New MF with fisheye and high flash sync.

[Lee J]

A focal plane flashbulb has a long high output that last many milliseconds. Couple this bulb using the X synchronization and the leaf shutter of a Hasselblad and you will have a very bright light source. IIRC it should be much brighter than the three strobes.

Many milliseconds would be too long. It isn't the power that's the problem - it's having enough power with a short enough duration. Either one on their own are easy to get, but both together = $$$

 

[Sirius Glass]

Many milliseconds would be too long. It isn't the power that's the problem - it's having enough power with a short enough duration. Either one on their own are easy to get, but both together = $$$

It is a bright source that will allow, with leaf shutters, continuous exposure from as slow as 1/30 second to 1/500 second.

Steve

 

[David A. Goldfarb]

1/500 s. is probably too slow for skate photography, if the desire is to stop action.

 

[Rob Skeoch]

I still think the hasselblad combo is the best solution.
I shot a few skateboarders with a fisheye the other day. LOL.
-rob

you can laugh at them here.....
http://www.flickr.com/photos/sportsphotorob/

 

[Lee J]

It is a bright source that will allow, with leaf shutters, continuous exposure from as slow as 1/30 second to 1/500 second.

Steve

Like David A. Goldfarb says above, 1/500 is too slow and this is the problem - we need at least 1/1000, from the lights, to be sure we're going to freeze action. The flashes (aperture) expose the subject, the shutter the ambient.

The image below is something I shot about 4 years ago with the Bronica SQ fisheye. As you can see from the skater's shadows on the board behind him I was using multiple flashes - 3 in fact. All Vivitar 285's. IIRC I had two at full power, and one at 1/2 power. If you look at the underside of his board it's clear that this isn't frozen as well as it could be, and there is obvious flash blur (from too slow a flash duration) on his front right side. I wouldn't say this destroys the shot, but it clearly demonstrates that Vivitar 285's are not fast enough, even when the local ambient is a stop or more underexposed.

Make sense?

 

[Sirius Glass]

Thank you, that is a great example of the environment. I underestimated the amount of relative motion in the very wide angle skate boarding environment. My idea was to dump as much light as possible on the scene. Sometimes there is no substitute for fast shutters or faster strobes.

Steve

 

[keithwms]

So, I don't know about this business of dumping a lot of flash light on the subject, it creates a look that I find rather unnatural looking (and yes, I do realize the irony of that statement, since we are talking about fisheye perspectives of people doing some rather gravity-defying stunts, but I simply prefer the look of shots that use ambient....)

Maybe a better option is simply to go to a smaller format. The mamiya 645 system has two fisheyes- one (the mamiya one) is exceedingly rare and probably ~$1000+ if you do find it, and then there is some non-Mamiya one that is so so, but hey, at least then you get fast shutter speeds and thus can go without flash in decent ambient light, or build up your ambient with some spotlights or whatever. Then there is 35mm... plenty of excellent and inexpensive offerings there and fast synch speeds if you need them, or fast shutter speeds if you want to go without flash.

I have an rb fisheye and I like it a lot for some things, but it never occurred to me even to try fast action with it. If I did do it, I think I'd go to a smaller format, or if MF then I'd go with a strobe, not a bunch of weak flashes. Bear in mind that people did very fast action photography loooong before there were high shutter speeds. There all kinds of inventive things one can do, including having a strobe triggered by the subject passing a certain plane or whatever. I think my nikon sb800 has that capability and command other flashes as well, though I haven't tried it yet, but I was pondering doing some LF hummingbirds and did conclude that it was quite possible.

 

[David A. Goldfarb]

Fast sync speed with a focal plane shutter isn't the answer either, because the way that usually works involves powering down the flash and firing it rapidly in sequence as the shutter slit travels across the film gate, so at high speed sync there isn't always enough flash to overpower daylight, and then you're still only as fast as the shutter at the maximum sync speed, which is usually longer than a short flash duration.

With a leaf shutter, the flash power is independent of the shutter speed, and with several flash heads at low power, you can get short flash duration and enough light to overpower daylight.

 

[keithwms]

Why would you want to overpower daylight? If you have a fast shutter speed and enough film speed to get the shot without flash?

 

[Lee J]

Why would you want to overpower daylight? If you have a fast shutter speed and enough film speed to get the shot without flash?

This is something I asked myself over two years ago and it led me to dump all my flashes and move to a 200 series 'blad. I only shoot natural light MF skate shots now.

Essentially it's done for the same reasons fill flash is used for any other shot - to get a nicely exposed subject with no harsh shadows. The second reason in skate photography is to make the subject stand out - a lot of shots will underexpose the ambient. The third reason is the skate photographers tend to be a bit sheep like, if someone does something interesting looking then eventually everyone tries it.

You're right though, it can look very unnatural. A lot of shots just look untidy with ugly shadows and such. There are some skate photographers that are masterful at using lights however, just check out some of Dead Link Removed, Dead Link Removed or Wig Dead Link Removed's shots. Wig was so good at it, that even when you thought he wasn't using lights there was a good chance he was.

 

[David A. Goldfarb]

And yet another reason is that, if you want medium format quality, then flash duration can often be faster than the fastest available medium format shutter speeds. Again, think of Lois Greenfield--even if she wanted to use reflectors and scrims outdoors on sunny days (which isn't the natural habitat of the dancers she photographs, but setting that aside for the moment), there isn't a medium format focal plane shutter fast enough.

 

[keithwms]

Well, I can get 1/4000 sec with my mamiya 645 afd... just sayin'

P.S. Interesting links, Lee! It'd be nice to see your natural light work too...

 

[Greg_E]

It's not a true 1/4000 is it? Isn't it still a traveling slit to get that fast? The fastest true speed on the Pro and Super is around 1/250 or maybe only 1/125, but the effective time can be made to be 1/1000 by reducing the size of the slit that passes across the film. I'd have to try that fast shutter with some fast moving objects going both left to right and right to left to see how it looked. Might get some really strange image compression as the subject moves and the slit moves.

 

[David A. Goldfarb]

Sync speed on the Mamiya 645 afd is 1/125 sec. While a focal plane shutter at high speed seems like it should stop action, when things really are moving fast, 1/4000 sec. distributed over 1/125 sec won't look as crisp as a 1/4000 sec. strobe burst.

One can see that with things moving a lot slower speeds with my 5x7" Press Graflex, which has a top shutter speed of 1/1500 sec distributed over the 1/5 sec it takes for the 1/8" slit to travel five inches.

 

[keithwms]

Well maybe I am deluding myself, but unless a lacrosse shot is appreciably slower than skateboard action....

1/2000 sec

 

[Lee J]

Sync speed on the Mamiya 645 afd is 1/125 sec. While a focal plane shutter at high speed seems like it should stop action, when things really are moving fast, 1/4000 sec. distributed over 1/125 sec won't look as crisp as a 1/4000 sec. strobe burst.

Interesting, I didn't know the 645 afd went up to 1/4000.

@keithwms: You can see some of my shots here: http://www.flickr.com/photos/etdm/ most of my shots are private though. All but 3 of the public shots are natural light only - and the shots using lights were in situations where it wouldn't have been possible to freeze action / achieve the same results without them.

 

[Q.G.]

Sync speed on the Mamiya 645 afd is 1/125 sec. While a focal plane shutter at high speed seems like it should stop action, when things really are moving fast, 1/4000 sec. distributed over 1/125 sec won't look as crisp as a 1/4000 sec. strobe burst.

It indeed will.
The only effect the longer slit travel time has is distorting the shape of moving objects.
But sharp, crisp, it will be.

The speed isn't "distributed".
A scene with (fast) moving bits will change during the 1/125 it takes the slit to traverse the film. And that you may see.
But every bit of the scene will have no more than 1/4000th of a second to leave its mark on film. The same as during a burst of flash of that duration. The 'motion stopping power' of both will be equal.

 

[Nick Zentena]

How fast do they move? My calculator makes 30km/h equal to 1 meter in 1/125 sec. 1 meter is hardly a slight difference.

 

[Q.G.]

That's fast!
1 m per 1/125 s = 125 m/s!
That's 450 km/h!

My calculator makes 30 km/h equate to 0.0666 m, i.e. about 7 cm, in 1/125 second.
(30,000 m / 3600 seconds = 8.3333 m/s
8.3333 m / 125 = 0.06666 m per 1/125 s.)

Still fast though.

 

[David A. Goldfarb]

I would say that motion distortion is part of what makes a photo look more or less sharp. It depends on whether the motion is with or against the motion of the shutter as well. Sharpness is a subjective phenomenon and is a whole gestalt, not attributable to any single factor. I don't think Lois Greenfield could get her characteristic look without a leaf shutter and powerful short duration strobes that convey the sense that every element in the frame is frozen at a single instant in time. Not everyone is after that look, and different subjects demand different treatment, but if you could photograph the same moving subject using two cameras, one with a high shutter speed and focal plane shutter using continuous lighting and the other with strobe at the same duration as the shutter speed and a leaf shutter, I think the two photographs would look different.

 

[keithwms]

Fellas, I am not seeing any appreciable distortion. What slight softness I see in that image is almost certainly from my crappy flatbed scan.... if there is intense interest then maybe I will get a proper scan done.

So, you might say that the motion of the ball and the kid is covering a small part of the frame and that's why I don't see it... he's about 20 paces away. But nevertheless I would assert that the crop is decent. Bear in mind this is with a 300mm lens, handheld, plane-jane 400 speed film on a normal day... no flashes, no strobes With a really wide lens I really doubt you will resolve motion distortion at all except under certain conditions, and anyway, this is skate photography we're talking about, distortion is everywhere in that genre so who cares! It's not like you're going to shoot a test chart painted on a moving formula one car or something.

Somebody send me a fisheye and I'll go find some skaters

P.S. the really inexpensive and nice mamiya 645 pro goes to 1/1000.

 

[Nick Zentena]

Oops. brain confused 1/8th with 1/125.

 

[drkhalsa]

photo incentives

This is something I asked myself over two years ago and it led me to dump all my flashes and move to a 200 series 'blad. I only shoot natural light MF skate shots now.

Essentially it's done for the same reasons fill flash is used for any other shot - to get a nicely exposed subject with no harsh shadows. The second reason in skate photography is to make the subject stand out - a lot of shots will underexpose the ambient. The third reason is the skate photographers tend to be a bit sheep like, if someone does something interesting looking then eventually everyone tries it.

You're right though, it can look very unnatural. A lot of shots just look untidy with ugly shadows and such.

My son is a professional skateboarder and in addition to getting paid a monthly salary by the skateboard and shoe companies, he gets paid photo incentives whenever the logos of the board, shoe or clothes are clearly visible in the photos which are published.

This may be one reason for using flash fill - to enhance the visibility of product logos for marketing purposes.

 

[Q.G.]

I would say that motion distortion is part of what makes a photo look more or less sharp.

I wouldn't.

You get the same sharpness in terms of motion blur and (un)resolved detail, no matter how the period the subject's image is projected on film is produced. 1/4000 is 1/4000 no matter wehther focal plane shutter, central shutter, or strobe burst length.

The writing underneath the board will be equally blurry, no matter what method.
The board and skater may be bend a bit by a focal plane shutter, but that really is another matter.
If the concern is about achieving speeds to stop motion, strong enough ambient light and a fast focal plane shutter is just as good as a short flash burst in total darkness.

 

[Lee J]

My son is a professional skateboarder and in addition to getting paid a monthly salary by the skateboard and shoe companies, he gets paid photo incentives whenever the logos of the board, shoe or clothes are clearly visible in the photos which are published.

This may be one reason for using flash fill - to enhance the visibility of product logos for marketing purposes.

Yeah, that can be a big reason if you want to get a photo run as an ad by a specific brand. Sometimes it can work against you (saying that, photoshop probably more than solves this problem).

@Q.G. This is a thing (problem) we've been discussing in skate photo forums for a few years now. The majority of skate photographers are always at odds with what they want - a really sharp shot, but they want to use flashes in bright daylight. A product has been released recently that allows you to "push" the x-sync by anything up to a full stop (depending on the camera model: think digital crop sensor bodies) - obviously there was a lot of interest in this. There's a lot of detail on it here if you're interested in it.

I'd say this topic has well and truly gone off at a tangent to the OG poster's question.