Any way to avoid red-eye whilst using direct flash?

Hey all,

Shot a fashion show tonight, and the place wasn't really ideal for photography. Using a sigma 70-200 I stood at the back of the room (an attempt to blow out the background a bit more).

Couldn't really get too close to the stage as I'd be kneeling (which gets sore after a little while) or I'd be in the videographer's footage (and I'd also be shooting upwards, which isn't the most appealing for people).


I was too far away and the ceiling was too high for bounce flash to be of any benefit to me, so I had to shoot direct flash. I hate the shadows caused by direct flash, but there's nothing I can really do about that.

However, I was wondering if there is a fix for red-eye? I have a lot of photos with red-eye in it, and whilst i go looking to see if theres a program out there that can automatically remove it, i'm looking to see if there's a way of avoiding it in the first place?


I know that highering the flash head away from the lens can work, but i'm unsure of a way of doing that.

I've two more fashion shows to do (1st and 4th of November), both are in different venues, so I would hope that i'll get away with bouncing sooner or later, but presuming I'll end up shooting direct again (which has it's upsides anyway, as it evenly exposes the whole person, which is good for showing off clothes and stuff), I was wondering if anyone knows of a practical fix to this problem?


(also if anyone knows of a decent program that'll automatically remove red-eye for free, please to feel free to let me know!)


Cheers

colblimp

Get yourself a Sto-Fen Diffuser, point the flash vertically and you're away. No red eye, no shadows - perfick!

Did you even read it?

oshead

Take the flash off camera and on to a light stand. Then trigger it remotely.

PCPhoto

Red Eye is mainly caused by the angle of reflection/refraction (Cant remember which)....reflection (I googled it)

anyway - its got to do with the angle of light reflecting back from the retina (back of the eye) .... so there are several methods to stop or reduce the risk.

As oshea says - off camera flash (remote flash) - this allows you get get the benefits of flash with less risk of redeye because the angle of light entering the eye has changed.

another method would be to use a pre-flash (most commonly on compact cameras) - this causes the iris to contract and so letting less light into the retina when the photo is taken (second flash).

another method ... reduce the power output of the flash (this is risky and would need a lot of calculations as some of the images may be under/overexposed because of the clothing worn) ...really only used if you know and understand flash outputs....difficult to master in such a short time.

or diffuse the flash (Stofen diffuser or piece of milk bottle or the diffuser which is part of the flash) - this lowers the output of the flash even when shooting on TTL (softens the light so less chance of it reflecting back out)

you could also try shooting without flash (I'm guessing that the lighting is very poor because its something I would say you thought of already)

if you want to borrow an ST-E2 and flash or two let me know....I don't have pocket wizards.

colblimp

Deleted User wrote: »

Did you even read it?

Er, yes, I did read it! :rolleyes:

pixbyjohn

Picassa is free and will remove red eye nicely.

pixbyjohn

Does your 7D support wireless flash with the flashgun you are using ? That will be your easiest answer for off camera flash. Check your manual to see if your camera can trigger a remote flash.

kfish2oo2

pixbyjohn wrote: »

Does your 7D support wireless flash with the flashgun you are using ? That will be your easiest answer for off camera flash. Check your manual to see if your camera can trigger a remote flash.

As far as I can tell, the 7D can trigger remote flashes with the on-board flash in the UP position. I'm not sure if that means it triggers the other flashes with a pulse or if there's IR somewhere in the pop-up mechanism. Regardless, yes the 7D can indeed trigger remote flashes. The 430EX and 580EXII can be used as slaves, IIRC.

colblimp

colblimp wrote: »

Er, yes, I did read it! :rolleyes:

Well as I say, I can't bounce. It's not effective.

oshead wrote: »

Take the flash off camera and on to a light stand. Then trigger it remotely.

Honestly, that is what i really want to do, but I don't know if a lightstand is a realistic idea for these events. People walking around the place and getting up during the break and such, surely someone will eventually knock it over and either hurt themselves or cost me the price of a flashgun?

I was thinking I could position myself against the back wall, facing the catwalk with a 70-200, and have the stand right behind me (essentially pinned between me and the wall) with the flash raised up firing over my head?

PCPhoto wrote: »

another method would be to use a pre-flash (most commonly on compact cameras) - this causes the iris to contract and so letting less light into the retina when the photo is taken (second flash).

another method ... reduce the power output of the flash (this is risky and would need a lot of calculations as some of the images may be under/overexposed because of the clothing worn) ...really only used if you know and understand flash outputs....difficult to master in such a short time.

or diffuse the flash (Stofen diffuser or piece of milk bottle or the diffuser which is part of the flash) - this lowers the output of the flash even when shooting on TTL (softens the light so less chance of it reflecting back out)

you could also try shooting without flash (I'm guessing that the lighting is very poor because its something I would say you thought of already)

if you want to borrow an ST-E2 and flash or two let me know....I don't have pocket wizards.

I have a diffuser, but I got red eye with it when I was using it, so I decided to not bother using it (with direct flash, all a diffuser really does is lessen the power, really, in my experience?).

Can't really afford to adjust the flash power too low either, or my ISO starts to jump way up again. I also don't think my flashgun has pre-flash options (Metz 48 AF-1).


Shooting without the flash leaves me hitting or going over ISO 3200 so It's something Id like to avoid.



Honestly, the light stand with a wirelessly triggered flash (I have Yongnuo triggers, which work a treat) is the best idea, but i just don't know if it's practical, is the problem :o


Cheers for everyone's replies, by the way.

nager

A couple of bungee cords and strap the flash up high - then remote trigger it - should work fine.

Corkbah

why not hire out or get the organisers to hire out decent lights ...or spots ....so you will have adequate light to do the job they are paying you to do.

Nager, I think that'd be too complicated and realistically unworkable. Corkbah, they're charity events.

PCPhoto

the option of borrowing an ST-E2 and some 580EX flashes is still there - just gaffer tape the flashes to the catwalk and ensure line of sight for the sensor and away you go - you expose perfectly.

alternatively .... whack the ISO way up and hope for the best (forgot to throw that option out ... but you had mentioned it - I think.)

Not sure how you'd stick the flash to the catwalk in a usable way? (they'd have to be at the models feet?)

I have three flashguns and wireless triggers, PC, so it's not a shortage of gear that's throwing me, it's just the awkward set up. (I don't like having high ISOs if i can avoid it). ISO3200 I think was necessary last time with a low power direct flash, but i think 3200 is just too high for people

PCPhoto

gaffer tape is usually strong enough to hold a flash in place on a runway.

runways are usually wide enough to have a flash taped to the side or even sitting/resting on the side (but if its not taped down the vibrations may cause it to change position/fall over)

I see what you're saying, PC, but Im just unsure how you're picturing these flashguns being taped town? Are they being taped lying on their back, on the stage? Firing upwards into the air? or are they on a shoe-mount thingy to keep them standing, and then the head tilted upward a bit to fire at the model (from both sides, i presume?).


I just can't picture in my head how you'd actually do it?


Tonight's fashion show was a massive improvement over the other one, with room for a lightstand and such, and a proper stage/lighting/etc. so the photos (should be) a good bit better than the last ones. I'll post up a sample or two when I get a chance to look at them.


Back in a hotel again for a fashion show on Friday, so i reckon i'll be back to my original problems, again.

The Snipe

Invest in a monopod I've shot on before in similar conditions using a 7D 70-200 2.8 too, and the monopod really helped!

Not sure how that'll help with red-eye, but it's actually something i have been looking into. Can you recommend a particular monopod by any chance Xiled?

PCPhoto

depending on how many flashes you want to use and positions which you want to shoot.

if you are at the end of the runway (possibly back 10-12feet from the actual end ..or whatever distance)

you have a line of sight to the flashes which are positioned on the runway (attached to the side of the runway if there is limited space - sensor pointing towards you and flash output angled diagonally upwards)

if you have loads of flashes you could line them along the runway and have them on different channels.

in an ideal world you use two flashes positioned in a "V" from the model - at the point which you wish to photograph her/him, if you have extra flashes you could put a further one or two behind the model to make an "X"

essentially it means you only have one point/area to get your shot ..if a flash fails or someone walks/blocks the line of sight for the flashes (I almost forgot you have radio triggers) .... anyway - thats what I was imagining when I wrote the earlier posts.

EDIT: The more flashes positioned along the runway the more opportunities you have to get different images (ie. walking/posing turning etc)....but ideally not all on the same channel.

Ah, PC, I see what you mean now, alright (Sorry for the late reply, by the way).

I never thought of that that way you have it set up in your head. Would flash blinding the models be of any issue there (I'd assume not as the flash power would be set lower as it'd be closer? Thus; you'd actually be better off doing it like that?)


I'm finished my fashion shows now (unless anything else appears on the horizon that looks interesting). The first one was pretty poorly lit, the second one was great, but I was a fair distance from the stage (though I'm still happiest with the photos from the second one) and the third one was lit up decently enough, but whatever kinda bulbs the lighting guy used, changed dramatically from the front of the catwalk to the back of it, so the colour temerature's were all over the place (and whatever bulbs he used to light the end of the catwalk completely blew out all detail in skin and clothing). Very strange set up.

It also meant that the colour temperature changed massively as the models progressed along the stage (cool blue at the back of the stage, overly warm/yellow at the front of the stage). AWB could'nt figure it out, and even using my own flashgun, the colour tint of the lights was still prevalent.

Awfully annoying, actualy, as i had to delete about half a dozen photos that I thought were really, really good (girls sometimes pulled a pose at the end of the catwalk and looked at me, and the results of which were great, and I shot away hoping for the best, but the lighting was just too bad, so they had to go).

Video guy wasn't impressed, either (and I'd say he had it a lot worse than I did!).


Here are my efforts anyway, if anyone cares. Some are a little darker than I'd have liked (and the above issues mentioned about the third show);

1.Tesco charity fashion show in the Bracken Court Hotel in Balbriggan;

http://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.233088416752694.58349.122674161127454&type=1


2. Tesco charity fashion show in the TLT in Drogheda;

http://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.236091213119081.59127.122674161127454&type=1


3. St. Mary's Drumcar "Buy A Bus" fashion show in the Westcourt Hotel in Drogheda;

http://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.237461796315356.59445.122674161127454&type=1


All in all, a great learning experience, though, and I'm pleased with how I fared out in the end (and I've gotten good feedback from other people, too, so.. all in all I suppose I can't complain).

Would really like to try out that gaffer tape/flash idea though.

The Snipe

The reason I recommend a monopod, is the same reason I use one, You can hold it and slower speeds so you wont need to use a flash Also Shoot RAW You should know that by now Shane! :P

XiledSniper

XiledSniper wrote: »

The reason I recommend a monopod, is the same reason I use one, You can hold it and slower speeds so you wont need to use a flash Also Shoot RAW You should know that by now Shane! :P

I'd like to see you manually editing almost a thousand RAW files in the space of a week!

I only use RAW for things where I reckon I'll want to sit down with each photo individually (portraiture, or landscape for example, or jobs when I'm being paid).

Fashion shows don't get much editing and most of it is batch-processing, as I have to turn them around and get them online as quickly as I can (so far I've gotten everything up within 16 hours of the shows, though this required pulling an all-nighter and sitting at the PC for hours on end, straightening, cropping, etc.)


So yeah. No RAW for me, thank you very much!


What monopod are you using, by the way?


(Edit: I'd have had to have used flash anyway, even if I had got slower shutter speeds. The people were moving at a decent pace up and down the walkway, so...)

The Snipe

I do! :P I shoot everything in RAW, if I do an event I can take about 1200 photos at most (This is a real stretch only ever done this twice!) I normally shoot about 300-600 per shoot; and I'll go through them all. But thats the glories of Lightroom 3

I don't know exactly, Its a Manfratto one for sure anyway :P I'll check it out for you, A mate of mine has it at the moment.

Oh, I despise Lightroom. Tried to install it twice on my PC and both times it tried to catalogue every image on my PC into it's own little in-program library, which annoyed the life out of me, so i uninstalled.

Now everything is just Adobe Camera Raw and PS CS5.

I usually get my exposure fairly okay for what I'm aiming for. When im out doing general stuff, I only really ever use the RAW files for adjusting the white balance if i don't like it, or a bit of recovery/fill light if i'm met with a bit of an awkward exposure situation.

Out from that I don't use RAWs really, to be honest. (though I generally agree that a shot brought into Camera RAW, sharpened and saved as a JPeg, does usually look better than the out-of-camera JPeg anyway (and is usually a smaller file size, too!).

7.62 rule

XiledSniper wrote: »

Invest in a monopod I've shot on before in similar conditions using a 7D 70-200 2.8 too, and the monopod really helped!

That sounds like a great idea, handier than a full tripod.:)

7.62 rule

what i used to do when taking pictures at a distance during fashion walks or weddings, was to use a hammer head Metz for distance pictures, or slower speeds and a tripod, the natural light pictures where possible the best. Hammer head flashguns dont get rid of all red eye, but I remember getting far less of it. Dark rooms are a demon for red eye.

Cheers:)

The Snipe

Also, if you use two monopods, you can handly your camera with just one; and use the other as a very long 'arm' of sorts if you put your flash on it :P Wouldn't be practical for most shots but for some if you want! :P

Also, I seem to remember my LR3 trying to do that once, but I just cancled and import the ones I want as I go along - and it saves me so much time! Only really use PS for those more 'artistic' ones instead of those 'every day' ones of events etc.