09-19-07 – Painting With Light
-
For my light source I broke out the Kmart Focal 320 BS flash that I bought with a SLR I got in about 1977. I haven’t used this flash in about 15 years. I’m suprised it still worked. Wth the Canon on a tripod and a slow shutter, I triggered the flash at different angles.
Notice the nifty duct tape battery cover.
I’m really looking forward to tonight’s contest. I’m very proud of my entries and I’m hoping others will enjoy them; but more than that I’m looking forward to seeing some of the creative lighting situations you other folks have come up with. Snug Tight I have to say that your description sounds very promising.
/Haven’t been this excited about a contest in a while…
Wow Snug Tight, I’m happy that you did not fry your camera’s circuitry. I’ve heard that older flashes on newer D-SLRs can be a very-bad-thing, due to the older flashes’ having a high sync voltage. Did you use a safe-sync device or something?
Here’s a Wiki article on the issue.
Can somebody post my entires for me? I’ll be out on a shoot tonight. No I did not screw up my HTML tags, I gave pure code for ease of whoever copy-pastes.
Outdoors but with supplementary lighting from studio flashes:
Pure flash lighting:
Literally light painted with a flashlight:
The flash has a button on the back that triggers it. I would use the wireless trigger on the canon, and then hit the flash while the shutter was open.
Can somebody post my entires for me? I’ll be out on a shoot tonight. No I did not screw up my HTML tags, I gave pure code for ease of whoever copy-pastes.
Outdoors but with supplementary lighting from studio flashes:
![]()
Pure flash lighting:
![]()
Literally light painted with a flashlight:
![]()
I can OBO post for you tonight Analogy. Do you want the descriptions in there as well or were those just for the benefit of the forum readers? Have fun on your shoot!
I can OBO post for you tonight Analogy. Do you want the descriptions in there as well or were those just for the benefit of the forum readers? Have fun on your shoot!
Thank you! Keep the descriptions in please.
I can OBO post for you tonight Analogy. Do you want the descriptions in there as well or were those just for the benefit of the forum readers? Have fun on your shoot!
Thank you! Keep the descriptions in please.
No problem, consider it done!
Man, I’m really impressed by the previews I’ve seen from people. I wish I could say I had been really inspired this week, but my muse went on vacation. I’m really looking forward to the thread though. I bet it’s going to be full of awesome.
I have a question that I hopefully haven’t left too late, but would this photo count as self-lit?
I’m thinking about using it but I’m not sure if it is against the rules.
Thanks.
I have a question that I hopefully haven’t left too late, but would this photo count as self-lit?
http://www.stevecollis.com/images/farktography/light10.jpg
I’m thinking about using it but I’m not sure if it is against the rules.
Thanks.
Damn, good question, that’s a tough one. Did the dog get into the lights on its own or did you wrap him up like that? If you wrapped him up, I’d say that’s legal. If not, then no. Other thoughts before this thing hits TotalFark?
My thought would be, because the light is visible and provides a lot of the color for the picture, that it wouldn’t be legal. However, the subject clearly is the dog, which is lit from all around by the object.
It’s a seriously close call… I’d say 51% no 49% yes… but slightly in the “no” direction.
I dunno though, i’m not a judge… just my interpretation of the rules.
I have a question that I hopefully haven’t left too late, but would this photo count as self-lit?
http://www.stevecollis.com/images/farktography/light10.jpg
I’m thinking about using it but I’m not sure if it is against the rules.
Thanks.
Damn, good question, that’s a tough one. Did the dog get into the lights on its own or did you wrap him up like that? If you wrapped him up, I’d say that’s legal. If not, then no. Other thoughts before this thing hits TotalFark?
Actually yeah, upon closer inspection of the theme description, I’d say no. The subject can’t be holding the lights. The dog isn’t exactly holding the lights, but it’s accomplishing the same thing. So yeah, I’d say no on this one, despite my earlier comment
I’m torn. The subject is clearly the dog, and the lights are merely illuminating it, so I’m inclined to say it should be legal, but there is some ambiguity with the theme description wording. Perhaps Silver Stag could give his thoughts since that part of the difficulty was his baby.
We wrapped the dog up but I was having the same thoughts as Flavivirus.
I might just go with my backup as there doesn’t seem to be a definate “no its fine” thought.
- The topic ‘09-19-07 – Painting With Light’ is closed to new replies.
.
