Discussion
I really don't see much point in 'stofen'-style diffusers. I think people use them because the flash comes with one and it must be better mustn't it? Certainly when used 'head on' the area of illumination (from the subject's perspective) is the same and the cap will simply waste light up down left and right. Once in while if I've just gone outside I might forget to move the head from bounce to direct ; you can tell instantly by the louder crack it makes on firing. But if any wedding tog can go all day without making a single mistake in 600+ photos, he's cleverer than me.
It does soften it down a bit with the diffuser, but yes - wasteful use of light.
I shot a wedding for a mate with one, my other friend was primary and I was doing backups. He was using bare flash, and you can see the difference on closer inspection, (especially on the sunset shots) but for what hassle it caused in correcting exposures on the fly its value was questionable.
I shot a wedding for a mate with one, my other friend was primary and I was doing backups. He was using bare flash, and you can see the difference on closer inspection, (especially on the sunset shots) but for what hassle it caused in correcting exposures on the fly its value was questionable.
Simpo Two said:
I really don't see much point in 'stofen'-style diffusers.
Me either. AFIK 'softness' is a function of diffuser size and distance from the subject. A stofen increases the diffusion by about what 10-20% or something over a normal flash head? Doesnt sound like it would make much of a difference.Simpo Two said:
But if any wedding tog can go all day without making a single mistake in 600+ photos, he's cleverer than me.
I bet some do.. Theres always one s
t hot bd around.. 
Pints said:
RobDickinson said:
there
ian in lancs said:
no clouds to bounce of...
Even I can tell there's something not quite right with that.
Edited by mattdaniels on Sunday 31st July 21:24
Do think a lot of people use 'stofen style' diffusers for direct illumination where, as has been said, you aren't really increasing the area of the lightsource - so the end result will tend to be similar to direct flash.
They do however help to turn the flash from direct light source into more of a 'light-bulb'. In an enclosed space (like a room) you will get the direct illumination of the flash plus a bit of bounce from the roof/wall/floor.
Plus, if you are bouncing off a wall then a 'stofen style' diffuser will also give you a nice catch light.
They aren't a replacement for a softbox, but for the size / weight I think they are worth carrying around
They do however help to turn the flash from direct light source into more of a 'light-bulb'. In an enclosed space (like a room) you will get the direct illumination of the flash plus a bit of bounce from the roof/wall/floor.
Plus, if you are bouncing off a wall then a 'stofen style' diffuser will also give you a nice catch light.
They aren't a replacement for a softbox, but for the size / weight I think they are worth carrying around
dibbly dobbler said:
'bounce the flash off the sky'
Can't think of a flash with a guide number high enough to bounce off the moon.... Edited by flat-planedCrank on Sunday 31st July 21:50
mattdaniels said:
Pints said:
RobDickinson said:
there
ian in lancs said:
no clouds to bounce of...
Even I can tell there's something not quite right with that.
Edited by mattdaniels on Sunday 31st July 21:24
flat-planedCrank said:
Do think a lot of people use 'stofen style' diffusers for direct illumination where, as has been said, you aren't really increasing the area of the lightsource - so the end result will tend to be similar to direct flash.
They do however help to turn the flash from direct light source into more of a 'light-bulb'. In an enclosed space (like a room) you will get the direct illumination of the flash plus a bit of bounce from the roof/wall/floor.
Plus, if you are bouncing off a wall then a 'stofen style' diffuser will also give you a nice catch light.
They aren't a replacement for a softbox, but for the size / weight I think they are worth carrying around
He was using Nikon gear so to spread the light and diffuse it he could slide the wide angle diffuser out and not even bother with a stofen.They do however help to turn the flash from direct light source into more of a 'light-bulb'. In an enclosed space (like a room) you will get the direct illumination of the flash plus a bit of bounce from the roof/wall/floor.
Plus, if you are bouncing off a wall then a 'stofen style' diffuser will also give you a nice catch light.
They aren't a replacement for a softbox, but for the size / weight I think they are worth carrying around
dibbly dobbler said:
'bounce the flash off the sky'
Can't think of a flash with a guide number high enough to bounce off the moon.... Edited by flat-planedCrank on Sunday 31st July 21:50
ian in lancs said:
And me but the same mistake on all outdoor fill-in flash shots. I don't envy the post production job he's got.
If it was pointing straight up then it would probably look the same as ambient - the flash isn't contributing to the photo so the CLS will ignore it... I think....
But it looks good and will get people's attention ....
A few years back I was shooting at a rally and two official pro photographers to run some spectic shots, with sponsors banner backdrops, on that stage. It happened to have a water splash. By the time they had added some extra stones to the system it had a deeper water splash.
It was a dull day but not darkness. Both if them used small camera mounted flash, with Stofen but pointing at the subject, and I wondered why. One was shooting from about 30 meters from the subject and the other a little further maybe up to 50mtrs.
Anyway, the reasoning in their case was the a little light would lift the images and reflect in the splashed water (i.e. bright shiny stuff made even brighter) and certain parts of some of the cars - refelctive number plates if any had plates left after the water splash - would also respond more than might be desirable so the Stofen might reduce the 'glare' from a direct flash. Not on all shots but it might be the difference between something that could be used without much PP and something that couldn't but without being obvious.
Obviously for some shots the flash went off without doing much although I seem to recall them saying that the output would be minimal if no flash was required (not sure how that worked) and their re-cycle times seemed pretty good.
If there is a purpose for wedding shots the only thing I can think of that might be similar would be to 'lift' any jewellery - unless some of the party were wearing hi-viz jackets.
I suppose going through a couple of sets of batteries for the combined benefit of grabbing attention and getting a couple of shots that respond to the flash might be considered worthwhile.
Stofen straight up would not make much sense but a Fong type device might as my understanding is that they redirect the light all around.
My Metz CT-60 has a large adapter and reflector to give a similar effect. It's mounted above the flash head (which would be pointing vertically when the diffuser is fitted) and deflects and diffuses the light from the flash. I must remember to use it the next time I get the thing out since direct flash seems almost impossible to predict successfully shot to shot and I suspect some diffusion would give more consistently usable results.
Of course, whether the photographer in question was operating with any of these ideas in mind, rightly or wrongly, is something we don't know.
A few years back I was shooting at a rally and two official pro photographers to run some spectic shots, with sponsors banner backdrops, on that stage. It happened to have a water splash. By the time they had added some extra stones to the system it had a deeper water splash.
It was a dull day but not darkness. Both if them used small camera mounted flash, with Stofen but pointing at the subject, and I wondered why. One was shooting from about 30 meters from the subject and the other a little further maybe up to 50mtrs.
Anyway, the reasoning in their case was the a little light would lift the images and reflect in the splashed water (i.e. bright shiny stuff made even brighter) and certain parts of some of the cars - refelctive number plates if any had plates left after the water splash - would also respond more than might be desirable so the Stofen might reduce the 'glare' from a direct flash. Not on all shots but it might be the difference between something that could be used without much PP and something that couldn't but without being obvious.
Obviously for some shots the flash went off without doing much although I seem to recall them saying that the output would be minimal if no flash was required (not sure how that worked) and their re-cycle times seemed pretty good.
If there is a purpose for wedding shots the only thing I can think of that might be similar would be to 'lift' any jewellery - unless some of the party were wearing hi-viz jackets.
I suppose going through a couple of sets of batteries for the combined benefit of grabbing attention and getting a couple of shots that respond to the flash might be considered worthwhile.
Stofen straight up would not make much sense but a Fong type device might as my understanding is that they redirect the light all around.
My Metz CT-60 has a large adapter and reflector to give a similar effect. It's mounted above the flash head (which would be pointing vertically when the diffuser is fitted) and deflects and diffuses the light from the flash. I must remember to use it the next time I get the thing out since direct flash seems almost impossible to predict successfully shot to shot and I suspect some diffusion would give more consistently usable results.
Of course, whether the photographer in question was operating with any of these ideas in mind, rightly or wrongly, is something we don't know.
Are you sure it wasn't being used just to introduce a catchlight in to the eyes? My flash has a small pull out white reflector which can be used whilst the flash head is pointing vertically up. The idea is that the reflector is illuminated which gives the catchlight, but the flash doesn't illuminate the subject.
Just a possible explanation as to what they might have been doing.
Just a possible explanation as to what they might have been doing.
DIW35 said:
Are you sure it wasn't being used just to introduce a catchlight in to the eyes? My flash has a small pull out white reflector which can be used whilst the flash head is pointing vertically up. The idea is that the reflector is illuminated which gives the catchlight, but the flash doesn't illuminate the subject.
Just a possible explanation as to what they might have been doing.
Not on a bridal car bonnet no...Just a possible explanation as to what they might have been doing.
Clearly we all have our own styles and prefences so I'm not going to debate lighting, but you'd be surprised how much difference a properly balanced Speedlight can make, even in full sun at 25 feet. The brighter the sun, the darker the shadows by contrast.
Ambient light done well is lovely, bride gazing out of window etc, but nature rarely sets it up perfectly. It's up to the photographer to help it along if his toybox permits. Part of me suspects that the current stle of 'everything ambient' is sometimes a bit of laziness coupled with high ISO sensors.
Even in the case of the shiny white wedding car, I'll take two shots in quick succession, one with and one without flash, and make a judgement later. The flash pings straight off the reflective bits and disappears from bright bodywork, but lifts wheels and foreground which are dark by comparison.
Ambient light done well is lovely, bride gazing out of window etc, but nature rarely sets it up perfectly. It's up to the photographer to help it along if his toybox permits. Part of me suspects that the current stle of 'everything ambient' is sometimes a bit of laziness coupled with high ISO sensors.
Even in the case of the shiny white wedding car, I'll take two shots in quick succession, one with and one without flash, and make a judgement later. The flash pings straight off the reflective bits and disappears from bright bodywork, but lifts wheels and foreground which are dark by comparison.
Gassing Station | Photography & Video | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff