How could have I improved this picture? Could someone maybe post process it nicely?:)

[kallisti]

I don't know the ambient light in your first post.

Decided to take some shots in low light that seemed to approximate what you would see in a bar/club.

Shot on a tripod to keep things equal between shots. 50mm lens on a Nikon FF body. All but the final example shot at f/2.8 similar to your initial post The first 3 were taken using the built-in flash but varying the flash output (100% flash output, -0.7 flash exposure compensation, -1.0 flash exposure compensation). The final two shots were taken without flash at f/2.8 and f/1.4.

Included both non-reflective subjects and reflective subjects. None of the shots altered in post, all straight from LR5.


On-camera flash @ 100%


On-camera flash with negative flash compensation of 2/3 stop


On-camera flash with negative flash compensation of 1 stop


No flash @ f/2.8


No flash @ f/1.4


No flash @ f/1.4. WB corrected to approximate the shots taken with flash. However, the shots with flash had different temperatures of light for the foreground and background (flash and ambient) whereas this shot only has ambient light. So the WB "correction" isn't the same between the two (i.e. foreground and background light temperature was the same for this shot while it wasn't the same for the shots with flash).

I would suggest that you do experiments like this to see the effects of different camera/lens settings. The only way to learn is by experimenting and seeing how changing various settings influences the final image. Then you can get a feel for what you need to do to achieve the image you desire.

 

[KimJonNumberUn]

I don't know the ambient light in your first post.

Decided to take some shots in low light that seemed to approximate what you would see in a bar/club.

Shot on a tripod to keep things equal between shots. 50mm lens on a Nikon FF body. All but the final example shot at f/2.8 similar to your initial post The first 3 were taken using the built-in flash but varying the flash output (100% flash output, -0.7 flash exposure compensation, -1.0 flash exposure compensation). The final two shots were taken without flash at f/2.8 and f/1.4.

Included both non-reflective subjects and reflective subjects. None of the shots altered in post, all straight from LR5.

[url=https://farm3.staticflickr.com/2931/13680132623_9d17236778_b.jpg]Image[/url]
On-camera flash @ 100%

[url=https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7014/13680085235_26ff22bfcb_b.jpg]Image[/url]
On-camera flash with negative flash compensation of 2/3 stop

[url=https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7130/13680133843_18a7081448_b.jpg]Image[/url]
On-camera flash with negative flash compensation of 1 stop

[url=https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7422/13680086085_9a532e4b56_b.jpg]Image[/url]
No flash @ f/2.8

[url=https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7180/13680135253_2cef5cec43_b.jpg]Image[/url]
No flash @ f/1.4

[url=https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7450/13681369745_d8eb8f7784_b.jpg]Image[/url]
No flash @ f/1.4. WB corrected to approximate the shots taken with flash. However, the shots with flash had different temperatures of light for the foreground and background (flash and ambient) whereas this shot only has ambient light. So the WB "correction" isn't the same between the two (i.e. foreground and background light temperature was the same for this shot while it wasn't the same for the shots with flash).

I would suggest that you do experiments like this to see the effects of different camera/lens settings. The only way to learn is by experimenting and seeing how changing various settings influences the final image. Then you can get a feel for what you need to do to achieve the image you desire.

wow very nice! id sy tthhe bar scene was prob a bit darker but none the less the no flash shots looked alot nicer from your examples, they are less , uh, artificial would be my word for it.

your shots would look nicer though since you hvae a full frame vs. my 70D crop sensor.

i try to experiment at times, but I would hate to screw up a moment of taking pics of friends which is about the only time i ever really take pictures of people. i gues si shuld insist i might take a couple shots of them before taking a pic to see how non flash and flash turn out.

 

[kallisti]

wow very nice! id sy tthhe bar scene was prob a bit darker but none the less the no flash shots looked alot nicer from your examples, they are less , uh, artificial would be my word for it.

your shots would look nicer though since you hvae a full frame vs. my 70D crop sensor.

i try to experiment at times, but I would hate to screw up a moment of taking pics of friends which is about the only time i ever really take pictures of people. i gues si shuld insist i might take a couple shots of them before taking a pic to see how non flash and flash turn out.

Shot this again. This time with a crop sensor camera (Nikon D3200) and 24mm f/1.4 lens (don't own a Nikon mount 35mm f/1.4 to directly compare to yours).

Made the scene darker to more directly compare to a bar scene--there is a side light in the foreground and a side light in the background, both "warm" indoor lights.

All shot in aperture-priority mode. The early ones with flash @ f/2.8 (similar to your original post). The last two without flash shot at f/2.8 and f/1.4. While it is a PITA to change controls on the D3200 (I wanted to throw it at a wall in frustration while shooting this series), flash was set at regular and not slow sync. It ended up adopting settings that "dragged the shutter" by exposing for the background even though that wasn't my specific intent. Image quality issues aside, I *really* detest this body. Such a fricken PITA to use compared to the simplicity of my Leica. /rant.

All shot on a tripod to make the composition the same. Will include shooting info with each shot. ISO was set to auto for all, though the camera chose 3200 each time. For the ones with flash, all shot at 1/60 sec, as was the final shot @ f/1.4. All of these save the penultimate shot @ f/2.8 without flash could have been achieved hand-held.

Focus for all was auto-focus at the time the shot was taken on the tripod, didn't try to keep it constant between shots. Or even make sure that it was accurate. Just let the camera do its thing.


Nikon D3200. 24mm. f/2.8. 1/60 sec. ISO 3200. On-camera flash 100%


Nikon D3200. 24mm. F/2.8. 1/60 sec. ISO 3200. On-camera flash -1 stop.


Nikon D3200. 24mm. F/2.8. 1/60 sec. ISO 3200. On-camera flash -2 stops.


Nikon D3200. 24mm. F/2.8. 1/15 sec. ISO 3200. No flash. This couldn't have been hand-held without blurring the image.


Nikon D3200. 24mm. F/1.4. 1/50 sec. ISO 3200. No flash. This could have been hand-held.

These were all taken in really low light--probably lower than you would find in a bar.

Taken with a crop sensor body and not a FF camera body. Actually last generation crop body. All at auto ISO, though the camera chose a value of 3200 for each even though flash wasn't set to "slow sync" in the menus which is the setting one would choose to automatically tell the camera you want to "drag the shutter." Newer bodies (even crop bodies) would likely handle the noise better.

These were all "dragging the shutter" (i.e. exposing for the background while still using flash). Happy it did it for illustrative purposes, but I didn't tell the camera to do this by setting the flash option to "slow sync" and was reminded how much I hate this camera body while shooting this series. PITA to try to change settings to achieve more control over the image.

You commented that you chose the "auto" settings on your camera because you trust it more to "get the shot" and you don't want to screw up a moment with your friends. However, you also mentioned that you weren't happy with your shot and hoped someone could fix it in post.

You've done the easy part by buying a capable body and lens. Now comes the hard part: learning how to use them to the best effect.

I understand your reluctance to "ruin" the moment by trying to experiment when out with your friends. I would offer that relying on the "auto" settings of your camera you already ruined the moment.

Doing experimental series like this may seem like a waste of time, but it is the only way to make sure you don't ruin all the other moments you'll have with your friends in the future. Or with family. Or with kids. You'll have many *priceless* moments in the rest of your life. Experiment with your gear *now* so you can capture all of them the way you want to....

 

[kallisti]

Wanted to provide a more "classic" example of flash vs no flash in low light.

For both of these, the ambient light was the same as in the previous examples from my last post.

This time I used an external flash with my Leica. This is the "classic" example where the different foreground and background exposures from the flash and ambient light are very obvious.

In the first shot, flash output was decreased by 2 stops. However, I didn't "drag the shutter" to make the background exposure closer to the foreground exposure. As opposed the images in the previous posts, the much lower ISO with flash exposed for the foreground left the background underexposed.

In the second shot, I opened up the lens to f/1.4 to expose the entire scene for ambient light.


FF body. 50mm lens @ f/2.8. 1/45 sec. ISO 320. External flash -2 stops. Note that compared to the examples in prior posts, the overall exposure was much lower (ISO 320 vs 3200 before). While the foreground is similarly exposed because of the flash, the background is *very* underexposed compared to the prior examples).


FF body. 50mm lens @ f/1.4. 1/45 sec. ISO 800. No flash.

Very different images in all the examples I've provided here. Using flash greatly complicates things as it creates two different exposures relating to foreground and background. You have to tweak flash output to control exposure for the foreground and you have to tweak overall exposure to control exposure for the background.

Additionally, the temperature of the light varies between flash and ambient indoor light.

Since you have a fast lens, often easier (and more pleasing) to just skip using flash altogether and open up the lens. *But* there are things you can only achieve by using some degree of flash and "dragging the shutter."

Photography isn't always easy unfortunately.....

 

[ChrisA]

Since you have a fast lens, often easier (and more pleasing) to just skip using flash altogether and open up the lens. *But* there are things you can only achieve by using some degree of flash and "dragging the shutter."

Photography isn't always easy unfortunately.....

Yes THAT is the trick, balance.

You need some flash to brighten of the foreground subjects and make then stand out from the clutter in the background. But you have to think about how many stops of difference you what between the people and the bar. I would NOT make then equal but I would not make the difference as large as you did. Practice at home

In post processing I would greatly "tone down" those bright lights. The attract the eye from the subject and don't add anything. This requires some more sophisticated post processing then can be done in iPhoto or Aperture because you need to mask the lights and likely introduce a correction layer. Or just a "burn tool" for a quick and dirty "scribble over" With a mask you can do more of a change before it looks fake.

I would do the same for that white dress that is over exposed but if this is a JPG phot there is not much you can do. If RAW you might be able to recover highlights in the white clothing and tone it down slightly.

I don't like the color balance in the faces at all. It looks just like what it is, blueish light from a flash. I'd warm up the foreground to get closer to the white balance in the background. Again you must use a MASK. and apply the warming balance to the masked out foreground subjects. But don't over do it, do not try for a 100% match, maybe 50%. In years past with film you would have fixed this by using a gell over the flash to make it match the ambient light. But shooting RAW and using photoshop can fix it now. (but the gel takes 10 seconds and cost under $1. I don't know if we are better off today.)

 

[KimJonNumberUn]

i found a canon 430EX II external flash on sale for 279. Ive seen night club pics before and they seemed super nice since they use external flashes. im gonna have to take a break after exams to read all the useful advice you guys have given me

 

[kallisti]

i found a canon 430EX II external flash on sale for 279. Ive seen night club pics before and they seemed super nice since they use external flashes. im gonna have to take a break after exams to read all the useful advice you guys have given me

Good for you! Playing with flash is really one of the most advanced topics in photography. Light is vital to any image and using external lights gives you the opportunity to have complete control over your images.

For where you are at now, just play around with the settings on your camera keeping in mind that flash settings control foreground exposure and overall exposure settings control background exposure.

Flash output settings control how bright or dark your foreground subjects will be while general camera settings like ISO, aperture, and shutter speed control how bright or dark the background will be.

There should be a menu option on your camera related to flash that is "slow sync." This tells your camera to adjust the background exposure to achieve a "dragging the shutter" effect to make the background and foreground exposures more equal when you are using flash. Isn't perfect however and it's good to experiment with this if you routinely want to use flash in low-light and learn how to tweak your camera settings to get the "right" balance. Easiest way is to use exposure compensation if you like to shoot in "auto" modes.

Tweak the flash output compensation to change the exposure of the foreground. Tweak the overall exposure compensation to the change the exposure of the background.

If you are buying an external flash, then you also gain the option of "bounce." You can angle the flash head off of the subject towards the ceiling or a wall to get a "softer" flash effect without the shadows that a direct flash can produce on nearby backgrounds.

If using flash ends up being something that interests you, one of the best books I have read about light and flash that radically changed my understanding of this topic is:

Light--Science & Magic: An Introduction to Photographic Lighting.

Compuwar suggested this to me and it is a fantastic read. Might be too involved for where you are at now, but it is very well written, easy to read, and provides numerous examples. Light is *key* to all photography and learning to appreciate how light influences your images and how to influence light to your advantage will make you a better photographer. While this book is mostly aimed at using flash in the studio setting, the principles are priceless for any photographer. If you are at all serious about photography, this is an amazing book.