Balancing Natural Light with flash in indoor photography

[cauger61]

The general answer would be "yes" as most people seem to prefer images with more contrast. That being said, that argument does not hold for foggy conditions.

Manfred, it was not foggy but cloudy with overcast skies!!

[Manfred M]

Closing down from f/6.3; how much f/8 or f/11?

That depends on the depth of field you need to get the image you are trying to make. Sometimes we want an image with a very shallow depth of field and we will use a large aperture. Other times we will want an image that is sharp throughout the range and we will use a smaller aperture.

secondly, if I increase the f-number and the same time go up with the shutter speed, don't I have to crank up the ISO above 3200?

That is correct and a decision you have to make as a photographer. There are trade-offs with any decision you take in photography. This image was shot at ISO 8000 and there is a bit of noise that I find acceptable for the conditions in the background.

Can I take that risk or it is better to drag the shutter below 1/60 and use a tripod?

Dragging the shutter only applies to flash photography. If you are using camera mounted flash at the focal length you are shooting with, very little light from the flash will impact your image.

I use a tripod a lot when shooting in low light conditions, especially using a long focal length.

[cauger61]

Thnx a lot Manfred. Thus does it boil down to primarily an issue of using a tripod? Would it have been better if I would use shutter below 1/60 and on a tripod? Also, yes there was nothing difficult to get close to the animals. But, if apprehended that by the sound of my opening the door, then approaching them with camera having a long protruding lens, they might have just came out of the basket and thus spoiling the whole scene. Anyway, your findings and suggestions are very helpful. Thnx and best regards,

Sanjib

[Manfred M]

Manfred, it was not foggy but cloudy with overcast skies!!

My answer was in response to Ted's question, not the images you posted.

If we photograph a scene that involves fog, haze or clouds, we have to be careful to preserve the look rather than being overly aggressive with contrast, which can remove the impact of those elements in the image. In this image I had to be very careful in balancing out the building and the surrounding clouds.

[Manfred M]

Thnx a lot Manfred. Thus does it boil down to primarily an issue of using a tripod? Would it have been better if I would use shutter below 1/60 and on a tripod? Also, yes there was nothing difficult to get close to the animals. But, if apprehended that by the sound of my opening the door, then approaching them with camera having a long protruding lens, they might have just came out of the basket and thus spoiling the whole scene. Anyway, your findings and suggestions are very helpful. Thnx and best regards,

Sanjib

Whenever I shoot something my workflow very much involves deciding what camera settings will give me the image I am trying to take. I will decide on whether depth of field or motion are my primary objective when taking a shot and that will help determine my ISO, aperture and shutter speed.

I rarely use focal lengths longer than 200mm on my full frame camera unless I am photographing wildlife, where I will use focal lengths of up to 400mm or 500mm, depending on which lens I use.

If I have a tripod available I will use it in much of my photography simply because it helps eliminate camera movement. I own several tripods and I will take the right one for the job and usually it is my heavy-duty one that can hold my camera motionless for hours.

[cauger61]

I use a tripod a lot when shooting in low light conditions, especially using a long focal length.

This is the most valuable suggestion of this discussion, I consider. Thnx a lot. Best regards — Sanjib

[cauger61]

My answer was in response to Ted's question, not the images you posted.

Oh!! I am very sorry, Manfred.

[cauger61]

First as to sharpness, I am going to guess at something, you have a 300mm lets say set for 280mm, cats are 7m distance with a 300mm @280mm with f/5.6 you have a total of about 120mm (5 inches) of depth of field. Cheers: Al

I have downloaded one DOF calculator in my smartphone. But, that gives dof as 13.58 cm at f/5.6 and 15.24 cm at f/6.3 with the parameters assumed by you. (7m and 280mm). Is it because that my nikon d5300 has crop factor x1.5; 280mm has to be taken as multiplied by 1.5 i.e. 420mm? Even keeping apart that DOF calculation, your point i.e. the relation between dof and sharpness, is not very clear to me; my apology for the ignorance!! What I mean to say is that as you have calculated the dof as 120mm (5 inches); what does that mean — 5 inch in front of my focus (the animals here) and 5 inch behind them, will be sharp and everything before and behind will be blurred? Pls. tell me in specific terms what values I should have set for the shot in terms of a) distance of the subject; b) aperture; c) focal length and d) shutter considering that ISO is restricted not beyond 6400!! and the shots taken on tripod mount. Sorry to disturb you; Thnx and regards — Sanjib.

[Polar01]

Sanjib if you could supply a little information about you cat shots. You state that you set Auto ISO at 3200 with a minimum shutter at 1/60th. All this means is the camera will adjust the ISO up to 3200 and not allow the shutter to be slower than 1/60th, this does not mean that the images were taken at ISO 3200 and 1/60th. So my question is what was the ISO those shots and what was the shutter speed of them

Cheers: Al.

[Polar01]

Sanjib, you need on that will work for a full frame sensor and a C-crop sensor which is what the D5300 is. I keep it simple the depth of field is the amount of distance what will be in good enough sharpness from the point at which the focus was taken. I did some quick math and came up with 5 inches, now that is not 5 inches in front and behind the focus point but a complete total distance. Now to add some confusion to the mix, it is 1/3rd the distance in front of the focus point and 2/3s of that distance behind the point that was focused on.
Here is a example now this is completely made up only the 1/3rd and 2/3rds is more or less true. Now you are taking a shot of a person and you focused on their eye, now you did the math and the DoF is 30 inches (made up) so 10 inches in from of the eye is sharp enough and 20 inches past the eye is good enough. Now camera lens change with distance still focusing on the eye, you do the math and the DoF is 3 inches that will likely mean that the tip of the nose is out of focus and the ears are also out of focus. DoF greatly varies with the length of the lens used and the distance from the subject. The only way is to practice, if you do something and it works remember and if it did not work again remember what does not work.

Cheers: Allan

[cauger61]

OK, I am giving you those data of my images. But prior to that I like to refer to the comments at #56 by Dan:

Re sharpness: if you blow up this picture, it's very soft, and the front-most kitten's eyes are clearly out of focus. One issue, as Allan wrote, is using a setting that will get you enough depth of field, which probably means closing down from the f/6.3 you used.

Would you pls. help me understand how dof affects the sharpness of the subject (here the kittens)? because as I understand, dof affects the background blur; apologies for my ignorance!! In my opinion, as pointed out by Manfred (# ), my sharpness issue is mostly related to camera movement at 1/60 shutter at 300mm. It could have been taken care of, if I would have used tripod!!

Now pls. find here the EXIF data of my images:

Image 1): kittens inside the basket: DSC_0008.JPG: Date Created: 2019/07/10 05:59:46
Focal Length: 300mm
Focus Mode: AF-S
AF-Area Mode: Single
VR: ON
Aperture: f/8
Shutter Speed: 1/60s
Exposure Mode: Aperture Priority
Exposure Comp.: -0.3EV
Metering: Matrix
ISO Sensitivity: Auto (ISO 900)
White Balance: Auto, 0, 0
Picture Control: [SD] STANDARD

Image 2: One kitten alone + kittens inside basket: DSC_0024.JPG Date Created: 2019/07/10 06:30:08
Focal Length: 140mm
Focus Mode: AF-S
AF-Area Mode: Single
VR: ON
Aperture: f/4.8
Shutter Speed: 1/60s
Exposure Mode: Programmed Auto
Exposure Comp.: +0.7EV
Metering: Matrix
ISO Sensitivity: Auto (ISO 400)
White Balance: Direct sunlight, 0, 0
Picture Control: [SD] STANDARD

[Polar01]

Sanjib, thanks for the info it helps. To start going strait to Exp Com to me - is less light so faster shutter and + is more light slower shutter. I am going to make a suggestion, that you either shoot Aperture Priority or Shutter Priority and turn off Auto ISO completely. My thinking behind that is this, for me Aperture is the most important thing to get the look I want, because if the shutter is too slow I either adjust the F-stop that I can live with or bump up the ISO. I bump the ISO as I usually shoot at base ISO of 64 (D850), your base is 100. I am not afraid to bump up the ISO as long as I get a good exposure, now I use Photoshop CC to process my images and am learning how far I can go. Forgive me my mind wanders a lot, you have to figure out what is important to you the DoF Aperture (people/cats) or shutter speed (sports/Birds in Flight) so do not add another auto into the mix until you understand completely and get what you want. As to hand holding at a slow shutter, I would not really try at 300mm to hold at 1/60th most likely bumped ISO two stops to get 1/250th, with practice, rolling the finger on the shutter release not pushing it you likely could do better than 1/250th with practice (there is that word again practice)

Cheers: Allan

[Manfred M]

+1 to Allan's thoughts, especially as you are learning. The is a place for auto-ISO and I do use it on occasion, however, like Alan I usually try to shoot at base ISO (the lowest numeric ISO setting the camera has). This maximizes dynamic range, colour bit depth and minimizes digital noise. There are times I need to raise ISO, but I tend to do so manually. The only time that I tend to use auto-ISO is when I am shooting in highly variable lighting conditions and there is a good likelihood I would miss shots.

The other reason is that I like to work with as few variables as possible when I am shooting (generally one only). I generally set my ISO when I get to where I am going to shoot and then determine whether or not motion or depth of field are the most important parameters for getting the shot that I want. About 80% of the time, I want to control depth of field and motion (freezing or blurring motion) for the other 20%, which drives me to a position of shooting aperture priority or shutter priority.

There are some rare occasions where I want a specific shutter speed and specific aperture and in that case, I will set my camera to manual exposure mode and set auto-ISO.

Some people advocate shooting in manual mode 100% of the time, especially when a photographer is learning. I am not one of those because if if you select your ISO and either the shutter speed or aperture, then it makes no difference if I dial in the third variable myself or let the camera calculate it.

[cauger61]

DoF greatly varies with the length of the lens used and the distance from the subject.

You mean the focal length of the lens?

[cauger61]

OK; good one!! let me try. Many thnx.

[cauger61]

OK; that's good. In that case, would you suggest the P mode; no? Anyway, I am extremely thankful to both of you and Allen, for spending so much of your time for my nonsense attempts.

With regards,

Sanjib

[Polar01]

To post #74 yes focal length, my brain just couldn't think at that moment in time.

Cheers: Al

[Polar01]

To your post #76, no. I am very much the same, as Manfred in his post #73. Your questions are not nonsense, it is how we learn, if it was easy everyone could do it.

Cheers: Allan

[DanK]

DoF greatly varies with the length of the lens used and the distance from the subject.

That's not quite right, I believe. Distance from the subject is the key. The focal length of the lens affects DOF because it will lead you to shoot at different distances for a given framing, but if the framing is the same--if you change your distance when you change focal length to keep the subject the same size relative to the frame--DOF is not much affected. This is from the DOF tutorial on this site:

Note that focal length has not been listed as influencing depth of field, contrary to popular belief. Even though telephoto lenses appear to create a much shallower depth of field, this is mainly because they are often used to magnify the subject when one is unable to get closer. If the subject occupies the same fraction of the image (constant magnification) for both a telephoto and a wide angle lens, the total depth of field is virtually* constant with focal length! This would of course require you to either get much closer with a wide angle lens or much farther with a telephoto lens,

Or do I misunderstand?

[pschlute]

Or do I misunderstand?

My understanding is the same as yours. A telephoto lens by itself will not decrease DOF for the same framing. It is the "same framing" qualifier that causes debate on this subject however. I like this article of the subject https://luminous-landscape.com/dof2/