Autofocus Drill-down

Posted on January 31, 2015 by Andrew Astbury

Long Lens Autofocus Considerations.

If you read my previous post about the 1Dx sensor you will have seen that I mentioned my, as yet unfinished, tome about long lens autofocus for wildlife photography. It’s a frustrating project because I keep having to change various bits to make them simpler, re-order certain paragraphs etc.

But I thought I’d blog-post something here that I expand on in the project, and it’s something an awful lot of people NEVER take into consideration.

As a Nikon user I’m used to the vagaries of the Nikon AF system and I manage to work with it just fine – I have to!

But photographers who don’t shoot wildlife, and don’t use 400mm or 500mm lumps of glass as their “standard lens” might not find the vagaries I bitch about quite so apparent; indeed some might not come across them at all.

As a wildlife photographer I shoot in crappy light, I shoot with slow lenses (both in terms of f-number and focus speed), I shoot low contrast subjects on equally low contrast backgrounds, I’m constantly shooting brown-on-brown, grey on grey etc, I shoot stupidly small subjects….the list goes on!

For years, good wildlife photography has been done by pushing camera/lens capabilities beyond their performance design parameters; and this particularly applies to our “expectations” of our latest and greatest AF system – be it Canon or Nikon.

I find so many people who come to my workshops etc. are not even aware of this one simple fact – sharp focus requires more work AND increased speed of work by the lens AF motor the closer a subject is to the camera.

Just try looking at the delineations on the focusing ring of a lens:

Canon 200-400 focused at 20 meters. (Lens porn WARNING: This lens will cause movements in the front-of-trouser department).

Look at the scale and note the distance between 20m and 50m marks – that distance is indicative of the amount of work required of the autofocus controller and motor to move from 20m to 50m or vice versa.

Now look where the 10m mark is – it requires FAR MORE work from the focus controller and motor to move from 20m to 10m, than it did to move the 30 meters from 50m to 20m.

On top of that extra work, if we are tracking a subject moving at 10 meters per second the lens takes 3 seconds to move from 50m to 20m, but then has to move a lot FASTER as well to cover the extra workload moving from 20m to 10m in just 1 second.

Then you wonder why your Nikon D40 + Sigma 50-500mm is crap at doing “birds in flight”; you never realise that your autofocus system is bag of spanners and powered by a hamster on a wheel…….it’s just not fast enough kids

Autofocus accuracy is nothing without speed if you are wanting to do productive wildlife photography.

As I alluded to before, as a photographer of the old wildlife I, and YOU will always encounter problems that users in other photographic disciplines may not, or if they do then the problem has a lot less impact than it does for us.

Think of it this way – a sports photographer will use a 500mm f4 to photograph a 6 foot tall overpaid git who’s 25m to 70m away, on a sunny Saturday afternoon or under a squillion watts of flood lighting; and he’s looking for a 6×12 for the back page of the Sunday Sport. I’ll use the same lens to photograph a cute Red Squirrel at 5m to 7m in a gloomy wood in the middle of winter and I’m looking for a full size, full resolution image for stock.

Red Squirrel – this is basically the FURTHEST DISTANCE you could shoot at with a 500mm lens and still get a meaningful composition. Click for larger view.

Note the distance – 631/100 – that means 6.31 meters. Aperture is f8, so DoF is around 7 centimeters.

The image is UNCROPPED as are all the other images in this post

We don’t really want to be any further away because “his cuteness” will be too small in the frame:

The factors effecting subject distance choice are:

lens resolving power – small, fine details need to be as close as possible.*
sensor resolving power – we need as many pixels as possible covering the subject.*
auto focus point placement accuracy – if the subject is too small in the frame, point placement is inaccurate.
general “in camera” composition

*These two are inextricably intertwined

I’ve indicated the active focus point on the above image too because here’s a depth of field “point of note” – autofocus wastes DoF. Where is the plane of focus? Just between the eyes of the squirrel.

Assuming the accepted modern norm of DoF distribution – 50/50 – that’s 3.5 centimeters in front of the plane of focus, or indicted AF point, that will be sharp. Only problem there is that the squirrel’s nose is only around 1 centimeter closer to the camera than the AF point, so the remaining 2 .5 centimeters of DoF is wasted on a sharp rendition of the fresh air between its nose and the camera!!

Now let’s change camera orientation and go a bit closer to get the very TIGHTEST shot composition:

Red Squirrel – this is basically the CLOSEST DISTANCE you could shoot at with a 500mm lens and still get a meaningful composition. Click for larger view

The subject distance is 5.62 meters. Aperture is f6.3 so DoF is around 4.4 centimeters.

Now let’s change photographic hats and imagine we are a sports photographer and we are spending a Saturday afternoon photographing a bunch of over-paid 6 foot tall gits chasing a ball around a field, using the very same camera and lens:

He’s not over-paid or chasing a ball, but this is the CLOSEST distance we can shoot at with this orientation and still get a “not too tight” composition of a 6 foot git! “Shep’s” not a git really – well, not much! Click to enlarge

The distance for this shot is 29.9 meters. Aperture is f6.3 so DoF is around 1.34 meters.

And here we are at the CLOSEST distance for this horizontal camera orientation – still not too tight. Click to enlarge.

The distance here is 50.1 meters. Aperture is f6.3 so DoF is around 3.79 meters.

So with this new “sports shooter” hat on, have we got an easier job than the cold, wet squirrel photographer?

You bet your sweet life we have!

The “Shepster” can basically jump around and move about like an idiot on acid and stay in sharp focus because:

the depth of field at those distances is large.
more importantly, the autofocus has VERY little work to do along the lens axis, because 1 or 2 meters of subject movement closer to the camera requires very small movements of the lens focus mechanicals.

But the poor wildlife photographer with his cute squirrel has so much more of a hard time getting good sharp shots because:

he/she has got little or no depth of field
small subject movements along the lens axis require very large and very fast movement of the lens focus mechanicals.

So the next time you watch a video by Canon or Nikon demonstrating the effectiveness of their new AF system on some new camera body or other; or you go trawling the internet looking for what AF settings the pros use, just bear in mind that “one mans fruit may be another mans poison” just because he/she photographs bigger subjects at longer average distances”.

Equipment choice and its manner of deployment and use is just not a level playing field is it…but it’s something a lot of folk don’t realise or think about.

And how many folk would ever consider that a desired “in camera” image composition has such a massive set of implications for autofocus performance – not many – but if you put your brain in gear it’s blindingly obvious.

Become a patron from as little as $1 per month, and help me produce more free content.

Patrons gain access to a variety of FREE rewards, discounts and bonuses.

Canon 1Dx Sensor Noise

Posted on January 30, 2015 by Andrew Astbury

What seems an age ago now I did a two-day workshop for Calumet at Drummond Street in London, and a chap turned up there armed with a Canon 1Dx PLUS a 200-400 f4. The lens had only just been launched, and he’d been out and spent a truck-load of cash on both lens and body.

Yours truly was all over him like a severe rash, and I ripped it from his poor old fingers, stuck it in Case 2 and dived outside and started ripping through frames of vehicles passing the store!

I was smitten from that very moment – but it was weird all the same. I was joyous at how the lens and camera performed; pissed off that I didn’t own it; and seething at Nikon AF and the poor distance performance of their own 200-400.

Not that Nikon is crap – far from it; it’s fantastic – but this was just SO much better, and child that I am, THIS was what I should be using and all else was just pants.

Begrudgingly I handed the old chap his camera back, satisfied my dour mood with a cursory “not bad….” and carried on with the workshop.

Later in the day I stuck the images I’d shot with the Canon 1Dx into Lightroom on the 27″ iMac I use for workshop presentations – and was immediately a little happier – they looked “iffy” to say the least!

The Nikon 200-400s’ distance resolution problem has always hacked me off – 10m or less it’s epic, but 75m and further I hate it, and in between well, sometimes I like it and sometimes I don’t. And it’s bad with teleconverters, it really is…

Scanning through all the Canon 1Dx shots I was still amazed by the lens – it was delivering tack sharp high-resolution images at all focal lengths and distances, with and without teleconverter; basically it was kicking the Nikon into the last century simply by NOT displaying ANY of the same faults.

But I was having to look past – in comparison to Nikon – a thin veil of sensor noise, and I was also aware of a reduction in sensor Dynamic Range when I looked at the shots and noted the popped highlights that experience told me my Nikon wouldn’t produce.

Since then I’ve had a few more occasional chances to use the lens and body, and my results have continued to generate the same response – great lens, shame about the sensor IQ; but I’ve always been using other folks cameras and you don’t like to mess about with them too much, so I have always assumed that things “could be made a bit better” with some fiddling about.

Last year, hand on heart, I can honestly say that I was responsible, in whole or part, for at least 6 sales of Canon 200-400’s to existing 1Dx owners, and the lens-envy has always been there when they’ve been and bought it.

Since the first day I handled the lens I’ve been of the mind that it would be the ultimate lens for my Eagle workshops in Norway. I was thinking of trying to take one, plus the required 1Dx, over there in June last year; but seeing as the my clients were all Nikon I thought I’d best not!

But I have a “mixed bag” of clients booked for my Winter trip in a couple of weeks time, so seeing as I was of the mind that a few folk owed me a few favours…..

Upshot is that for the last two weeks, thanks to Reece Piper at Calumet, I’ve had a Canon 1Dx sat in my office; and many thanks to my favourite Geordie lass June Lown, a 200-400 f4 to go with it.

When I picked up the 1Dx from Calumet I swiped a 100mm f2.8 macro while I was at it, as I had been tasked with a high speed action shot featuring makeup brushes and I thought we’d go nuts and do the shot whilst exploring the 1Dx in a bit more depth.

Canon 1Dx + 100mm f2.8 macro. Nikon SB800 flash & Calumet ProSeries wireless.

Prior to picking up the Canon 1Dx I’d done a few test shots on my own Nikon gear just to get the lighting and flash timing sorted out, but I’d been using some different brushes:

Okay, so here is the base .CR2 raw file for the finished image:

Base .CR2 raw file

Now, I’m going to get to the point of this post topic!

As a standard retouching procedure on this type of shot I always overlay a custom Curves Adjustment layer with a sine-wave curve – it helps show up all those little imperfections you can’t see when you view the image without it:

Custom Curve for retouching

The main purpose in this particular case is to check for dark imperfections in that black background – yep, proper retouching is all about the minutia if you want perfection.

I’m trying to put together a video course on retouching that’ll be available in my store a little later this year – email me for details

Because the powder velocity is so damned high as it leaves the brush bristles I needed 1/32nd output power on the SB800s in order to freeze absolutely every grain of powder, so the shots(both Nikon and Canon) were at 400 iso just to give me a working aperture of f14.

When checking the test shots they looked like this with the customised Curve Layer:

Nikon D4 400 ISO test shot with custom curves layer.

Nikon D4 400 ISO 1/250th @ f14 test shot with custom curves layer.

Check out how clean the black background is.

So now all we do is swap the brushes, and change from Nikon D4 to the Canon 1Dx – I make no changes to either the lights or the background, and the exposure settings are exactly the same – 1/250th, 400 ISO, f14 – and I’m expecting gold…

But throw the CR2 file into Photoshop and stick the custom curve over it to see the comparrison:

Canon 1Dx 400 ISO 1/250th @ f14

Sweet Jesus………….!

Now don’t run away with the idea that it’s the “normal” noise you think of – luminance noise. In fact from that point of view it’s no better or worse than the Nikon D4 sensor.

But what you can see here is PATTERN NOISE/READ NOISE – see my Sensor Noise post from a while ago HERE

Don’t get me wrong, you can barely see it at 100% magnification, and a lot of folk won’t notice it AT ALL:

Canon 1Dx/Nikon D4 comparrison at 100% magnification viewed normally.

Canon 1Dx/Nikon D4 comparison at 100% magnification viewed normally. CLICK to view larger

But if you want BIG prints, or you sell your images for stock, then you need to check them a lot more thoroughly at higher magnifications:

Comparison at 400% magnification CLICK to view larger

At 400% the noise is just about visible – because it’s a dark error/fault on a basically slightly darker background. But keep it at 100% and put the custom curve over it and:

Custome Curve layer at 100% - now that pattern noise on the Canon sensor is obvious.

Custom Curve layer at 100% – now that pattern noise on the Canon sensor is obvious.

…now you can see what you have got to take care off in retouching.

Got a 1Dx? Then this pattern noise is in YOUR images – FACT.

But if the image has a more “normal” tonality to it then it certainly won’t be obvious to you – but it’s there nevertheless. Just try looking in your shadow areas.

Why the 1Dx sensor should be so much noisier than the D4/D4S is beyond me to be honest. Yes I know it’s an older mark, but the then current Nikon D3 and D3S were far better than this; in fact they were, and still are, only marginally worse than today’s Nikons for pattern noise.

In reality the images are of course eminently usable – as the millions of 1Dx images used daily world-wide testifies; but they do need a teeny bit more effort when processing than files from a top-end Nikon camera, if the final images are to have the same degree of quality in terms of “clean-ness of file”.

There is also the question of a clipped Dynamic Range, but that’s an easy walk-around in most cases – neither Highlight Tone Priority or Safety Shift are the answer though IMO; the former just under-exposes the shot, and the latter drives me nuts, though it’s a damnably good idea in principle.

So this noise thing truly is my ONE AND ONLY gripe about this camera – up until this last week I had a few others based solely on my usage of other folks cameras, but those are now well and truly GONE.

On the “pros & cons” side of things, noise and clipped dynamic range are my only cons, and there are many pros that cancel them out – the real big one for my is the autofocus system which, at least when used with the new(ish) 200-400 and the latest firmware, is truly EPIC and seriously kicks Nikon into a cocked hat in terms of tractability, speed, accuracy and user control.

I’m working on a large pdf document all about autofocus with both Nikon D4/D4S and Canon 1Dx bodies that has wildlife photography and long lenses as the main bias, but it will give a lot of valuable information and knowledge to non-wildlife photographers and 5DMk3 owners as well. Again, email me for details – BUT IT WON’T BE FREE!

If I had the dough I’d buy a 1Dx and a 200-400 f4 tomorrow – perhaps I’d even dump Nikon all together for long lens action/wildlife photography.

But I haven’t, so unless a miracle happens and Canon suddenly feel like sponsoring someone who actually “knows about stuff” then there’ll be tears when this rig has to go back I can tell you…:(

Would I dump Nikon for all my photography where speed and autofocus are not required, like macro or landscape – not on your bloody life!

Many thanks to Reece Piper & Calumet UK, June Lown, and Chuck Westfall of Canon USA

Please consider supporting this blog.

Become a patron from as little as $1 per month, and help me produce more free content.

Patrons gain access to a variety of FREE rewards, discounts and bonuses.

Camera Calibration

Posted on September 29, 2014 by Andrew Astbury

Custom Camera Calibration

The other day I had an email fall into my inbox from leading UK online retailer…whose name escapes me but is very short… that made my blood pressure spike. It was basically offering me 20% off the cost of something that will revolutionise my photography – ColorChecker Passport Camera Calibration Profiling software.

I got annoyed for two reasons:

Who the “f***” do they think they’re talking to sending ME this – I’ve forgotten more about this colour management malarkey than they’ll ever know….do some customer research you idle bastards and save yourselves a mauling!
Much more importantly – tens of thousands of you guys ‘n gals will get the same email and some will believe the crap and buy it – and you will get yourselves into the biggest world of hurt imaginable!

Don’t misunderstand me, a ColorChecker Passport makes for a very sound purchase indeed and I would not like life very much if I didn’t own one. What made me seethe is the way it’s being marketed, and to whom.

Profile all your cameras for accurate colour reproduction…..blah,blah,blah……..

If you do NOT fully understand the implications of custom camera calibration you’ll be in so much trouble when it comes to processing you’ll feel like giving up the art of photography.

The problems lie in a few areas:

First, a camera profile is a SENSOR/ASIC OUTPUT profile – think about that a minute.

Two things influence sensor/asic output – ISO and lens colour shift – yep. that’s right, no lens is colour-neutral, and all lenses produce colour shifts either by tint or spectral absorption. And higher ISO settings usually produce a cooler, bluer image.

Let’s take a look at ISO and its influence on custom camera calibration profiling – I’m using a far better bit of software for doing the job – “IN MY OPINION” – the Adobe DNG Profile Editor – free to all MAC download and Windows download – but you do need the ColorChecker Passport itself!

I prefer the Adobe product because I find the ColorChecker software produced camera calibration profiles there were, well, pretty vile in terms of increased contrast especially; not my cup of tea at all.

5 images shot at 1 stop increments of ISO on the same camera/lens combination.

Now this is NOT a demo of software – a video tutorial of camera profiling will be on my next photography training video coming sometime soon-ish, doubtless with a somewhat verbose narrative explaining why you should or should not do it!

Above, we have 5 images shot on a D4 with a 24-70 f2.8 at 70mm under a consistent overcast daylight at 1stop increments of ISO between 200 and 3200.

Below, we can see the resultant profile and distribution of known colour reference points on the colour wheel.

Here’s the 200 ISO custom camera calibration profile – the portion of interest to us is the colour wheel on the left and the points of known colour distribution (the black squares and circled dot).

Next, we see the result of the image shot at 3200 ISO:

Here’s the result of the custom camera profile based on the shot taken at 3200 ISO.

Now let’s super-impose one over t’other – if ISO doesn’t matter to a camera calibration profile then we should see NO DIFFERENCE………….

The 3200 ISO profile colour distribution overlaid onto the 200 ISO profile colour distribution – it’s different and they do not match up.

……..well would you bloody believe it! Embark on custom camera calibration profiling your camera and then apply that profile to an image shot with the same lens under the same lighting conditions but at a different ISO, and your colours will not be right.

So now my assertions about ISO have been vindicated, let’s take a look at skinning the cat another way, by keeping ISO the same but switching lenses.

Below is the result of a 500mm f4 at 1000 ISO:

Profile result of a 500mm f4 at 1000 ISO

And below we have the 24-70mm f2.8 @ 70mm and 1000 ISO:

Profile result of a 24-70mm f2.8 @ 70mm at 1000 ISO

Let’s overlay those two and see if there’s any difference:

Profile results of a 500mm f4 at 1000 ISO and the 24-70 f2.8 at 1000 ISO – as massively different as day and night.

Whoops….it’s all turned to crap!

Just take a moment to look at the info here. There is movement in the orange/red/red magentas, but even bigger movements in the yellows/greens and the blues and blue/magentas.

Because these comparisons are done simply in Photoshop layers with the top layer at 50% opacity you can even see there’s an overall difference in the Hue and Saturation slider values for the two profiles – the 500mm profile is 2 and -10 respectively and the 24-70mm is actually 1 and -9.

The basic upshot of this information is that the two lenses apply a different colour cast to your image AND that cast is not always uniformly applied to all areas of the colour spectrum.

And if you really want to “screw the pooch” then here’s the above comparison side by side with with the 500f4 1000iso against the 24-70mm f2.8 200iso view:

500mm f4/24-70mm f2.8 1000 ISO comparison versus 500mm f4 1000 ISO and 24-70mm f2.8 200 ISO.

A totally different spectral distribution of colour reference points again.

And I’m not even going to bother showing you that the same camera/lens/ISO combo will give different results under different lighting conditions – you should by now be able to envisage that little nugget yourselves.

So, Custom Camera Calibration – if you do it right then you’ll be profiling every body/lens combo you have, at every conceivable ISO value and lighting condition – it’s one of those things that if you don’t do it all then you’d be best off not doing at all in most cases.

I can think of a few instances where I would do it as a matter of course, such as scientific work, photo-microscopy, and artwork photography/copystand work etc, but these would be well outside the remit the more normal photographic practices.

As I said earlier, the Passport device itself is worth far more than it’s weight in gold – set up and light your shot and include the Passport device in a prominent place. Take a second shot without it and use shot 1 to custom white balance shot 2 – a dead easy process that makes the device invaluable for portrait and studio work etc.

But I hope by now you can begin to see the futility of trying to use a custom camera calibration profile on a “one size fits all” basis – it just won’t work correctly; and yet for the most part this is how it’s marketed – especially by third party retailers.

Become a patron from as little as $1 per month, and help me produce more free content.

Patrons gain access to a variety of FREE rewards, discounts and bonuses.

Speed Light Photography

Posted on September 23, 2014 by Andrew Astbury

Speed Light Photography – part 1

First things first, apologies for the gap in blog entries – I’ve been a bit “in absentia” of late for one reason or another. I’ve got a few gear reviews to do between now and the end of the year, video tutorial ideas and requests are crawling out of the woodwork, and my ability to organise myself has become something of a crumbling edifice!

I blame the wife myself………………..

But I’ve come to the conclusion that for one reason or another I’ve become somewhat pigeon-holed as a wildlife/natural history photographer – going under the moniker of Wildlife in Pixels it’s hardly a big surprise is it..

But I cut my photographic teeth on studio product/pack shot and still life work – I loved it then and I still do. And there’s NOTHING that teaches you more about light than studio work – it pays dividends in all aspects of photography, wildlife and landscape work are no exception. Understanding how light behaves, when it’ll look good and when it’ll look like a bag of spanners is what helps capture mood and atmosphere in a shot.

The interaction between light and subject is what makes a great image, and I do wish photographers would understand this – sadly most don’t.

To this end I’ve begun to teach workshops that try to give those attending a flavor of the basic concepts of light by introducing them to the idea of using their speed lights to produce images they can do 365 days a year cum rain or shine – high speed flash, and simple product still life.

Both styles demand a high level of attention to detail in the way the light produced by the speed lights bends and wraps around the subject. Full-blown studio lights have the benefit of modelling lights so that you can see this before you take the shot, but using speed lights means you have to imagine what the light is doing, so it’s level of difficulty begins high, but decreases with practical experience.

A basic 3 light setup with speed lights can produce some really soft and moody lighting with ease.

A basic 4 light setup with speed lights can produce some really soft and moody lighting with ease.

This Black Label shot went a bit bonkers in the final stages with the addition of smoke, but it gives you an idea of the subtlety of lighting that can be achieved with speed lights.

As for the setup, here’s a shot before I introduced the glass….

Simple setup for the Black Label shot – note the well-appointed studio!

…featuring that most valuable of studio photographers tools, the Voice Activated Light Stand..!

Four SB800’s in all, the one on the right is running at 1/2 power and is fitted with an Interfit Strobies softbox and is double diffused using a Calumet 42″ frame (available here) and white diffuser – this constitutes the main light.

Just look at the size of the diffused disc on the face of that 42″ frame – all that from a poxy 2″x1″ flash head in less than 16″ – epic!

The SB800 on the left, fitted with another softbox is turned down to 1/64th power, and is there solely to illuminate the label where it wraps around the left edge of the bottle, and to get a second neck highlight. Although their is light emanating from it, its greatest effect is that of “bouncing” light from the right hand source back in to the bottle.

The V.A.L.S. is fitted with a third speed light that has a diffused snoot – note the expensive diffusion material and the highly engineered attachment method – kitchen towel and rubber band! The sole purpose of this tiny soft light is to just help pull out the left side of the bottle cap from the intensely dark background towards the top of the shot.

The 4th SB800 is fitted with a 30 degree honeycomb and a “tits ‘n ass”; or TNA2 to be more correct; filter just to give a subtle warm graduation to the background.

Speaking of the background, this is a roll of high grade tracing paper – one of the most versatile materials any studio has, both as a front lit or back lit background, or as a diffusion material – just brilliant stuff, second only to Translum plastic, and a shed-load cheaper.

At the other end of the speed light photography spectrum is the most enjoyable and fascinating pastime of high speed liquid motion photography – a posh way of saying “making a mess”!

It doesn’t have to be too messy – just don’t do it on your best Axminster!

By utilising the IGBT (Isolated Gate Bipolar Transistor) circuitry given to us in speed lights we can deploy the very fast tube burn times, or flash durations, obtained at lower output power settings to our advantage.

Simple shots of water, both dyed and clear can produce some stunning captures:

Streams of water captured back lit against a white background illuminated by two speed lights.

The background for this shot (above) is an A1 sized sheet of white foam board illuminated by a pair of SB910s. The internal reflector angle is set to 35mm and the two speed lights are placed on stands about three feet from the background, just out of shot left and right, and aimed pretty much at the center of the board to facilitate a fairly even spread of light.

The power output settings for both speed lights is set to 1/16th which gives us 1/10,000th of a second flash duration.

Switching to tracing paper as a back lit background immediately puts us at a disadvantage in that it’ll cut the amount of light we see at the camera. But a back lit background always looks just that little bit better as it makes your lighting more easy to shape and control.

Doubling the speed light count behind the trace background to 4 now gives us the power in terms of guide number equal to your average studio light – but with full IGBT advantages.

Working a little closer to the background than we were with the white board/reflected light method we can very easily generate a smooth white field of 255RGB which will make our liquid splash shots really punchy:

Working about 3 feet from a translucent background illuminated by 4 SB800’s gives us a much flatter white background, especially when deploying a 150mm or 180mm macro lens.

Shot with a 180mm macro lens at ISO 260 and f16 we have bags of depth of field on this shot.

Using 4x SB800s we can dial in the correct background exposure using the flash output power and camera ISO – we want a background that’s just on the verge of “blinkies”. If we over expose too much for the background the light will wrap around the liquid edges too much, washing out the contrast and flaring – that’s something that muppet on Adorama TV doesn’t tell you!

Take a few shots holding the glass by the rim gives us a clean foot to the glass, so we can now go and make a nice composite in Photoshop:

Composite of a couple of splash shots and a couple of “clean foot” images….

Happy sodding Valentines day for next year everyone……..yuck, but it’ll sell all day bloomin’ long!

A while ago I posted an entry on this blog about doing splash shots using a method I call “long flash short shutter” HERE.

All the shots on this entry have been taken using the “short flash long shutter” method.

This latter method is the more versatile one of the two because it has a more effective “motion freezing” power; the former method being speed-limited by the 1/8000th shutter speed – and it’s more costly on batteries!

BUT………there’s always one of those isn’t there…?

Short flash long shutter utilises the maximum X-synch speed or the camera. This is the fastest speed we can use where the sensor is FULLY open, and it’s most commonly 1/250th sec.

Sussed the massive potential pitfall yet?

That’s right – AMBIENT LIGHT.

If any ambient light reaches the sensor during our 1/250th sec exposure time then WE WILL GET MOTION BLUR that will visually amount to the same sort of effect as slow synch, sharp image with under exposed blur trails.

So we need to make sure that the ambient light is low enough to render a totally black frame.

The “long flash short shutter” method works well in conditions of high ambient provided that the action can be frozen in 1/8000th sec. If your camera only does 1/4000th sec then the method becomes somewhat less useful.

Freezing action depends on a number of things:

1. Is the subject falling under gravity or rising against it?
2. How far away is the subject?

A body falling under gravity is doing around 10mph after it’s fallen 2 feet from a dead start, and a car doing 100mph looks a lot slower when it’s 200 yards down the road than it does when it’s 20 yards away.

Similarly, if we have a cascade of liquid falling under gravity through the frame of our camera and (to avoid the jug or pouring vessel) the liquid has fallen 6 inches when it enters the top of the frame, and 30 inches when it vacates the bottom of the frame; we have to take a few things into consideration.

The liquid is faster at the bottom of the frame than at the top – think Angel Falls – the water pulls itself apart (that’s why the images can look so amazing).
If we shoot close with a short lens the speed differential across the frame will be the same BUT the overall speed will be a little more apparent than if we shoot with a longer lens from further away.

An SB910 has a 1/16th power output duration of 1/10000th sec and an SB800 1/10,900th at the same output setting (OEM-quoted values). With a 70mm lens close up this can make a subtle difference in image sharpness, but fit a 180mm and move further away from the subject to maintain composition, and the difference is non-existent.

If you are throwing liquid upwards against gravity, then it’s slowing down, and will eventually stop before falling back under the effects of gravity – quite often, 1/8000th is sufficient to freeze this sort of motion.

Both “long shutter short flash” and “short shutter long flash” are valid methods, each with their own pluses and minuses; but the method I always recommend people start with is the former “long shutter” method – it’s easier!

When a shot features a glass remember one thing – drinking glasses were invented by a race of photographer-hating beings! Glasses transmit, reflect and refract light through a full 360 degrees and you can really end up chasing your tail trying to find the source of an errant reflection if you don’t go about lighting it in the correct manner.

And if you put liquid in it then things can get a whole lot worse!

I’ll be doing some very specific workshops with Calumet in the near future that will be all about lighting glass and metal, gloss and matte surfaces, so keep your eye open if this sort of thing interests you – IT SHOULD ‘cos it’ll make you a better photographer….!

The simplest “proper” glass lighting method is what we call “bright field illumination” and guess what – that’s the method used in all the above liquid shots.

Glass Photography – Bright Field & Dark Field illumination.

In the image above, I’ve photographed the same glass using the two ancient and venerable methods of glass photography – one is easy, the other a total pain in the ass; guess which is which!

I’m not going to go into this in detail here, that’ll be in a later post; but BRIGHT FIELD defines the outline of the glass with DARK lines, and DARK FIELD defines the glass white lines of WHITE or highlight.

If you guessed DARK FIELD is the pain the bum then you were right – you will see bits of your “studio” reflected in the glass you didn’t even know existed unless you get this absolutely spot on and 100% correct.

The nice thing about studio-style photography is that you have thinking time, without pressure from working with people, animals or weather and a constantly moving sun. You can start to work up a shot and then leave it over night, when you come back the next day and click the shutter everything is as you left it – unless you’ve had burglars.

You do develop a habit of needing more “grips” gear – you’ve NEVER got the right bit! But then again it’s far cheaper than the bad habit of tripod accumulation like my friend Malc is afflicted with!

Later Folks!

Become a patron from as little as $1 per month, and help me produce more free content.

Patrons gain access to a variety of FREE rewards, discounts and bonuses.

The ND Filter

Posted on July 16, 2014 by Andrew Astbury

Long Exposure & ND Filters

long exposure,slow shutter speed,ND filter,CMOS sensor,noise

A view of the stunning rock formations at Porth Y Post on the Welsh island of Anglesey. The image is a long exposure of very rough sea, giving the impression of smoke and fog. 30 seconds @f13 ISO 100. B&W 10stop ND – unfiltered exposure would have been 1/30th.

The reason for this particular post began last week when I was “cruising” a forum on a PoD site I’m a member of, and I came across a thread started by someone about heavy ND filters and very long exposures.

Then, a couple of days later a Facebook conversation cropped up where someone I know rather well seemed to be losing the plot over things totally by purchasing a 16 stop ND.

The poor bugger got a right mauling from “yours truly” for the simple reason that he doesn’t understand the SCIENCE behind the art of photography. This is what pisses me off about digital photography – it readily provides “instant gratification” to folk who know bugger all about what they are doing with their equipment. They then spend money on “pushing the envelope” only to find their ivory tower comes tumbling down around them because they THOUGHT they knew what they were doing………..stop ranting Andy before you have a coronary!

OK, I’ll stop “ranting”, but seriously folks, it doesn’t matter if you are on a 5DMkIII or a D800E, a D4 or a 1Dx – you have to realise that your camera works within a certain set of fixed parameters; and if you wander outside these boundaries for reasons of either stupidity or ignorance, then you’ll soon be up to your ass in Alligators!

Avid readers of this blog of mine (seemingly there are a few) will know that I’ve gone to great lengths in the past to explain how sensors are limited in different ways by things such as diffraction and that certain lens/sensor combinations are said to be “diffraction limited; well here’s something new to run up your flag pole – sensors can be thought of as being “photon limited” too!

I’ll explain what I mean in a minute…..

SENSOR TYPE

Most folk who own a camera of modern design by Nikon or Canon FAIL at the first hurdle by not understanding their sensor type.

Sensors generally fall into two basic types – CCD and CMOS.

Most of us use cameras fitted with CMOS sensors, because we demand accurate fast phase detection AF AND we demand high levels of ADC/BUFFER speed. In VERY simplistic terms, CCD sensors cannot operate at the levels of speed and efficiency demanded by the general camera-buying public.

So, it’s CMOS to the rescue. But CMOS sensors are generally noisier than CCDs.

When I say “noise” I’m NOT referring to the normal under exposure luminance noise that a some of you might be thinking of. I’m talking about the “background noise” of the sensor itself – see post HERE .

Now I’m going to over simplify things for you here – I need to because there are a lot of variables to take into account.

A Sensor is an ARRAY of PHOTOSITES or PHOTODIODES
A photodiode exists to do one thing – react to being struck by PHOTONS of light by producing electrons.
To produce electrons PROPORTIONAL to the number of photons that strike it.

Now in theory, a photodiode that sees ZERO photons during the exposure should release NO ELECTRONS.

At the end of the exposure the ADC comes along and counts the electrons for each photodiode – an ANALOGUE VALUE – and converts it to a DIGITAL VALUE and stores that digital value as a point of information in the RAW file.

A RAW converter such as Lightroom then reads all these individual points of information and using its own in-built algorithms it normalises and demosaics them into an RGB image that we can see on our monitor.

Sounds simple doesn’t it, and theoretically it is. But in practice there’s a lot of places in the process where things can go sideways rapidly……..!

We make a lot of assumptions about our pride and joy – our newly purchased DSLR – and most of these assumptions are just plain wrong. One that most folk get wrong is presuming ALL the photodiodes on their shiny new sensor BEHAVE IN THE SAME WAY and are 100% identical in response. WRONG – even though, in theory, it should be true.

Some sensors are built to a budget, some to a standard of quality and bugger the budget.

Think of the above statement as a scale running left to right with crap sensors like a 7D or D5000 on the left, and the staggering Phase IQ260 on the right. There isn’t, despite what sales bumph says, any 35mm format sensor that can come even close to residing on the right hand end of the scale, but perhaps a D800E might sit somewhere between 65 and 70%.

The thing I’m trying to get at here is that “quality control” and “budget” are opposites in the manufacturing process, and that linearity and uniformity of photodiode performance costs MONEY – and lots of it.

All our 35mm format sensors suffer from a lack of that expensive quality control in some form or other, but what manufacturers try to do is place the resulting poor performance “outside the envelope of normal expected operation” as a Nikon technician once told me.

In other words, during normal exposures and camera usage (is there such a thing?) the errors don’t show themselves – so you are oblivious to them. But move outside of that “envelope of normal expected operation” and as I said before, the Alligators are soon chomping on your butt cheeks.

REALITY

Long exposures in low light levels – those longer than 30 to 90 seconds – present us with one of those “outside the envelope” situations that can highlight some major discrepancies in individual photodiode performance and sensor uniformity.

Earlier, I said that a photodiode, in a perfect world, would always react proportionally to the number of photons striking it, and that if it had no photon strikes during the exposure then it would have ZERO output in terms of electrons produced.

Think of the “perfect” photodiode/photosite as being a child brought up by nuns, well mannered and perfectly behaved.

Then think of a child brought up in the Gallagher household a la “Shameless” – zero patience, no sense of right or wrong, rebellious and down right misbehaved. We can compare this kid with some of the photodiodes on our sensor.

These odd photodiodes usually show a random distribution across the sensor surface, but you only ever see evidence of their existence when you shoot in the dark, or when executing very long exposures from behind a heavy ND filter.

These “naughty” photodiodes behave badly in numerous ways:

They can release a larger number of electrons than is proportional to their photon count.
They can go to the extreme of releasing electrons when the have a ZERO photon count.
They can mimic the output of their nearest neighbors.
They can be clustered together and produce random spurious specks of colour.

And the list goes on!

It’s a Question of Time

These errant little buggers basically misbehave because the combination of low photon count and overly long exposure time allow them to, if you like, run out of patience and start misbehaving.

It is quite common for a single photodiode or cluster of them to behave in a perfect manner for any shutter speed up to between 30 seconds and 2 minutes. But if we expose that same photodiode or cluster for 3 minutes it can show abnormal behavior in its electron output. Expose it for 5 minutes and its output could be the same, or amplified, or even totally different.

IMPORTANT – do not confuse these with so-called “hot pixels” which show up in all exposures irrespective of shutter duration.

Putting an ND filter in front of your lens is the same as shooting under less light. Its effect is even-handed across all exposure values in the scenes brightness range, and therein lies the problem. Cutting 10 stops worth of photons from the highlights in the scene will still leave plenty to make the sensor work effectively in those areas of the image.

But cutting 10 stops worth of photons from the shadow areas – where there was perhaps 12 stops less to begin with – might well leave an insufficient number of photons in the very darkest areas to make those particular photodiodes function correctly.

Exposure is basically a function of Intensity and Time, back in my college days we used to say that Ex = I x T !

Our ND filter CUTS intensity across the board, so Time has to increase to avoid under exposure in general. But because we are working with far fewer photons as a whole, we have to curb the length of the Time component BECAUSE OF the level of intensity reduction – we become caught in a “Catch 22” situation, trying to avoid the “time triggered” malfunction of those errant diodes.

Below is an 4 minute exposure from behind a Lee Big Stopper on a 1Dx – click on both images to open at full resolution in a new window.

Canon 1Dx
4 minutes @ f13
ISO 200 Lee 10stop

The beastly Nikon D800E fairs a lot better under similar exposure parameters, but there are still a lot of repairs to be done:

A 4 minute exposure on a D800, f11 at 200ISO

Most people use heavy ND filters for the same reason I do – smoothing out water.

The texture of the water in the top shot clutters the image and adds nothing – so get rid of it! D4,ISO 50, 30secs f11 Lee Big Stopper

Then we change the camera orientation and get a commercial shot:

Cemlyn Bay on the northwest coast of Anglesey, North Wales, Approximately 2.5 km to the east is Wylfa nuclear power station. Same exposure as above.

In this next shot all I’m interested in is the jetty, neither water surface texture or horizon land add anything – the land is easy to dump in PShop but the water would be impossible:

I see the bottom image in my head when I look at the scene top left. Again, the 10 stop ND fixes the water, which adds precisely nothing to the image. D4 ISO 50, 60 secs, f14 B&W 10 stop

The mistake folk make is this, 30 seconds is usually enough time to get the effect on the water you want, and 90 to 120 seconds is truly the maximum you should ever really need. Any longer and you’ll get at best no more effect, and at worst the effect will not look as visually appealing – that’s my opinion anyway.

This time requirement dovetails nicely with the “operating inside the design envelope” physics of the average 35mm format sensor.

So, as I said before, we could go out on a bit of a limb and say that our sensors are all “photon limited”; all diodes on the sensor must be struck by x number of photons.

And we can regard them as being exposure length limited; all diodes on the sensor must be struck by x photons in y seconds in order to avoid the pitfalls mentioned.

So next time you have the idea of obtaining something really daft, such as the 16 stop ND filter my friend ordered, try engaging your brain. An unfiltered exposure that meters out at 1/30th sec will be 30 seconds behind a 10 stop ND filter, and a whopping 32 minutes behind a 16 stop ND filter. Now at that sort of exposure time the sensor noise in the image will be astonishing in both presence and variety!

As I posted on my Book of Face page the other day, just for kicks I shot this last Wednesday night:

Penmon Lighthouse in North Wales at twilight.
Sky is 90 secs, foreground is 4 minutes, D4, f16, ISO 50 B&W 10 stop ND filter

The image truly gives the wrong impression of reality – the wind was cold and gusting to 30mph, and the sea looked very lumpy and just plain ugly.

I spent at least 45 minutes just taking the bloody speckled colour read noise out of the 4 minute foreground exposure – I have to wonder if the image was truly worth the effort in processing.

When you take into account everything I’ve mentioned so far plus the following:

Long exposures are prone to ground vibration and the effects of wind on the tripod etc
Hanging around in places like the last shot above is plain dangerous, especially when it’s dark.

you must now see that keeping the exposures as short as possible is the sensible course of action, and that for doing this sort of work a 6 stop ND filter is a more sensible addition to your armoury than a 16 stop ND filter!

Just keep away from exposures above 2 minutes.

And before anyone asks, NO – you don’t shoot star trails in one frame over 4 hours unless you’re a complete numpty! And for anyone who thinks you can cancel noise by shooting a black frame think on this – the black frame has to be shot immediately after the image, and has to be the same exposure duration as the main image. That means a 4 hour single frame star trail plus black frame to go with it will take at least 8 hours – will your camera battery last that long? If it dies before the black frame is finished then you lose BOTH frames……………

Become a patron from as little as $1 per month, and help me produce more free content.

Patrons gain access to a variety of FREE rewards, discounts and bonuses.

Exposure Compensation

Posted on July 13, 2014 by Andrew Astbury

Exposure Compensation

Exposure Compensation – that’s something else that cropped up once or twice for the chaps on my recent Norwegian Eagle workshop!

We had something like 420 or more dives from eagles during the trip, and very few if any were shot with flat metering, or 0Ev compensation.

What is Exposure Compensation, and why do we need to use it?

It all begins with this little button:

D3 Exposure Compensation button – Nikon, Canon and most others use the same symbol.

Pushing this button and rotating your main command dial will select a certain exposure compensation value.

Why do we need to use Exposure Compensation though?

Cameras, for all their complexity and “intelligent whotsits” are basically STUPID! They don’t know WHAT you are trying to photograph, or HOW you are trying to photograph it.

They make a lot of very basic assumptions about what you are trying to do – 99.99% of which are WRONG!

The camera does NOT know if you are trying to photograph:

A white cat in a coal shed
A black cat in a snow storm
A white cat in a snow storm
A black cat in a coal shed

All it sees is a frame full of various amounts of light and shade, and depending on your metering mode (which should always be Matrix/Evaluative – see post here) it gives you an “average mean exposure value”.

Take a general scene of fairly low contrast under flat overcast light:

A scene as WE see it.

The same scene as the camera METER sees it.

Lighter tones within the scene.

Some darker area tones within the scene.

The exposure is governed by the PREDOMINANT tone.

As discussed in the previous metering article mentioned earlier, only MATRIX/EVALUATIVE takes the entire frame area into account.

Okay, so that scene was fairly bland on the old tonal front, so let’s have a look at something a little more relevant:

Straight off the camera with no processing. 1/2000th @ f4 1600ISO +1.3Ev

As the camera metered the scene WITHOUT compensation.

Why would the image be so dark and under exposed?

Well here’s an approximation of the cameras average tone “thought process”:

The approximate average value of the scene.

But if we look at some averages WITHIN the overall image:

Random tonal averages within the image.

We can see that the tonal values for the subject are generally darker than the average scene value, therefore the camera records those values as “under exposed”.

This is further compounded by the cameras brain making the decision that the commonest tonal value MUST represent “mid grey” – which it DOESN’T; it’s lighter than that – and so under exposing the image even further!

Now I’m not going to get into the argument about “what is mid grey” and do Nikon et al calibrate to 12%, 18%, 20% or whatever – to be honest it’s “neither here nor there” from our standpoint.

What is CRITICAL though is that we understand the old adage:

“Light Subject Dark Background = Under, or negative exposure compensation. And that Dark Subject Light Background = Over, or positive exposure compensation”.

Okay, but what are we actually doing?

In any exposure mode other than Manual mode, we are allowing the camera to meter the scene AND make the decision over which shutter speed or aperture to use depending on whether we have the camera in Av or Tv mode – that’s Canon-speak for A or S on Nikon.

If we are in shutter priority/S/Tv mode then the camera sets the aperture to give us its metered exposure – that thing that’s usually WRONG! – at the shutter speed we’ve selected.

If, as in the case above, we ADD +1.3Ev – one and one third stops of POSITIVE exposure compensation, the camera uses the shutter speed we’ve selected but then opens up the aperture WIDER than it’s “brain” wants it to.

How wide? 1.3 stops wider, thus allowing 1.3 stops more light into the the sensor during the exposure time.

If we were in Av/A or aperture priority mode then it’s the shutter speed that would take up the slack and become 1.3 stops SLOWER than the cameras “brain” wanted it to be.

Here’s an example of negative exposure compensation:

1/3200th @ f4.5 1000ISO -1.3Ev exposure compensation.

In this particular shot we’re pointing towards the sun – a “dark subject, light background” positive exposure compensation scenario, or so you’d think.

But I want to “protect” those orange highlights in the water and the brightest tones in the eagle, so if I “peg those highlights” just over a stop below the top end of the cameras’ tonal response curve then there is no way on earth they are going to “blow” in the final RAW file.

Manual Exposure mode can still furnish us with exposure compensation based on metering if we engage AUTO-ISO. If we decide we want to shoot continuously with a high shutter speed and a set aperture at a fixed ISO then our exposures are going to be all over the place. But if we engage AUTO-ISO and let the camera choose the ISO speed via the meter reading, we can use the exposure compensation adjustments just the same as we do in Av or Tv modes.

This get’s us away from the problem of fixed ISO Tv mode running out of aperture in low light or when very high shutter speeds are needed; or conversely, stopping the aperture down too far when the sun comes out! – I’ll do a breakdown on this method of shooting later in the year – it’s not without it’s problems.

Next time you get the chance to stand by a large lake or other body of water, just take a moment to notice that the water is dark in some places and light in others. ambient light falling on a moving subject can easily be very uniform and so the subject basically has the same exposure value all the time. But it’s the changing brightness of the background as the subject moves across it that causes us to need exposure compensation.

People seem to think there’s some sort of “magic” at play when they come out with me and I’m throwing exposure compensation values at them. But there’s no magic here folks, just an ability to see beyond “the subject, framing etc” and to actually “see the light” and understand it.

After all, when we click our shutters we are imaging light – the subject is, for the most part, purely incidental!

And there’s only one way you can learn to see light and grasp its implications for camera exposure, and that’s to practice.

Become a patron from as little as $1 per month, and help me produce more free content.

Patrons gain access to a variety of FREE rewards, discounts and bonuses.

Auto Focus Work Out

Posted on July 1, 2014 by Andrew Astbury

Auto Focus Work Out

My recent summer trip to Flatanger in Norway, and to the famous “Eagle Man of Norway” Ole Martin Dahle, proved, as ever, a severe test of the auto focus capabilities of the gear!

We had 4 guys on the trip, 3 Nikon and 1 Canon, and White-tailed Eagles doing more than 40mph and turning on a dime is one of the hardest tests for auto focus tracking and lock on that you can imagine – especially when it’s all done hand held from a boat that’s rolling around in the sea swell.

wildlife photography,auto focus,Nikon,D4,Andy Astbury,eagle,Norway,workshop,camera settings

The Guys – yours truly, Malcolm Clayton and Paul Atkins; and Mohamed El Ashkar (all the way from Cairo!) and our Cambridge “Don” – all trips should have one – Jamie Gundry. Photo by Ole Martin Dahle.

We had a conglomeration of D4’s, D800E’s and 200-400 f4’s, with a smattering of 300mm and 400mm f2.8’s – and then there was Mohamed with his solitary 1Dx and 300 f2.8.

And our target:

Say “Hello” to “Brutus” – an eagle who lives up to his name for sure – a total brute, especially to a boat full of daft photographers! CLICK for larger view.

Just to set the scene with regard to the technical side of things; birds fly into the wind given the choice, and the sun is wherever it decides to be! So the boat driver – Ole – always needs to position the boat so that “wind and sunlight” are coming from pretty much the same direction, otherwise the birds are not front-lit and cast their own shadows across themselves. In other words the images look like crap!

Some birds come towards the boat, take the fish and then turn away; some will do their approach parallel to the boat; and gits like Brutus will fly low and fast straight at you, pick the fish and then turn straight for the boat and climb.

But no matter how they choose to approach the camera boat all the birds pick the fish and go back to where they’ve come from.

Ole has intimate knowledge of these birds as individuals, and so has a damn good idea of what they will do as they come to the boat. This enables him to manoeuvre the boat for the best shots, and this skill is what you pay for.

Perhaps by now you’ve got the general feel for the situation – a boat that’s subject to wave motion and which might suddenly go backwards 10 yards through its own wake – not the steadiest of camera platforms!

Couple that with trying to make the auto focus lock on and track the bird, and maintain a modicum of composition – it’s just damned hard work.

Photographing anything that’s moving is hard work; moving erratically is even harder; and hand holding on an oscillating camera platform makes the job beyond hard. This style of shooting will NEVER yield vast rafts of sharp sequential images – anyone who tells you different is an outright liar. Christ, even licensed FIA F1 ‘togs are on “easy street” by comparison.

Auto focus cannot be set up perfectly for this sort of situation, but understanding it is a MUST if you want to maximise the opportunity.

Auto Focus Choices

There are 3 main things that control the effectiveness of auto focus and AF tracking:

AF Area Mode

AF Tracking Lock-on interval

Frame Rate

(Bare in mind I’m talking Nikon here, but sorting Mohameds’ 1Dx out showed my that Canon AF is pretty much the same).

Now I dealt with the latter in a previous post HERE and so we need to concentrate here on AF area modes in the main.

Let’s look at what we have to work with on a Nikon body – in this case a D4:

Firstly, the AF sensor layout.

All 51 focus sensors, and there approximate layout in relation to the image frame:

All 51 of the Nikon Multi Cam 3500 FX focus sensors – both cross and linear sensors depicted.

Just the Cross-type Sensors:

wildlife photography,auto focus,Nikon,D4,Andy Astbury,eagle,Norway,workshop,camera settings,Nikon Multi-Cam 3500 FX unit

The 15 Cross type focus sensors on the Nikon Multi-Cam 3500 FX unit.

The Linear-type Sensors:

The 36 Linear type focus sensors on the Nikon Multi-Cam 3500 FX unit.

Single Area AF

Single Area, or single point AF.

9 Point Dynamic Area AF:

9 Point Dynamic Area AF

9 Point DA AF as displayed in the viewfinder (drop shadows added in Photoshop behind the dots to aid visibility in this article).

21 Point Dynamic Area AF:

21 Point Dynamic Area AF

21 Point DA AF as displayed in the viewfinder (drop shadows added in Photoshop behind the dots to aid visibility in this article).

51 Point Dynamic Area AF:

51 Point DA AF as displayed in the viewfinder (drop shadows added in Photoshop behind the dots to aid visibility in this article).

As a stills photographer you are using what’s called Phase Detection auto focus (that’ll be another blog post topic!) but it still relies on a mix of contrast,luminosity and colour to work out what it should be concentrating on in the frame.

Consider the following 2 images, A & B:

A. Dark Subject and Light Background.
Subject itself is low contrast, background water is higher contrast. Subject is at 15 meters, Focal Length is 240mm

B. Light Subject against a Dark Background.
Subject now has a slightly higher contrast, and background is lower contrast. Subject 29 meters, Focal length 360mm

Auto focus is dumb; just plain stupid, left to its own devices. It, like me (yep, me dumb too!) favours lighter things with a higher degree of contrast. The lighter something is then the brighter and more saturated it colour is, and this in turn gives it higher localised contrast.

Auto focus will be happier locking on to and tracking Eagle B than Eagle A.

In A, the AF will want to switch to the lighter, more contrasty water behind the bird – unless of course you “hobble it” and stop it from doing so…

And you stop it by BLINDING IT – in other words use LESS active auto focus points!

“If it ain’t got ’em it can’t switch to ’em!”

If all the AF points in use are on the important part of the subject (the EYE in this case) then there’s little or no chance of the auto focus switching to somewhere you don’t want it to go to.

In a perfect world we’d all be using Single Area AF on a tripod and panning away quite happily keeping that single sensor on the targets eye……………oh I wish!!!!!!

51 point AF is out for this sort of work – with what I’ve just written you should now easily understand why.

So we are down to either the 9 point or 21 point Dynamic Areas.

It all comes down to two things:

How steady you can keep the camera.
How big in the frame the birds are – in other words, subject distance.

But accuracy of auto focus will always be improved by using the least number of sensors you can get away with.

Image A. is at 240mm and a subject distance of 15 meters, and Image B. is at 360mm and a subject distance of 29 meters. Both images were shot using 21 point Dynamic Area AF, 1/2000th @ f7 and 1600ISO.

21 point AF, 15 meters and 240mm focal length.

21 point AF, 29 meters and 360mm focal length.

On the upper detail image there’s one, perhaps two of the 21 sensors that are NOT on the subject.

On the second image there are at least 9 sensors out of the 21 in the group that are NOT on the bird.

If the bird in image A. had been 29 meters away I’ll guarantee it would have been out of focus – why?

Lack of good directional light.
Poor subject contrast and illumination.
Brighter, higher contrast background.
More sensors “Off Target”.

And the auto focus hasn’t wanted to wander to the background on image B. because there’s nothing there for it to favour over the main subject.

How Dynamic Area AF Works

9 point DA auto focus uses the single AF point that you select, but activates the 8 points surrounding it. If you, or the subject, or both, move so that the single point you selected comes “off target” then one of those 8 surrounding points will “cover” the error and maintain focus lock and tracking until you get back on target.

In 9 point DA, auto focus ALL the sensors activated are “cross type” sensors, assuming you use a sensor on the vertical center line of the AF grid.

In 21 point DA, auto focus is still centered on the single sensor you select, but now the surrounding 20 are activated. But at least 6 of these sensors will be linear, not cross type sensors.

Auto Focus Senor Types – Cross and Linear (line).

This is going to be immensely paraphrased!

AF sensors need to see edge detail in order to work. A linear sensor can work more effectively when the edge it’s looking at is perpendicular to it.

The more an edge is parallel to said line sensor then the harder time it has in discerning when said edge is sharp or not.

But if we add 2 line sensors together at right angles to each other, then an edge that is parallel to one line is perpendicular to the other – so edge detection is greatly enhanced.

In an ideal scenario 9 point Dynamic Area AF, centered in the middle of the view finder and kept on the eagles head would be the ideal way to go, but with the other circumstances of:

Moving camera platform
Potential closeness of subject (sub 15 meters possible)

then 9 point DA might be a wee bit tight on both counts, and 21 point makes more sense from a tracking and shooting perspective.

But it leads to an initial problem with the auto focus acquiring the target in the first place. You have to pick these eagles up quite a way out, and if one is coming low to the water then there is possibly too much in the frame to act as a distraction to the auto focus unit itself; though this isn’t quite such an issue if the bird is high in the sky.

So my recommendation for any form of bird-in-flight photography is to start out at 9 point DA and see how you get on!

There is always the AF Tracking Lock On feature that you can deploy in order to “hobble” the AF unit from switching to subjects closer to or further away, but if I’m honest I find this the most sticky and difficult aspect of the Nikon system to get a precise handle on. It does exactly “what it says on the tin” but it’s the “when” and “how much by” bits that have me slightly guessing.

Sometimes I put it on long and it basically waits for perhaps 4 or 5 seconds before it tries to switch focus, while at other times it does so in less than half the time. Sometimes I feel it actually diminishes the effectiveness of the “predictive” side of the auto focus tracking unit.

But if I turn it off when hand holding the camera for flight shots then everything turns to crap – so I turn it back on again!

Again, my base recommendations for this are SHORT to NORMAL and see how things go.

One thing that can have a considerable impact on the way you perceive your auto focus effectiveness is how you have your AF release priority set up (CS a1).

There are 4 options:

Release
Focus+Release
Release+Focus
Focus

By default this is set to FOCUS. With the default setting, it’s theoretically impossible to take a soft shot. But in practice that’s not so simple, and I’ve taken many a soft shot when the D4 “thinks” things are sharp; though in the main, that seems to have been cured the minute we got trap focus back with the latest firmware upgrade.

Release means the camera will take shots irrespective of focus being acquired or not. I NEVER use this option.

Focus+Release means that the first frame will only be taken once focus is acquired, and subsequent frames will be taken irrespective of focus. This is one of my preferred options when everything is unstable – that first frame hopefully sets up the auto focus and AF tracking and so everything SHOULD keep the subsequent frames sharp – please note the use of the word “should”!

Both the above release priority modes do NOT slow the frame rate.

Release+Focus – works the opposite way to Focus+Release – it does slow the frame rate down giving the mirror more down-time and so the auto focus system has more time to work. This is my other preferred option, the one I use when the “action” may not be as repeatable.

Focus – This is the option I deploy when shooting from a tripod or when the action is not quite so fast-paced. Again, this option slows the frame rate.

The Back Button Auto Focus Option

I always use the back button for auto focus activation. There are plenty of arguments for doing this, but I just feel it’s darn right more efficient than having AF activation on the shutter button. Just don’t forget to turn AF/Shutter ON to OFF in the menu, otherwise you are just wasting time and effort!

Conclusion

A lot of folk feel that their auto focus is flawed; but more often it is they and their setup choices which are flawed.

There is no blanket panacea or magic bullet setting for your AF system – as with everything else you have to constantly evaluate the light around you, anticipate the shot and make the necessary changes to setup – otherwise it’s going to be a sad day.

But knowing how your gear works and how it reacts under different scenarios is the “meat and two veg” of good photography. Couple that with shot anticipation and the proper corrective measures and it’s off home for tea and medals!

But above all, remember to have a laugh – you’re a long time dead……..

“GIMME SOME, YOU MEAN BARSTARD!”

Become a patron from as little as $1 per month, and help me produce more free content.

Patrons gain access to a variety of FREE rewards, discounts and bonuses.

Flash Output Power

Posted on May 1, 2014 by Andrew Astbury

Flash output power raises a lot of questions when you are trying to decide how to spend your money.

A lot of people writing on the internet decry the versatility of portable speedlights and their use as studio-type lighting – something which is entirely wrong in my opinion; as there is nothing that can’t be done with them, as long as you have enough of them!

And you don’t have to take my word for it – just go and watch the worlds best exponent of the art, in my opinion anyway – Joe McNally. – then tell me if I’m wrong!

But with a top-of-the-line Nikon SB910 running at £340 and Canons new 600EXRT a cool £400 plus here in the UK, purchasing 10 to 15 of these puppies is a wallet-emptying proposition; though given the cash or sponsorship it’s the way I’d go all day long.

A lot of folk come to me with the same quandary – studio flash heads are a lot more cost-effective; notwithstanding their big limiting factor – lack of portability.

Leaving aside the other problems of many studio-style flash heads, namely lack of TTL and HSS/FP facility (though this can be walked-around on certain models with Pocket Wizards and the dark art of Hypersynch) they do give one big advantage – more photons for your buck.

But just how does one compare the flash output power of one unit/type with another – after all, this is what we want to know:

Can I get more light from flash A than I can from flash B
How many speedlights do I NOT have to buy if I get studio-style flash head C which costs 1.5x the price of one of my speedlights.

The problem is that manufacturers don’t make it easy to do direct comparisons of flash output power between brands and formats, and they tend to try and confuse the buyer with meaningless numbers and endless amounts of jargon.

Back in the days of manual-everything, we used to use flash in a very simple way using the units Guide Number.

The guide number is usually quoted as being at 100 ISO and at two values, one for metres and one for feet, and we use it with the following equation:

GUIDE No: = Distance x Aperture

So we might see a flash unit has a guide number quoted as 40/131 at 100 ISO. This means for example, that at 100 ISO and a flash to subject distance of 2.5 metres or 8.2 feet the correct aperture to use would be:

Guide No: divided by distance – in this case 40/2.5m or 131/8.2ft.

Either way the answer is 16, so we would set the shutter speed to the flash synch speed and the aperture to F16.

Simple!

Where things used to go a bit pear-shaped was when we introduced any form of output modifier such as a bounce board or diffuser because these spread and smooth the light and so reduce the number of photons falling on the subject by one or two stops.

But TTL flash metering soon put paid to all that grief.

Camera OEM Speedlights

Let’s compare a Nikon SB800 & SB910 – these have 100 ISO guide numbers of 38/125 & 34/112 respectively (published) – that’s right folks, the new one is weaker than the old one.

But by how much?

Well the old SB800 has a guide number that is 11.7% higher than the newer SB910, but what does this mean in terms of exposure value?

At a flash-to-subject distance of 3.4 metres, doing the maths says that our correct aperture would be 38/3.4 and 34/3.4 respectively. So the SB800 would put us at f11 (11.18 to be precise) while the SB910 would give us f10 – that’s an increase of over 1/3rd of a stop using the older unit.

When working with long lenses and wide apertures this extra 1/3rd of a stop gives me just that little bit more depth of field – and folk wonder why I don’t change mine!

Complications & Caveats

Nikon quote the two units above with guide numbers based on the head “zoom feature” being set to 35mm, which gives a fairly wide angle of lighting. Someone said to me the other day that the new Canon 600EX was twice the power of the Nikon units I’ve already mentioned, simply because Canon quote the guide number for that device as a massive whopping 60!

The world is full of fools………..

Canon, in their infinite wisdom, quote that 60 value at a zoom head setting of 200mm. The reality is that the guide number of this Canon unit varies between 26 with the zoom head at 20mm and 60 at 200mm – so in other words, give or take a bit, it’s pretty much in the same ball park as the Nikon units previously mentioned.

Canon speedlight naming policy tells you the units MAXIMUM guide number:

600EX = 60 (metres)
580EX = 58 (metres)
550EX = 55 (metres)

The 550 specs also give you zoom length variations:

105mm = 55 (metres)
50mm = 42 (metres)
17mm = 15 (metres)

Canon 600EX vs Nikon SB800 zoom lengths:

105mm = 58 vs 56 (metres)
50mm = 42 vs 44 (metres)
14mm = 15 vs 17 (metres)

Light leaves a flash unit in a cone of sorts, and the zoom heads on speedlight style units gather this cone of light so it basically matches the angle of view of the lens you are using and results in an efficient distribution of light across the image area – that’s the theory anyway.

Making the cone “tighter” forces the photons released by the flash into a more concentrated area, thus increasing the number falling on the subject and so increasing the overall exposure value.

So when we use guide numbers to compare various flash units we must ensure that we are comparing the units on a level playing field – in other words, the values we use are for the same “cone or reflector angle”. And if the manufacturers use different reflector angles when assessing their flash guide numbers for promotion to the public, then you guys ‘n gals run the risk of being hood-winked into buying something that ain’t strictly what you thought it was when you ordered it.

So how do speed light style flash units stack up against studio type units?

Notwithstanding the lack of FP/HSS and any TTL metering problems, studio-type flash heads have guide numbers that are usually quoted as being “with standard reflector”. This standard reflector is something which gathers those photons and shovels them out in a 50-55 degree spread; think “standard lens” on the image diagonal.

Current top end Nikon speed lights (and Canon) have guide numbers of sub 40 at 35mm reflector angles, and those equate to roughly 64 degrees diagonal coverage. So if we were to “tighten them up” to 50 or 55 degrees we could, as a rough guide, round the guide numbers up to 42m or 44m.

Now we are on a more even playing field.

A Bowens Gemini 500R is quoted by Bowens as having a guide number of 85 with a standard reflector, so let’s be a bit cavalier with the numbers and say that it’s double the guide number of SB800/910 or 580EX etc.

So roughly how many speed lights is this puppy going to be equivalent to in terms of real flash output power ?

Hands up those who think two………….wrong!

This is where everything you thought you knew about exposure turns to shit in front of your very eyes (but not really!), and it’s called the Inverse Square Law.

Inverse Square Law

Now listen folks, this is as simple or as complicated as you care to make it!

When we capture a scene we capture a 2 dimensional plane filled with photons travelling towards us.

When we shine any light on an object we are actually throwing a flat sheet of light at it. This sheet is expanding outwards as it travels towards the subject because the photons in that sheet of light are all diverging.

So, let’s look at something tangible as an analogy – metric paper sizes!

How many sheets of A3 paper fit on a sheet of A2 paper?

That’s right, TWO – we’ve effectively doubled the surface area of the paper.

Now exposure works in stops – and making a 1 stop change in exposure effectively doubles or halves the exposure value depending on which way we’ve made the adjustment.

So moving from A3 to A2 is like making a 1 stop change in exposure; we’ve doubled the surface area of the paper. BUT – we’ve not doubled the papers physical dimensions.

What paper size is twice the width AND twice the height of A3 – yep, that’s right, A1.

And how many sheets of A3 fit on a sheet of A1 – right again, 4.

So we have quadrupled the papers surface area – in exposure terms that would equate to 2 stops.

Now imagine a projector throwing an image onto a big screen and the screen to projector distance is 4 metres. We go to the screen and measure the size of the projected image and it’s 1.5 metres by 2 metres.

How big will the image be if we move the projector to 8 metres from the screen?

Answer – 3 metres x 4 metres. (and the brightness of the image will have gone down by 2 stops).

And if we move the projector to 2 metres from the screen the image will be 0.75 metres x 1 metre. (and the brightness of the image will have increased by 2 stops!).

Inverse Square Law, Lights & Distances

Let’s say we have a theoretical flash with a metres guide number of 80.

If the subject is 10 metres from the light we need an aperture of f8 because 80/10 = 8.

If we now move the light to 5 metres from the subject our aperture decrease to 80/5 = f16

Halving the light-to-subject distance means we increase the overall intensity of the light (its effective flash output power) by 2 stops, so we have to reduce our overall exposure by two stops to compensate; otherwise we’ll just end up with 2 stops of over exposure.

And of course if we move the light away to 20 metres from the subject the inverse applies and we effectively reduce the flash output power by two stops and we’ll have to open the aperture up by two stops to avoid under exposure.

But what do we have to do in order to use f16 at 10 metres AND get correct exposure?

Use a flash with a guide number of 160 is what we’d need to do – it really is that simple.

Reality

So, how many guide number 45 speed lights would we need to equal one guide number 90 studio flash head in terms of effective flash output power?

Well it isn’t two – oh that we should be so lucky!

If we have two speed lights mounted together their cumulative guide number is equal to the square root of the sum of the squares of their individual guide numbers!

Sounds scary, but the answer is 63 or thereabouts.

But here’s the thing about photo-maths – it usually ends up as something really simple and this is no exception.

If you want to double the guide number you always need 4 identical units.

Do not forget what I’ve said above about published guide numbers – you have to ensure that the values were obtained using equal criteria, and manufacturers sometimes don’t always like to furnish you with the information you need in order to do easy comparisons.

Have they got something to hide – you may think that, but I couldn’t possibly comment!

What really does piss me off the meaningless crap they do furnish you with – watt-second, w/s, watt/sec or if you like Joules values.

The only thing these values do is inform you of the “potential energy” available at the capacitor; it’s no measure of how efficiently the flash tube converts that power into photons – and the photons is ALL we’re really interested in.

Other things such as tube temperature can have dramatic effects on both light output and the colour of that light.

Conclusion

This post has been a bit of a ramble but I’ve tried as best I can to give you a rough guide on how to compare one flash source with another.

Different photographers require different things – if all you want to do is shoot portraits and still life then shutter speeds above 1/250th synch are of little importance in general terms, so access to HSS/AutoFP via speed lights isn’t needed, and normal studio lights would be a far more economical proposition.

But on the other hand 8 speed lights in one bank, and two more banks of 4 speed lights each – all HSS/AutoFP compliant – crikey, the photographic possibilities are endless, and readily achievable – if your bank balance is endless too!

Become a patron from as little as $1 per month, and help me produce more free content.

Patrons gain access to a variety of FREE rewards, discounts and bonuses.

Flash Duration – How Fast Can We Go

Posted on April 3, 2014 by Andrew Astbury

Flash duration – how long the burst of photons from flash actually lasts, does seem to get a lot of people confused.

Earlier this year I posted an article on using flash HERE where the prime function of the flash was as a fill light. As a fill, flash should not be obvious in the images, as the main lighting is still the ambient light from the sun, and we’re just using the flash to “tickle” the foreground with a little extra light.

flash duration,fill flash,flash,shutter speed,photography,Andy Astbury,digital photography,wildlife photography,Red Squirrel

Flash as “fill” where the main lighting is still ambient daylight, and a moderate shutter speed is all that’s required. 1/800th sec @ f8 is plenty good enough for this shot.

Taking pictures is NEVER a case of just “rocking up”, seeing a shot and pressing the shutter; for me it’s a far more complex process whereby there’s a possible bucket-load of decisions to be made in between the “seeing the shot” bit and the “pressing the shutter” bit.

My biggest influencers are always the same – shutter speed and aperture, and the driving force behind these two things is light, and a possible lack thereof.

Once I make the decision to “add light” I then have to decide what role that additional light is going to take – fill, or primary source.

Obviously, in the shot above the decision was fill, and everything was pretty straight forward from there on, and aperture/shutter speed selection is still dictated by the ambient lighting – I use the flash as a “light modifier”.

The duration of the flash is controlled by the TTL metering system and it’s duration is fairly irrelevant.

Let’s take a look at a different scenario.

flash duration,fill flash,flash,shutter speed,photography,Andy Astbury,digital photography,wildlife photography

The lovely Jo doing her 1930’s screen icon “pouty thing”. Flash is the ONLY light source in this image. 1/250th @ f9 ISO 100.

In this shot the lighting source is pure flash. There’s very little in the way of ambient light present in this dark set, and what bit there is was completely over-powered by the flash output – so the lighting from the Elinchrom BX 500 monoblocks being used here is THE SOLE light source.

Considerations over the lighting itself are not the purpose of this post – what we are concerned with here are the implications for shutter speed due to flash synchronization.

The flash units were the standard type of studio flash unit offering no TTL interface with the camera being used, so it’s manual everything!

But the exposure in terms of shutter speed is capped at 1/250th of a second due to the CAMERA – that is it’s highest synch speed.

The focal length of the lens is 50mm so I need to shoot at around f8 or f9 to obtain workable depth of field, so basic exposure settings are dictated. This particular shot was achieved by balancing the light-to-subject distance along the lines of the inverse square law for each light.

But from the point of view of this post the big consideration is this – can I afford to have movement in the subject?

At 1/250th sec you’d think not. Then you’d think “hang on, flash durations are a lot faster than that” – so perhaps I can…..or can I ?

Flash Duration & Subject Movement

Flash duration, in terms of action-stopping power, is not as simple or straight forward as you might think.

Consider the diagram below:

Flash Power Output curve plotted against Output duration (time).

The grey shaded area in the diagram is the “power output curve’ of the flash.

Most folk think that a flash is an “instant on, instant off” kind of thing – how VERY wrong they are!

When we set the power output on either the back panel of our SB800/580EX etc, or on the power pack of a studio flash unit, or indeed any other flash unit, we are setting a peak output limit.

We might set a Nikon SB800 to 1/4 power, or we might set channel B output on a Quadra Ranger to 132Watt/sec, but either way, we are dictating the maximum flash output power – the peak output limit. The “t 5 time” – or to be more correct the “t 0.5 time” is the total time duration where the flash output is at 50% or above of the selected peak output limit we set.

Just to clarify: we set say, 1/4th power output on the back of a Canon 580EX – this is the selected peak output limit. The t5 time for this is the total time duration where the light output is at or above 50% of that selected 1/4th power – NOT 50% of the flash units full power output – do not get confused over this!

So when it comes to total “light emission duration” we’ve got 3 different ways of looking at things:

Total – and I mean TOTAL – duration; the full span of the output curve.
T 0.5 – the duration of the flash where its output is at 50% or above that level set by the user – the peak output limit.
T 0.1 – the duration of the flash where its output is at 10% or above that level set by the user.

Anyone looking at the diagram above can see that the total output emission time/flash duration is A LOT LONGER than the t5 time. Usually you find that t5 times are somewhere around 1/3rd of the total emission time, or flash duration.

Getting back to our shot of Jo above, if my memory serves me correctly the BX heads I used for the shot had a t5 time of around 1/1500th sec. So the TOTAL duration of the flash output would be around 1/500th sec.

So I can’t afford to have any movement in the subject that isn’t going to be arrested by 1/500th sec flash duration, let alone the 1/250th shutter speed.

Why? Well that 1/250th sec the shutter is open will comprise of 1/500th sec of flash photons entering the lens, and 1/500th sec of NOTHING entering the lens but AMBIENT LIGHT photons.

Let us break flash output down a bit more:

In the previous article I mentioned, I quoted a table of Nikon SB800 duration times. At the top of the table was the SB800 1/1 or full output power flash duration. All times quoted in that table were t5 times.

The one I want to concentrate on is that 1/1 full power t5 time of 1/1050th sec.

Even though Nikon try to tempt you into believing that the flash only emits light for 1/1050th sec it does in fact light the scene for a full 1/350th sec – most flash manufacturers units are quoted as t5 times.

Now in most cases when you might employ flash – which let’s face it, is as some sort of fill light in a general ambient/flash mixed exposure, this isn’t in reality, a big problem. Reduced power multiple pulse AutoFP/HSS also makes it not a problem.

But if you are trying to stop high speed action – in other words “freeze time”, then it can become a major headache; especially when you need all the flash power you can get hold of.

Why? Let’s break the diagram above down to basics.

The darker shaded area represents the “tail” of the flash output – the area that can cause many problems when trying to stop high speed action.

The first 50% of the total light output is over and finished in the first 1/1050th of the total flash duration.
The other 50% of the total light output takes place over a further 1/525th sec, and is represented by the dark grey area – let’s call this area the flash “output tail”. Some publications & websites refer to this tail as after-glow. I always thought that ‘after glow” was something ladies did after a certain type of energetic activity!
The light will continue to decay for a full 1/525th sec after t5, until the output of light has died down to 0% and the full “burn time” of 1/350th sec has been reached.

That’s right – 1/1050th + 1/525th = 1/350th.

So, if our shutter speed is 1/350th sec or longer we are going to see some ghosting in our image caused by the movement of the subject during that extra 1/525th sec post t5 time.

I need to point out that most speedlight type flash units are “isolated-gate bipolar transistor” devices – that’s IGBT to you and me. Einstein studio flash units are also IGBT units – I’ll cover the implications of this in a later post, but for now you just need to know that the IGBT circuitry works to eliminate sub t5 output BUT doesn’t work if your speedlight is set to output at maximum power. And if you need access to full 1/1 power with your speedlights for any reason then IGBT won’t help you.

Let’s see the problem in action as it were:

A bouncing golf ball shot at 1/250th sec using full power output on an SB800.
The ball is moving UPWARDS.
The blur between points A & B are caused by the “tail” or “after-glow” of the flash.

And the problem will be further exacerbated if there is ANY ambient light in scene from a window for instance, as this will boost the general scene illumination during that “tail end” 1/525th sec.

We might be well advised, if using any form of non-TTL flash mode, to use a shutter speed equal to, or shorter in duration to the t5 time, as in the shot below:

A bouncing golf ball shot at 1/2000th sec using full power output on an SB800.

All I’ve done in this second shot is go -3Ev on the shutter speed, +1Ev on the aperture and +2Ev on ISO speed.

Don’t forget, the flash is in MANUAL mode with a full power output.

With the D4 in front-curtain synch the full power, 1/350th sec flash pulse begins as the front shutter curtain starts to move, and it “burns” continuously while the 1/2000th sec “letter-box” shutter-slot travels across the sensor.

In both shots you may be wondering how I triggered the exposure. Sitting on the desk you can see a small black box with a jack plug sticking out the back – this is the audio sensor of a TriggerSmart audio/light/Infra Red combined trigger system. As the golf ball strikes the desk the audio sensor picks up the noise and the control box triggers the camera shutter and hence the flash.

Hardy, down at the distributors,Flaghead, has been kind enough to send me one of these systems for incorporation into some long-term photography projects, and in a series of high speed flash workshops and training tutorials. And I have to say that I’m mighty impressed with the system, and at the retail pricing point ownership of this product is a no-brainer. The unit is going to feature in quite a few blog post in the near-future, but click HERE to email Hardy for more details.

Even though I constantly extol the virtues of the Nikon CLS system, there comes a time when its automatic calculations fight AGAINST you – and easy high speed photography becomes something of a chore.

Any form of flash exposure automation makes assumptions about what you are trying to do. In certain circumstances these assumptions are pretty much correct. But in others they can be so far wide of the mark that if you don’t turn the automation OFF you’ll never get the shot you want.

Wresting full control over speed lights from the likes of Nikons CLS gives you access to super-highspeed flash durations AND high shutter speeds without a lot of the synching problems incurred with studio monoblocks.

Liquid in Motion,flash duration,fill flash,flash,shutter speed,photography,Andy Astbury,digital photography,wildlife photography

Liquid in Motion – arrested at 1/8000th sec shutter speed using SB800’s at full 1/1 power.

Liquid in Motion – arrested at 1/8000th sec shutter speed using SB800’s at full 1/1 power. A 100% crop from the shot above.

“Scotch & Rocks All Over The Place”
Simple capture with manual speed lights at full power and 1/8000th shutter speed.

The shots above are all taken with 2x SB800s lighting the white background and 1 heavily defused SB800 acting as a top light.

One background light is set at 1/1 manual FP, the other to manual 1/1 SU-4 remote. The top light is set to 1/8 power SU-4 remote.

The majority light in the shot is in fact that white background – it’s punching light back through the glass and liquid splash – the subject is backlit.

So, that background is being lit for a full 1/350th of a second.

But shooting in front curtain synch I’m using 1/8000th sec as a shutter speed, an exposure duration 3 stops shorter than the flash unit t5 time for full power. So in effect I’m using the combined background flash units as a very short-term continuous light source which lasts for 1/350th of a second, but the camera is only recording the very first 1/8000th sec – in other words, photons are still leaving the flash AFTER the rear shutter curtain has closed and the exposure is finished.

Finally, the shutter and flash are triggered by dropping the faux crushed ice through the IR sensor beam of the TriggerSmart unit.

This is very much along the lines of what’s termed HYPERSYNCH – a technique you can use with conventional slow burn studio flash units and certain types of 3rd party trigger units such as Pocket Wizards – but that’s yet another story, and is fraught with synch problems that you have program out of the system using the Pocket Wizard utility.

So, there’s more to come from me about flash in future posts, but for now just remember – there’s not a lot you can’t do with speed lights – as long as you’ve got enough of the little darlings!

Become a patron from as little as $1 per month, and help me produce more free content.

Patrons gain access to a variety of FREE rewards, discounts and bonuses.

Trap Focus

Posted on March 18, 2014 by Andrew Astbury

Trap Focus on the Nikon D4

Trap focus comes to my D4 – Yay!!!!!!!!

What was it Nikon said – “we left it off the D4 because no one wanted it”….or words to that effect.

Well, with today’s (March 18th 2014) update version 1.10 trap focus is back – in a fashion.

What is trap focus some may ask. Well it’s basically pre-focusing on a particular distance or spot where you expect the subject to be or to pass through.

As the subject enters the frame and gets closer to the camera it’s also getting closer to the pre-focused distance, and when it reaches the set focus distance the camera actually detects the subject/image is sharp and so takes the shot.

Basically you sit there with the shutter button fully depressed, but no shots get taken until the camera AF system deems the subject is now in focus.

It’s a technique that a lot of sports photographers find very useful, but I find it has very limited use for my wildlife & natural history work. Having said that, it’s got me out of a bind more than once over the years, but ever since the D4 came out you’ve not been able to use it.

The failing lay in the flawed D4 focus priority – even if you told it to only trip the shutter when the image was deemed ‘in focus’ by setting CS a1 & a2 to FOCUS, it would still fire as if a1 and a2 were set to release priority.

But the new firmware update v1.10 has given trap focus back to the D4, but before you start jumping up and down and getting all excited you need to know how to set it up, and bare in mind that “as a technique” trap focus might not suit what you had in mind.

Setup for D4 Trap Focus

Update firmware to v1.10 – read the instructions FULLY before you attempt this, otherwise you may need another camera!
Go to Custom Settings a2 AF-S priority selection and set to FOCUS.
Go to Custom Settings a4 AF activation and set to AF-ON only – this takes to AF activation away from the shutter release button.
Put a wide angle lens on the camera.
Set the lens focus switch to M/A
Set the D4 focus mode selector (the lever on left side of the body front) to AF
Press the AF mode button and rotate the Command Dial (back one) to select AFS and NOT AFC.
Rotate the Sub Command Dial (front one) to select S (single) and NOT Auto.
Focus on your computers monitor screen using either the manual focus ring of the lens or the rear AF-ON button next to the Command Dial.
If you’ve pressed the latter TAKE your thumb OFF!
Move the camera directly away from the computer monitor screen so the image in the viewfinder goes soft.
Jam your finger down on the shutter release. Nothing happens (if it does then start again!).
Keeping that shutter button depressed and NOT touching the lens or AF button, move back towards the computers monitor screen – the shutter will fire when the monitor screen is sharp.

Got that? Good! Oh, and by the way, the award-winning shot you just missed – it would have been epic!

Now you’ve got a D4 that does trap focus.

Now for the trap focus caveats:

Trap Focus only works in AFS – not in AFC.

Trap Focus only works with a single AF sensor, AFS-S – so correct prediction of that one AF sensor/subject alignment to get the required ‘bits” in sharp focus and DoF is going to be difficult.

wildlife photography, common Kestrel, photography technique,manual focus trap,trap focus

Do NOT think you can pull this wildlife shot off using TRAP FOCUS.

By the time the camera has detected the sharp focus and got over the system lock time and triggered the shutter, the bird will be way closer to the camera – and sharp focus in the resulting image will be behind the tail!

This shot is done with a manual focus trap – a completely different technique, as described HERE

The subject is too small and so to close to the camera and 500mm lens for trap focus to work effectively.

However, if you are doing sports photography for instance, you are imaging subjects that are much bigger and a lot further away.

A 500mm f4 on an FX body has over 2 meters depth of field at f5.6 when focused at 40 meters. Take a baseball match for instance – not that I’ve ever covered one mind!

Set the single AF sensor focus distance at home plate.

Then tilt the camera up slightly, or move the sensor with the Dpad so it can’t see/is not overlaying what you just focused on. Hold the shutter button down and wait for a player to make a dive for home plate. As he enters the area of the AF sensor the camera will fire continually if you’re in continuous shooting mode, and will only stop when the camera detects focus has been lost.

Works like a charm!

The key thing is that the depth of field generated by the focus distance makes trap focus work for you – at much shorter distances where depth of field is down to an inch or so if you’re lucky, then couple that with a fast subject approach speed, and trap focus will fall down as a reliable method.

If I’m doing studio flash work like this:

which is never often enough any more! – I sometimes find it useful to use trap focus because it can help doing hand held work under the lowish flash unit modelling lights when you want to make sure eyes are sharp.

Using Trap Focus in a sort of ‘bastardised’ manner can help you maintain sharp focus on models eyes whilst giving you freedom to move around, change composition, zoom etc. by controlling the sharpness of the image with the lens focus ring.

Like I said earlier, it’s a technique that can get you out of trouble every now and again, but up until today you hadn’t got recourse to it on the D4.

But you seriously need to understand the limitations of trap focus deployment before you rush out and use it – you could be very disappointed with the results, and it’ll be all your own fault for trying to bang a square peg through a round hole.

Become a patron from as little as $1 per month, and help me produce more free content.

Patrons gain access to a variety of FREE rewards, discounts and bonuses.

Andy Astburys' Photography Blog

A general photography blog

Category Archives: Nikon

Autofocus Drill-down

Long Lens Autofocus Considerations.

Canon 1Dx Sensor Noise

Many thanks to Reece Piper & Calumet UK, June Lown, and Chuck Westfall of Canon USA

Please consider supporting this blog.

Camera Calibration

Custom Camera Calibration

Speed Light Photography

Speed Light Photography – part 1

The ND Filter

Long Exposure & ND Filters

SENSOR TYPE

REALITY

It’s a Question of Time

Exposure Compensation

Exposure Compensation

Auto Focus Work Out

Auto Focus Work Out

Auto Focus Choices

How Dynamic Area AF Works

Auto Focus Senor Types – Cross and Linear (line).

The Back Button Auto Focus Option

Conclusion

Flash Output Power

Flash output power raises a lot of questions when you are trying to decide how to spend your money.

GUIDE No: = Distance x Aperture

Camera OEM Speedlights

Complications & Caveats

Inverse Square Law

Inverse Square Law, Lights & Distances

Reality

Conclusion

Flash Duration – How Fast Can We Go

Flash Duration & Subject Movement

Trap Focus

Trap Focus on the Nikon D4

Setup for D4 Trap Focus

Long Lens Autofocus Considerations.

Share this post:

Many thanks to Reece Piper & Calumet UK, June Lown, and Chuck Westfall of Canon USA

Please consider supporting this blog.

Share this post:

Custom Camera Calibration

Share this post:

Speed Light Photography – part 1

Share this post:

Long Exposure & ND Filters

SENSOR TYPE

REALITY

It’s a Question of Time

Share this post:

Exposure Compensation

Share this post:

Auto Focus Work Out

Auto Focus Choices

How Dynamic Area AF Works

Auto Focus Senor Types – Cross and Linear (line).

The Back Button Auto Focus Option

Conclusion

Share this post:

Flash output power raises a lot of questions when you are trying to decide how to spend your money.

GUIDE No: = Distance x Aperture

Camera OEM Speedlights

Complications & Caveats

Inverse Square Law

Inverse Square Law, Lights & Distances

Reality

Conclusion

Share this post:

Flash Duration & Subject Movement

Share this post:

Trap Focus on the Nikon D4

Setup for D4 Trap Focus

Share this post: