Idea for shooting dance floor

joshhuntnm · June 18, 2008

I had an idea for shooting the dance last night . . . wanted to see what ya'll thought.

what if you set up four strobes (I am thinking 430s as I already have two. But, maybe there would be a better way.) Put them on the top of light stands, as high as they will go, pointed straight up. just looking at pics shot with the flash against the ceiling, it looks like one lights a pretty big area. It seems if you had four, it would pretty well light the whole room. I think they are high enough (around 8 feet) so you wouldn't see the flash itself.

is this an idea, or no?

Scott_Quier · June 18, 2008

Could work. Could also result in raccoon-eyes. And, it would be require that the ceiling be light colored to avoid most of the light being absorbed.

This is something very much worth experimenting with. I think I would see what you get with your current flashes before investing in more. See if the quality of the light is what you are looking for.

joshhuntnm · June 18, 2008

I am shooting a class reunion this weekend; may give it a shot. with two (three counting the 580 on the camera) flashes.

If this works, is a regular flash the way to go?

Scott_Quier · June 18, 2008

Lots of people do lots of great work with the Speedlights. There's plenty of power there, but you pay for it with recycle times and battery drain. Of course, the more of them you use, the lower the power expenditure on each flash will be, thus your recycle times will be better.

But, that's just an intellectual approach to the problem. Nothing settles the matter better than actually doing it. I would really, really test for recycle times. Oh, and remember, during most dancing (especially at receptions) the ambient light is usually less than stellar. Lower ambient means that more light will be required of the flash(es). So, do your testing in an environment that closely matches what you expect to find on the dance floor.

Noelimages · June 18, 2008

My fear with light stands is getting knocked over. Drinkin and Dancin don't mix with expensive photography equipment.

joshhuntnm · June 18, 2008

Noelimages wrote:

My fear with light stands is getting knocked over. Drinkin and Dancin don't mix with expensive photography equipment.

I had thought about that. I had in mind to put them on the side of the dance floor--maybe against a table. Def. a consideration.

Scott_Quier · June 18, 2008

Lightstands need to be in the corners of the rooms and/or against walls. Anywhere even close to the action is just asking for trouble. You may already have liability insurance, but, really, who wants to have to use it - it just sours the experience for everyone.

jbakerphoto · June 18, 2008

I saw it done at a wedding about a month ago. Except they used just two strobes on probaly 10-13 ft lightstands in between the DJ and one on the camera with a whale tail controling them. There pictures turned out pretty good. It was very dark in the room. I did see some racoon eyes but I cant tell you for sure if they were ones with just the whale tail or ones with the two strobes bounced off the ceiling and whaletail.....Something to look into anyway....

Nikolai · June 18, 2008

Josh,
this really depends on how big the dancing floor is, what is the celing situation is and what is the ambient light is set. More often than not the last two suck (no ambient light, no ceiling/high ceiling/dark ceiling), so you will simply waste a lot of power trying to get any reflection at all.
Besides, if the light is low and you somehow still fill the room with your strobes, the pictures will look very strange to the future audience. They would remember tha room was dark, yet your pictures would show them as dancing on the street during the high noon.
I would like to repeat the mantra I found in wonderful Joe McNally's book The Moment It Clicks: "To make your subject look interesting you don't have to light it all". Be selective. Use the spotlight effect. Use the high ISO capability of your camera to lower flash power just enough to get a 1/2..1 stop advantage over the rest of the scene. Use the snoot/grid if you must to highlight only one couple at a time.
Just my 0.0002 of the f/stop...

Swartzy · June 18, 2008

My 2 cents (won't buy gas that's for sure).....Selective lighting is KEY...lighting up a whole room looks....well, like a lit up room on "green mode". Light on a stick, a favorite concept used by many event photogs is great for the selective look, especially when there is nothing to really bounce off. Personally, my primary source of light is ON Camera...the reason being is I'm portable.....moving all over the place...up high, down low, landscape, portrait, wide, narrow..you name it....trying to get the light in the right place is at times crazy with light stands and additional strobes. It is very helpful to have a ETTL cord at times as well.

The biggest element of doing this properly is understanding how to get the ambient "mixed" with the flash and where to get the flash to look where it comes from. I have numerous examples that look like the flash was off to the left or right when in reality, was on board...I simply use different techniques. Take a look at Neil's site: http://planetneil.com/tangents/flash-photography-techniques/3-dragging-the-shutter/

He's one of my favorites....moreso than Strobist because he's dealing directly with the challenges of weddings/receptions. It's amazing what you can do with one light.....but it does take lots and lots of practice.

I only share this photo as an example. I was 15 feet away...I bounced it off the wall to "his" right (camera left)....across the room with a bounce card attached.....look where the light is coming from..is it on camera or off?

Scott_Quier · June 18, 2008

Swartzy wrote:

My 2 cents (won't buy gas that's for sure).....Selective lighting is KEY...lighting up a whole room looks....well, like a lit up room on "green mode". Light on a stick, a favorite concept used by many event photogs is great for the selective look, especially when there is nothing to really bounce off. Personally, my primary source of light is ON Camera...the reason being is I'm portable.....moving all over the place...up high, down low, landscape, portrait, wide, narrow..you name it....trying to get the light in the right place is at times crazy with light stands and additional strobes. It is very helpful to have a ETTL cord at times as well.

The biggest element of doing this properly is understanding how to get the ambient "mixed" with the flash and where to get the flash to look where it comes from. I have numerous examples that look like the flash was off to the left or right when in reality, was on board...I simply use different techniques. Take a look at Neil's site: http://planetneil.com/tangents/flash-photography-techniques/3-dragging-the-shutter/

He's one of my favorites....moreso than Strobist because he's dealing directly with the challenges of weddings/receptions. It's amazing what you can do with one light.....but it does take lots and lots of practice.

I only share this photo as an example. I was 15 feet away...I bounced it off the wall to "his" right (camera left)....across the room with a bounce card attached.....look where the light is coming from..is it on camera or off?

That's a thought I'm going to have to pursue in more depth. Thanks for the hint!

joshhuntnm · June 18, 2008

Swartzy wrote:

My 2 cents (won't buy gas that's for sure).....Selective lighting is KEY...lighting up a whole room looks....well, like a lit up room on "green mode". Light on a stick, a favorite concept used by many event photogs is great for the selective look, especially when there is nothing to really bounce off. Personally, my primary source of light is ON Camera...the reason being is I'm portable.....moving all over the place...up high, down low, landscape, portrait, wide, narrow..you name it....trying to get the light in the right place is at times crazy with light stands and additional strobes. It is very helpful to have a ETTL cord at times as well.

The biggest element of doing this properly is understanding how to get the ambient "mixed" with the flash and where to get the flash to look where it comes from. I have numerous examples that look like the flash was off to the left or right when in reality, was on board...I simply use different techniques. Take a look at Neil's site: http://planetneil.com/tangents/flash-photography-techniques/3-dragging-the-shutter/

He's one of my favorites....moreso than Strobist because he's dealing directly with the challenges of weddings/receptions. It's amazing what you can do with one light.....but it does take lots and lots of practice.

I only share this photo as an example. I was 15 feet away...I bounced it off the wall to "his" right (camera left)....across the room with a bounce card attached.....look where the light is coming from..is it on camera or off?

that lighting is perfect!

pathfinder · June 18, 2008

Josh,

4 430 exs can be set up as two groups or two flashes each - A and B, and controlled by an ST-E2, with the ability to vary the lighting ratio between group A and B. Thus, you have some control over which side is the highlight, and which is the fill light. Shooting the camera in Manual Mode, with the flashes in ETTL will allow you to control ambient vs flash as well.

As stated earlier, you will need a white ceiling for this to really work and a room not much larger than 30 feet on a side.

Shay described using two strobes in Manual, one for main and one for fill, fired by Pocket Wizards as an alternative, where the room is too large for an IR trigger like the ST-E2.

jeffreaux2 · June 18, 2008

I used the "light on a stick" method several weeks ago at a wedding in a very dark venue that had no place to bounce light from. I was pleased with the results. More than pleased actually. I used a single 580 fired by an STE2. The flash was on my extended mono pod. I held the pod with my left hand, and propped it off my hip to get nice sidelighting. The camera was held and fired with my right hand. My monopod has some feet that can be used for self support. I used those on some of the shots to get the light even farther away. The photos would have looked very HO HUM had I used the flash on camera. Also, lighting the whole room with flash would have ruined the atmosphere IMO.

Samples...

Nikolai · June 18, 2008

jeffreaux2 wrote:

I used the "light on a stick" method several weeks ago at a wedding in a very dark venue that had no place to bounce light from. I was pleased with the results. More than pleased actually. I used a single 580 fired by an STE2. The flash was on my extended mono pod. I held the pod with my left hand, and propped it off my hip to get nice sidelighting. The camera was held and fired with my right hand. My monopod has some feet that can be used for self support. I used those on some of the shots to get the light even farther away. The photos would have looked very HO HUM had I used the flash on camera. Also, lighting the whole room with flash would have ruined the atmosphere IMO.

Awesome stuff, Jeff, and a very nice technique indeed!

Question: did you use plain ETTL in P mode, or you were exposing for the ambient (in A or M) and then let ETTL do its thing for the forground subject? TIA!

jeffreaux2 · June 18, 2008

Nikolai wrote:

Awesome stuff, Jeff, and a very nice technique indeed!

Question: did you use plain ETTL in P mode, or you were exposing for the ambient (in A or M) and then let ETTL do its thing for the forground subject? TIA!

I shot with camera in M. This makes more sense when the lighting conditions will be more or less constant as they were. My shutter speed was 1/80....the slowest I trust myself handholding. Of course with flash being the primay ight source it would be tough to get a blurry subject, but this speed keeps the places in the room lit by exsisting light fairly blur free. Aperture 3.2....you would think a shallow DOF, but at 17-55mm, most of the range will hold a fairly deep DOF. ISO was 800. It was so dark, that I would still have needed flash to reach proper exposure even at 1600...so I made the decision to stay at 800 and keep the images realatively noise free. The flash was fired with the STE2 and was set in ETTL mode. Easy as pie. At those settings without flash, the photos would have been completely unusable, but with the exeption of using ISO 1600, I am letting in as much ambient light as possible..while shooting at speeds and apertures that should keep my "keeper" ratio high. I did toss a few photos, but most of those were shots that were under exposed due to me not waiting long enough for the flash to recycle..and had been shot in continuos burst mode.

It is worth noting, that I spent considerable time at the rehearsal shooting targets under the various existing light sources until I stumbled on the one that seemed most dominant for a WB setting. I then topped the flash with a CTO gel to match, and a Gary Fong lightsphere "cloud" with the lid removed. Removing the lid allows a good bit of light to spill from the end, and light the walls or ceiling (as in these examples) behind the subject. The flash itself was located only a few feet at most from the subject in each of these except the bouqet toss. On that one, someone held the monopod for me as I lay on the floor. It was 8 feet or so to my right.

I wasn't happy about having to rely on flash as the primary light source for the entire event, but as I said....I was VERY happy with the results. I definately will not abandon this technique! Using a stabilized lens probably upped my chances for success....and I am not at all sure that I could have pulled off this technique for the whole shoot with a heavier/ larger camera like the 40D. A hand strap would have definately helped!

Nikolai · June 18, 2008

Jeff,
thank you very much for the detailed writetup! Much appreciated!

beetle8 · June 18, 2008

Nikolai wrote:

I would like to repeat the mantra I found in wonderful Joe McNally's book The Moment It Clicks: .

What a great book!

joshhuntnm · June 18, 2008

nice shots. thanks for sharing the how-to

I guess the monopod just keeps your arm from getting tired? You could just and hold the flash? (except you said some the monopod has feet)

Scott_Quier · June 19, 2008

joshhuntnm wrote:

nice shots. thanks for sharing the how-to

I guess the monopod just keeps your arm from getting tired? You could just and hold the flash? (except you said some the monopod has feet)

And, I would guess, you could get the light higher with the mono-pod in those instances when you wanted it up there a bit more.

jeffreaux2 · June 19, 2008

Scott_Quier wrote:

And, I would guess, you could get the light higher with the mono-pod in those instances when you wanted it up there a bit more.

The last example shows what would be impossible side lighting if hand holding your own flash. The extended pod lets you reach WAY around and put light pretty much wherever you want.

joshhuntnm · June 19, 2008

jeffreaux2 wrote:

The last example shows what would be impossible side lighting if hand holding your own flash. The extended pod lets you reach WAY around and put light pretty much wherever you want.

Thanks for pointing that out. Some of us a a little sloooooooooooow on the uptake. That is why I ask clarifying question. I am smart enough to know I am not very smart!

Davidoff · June 19, 2008

joshhuntnm wrote:

Thanks for pointing that out. Some of us a a little sloooooooooooow on the uptake. That is why I ask clarifying question. I am smart enough to know I am not very smart!

I think you have a lot of options. Particularly with a 580 and 3 480's. How is the venue ? Can you go there before the actual reunion ? What I'd try is this, if there's a white ceiling:
580 on camera with a bounce card or something, pointing up and the 3 flashes pointing to the ceiling. Beware of your exposure, because you want to avoid that " dancing in the daylight " look, the ambient should be less exposed than the actual people in the foreground, that's where the bounce card on camera helps, the flashes bouncing on the ceiling are just to help you keep a low iso and high shutter while keeping a nice ambient.

If there isn't a white ceiling:
2.8 zoom, or faster prime, iso 1600. The 580 is on camera to trigger the 480's, no bounce card, pointing up. Then, you could point the 480's directly at the dance floor, but a bit higher up. This way you'll get a directional light, ambient because of the high iso and large apperture, and often backlit portraits but that have some direct light lighting the face as well.

What do you think ? Makes sense ?

joshhuntnm · June 19, 2008

Davidoff wrote:

Beware of your exposure, because you want to avoid that " dancing in the daylight " look, the ambient should be less exposed than the actual people in the foreground, that's where the bounce card on camera helps, the flashes bouncing on the ceiling are just to help you keep a low iso and high shutter while keeping a nice ambient.

What do you think ? Makes sense ?

I think so. I had to read a little slow. you want the people brighter than everything else, right? (but not too much brighter lest we have the other problem--dancing in a cave.)

Good news about this event this weekend is we are really there to take portraits; the dance floor deal is just kind of thrown in so I plan to do LOTS of expermenting.

Davidoff · June 19, 2008

joshhuntnm wrote:

I think so. I had to read a little slow. you want the people brighter than everything else, right? (but not too much brighter lest we have the other problem--dancing in a cave.)

Good news about this event this weekend is we are really there to take portraits; the dance floor deal is just kind of thrown in so I plan to do LOTS of expermenting.

That's the gist of it. Keep in mind I've never actually tried this, so, have a backup plan. If you don't like the harsh light you can always set up a couple umbrellas :ivar

Nikolai · June 19, 2008

Davidoff wrote:

That's the gist of it. Keep in mind I've never actually tried this, so, have a backup plan. If you don't like the harsh light you can always set up a couple umbrellas :ivar

Unless used at a fairly close distance (up to 10-15 ft or so) umbrellas and other small diffusers/modifiers do nothing but eat half or more of your lumens

pathfinder · June 19, 2008

Jeffused a Fong diffuser for his flash on a stick. That was kind of glossed over, but I think is a very important thing to remember. Bare flash on a stick would definitely not look as nice. Much harsher shadows than he had.

joshhuntnm · June 19, 2008

pathfinder wrote:

Jeffused a Fong diffuser for his flash on a stick. That was kind of glossed over, but I think is a very important thing to remember. Bare flash on a stick would definitely not look as nice. Much harsher shadows than he had.

oh, yeah, thanks. i had missed that. success in photography, like most things, is all about the details.

jeffreaux2 · June 20, 2008

pathfinder wrote:

Jeffused a Fong diffuser for his flash on a stick. That was kind of glossed over, but I think is a very important thing to remember. Bare flash on a stick would definitely not look as nice. Much harsher shadows than he had.

Well....more than that really...

That particular diffuser is different than many. I chose it because I like the bare bulb style of the 1960's...and it mimics that pretty well. The design of it, though, allows me to do something else that is interesting here. THe flash head and diffuser are aimed straight up along the axis of the monopod. The lid removed from the diffuser. Now, when I hold out the monopod at an angle that is somewhere between horizontal and vertical...and move the side of the diffuser to within....3 feet or so...from my subject and snap the shutter I get two things. I get the soft bare bulb effect I like....plus I get a blast of light from the end of the diffuser that is playing out somewhere behind my subject.

This is not to say that a similar look cannot be achieved without this particular diffuser, only to point out what I experienced.

Swartzy · June 20, 2008

Ha! Learn something new everyday.....Thanks a million Jeff! Gonna remodify my diffuser and goof around some more...I love the light you're capturing....especially the ambient in the background..way to be!

Davidoff · June 20, 2008

jeffreaux2 wrote:

Well....more than that really...

That particular diffuser is different than many. I chose it because I like the bare bulb style of the 1960's...and it mimics that pretty well. The design of it, though, allows me to do something else that is interesting here. THe flash head and diffuser are aimed straight up along the axis of the monopod. The lid removed from the diffuser. Now, when I hold out the monopod at an angle that is somewhere between horizontal and vertical...and move the side of the diffuser to within....3 feet or so...from my subject and snap the shutter I get two things. I get the soft bare bulb effect I like....plus I get a blast of light from the end of the diffuser that is playing out somewhere behind my subject.

This is not to say that a similar look cannot be achieved without this particular diffuser, only to point out what I experienced.

Could you post a picture of that actual flash on a stick set-up ?

Idea for shooting dance floor

Comments