<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: manual flash / TTL flash</title>
	<atom:link href="http://neilvn.com/tangents/2007/12/26/manual-flash-ttl-flash/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://neilvn.com/tangents/2007/12/26/manual-flash-ttl-flash/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=manual-flash-ttl-flash</link>
	<description>photography by Neil van Niekerk</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 22 May 2012 16:45:47 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Andrew</title>
		<link>http://neilvn.com/tangents/2007/12/26/manual-flash-ttl-flash/#comment-37278</link>
		<dc:creator>Andrew</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 12 Jan 2012 20:30:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://planetneil.com/tangents/2007/12/26/manual-flash-ttl-flash/#comment-37278</guid>
		<description>thanks for the help.....and a sense of confirmation that auto ISO is a bad thing with TTL.  stands to reason tho, now that i have time to think about it.  i&#039;ll definitely go back to constant and expose my background down a couple stops making the flash dominant.

i&#039;ll also kick up my EV and zoom out my flash head when using the BFT half rolled back to see how that works as a starting point.  i&#039;m sure i&#039;ll have to adjust from there.

am i on the right track in my thinking?

A</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>thanks for the help&#8230;..and a sense of confirmation that auto ISO is a bad thing with TTL.  stands to reason tho, now that i have time to think about it.  i&#8217;ll definitely go back to constant and expose my background down a couple stops making the flash dominant.</p>
<p>i&#8217;ll also kick up my EV and zoom out my flash head when using the BFT half rolled back to see how that works as a starting point.  i&#8217;m sure i&#8217;ll have to adjust from there.</p>
<p>am i on the right track in my thinking?</p>
<p>A</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Neil vN</title>
		<link>http://neilvn.com/tangents/2007/12/26/manual-flash-ttl-flash/#comment-37259</link>
		<dc:creator>Neil vN</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 12 Jan 2012 19:02:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://planetneil.com/tangents/2007/12/26/manual-flash-ttl-flash/#comment-37259</guid>
		<description>&lt;blockquote&gt;Andrew, 20 ft isn&#039;t such a huge distance to bounce flash, when used at an appropriate aperture and ISO combination. The one variable here that makes things murky, is that you used Auto ISO.  This means your actual ISO that you ended up with, was probably too low.  

Neil vN&lt;/blockquote&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote><p>Andrew, 20 ft isn&#8217;t such a huge distance to bounce flash, when used at an appropriate aperture and ISO combination. The one variable here that makes things murky, is that you used Auto ISO.  This means your actual ISO that you ended up with, was probably too low.  </p>
<p>Neil vN</p></blockquote>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Andrew</title>
		<link>http://neilvn.com/tangents/2007/12/26/manual-flash-ttl-flash/#comment-37117</link>
		<dc:creator>Andrew</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 11 Jan 2012 18:17:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://planetneil.com/tangents/2007/12/26/manual-flash-ttl-flash/#comment-37117</guid>
		<description>i may have figured out the second problem of light falloff.  i didnt have the zoom set to max and had too much of the BFT past the flash head.  which still leaves the first problem unresolved.  

i shot my D7000 mainly with an omnibounce since i didnt have time to really think about the bounce problems i was having.  i shot at 1/80s, 4.5 (or so) and auto ISO, all in TTL mode.  i know my ambient metering wasnt far off of -2 stops for without flash i was 1/20s, f4.5, ISO 2000 and still underexposed.  my flash compensation was set to +.7 mainly to make up for poor ambient light.

could the +EV have blown out my skin tones?  i thought auto ISO would have fixed that.  i never had any problem on my D200 when ISO was constant &amp; FEV was 0.  maybe i should go back to my old style and start over from there.

Argh.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>i may have figured out the second problem of light falloff.  i didnt have the zoom set to max and had too much of the BFT past the flash head.  which still leaves the first problem unresolved.  </p>
<p>i shot my D7000 mainly with an omnibounce since i didnt have time to really think about the bounce problems i was having.  i shot at 1/80s, 4.5 (or so) and auto ISO, all in TTL mode.  i know my ambient metering wasnt far off of -2 stops for without flash i was 1/20s, f4.5, ISO 2000 and still underexposed.  my flash compensation was set to +.7 mainly to make up for poor ambient light.</p>
<p>could the +EV have blown out my skin tones?  i thought auto ISO would have fixed that.  i never had any problem on my D200 when ISO was constant &amp; FEV was 0.  maybe i should go back to my old style and start over from there.</p>
<p>Argh.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Andrew</title>
		<link>http://neilvn.com/tangents/2007/12/26/manual-flash-ttl-flash/#comment-37114</link>
		<dc:creator>Andrew</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 11 Jan 2012 17:12:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://planetneil.com/tangents/2007/12/26/manual-flash-ttl-flash/#comment-37114</guid>
		<description>Neil,

I shot a wedding this past weekend and was disappointed with the inconsistency in exposure while in TTL mode, mainly overexposure.  i&#039;m not sure what went wrong, although i&#039;m reading a lot about not using auto ISO with TTL and am pondering if that made a difference.

Also, i tried to apply some bounce techniques and found a big problem was underexposure.  i was dealing with a tall black ceiling so tried bouncing mainly off walls (usually about a 20&#039; distance away).  i couldnt get enough flash power.  it was odd....and frustrating.

i hope a little more practice will help.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Neil,</p>
<p>I shot a wedding this past weekend and was disappointed with the inconsistency in exposure while in TTL mode, mainly overexposure.  i&#8217;m not sure what went wrong, although i&#8217;m reading a lot about not using auto ISO with TTL and am pondering if that made a difference.</p>
<p>Also, i tried to apply some bounce techniques and found a big problem was underexposure.  i was dealing with a tall black ceiling so tried bouncing mainly off walls (usually about a 20&#8242; distance away).  i couldnt get enough flash power.  it was odd&#8230;.and frustrating.</p>
<p>i hope a little more practice will help.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Neil vN</title>
		<link>http://neilvn.com/tangents/2007/12/26/manual-flash-ttl-flash/#comment-15021</link>
		<dc:creator>Neil vN</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 16 Jan 2011 17:09:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://planetneil.com/tangents/2007/12/26/manual-flash-ttl-flash/#comment-15021</guid>
		<description>&lt;blockquote&gt;Donovan, good luck on the new job. That&#039;s pretty exciting!

TTL vs manual flash in this instance ... if the photographer is working with specific aperture setting, and with specific distance to the subject ... then this fixed approach of using either 1/8 or 1/16 would work well.

However, if you move closer or further away from your subject .. or decide to use different aperture (and ISO) settings .. then the manual flash exposure will vary MORE than the TTL flash exposure would. You would have to work within a narrow range of distance / aperture / ISO settings for such a fixed manual flash approach to work properly.

Obviously, available light changes .. which immediately imply that shutter speed / aperture / ISO combinations change for different scenarios. Which, for me, would mean that such a limited way of using manual flash, doesn&#039;t quite make sense.

There are 2 more ways that using only 1/8 to 1/16 manual flash will fall down:

 - when you bounce flash, the size of the room will be a huge factor in light loss. TTL flash will automatically compensate for this.

 - the difference between fill-flash (with correct ambient exposure and FEC around -3EV) .. and flash as main soure of light (with ambient being under-exposed but flash taking up the slack) ... the difference in flash exposure there is 3 stops or more.

Finally, your colleagues would have to work within a fairly narrow set of scenarios for their approach to be consistently successful.

Neil vN&lt;/blockquote&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote><p>Donovan, good luck on the new job. That&#8217;s pretty exciting!</p>
<p>TTL vs manual flash in this instance &#8230; if the photographer is working with specific aperture setting, and with specific distance to the subject &#8230; then this fixed approach of using either 1/8 or 1/16 would work well.</p>
<p>However, if you move closer or further away from your subject .. or decide to use different aperture (and ISO) settings .. then the manual flash exposure will vary MORE than the TTL flash exposure would. You would have to work within a narrow range of distance / aperture / ISO settings for such a fixed manual flash approach to work properly.</p>
<p>Obviously, available light changes .. which immediately imply that shutter speed / aperture / ISO combinations change for different scenarios. Which, for me, would mean that such a limited way of using manual flash, doesn&#8217;t quite make sense.</p>
<p>There are 2 more ways that using only 1/8 to 1/16 manual flash will fall down:</p>
<p> &#8211; when you bounce flash, the size of the room will be a huge factor in light loss. TTL flash will automatically compensate for this.</p>
<p> &#8211; the difference between fill-flash (with correct ambient exposure and FEC around -3EV) .. and flash as main soure of light (with ambient being under-exposed but flash taking up the slack) &#8230; the difference in flash exposure there is 3 stops or more.</p>
<p>Finally, your colleagues would have to work within a fairly narrow set of scenarios for their approach to be consistently successful.</p>
<p>Neil vN</p></blockquote>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Donovan</title>
		<link>http://neilvn.com/tangents/2007/12/26/manual-flash-ttl-flash/#comment-14990</link>
		<dc:creator>Donovan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 16 Jan 2011 10:33:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://planetneil.com/tangents/2007/12/26/manual-flash-ttl-flash/#comment-14990</guid>
		<description>Hi Neil, just started my new job as a press photographer and as you know things move pretty fast at times. From what I&#039;ve read here you would use TTL,which I currently use but my work mates suggest I switch to Manual 1/8 - 1/16 as I&#039;m usually a few feet away from my subject. Any advice would be great.
Cheers
Donovan
P.S I do use -ev on my nikon sb900 flash sometimes (when using TTL) to prevent over exposing subject.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi Neil, just started my new job as a press photographer and as you know things move pretty fast at times. From what I&#8217;ve read here you would use TTL,which I currently use but my work mates suggest I switch to Manual 1/8 &#8211; 1/16 as I&#8217;m usually a few feet away from my subject. Any advice would be great.<br />
Cheers<br />
Donovan<br />
P.S I do use -ev on my nikon sb900 flash sometimes (when using TTL) to prevent over exposing subject.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Maurice</title>
		<link>http://neilvn.com/tangents/2007/12/26/manual-flash-ttl-flash/#comment-14636</link>
		<dc:creator>Maurice</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 13 Jan 2011 00:53:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://planetneil.com/tangents/2007/12/26/manual-flash-ttl-flash/#comment-14636</guid>
		<description>Thanks Neil. I will buy the Sekonic L-350 flash meter to make it easier for me and you are right. Practice and shooting a lot will make the difference. Thank you so much.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks Neil. I will buy the Sekonic L-350 flash meter to make it easier for me and you are right. Practice and shooting a lot will make the difference. Thank you so much.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Neil vN</title>
		<link>http://neilvn.com/tangents/2007/12/26/manual-flash-ttl-flash/#comment-14633</link>
		<dc:creator>Neil vN</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 12 Jan 2011 23:35:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://planetneil.com/tangents/2007/12/26/manual-flash-ttl-flash/#comment-14633</guid>
		<description>&lt;blockquote&gt;If you&#039;re getting under-exposure via the GN calculation, then just open up by 1/3 or 2/3 of a stop.  Or however much is necessary.  Obviously then Nikon&#039;s estimation of their GN is little boastful .. or perhaps you are trying this outside where there is no white walls to reflect some of the light and boost the GN.  There could be a few factors influencing this.

Ultimately though, if the theory doesn&#039;t match the practical results ... then be guided by the practical results.  There are real world limitations that come into play why the theory doesn&#039;t match the results.  We just accept it, adjust for it ... and try to get killer images.  That&#039;s the end objective.  To be an artist and not a technician. 

You&#039;re best option here still, is to rely on a lightmeter. That&#039;s the final word on this.  If it is calibrated to your camera.  So there&#039;s always that to play with and adapt to.  

Just remember, the end objective is for us to get killer images. 

Neil vN&lt;/blockquote&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote><p>If you&#8217;re getting under-exposure via the GN calculation, then just open up by 1/3 or 2/3 of a stop.  Or however much is necessary.  Obviously then Nikon&#8217;s estimation of their GN is little boastful .. or perhaps you are trying this outside where there is no white walls to reflect some of the light and boost the GN.  There could be a few factors influencing this.</p>
<p>Ultimately though, if the theory doesn&#8217;t match the practical results &#8230; then be guided by the practical results.  There are real world limitations that come into play why the theory doesn&#8217;t match the results.  We just accept it, adjust for it &#8230; and try to get killer images.  That&#8217;s the end objective.  To be an artist and not a technician. </p>
<p>You&#8217;re best option here still, is to rely on a lightmeter. That&#8217;s the final word on this.  If it is calibrated to your camera.  So there&#8217;s always that to play with and adapt to.  </p>
<p>Just remember, the end objective is for us to get killer images. </p>
<p>Neil vN</p></blockquote>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Maurice</title>
		<link>http://neilvn.com/tangents/2007/12/26/manual-flash-ttl-flash/#comment-14632</link>
		<dc:creator>Maurice</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 12 Jan 2011 23:26:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://planetneil.com/tangents/2007/12/26/manual-flash-ttl-flash/#comment-14632</guid>
		<description>Thank you so much Neil for your answer. The reason I did ask you this, is because ( I&#039;ve been investigating and studying a lot about using flash ) there is a table in the SB-800 manual regarding the GN ( you know about this of course ) and I found it very confusing. For example : 
Using f/4 at 18 feet at ISO 400 ( 4 x 18 = 72 / 2 - ISO factor - = 36 ), so 36 is my GN on this initial setup. Then if I look at that table for the matching number 36 from this equation, I am suppose to use 1/16 at 50 mm zoom head, so my ending setup will be : f/4 at 18 feet ISO 400 1/16 power at 50 mm zoom head ( focal lenght ). I shot this sample today and it was a bit underexposed. My speed was 1/200. My question is : how about if I want to shoot at 150 mm with my Nikon 70-200 ? In that table provided by Nikon, there is nothing more than 85 mm zoom head, so what will be my calculation ? 

I do not want to be just a photographer shooting with a flash, I want to become the best doing this as you are and I know it does require a lot of practicing but also a help from those who already know exactly what to do, so please help if you can that I would be very grateful as I&#039;ve been so far with all your help on this thread and all others. 

Beside, I shot the same picture today but instead Manual Flash, I decided to switch to TTL-BL and bounce the flash and the results were much better, following your advises, but for some portraits, sometimes you need to shoot in Manual and I would like to really know how to calculate my setup to the perfection. I do not set myself for less and thank you for your help !!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thank you so much Neil for your answer. The reason I did ask you this, is because ( I&#8217;ve been investigating and studying a lot about using flash ) there is a table in the SB-800 manual regarding the GN ( you know about this of course ) and I found it very confusing. For example :<br />
Using f/4 at 18 feet at ISO 400 ( 4 x 18 = 72 / 2 &#8211; ISO factor &#8211; = 36 ), so 36 is my GN on this initial setup. Then if I look at that table for the matching number 36 from this equation, I am suppose to use 1/16 at 50 mm zoom head, so my ending setup will be : f/4 at 18 feet ISO 400 1/16 power at 50 mm zoom head ( focal lenght ). I shot this sample today and it was a bit underexposed. My speed was 1/200. My question is : how about if I want to shoot at 150 mm with my Nikon 70-200 ? In that table provided by Nikon, there is nothing more than 85 mm zoom head, so what will be my calculation ? </p>
<p>I do not want to be just a photographer shooting with a flash, I want to become the best doing this as you are and I know it does require a lot of practicing but also a help from those who already know exactly what to do, so please help if you can that I would be very grateful as I&#8217;ve been so far with all your help on this thread and all others. </p>
<p>Beside, I shot the same picture today but instead Manual Flash, I decided to switch to TTL-BL and bounce the flash and the results were much better, following your advises, but for some portraits, sometimes you need to shoot in Manual and I would like to really know how to calculate my setup to the perfection. I do not set myself for less and thank you for your help !!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Neil vN</title>
		<link>http://neilvn.com/tangents/2007/12/26/manual-flash-ttl-flash/#comment-14625</link>
		<dc:creator>Neil vN</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 12 Jan 2011 21:57:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://planetneil.com/tangents/2007/12/26/manual-flash-ttl-flash/#comment-14625</guid>
		<description>&lt;blockquote&gt;Hi there Maurice ...

To answer your questions:

&gt;&gt; I am starting to use Flash Manual Mode. This is what I do : I do measure the distance from subject to my camera in feet; position myself to that distance; by pressing the select bottom in my SB-800, I do match that distance and my speedlight automatically select the power to match that distance, then, I do shoot. Is this right ?

That&#039;s essentially it. 
power (which you are adjusting) ... distance ... aperture and ISO
Those are the 4 things you need to control to give you correct exposure for manual flash.

While you could do it with the guide number (distance / aperture / ISO), and looking at the preview on your camera, it is easier and simpler to use a lightmeter for the flash.

If you have correct exposure, and you want to change your ISO, you have to change one of the other three things (distance, power, aperture), or a combination of those 3 things, to offset the change in ISO.

But really, manual flash is easier when you use a lightmeter. 

best

Neil vN&lt;/blockquote&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote><p>Hi there Maurice &#8230;</p>
<p>To answer your questions:</p>
<p>>> I am starting to use Flash Manual Mode. This is what I do : I do measure the distance from subject to my camera in feet; position myself to that distance; by pressing the select bottom in my SB-800, I do match that distance and my speedlight automatically select the power to match that distance, then, I do shoot. Is this right ?</p>
<p>That&#8217;s essentially it.<br />
power (which you are adjusting) &#8230; distance &#8230; aperture and ISO<br />
Those are the 4 things you need to control to give you correct exposure for manual flash.</p>
<p>While you could do it with the guide number (distance / aperture / ISO), and looking at the preview on your camera, it is easier and simpler to use a lightmeter for the flash.</p>
<p>If you have correct exposure, and you want to change your ISO, you have to change one of the other three things (distance, power, aperture), or a combination of those 3 things, to offset the change in ISO.</p>
<p>But really, manual flash is easier when you use a lightmeter. </p>
<p>best</p>
<p>Neil vN</p></blockquote>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

