Tangents

bounce flash – balancing foreground and background exposure

March 8, 2009

using bounce flash to balance exposure between foreground and background

Lighting for the impromptu portrait of this little cutie was simple – just an on-camera speedlight, bounced up and over my left shoulder. This gives soft directional light. A simple technique that works every time when using on-camera flash indoors where there are light ceiling and walls around.
Settings: 1/250th @ f4 @ 1000 iso; TTL flash

My exposure settings was determined by the out-of-focus garden area outside, seen through a large window. It was over-cast, and therefore not super-bright. This meant that the bounce flash had a chance at balancing my exposure for my subject, with that of the background.

This little girl’s mom asked me for a few quick portraits of the two of them. So to keep the background simple (and avoid the other guests and the food tables in the frame), I had her hold her baby with the two of them standing in front of (but away from) a large window. The green in the background are the out-of-focus trees outside. The yellow patch is a reflection of one of the tungsten spotlights in the ceiling inside the room. In composing this portrait, I purposely positioned the out of focus yellow highlight right there.

This is when it all comes together for a simple and effective portrait - the expression (or moment), deliberately combined with a complementing background and beautiful light. And this is the point I wanted to make with this post .. look at your background. Move yourself and move your subject until your background, at the very least, isn’t distracting. But better yet, look at the background and frame your subject such that the background enhances the image.

photography books by Neil vN

Amazon USA

Amazon UK

newsletter / forum / workshops & seminars

Stay informed of new articles via the monthly newsletter.
Also join us on the Tangents forum for further discussions.

If you need more direct help or instruction on flash photography,
I do present workshops & seminars and also offer individual tutoring sessions.

If you find these articles interesting and of value, then you can help by
using these affiliate links to order equipment & other goodies. Thank you!

37 Comments »

Hi, Neil. She is a cuitie, isn’t she :)

Just saw the settings. 1/1000th at 1000ISO.

I’m assuming the TTL was high speed synch for the 1/1000th but I’m curious about the balance of high shutter speed and high ISO used. You could have lowered it to 1/400th at 400ISO for the same result, still had high shutter to freeze any action but lower ISO for lower grain/noise.

Clearly there is no problem with the shot so I’m wondering about the ISO choice – was it just “that’s what I was in on the shots before” or was there something more subtle at work that I’m missing?

Comment by Mark Cornwell — March 8, 2009 @ 2:51 am
Ooops! This is what I get for posting so late at night – typos and errors slip in. The actual shutter speed was 1/250th, not 1/1000th as I had it there originally. (I’ve fixed it now).

Mark, that should explain it all, I think.
The settings should make sense now. : )

Neil vN

Comment by Neil — March 8, 2009 @ 3:19 am
Hi
I’ve been trying the on-camera speedlight, bounced up and over my left shoulder thing with TTL on the SB900, and even though I am in a normal room with low ceilings, I find sometimes I get correct exposure, sometimes need to set FEV +/- in the same room!
How does TTL work? Does it use the same metering modes, and if I use center-weighted as you suggest you usually use, then if I half-press and recompose would it be incorrect since the center during pre-flash is not my subject anymore?

Comment by Val — March 8, 2009 @ 3:21 am
Also, EV does seem to have an effect even in manual mode in Nikons, so since it’s manual, what do I set, EV or FEV?! or both?!?!

Comment by Val — March 8, 2009 @ 3:26 am
Hi Val

That’s the thing with TTL – since it is an automatic metering mode, it will be influenced by the reflectivity and tonality of your subject and the scene .. and how large your subject is in the frame, and how you frame your composition. Also, any backlighting will also influence TTL flash metering.

Then we also have no clear idea how the camera manufacturers have written the metering algorithms for different cameras in combination with various speedlights and lenses … for various lighting scenarios we might encounter.

There are a lot of variables here. Which is exactly why manual flash makes the most sense in a static situation. It is exactly what you tell it to be.

Yet, in a fluid changing scenario, or where I want to quickly use flash, I still find it that TTL flash is the easiest and fastest.

Alll of the above does mean that we have to constantly ride our TTL flash exposure compensation as we move around and photograph in different places, and photograph different subjects.

TTL flash makes life easier, but not thaaaat easy. We still have to think about our settings, our ambient light, and also the direction and quantity of light from our speedlight.

Neil vN

Comment by Neil — March 8, 2009 @ 3:45 am
Beautiful little girl with BEAUTIFUL big blue eyes! Her Mum would have loved that shot!

Can you get the background that OOF with the D40 kit lens? I struggle to see much more than a slight blur and it just looks like I’ve focused wrongly even at max aperture.

How do you increase blur? Get closer to subject and have background further away?

Nice blog!

Jas

Comment by Jas — March 8, 2009 @ 4:02 am
Jas ..

I don’t think you’d get the background that much out of focus with a kit lens. Even though the f4 aperture I used there isn’t wickedly fast, it might still be faster than some kit lenses. Also, kit lenses tend to be shorter than the 200mm zoom setting I used there.

But you could still get close to the same results by looking at the background, and how you position yourself .. and also making sure you have as much separation as you can between your subject and the background.

Neil vN

Comment by Neil — March 8, 2009 @ 5:24 am
Hi Neil
I am just starting to explore this over the shoulder bounce type of flash.
I was wondering about the catch light in her eye was this done in post??
Great shot and I really like your site.
John

Comment by John Jones — March 8, 2009 @ 8:07 am
John … those catch-lights are as they appear in the photo directly out of camera. No post-processing needed for that.

That is a nice side-effect of bouncing flash like that, and pretty much a predictable thing. You can also see it in this other posting on getting directional light from your on-camera speedlight.

Neil vN

Comment by Neil — March 8, 2009 @ 9:30 am
Neil:

Very nice shot as usual. As someone who can’t afford a D3, the D80 gets a little noisy at ISO 1000. Assuming I exposed for your background using a slower shutter speed and therefore lower ISO, would an SB600 flash be strong enough to light the cutie at f4 and still give me the same shot? I was thinking that 1/80 @ f4 320iso. i suppose that it would also depend on how far away you were from the wall you bounced off of?

Thanks for continuing to post and taking the time and interest to explain and demonstrate your great work. Much appreciated and I am always tuning in.

Comment by Gene — March 8, 2009 @ 10:12 am
Gene .. thanks.

I wouldn’t lower the shutter speed immediately that much, but would rather open up the aperture to f2.8 instead to give my speedlight more chance of giving enough light out when bounced like that.

The change in shutter speed wouldn’t affect the flash’s output, but the change in aperture would definitely help the smaller speedlight.

Similar settings would then have been 1/250th @ f2.8 @ 500 ISO …
and 1/200th @ f2.8 @ 400 ISo would’ve looked similar in terms of the balance between ambient light and flash.

For this image, I was in the middle of a large room where the cocktail hour reception was. I bounced flash upwards and behind me, and not off a specific wall .. but just towards a general direction that I wanted the light to spill back from.

Neil vN

Comment by Neil — March 8, 2009 @ 10:25 am
Hi Neil,
Lovely photo. With regards to the background comments you mentioned, I always feel ‘rushed’ and like I have no time to search all over for effective backgrounds as they relate to the overall composition. I most certainly attempt to avoid distracting backgrounds, but by the time one plays around with lighting and figures out the background just isn’t cutting it I am worried the subject will begin to get annoyed if I change locations five times to find that ‘right’ background. I am guessing it simply comes down to skill in creating compelling photographs.

My personal work doesn’t bother me as I will take all the time I need to set up a photo, but for something like this or weddings where time is of the essence I seem to struggle being able to create that ‘perfect’ photo. Again, skill and experience is the answer to be able to spot those backgrounds that will be conducive to creating those great images. I can’t yet seem to be able to create a photograph clear enough in my mind before I commit it to the camera.

It is sometimes frustrating to have people standing there looking at me and expecting that I can make amazing photographs in the blink of an eye without some tinkering, adjusting, and changing locations in order to give them what they are expecting. Any tips on how to effectively deal with people as I ‘muck’ around to get those better photos?

Comment by Mac — March 8, 2009 @ 10:34 am
Mac .. no specific advice on this one. It is just something that comes with experience. And the confidence that comes with experience.

But I also am on the lookout for suitable spots for when I have to take portraits like that. This way I’m not taken by surprise when someone asks me to take their portrait in an impromptu situation. Now I can respond with confidence in how I position people.

A fast aperture lens is also an essential tool .. you can throw much clutter out of focus with the right combination of aperture and distance to the background.

Neil vN

Comment by Neil — March 8, 2009 @ 11:45 am
What lens did you use? I assume it was a longer focal length?

Comment by Michael Fisher — March 8, 2009 @ 12:54 pm
I used the Nikon 70-200mm f2.8 AF-S VR lens, and it was zoomed to 200mm

Neil vN

Comment by Neil — March 8, 2009 @ 12:59 pm
Neil,

When capturing a shot like this, do you meter for a correct exposure on the background, or the childs face?

Comment by Edward James — March 8, 2009 @ 3:58 pm
Edward, in this case I set my camera to expose for the background as I wanted, and then I let the TTL flash metering technology take care of the flash exposure.

This is very similar to the recent posting on ambient exposure with TTL flash.

Neil vN

Comment by Neil — March 8, 2009 @ 4:30 pm
Mac, may I allow myself to comment on your question? Doesn’t a layman always expect instant miracles from a professional, regardless of his or her area of expertise? First, admit to yourself that you won’t be able to deliver such a thing. Second, act accordingly. In the field of photography, this would mean: find a good place for your subject, a suitable white wall to bounce your flash at, a decent background and start taking pictures. Then immediately say something really positive like “Great! Now let’s have some pictures with the light coming in from your left” and shamelessly repeat the entire procedure until you run out of ideas. You will appear to be a creative person and your memory card will probably contain a couple of nice portraits because even though you are not selling instant miracles, you are still a photographer.

Comment by Håkan — March 8, 2009 @ 4:31 pm
Håkan has it correct here. As I mentioned in an earlier comment, the the appearance of confidence is important, as is keeping an eye out for opportunity and good possible spots.

That said, the way you used the word “shamelessly” there does sound derogatory. Or maybe something got lost in translation along the way.

Neil vN

Comment by Neil — March 8, 2009 @ 5:00 pm
Wow, love this picture a lot, the background color is so beautiful.

Comment by Tim Wong — March 8, 2009 @ 5:12 pm
Neil,
I have been reading many of your blogs and find your concepts extremely interesting and helpful. I am curious as to your thoughts in the situation where walls or easy bounce structures are not available. Perhaps you have written on this, but I have not seen it yet. Thanks for the guidance.

Comment by Steven Seelig — March 9, 2009 @ 7:36 am
Steven … there is often unexpected opportunity to bounce flash off found surfaces outside.

But there are times when there just around objects or areas to bounce flash off, and the best results would then be achieved by deliberate use of off-camera flash in a softbox or with an umbrella.

Where that isn’t feasible for some reason, and we’re stuck to only using on-camera flash … well, that’s that .. we just have to accept that the results won’t be ideal.

Neil vN

Comment by Neil — March 9, 2009 @ 1:16 pm
Nice to know you can get great results with a speedlite.
sooooo cute. she is going to bless you for taking this picture 10 years from now.

Comment by Udi — March 10, 2009 @ 11:58 am
.. and a thank you to everyone for the nice comments about the photo.

Neil vN

Comment by Neil — March 10, 2009 @ 1:19 pm
Hi Neil
Great Picture. You said that the settings were
Settings: 1/250th @ f4 @ 1000 iso; TTL flash
and you used the 70-200mm 2.8 lens.
Why not keep Aperture at 2.8 to get the more shallow DOF as she is the only one in the frame . Was the choice of f/4 due to the fact that most lenses are most sharp at 2 stops above the largest aperture.
Thanks.
-MP

Comment by Mohanpreet Singh (MP) — March 13, 2009 @ 4:12 pm
MP, I often use very shallow depth-of-field, without being overly concerned about what aperture might be the optimal aperture for image sharpness. In this case, f4 worked nicely, and still had the background completely blurred.

Keep in mind at close working distances, the DoF becomes ever shallower .. and at this working distance, f4 would give me that little bit more leeway, but as you mentioned, f4 (over f2.8) would also add some extra bite to the crispness of the image.

Neil vN

Comment by Neil — March 13, 2009 @ 10:10 pm
Neil,
I would like to know how you came up with the similar settings for that shot you did. Example: 1/250@2.8@500 ISO= 1/200@2.8@400 ISO. Is there a formula that you could send me?
Would 1/250 @ 2.8 be the same as 1/125 @ f4 ?

Comment by Hank — March 14, 2009 @ 4:34 pm
Hank, yes .. 1/250th would be the same as 1/125th @ f4

I would strongly recommend that any serious photographer know all the 1/3rd stop values of apertures and shutter speeds … but there is an easy short-cut to change the settings to find equivalent exposures.

The easiest way, once you have correct exposure, but want to change the specific settings to other values .. is to count the number of 1/3rd stop clicks.

imho, you absolutely need to keep to 1/3rd stop indents on your camera settings, and not change to 1/2 stop indents.

A certain number of clicks down on the shutter speed (eg, 1/250th down to 1/125th = 3 clicks), and then you have to count the same number of clicks up on either the aperture or ISO (eg, f2.8 to f4).

Of course, you can count combination’s of clicks between aperture, shutter speed and ISO in order to balance out the changes you want to make in your settings.

Neil vN

Comment by Neil — March 18, 2009 @ 2:06 am
Neil,

Great photo and write-up !

To answer some of the questions regarding DOF, Neil’s FF D3 has a little more than 1 f-stop more shallow DOF than a 1.5x (Nikon) or 1.6x (Canon) cropped body does.

So, the cropped equivalent of Neil’s EXIF would be around f/2.6, roughly ISO 450, with a focal length of around 130mm. f/2.8 @ ISO 500 would do nicely.

source : http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/digital-camera-sensor-size.htm

Comment by David Harris — March 28, 2009 @ 11:38 pm
Neil,

Fantastic shot and a beautiful child. Did you use your foam snoot when you shot your flash over shoulder? If so why? If not, Why?

Thanks,
Brian

Comment by Brian — April 1, 2009 @ 1:42 pm
Brian .. I did in fact use the Black Foamie Thing (TM) like I invariably do when I am shooting indoors.

All for the same reasons as mentioned before:
1. so I can direct my light where I want it to come from,
2. not to hurt other people by blasting flash in their eyes.

Looking at those photos now of the Black Foamie Thing, I see the one I am currently using has been snipped to about 2/3rds the size shown there. But, as mentioned in that article, this isn’t about the size and shape of the foam, but it is about the technique .. soft, directional light from your on-camera flash.

Neil vN

Comment by Neil — April 1, 2009 @ 2:44 pm
Thanks Neil. I still have the one from your seminar..
Shall I send it in for a factory modification……

Comment by Brian — April 1, 2009 @ 4:49 pm
Thanks again Neil. So the catchlight is from the wall/ceiling, etc that the bounce comes from. Any way to get a catchlight when the flash is just being bounced more generally into a large room? There are times when the bounce is not going to get the softbox effect (though when I looked closely at some recent bounce stuff I’ve done, I did see catchlights, often just smaller than a softbox in close would give. But it doesn’t take much to bring a little life to the eyes.

If I put a small strip of white of silver tape on the inside of the half snoot, would that work to not so much kick light toward the subject as give a point to get a specular in the eye? I know I can (and will) try this for myself. Much of my family has very dark eyes and without a catchlight they really seem to recede.

BTW– the comment immediately above with a ref to your seminar is NOT from me…in case you were puzzled by the non sequitur.

Also, any plans to return to the Raleigh/Charlotte for a seminar? Was out of town when you last came here and am hoping you’ll be local (to me) again. Thanks.

Comment by Brian — May 29, 2009 @ 7:31 am
Brian .. that catchlight in the baby’s eyes is from the flash being bounced into the large room behind me. No specific wall. I just bounced it into the general area from which I wanted the light to return.

My guiding decision when I am bouncing flash indoors, is … where would I have placed my softbox if this were a studio shoot?

And with that, the catchlight is a near certainty.

Re Raleigh / Charlotte … maybe in 2010 again. :)

Neil vN

Comment by Neil — May 31, 2009 @ 2:10 pm
I do not have such a good camera and lens as you have. I only have the standard Fujifilm S100FS and a CyberTik MZ45 flash. I will have noticible noises if above ISO-800.

If the room you bounced the flash is big, then my small MZ45 may not have the power to bounce back enough light for this shot you took. I have not tried this trick yet.

Would 1/60, f3.6, ISO800 do the same trick? (Why f3.6 is because at zoom, my aperture becomes smaller even though it is rated 2.8)

Comment by TLCHUA99 — June 24, 2009 @ 9:32 pm
Hi there .. The only thing you can do is try, and see whether you’re successful. A determining factor would be how large the room is. If you’re working indoors at home, then f3.6 and 800 ISO would be good enough to give you enough light from your flash when bounced behind you.

But this is one of those things where you just have to go out and use your camera and see what results you get. :)

Neil vN

Comment by Neil — June 26, 2009 @ 4:12 am
Hi Neil

Could you tell me why you feel it’s important to keep to the 1/3rd of a stop step values please?

I guess I’m a little old school; when I first got my D300 I changed the custom setting to 1/2 stops as they made more sense, recently I changed to “whole” stops as I can get my head around them far more easily – however, I’m quite sure there is a very good reason not to go down this route?!

Regards,

James

Comment by James — August 30, 2009 @ 2:53 pm