From: Allen on
Richard Polhill wrote:
> Rita Ä Berkowitz wrote:
>> dmac wrote:
>>
>>> As other's have said in the earlier thread, these 6¢ plastic wonder
>>> caps - first the "Sto-Fen" now the "Fong" all have one thing in
>>> common... The producers are out to make a big buck from those stupid
>>> enough or lazy enough to think this will cure their lighting problems.
>>
>> BRAVO! I'm glad another person out here understands this. What's really
>> perplexing is Bret uses a Fong and claims it has improved his
>> photography so
>> it has to be good.
>>
>
> Well I'm sure Bret's photography can be improved by it. He just has to
> put it over the lens.
Apparently, you mistakenly put one over your eyes.
Allen
From: Annika1980 on
On Jul 30, 6:02 am, Rita Ä Berkowitz <ritaberk2O04 @aol.com> wrote:
> dmac wrote:
> > As other's have said in the earlier thread, these 6¢ plastic wonder
> > caps - first the "Sto-Fen" now the "Fong" all have one thing in
> > common... The producers are out to make a big buck from those stupid
> > enough or lazy enough to think this will cure their lighting problems.
>
> BRAVO! I'm glad another person out here understands this. What's really
> perplexing is Bret uses a Fong and claims it has improved his photography so
> it has to be good.
>

I made no such claims. I said it gives excellent results, much better
in fact that bounce cards, alcohol bottles, tracing paper, and even
some other commercial diffusers. I've used all of those tricks and
more.
You, and the others who argue the point, claim to know differently
even though you've never used a LightSphere. Thus, your opinions are
suspect.

I have no financial interest in touting Gary Fong's product. I tout
it because it does what it says and I encourage anyone looking for a
lighting solution to try it. You rag on it only because I tout it,
not because you have any expert knowledge of the subject.

You are slowly sinking down into the loony Troll Hole with D-Mac.




From: Ben Miller on
On Jul 30, 5:01 am, Rita Ä Berkowitz <ritaberk2O04 @aol.com> wrote:
> Ben Miller wrote:
> >http://www.pbase.com/sigphotography/image/82704544(this room is about
> > 220' long, for reference)
>
> Not bad, but you lost intensity and even distribution of the light. This is
> the perfect situation for Larry Thong's LightBag! The LightBag would have
> evenly lit that room without hotspots or harsh shadows. And 220' is a spit
> in the bucket for the LightBag.

Riiiight. But really, that shot was just fine for the purpose at
hand. It wasn't a photo shoot, I only had one light, the SB800, and
save for one or two minor instances, the shadows aren't harsh at all.

From: Eric Miller on
>
> To be fair, Eric, your shot doesn't exactly scream out for large soft-
> box type lighting..! I'm not having a go at the shot - it's lovely
> and you have balanced the light very well. But it's not like she has
> complexion issues to hide, she is fully face on with an up-tilted
> button nose (so it's really just under her jaw that a shadow is
> obvious), and you obviously have nice soft indirect window light
> (bouncing off all those white walls!) - so it looks as if the flash
> contribution is not that great (which is backed up by the flash shadow
> not having an awful lot of contrast...
>

I have now posted one of the shots taken without flash for comparison.
The window isn't all that big, given the size of the room. I think the
difference is fairly noticeable. Same link:

http://www.dyesscreek.com/hidden_pages/diffuser.html

Eric Miller
www.dyesscreek.com
From: Matalog on
Cream colored business card and tape







"Eric Miller" <miller_nospam_eric(a)bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:ncbri.5240$RQ5.1813(a)bignews8.bellsouth.net...
> Having just wandered from the political thread, I thought I'd toss out a
> puzzle of sorts that might get back OT. Does the type of diffuser really
> matter? If you think so, then tell me what kind of diffuser was used in
> this photo? Heck, if you can't tell, just give your opinion as to whether
> you think it did a good or even adequate job.
>
> http://www.dyesscreek.com/hidden_pages/diffuser.html
>
> Here is some additional info:
>
> Camera Canon EOS 5D
> Lens Canon EF 85mm f/1.8 USM
> Aperture 1.8
> Shutter 200
> ISO 100
>
> Clues: The model, my daughter, is sitting on a bed in our upstairs
> bedroom. To her left, camera right, is an open window. The room has white
> walls, a low white ceiling and light carpeting. The room was a bit dark
> and it was cloudy today, so without flash her right side would have been
> in shadow. That was filled with a canon flash with a diffuser on it.
>
> If you need a hint, I'll narrow the choices:
>
> Gary Fong Lightsphere
> White Post-it note
> Larry Thong Light Bottle
> Lumiquest Pocket Bouncer
> Cream colored business card and tape
> Sto-Fen Omni-Bounce
>
> There you have it. No doubt the people who think the equipment matters
> will nail this one.
>
> Incidentally, this isn't being offered as an example of a good photo, but
> if you want to critique or flame me, go for it. I will post the answer
> later if anyone is interested.
>
> Eric Miller
> www.dyesscreek.com