds very familiar

[IzzieK]

I have seen that you have been getting a lot of responses already so I will veer away from reading the others advice. 'Will read them later...in the meantime...


1. Here comes Grandpa again with that black thing in front of me...now let me see what I can do for him...is this one OK?



2. Pops...take a shot, take a shot...see my smile? Ain't I cutie here?



3. Is this a better pose? I'm gonna be a rock star by the time you finish experimenting on those lights...see? pretty eyes -- beat that! ha!


4. Ah hahahaha...I thought that was funny quip too, didn't you?



5. Now, how about this one? You like it, huh?


6. If I hear another click, I will cry...no more posing...end of my day, OK?

[Manfred M]

Thanks Manfred,

That's very useful to know about the types and their practical uses.

What about size?
I assume the bigger the better, as long as it fits in the room.

Would you advise 33, 40 or 43 inch?

Dave - like any other light modifier, your size requirements will be based on the size of your subject. You are trading off several things when size gets involved. I primarily shoot the umbrellas in reflective mode, although I have used my convertible both ways.

1. The closer your umbrella is to the subject, the softer and more diffuse the light it. The farther away it is, the more it behaves like a point source and you start introducing harder light and harder shadows. My experience suggests that the maximum distance you want your umbrella is about 2x the diameter (confirmed by a couple of commercial photographers I know). Obviously the closer you are, the more likely you are going to get the umbrella into you shot, so I tend to be in the 1x - 2x range (I measure that from approximately where the flash head is, with a softbox I measure from the outermost baffle). With your 33", 5-1/2 ft is the furthest I would move it out, so this will be good for your baby shots.

2. The larger the diameter of the umbrella, the wider the light gets thrown and the inverse square law becomes the factor. With a larger diameter umbrella, your light is distributed over a wider area and you need to turn up the flash power or shoot at a wider aperture.

3. The larger the diameter of your light modifier, the more unwieldy it gets. Large is okay for larger groups by small is better for smaller subjects. I'll throw a small sandbag on the light stand when I shoot the 60" umbrella so that it does not topple over. It is stable indoors, but too easy to bump into and knock over. I don't shoot umbrellas outdoors, although I know some people that do.


Just as an aside - I have three umbrellas. As light modifiers go, these are nice and inexpensive and give you nice circular catchlights, but you also get a lot of light spill.

36" silver - hard light, small portraits - really for men for head and chest shots. I bought this last year for the photography course I was taking,;

42" convertible (white interior) - general portraiture (especially women and children with their softer skin) - up to 3/4 shots. This is the one I use the most (having a wife and two daughters )

60" white - group shots - I bought this for family portraits. Comes out at Christmas and other times when there are a few of us together.

[Dave Humphries]

Izzie,

Thank you very much for the biggest laugh of the day!

OK, here's a challenge; please produce a series of human or animal portraits for me to have a go at captioning.

Thanks again, Dave

[bnnrcn]

Lovely, lovely, lovely

[Dave Humphries]

Thanks for the very useful additional information in your reply Manfred,

There are several nuggets in there that are useful to comprehend, also the uses of the various sizes and types of umbrella.

At some point in the future, I was going to ask you about soft boxes, but I see that topic has been raised by Bruce in the other thread, so I'll not deviate here from umbrellas.

Thanks for all your help with my questions, Dave

[Dave Humphries]

Lovely, lovely, lovely

Thanks Binnur,