What's with the idiots who use their flashes in big open areas?

[Aharami]

iSpider

 

[Sqube]

Originally posted by: Aharami
iSpider

uFailure.

That said, I think that a lot of people don't know that having the flash go on in that situation will make your pictures come out *****. If anything, I wouldn't use the flash because I wouldn't think the flash would have a measurable effect on something that far away.

Would that make me right by broken clock syndrome?

 

[ViviTheMage]

they are trying to combine there flashes to produce one enormous flash to blind the batter!!

 

[DrPizza]

This almost belongs in digital video and cameras, but I'm going to pretend that forum is only for digital cameras and make believe that everyone at baseball games has those $4.99 disposable cameras where you really don't have a choice if it flashes or not.

 

[OutHouse]

Originally posted by: Lalakai
with the right camera and equipment, you can take flash shots from a long ways away; you just have to know to juggle the settings to compensate. I agree though with an earlier statement where the person pointed out that most of the people taking the pictures, use their cameras on auto, and the camera will use the flash, resulting in a picture that is basically worthless as the subject was too far away to benefit from the flash.

if you do it right, you can take some extremely interesting pictures using flashes, and different types of flash (strobe, slaved, ect.).

not true. most digital camera flashes have a range of 20-25 feet.

i have a detachable honeywell flash for my 35mm that has a range of 60-70 feet.

 

[Demon-Xanth]

With a lot of the digital cameras I've used, if you turn off the flash, it ramps up the exposure time to something much larger that results in a blurry image unless the camera and what you're taking a picture of are perfectly still. Leave the flash on and everything works.

 

[mugs]

Originally posted by: foghorn67
Or you want to meter for what is on the infield, and fill flash the rest. Don't mock what you don't understand.

If he was talking about some other situation, I would have said the same thing. But you know that the vast majority of the people taking pictures at a baseball game have no idea what you're talking about, and most of them just want to get the action on the field, not whatever surrounds them in the stands (if it's even in the frame).

 

[Sinsear]

Originally posted by: Syringer


I must admit though, it's a nice effect when tons of flashes go off consecutively..

It is pretty cool. I was at Yankee Stadium the night before Arod hit 500. Every pitch was like a festival of flashes. Was pretty neat looking IMO.

 

[Syringer]

Originally posted by: Demon-Xanth
With a lot of the digital cameras I've used, if you turn off the flash, it ramps up the exposure time to something much larger that results in a blurry image unless the camera and what you're taking a picture of are perfectly still. Leave the flash on and everything works.

It's much better to risk a blurry image in hopes of getting a good clear image than to ALWAYS having a bad, dark image.

 

[Eos]

Originally posted by: Turin39789

Originally posted by: foghorn67
Or you want to meter for what is on the infield, and fill flash the rest. Don't mock what you don't understand.

I think he's talking about those moments at major sporting events when the entire audience is flashing away. In fact its pretty clear that is what he is talking about. There is no way that is what all of those people are doing. Or even what 2% of them are doing

You wouldn't see the people who know what they're doing because their flash is not firing...

 

[TallBill]

Originally posted by: DrPizza
This almost belongs in digital video and cameras, but I'm going to pretend that forum is only for digital cameras and make believe that everyone at baseball games has those $4.99 disposable cameras where you really don't have a choice if it flashes or not.

The tough choices that one has to live with for the rest of his life, those of an Anandtech Moderator.

 

[LTC8K6]

The flash range on the pocket cams that those folks are using is probably not more than 20 feet at the most.

The flash is doing nothing for the vast majority of them, except lighting up the heads of the folks near them.

You see the same thing at a Nascar race. People 200 feet away from their subject with the flash firing.

Of course, it's really just that they have the thing on Auto, and in the end, that's as it should be for most people.

What's really cool is the flash system set up for the NBA. Big flash guns up in the ceiling, wireless transmitters on the cameras to trigger them.

 

[Number1]

Originally posted by: George P Burdell
People just wanna point and shoot, don't bother about anything else. Let them be.

:thumbsup:

 

[feralkid]

Originally posted by: Lalakai
with the right camera and equipment, you can take flash shots from a long ways away; you just have to know to juggle the settings to compensate. I agree though with an earlier statement where the person pointed out that most of the people taking the pictures, use their cameras on auto, and the camera will use the flash, resulting in a picture that is basically worthless as the subject was too far away to benefit from the flash.

if you do it right, you can take some extremely interesting pictures using flashes, and different types of flash (strobe, slaved, ect.).

Is ect "ectoplasmic" for taking photos of ghosts?

 

[mugs]

Originally posted by: LTC8K6
What's really cool is the flash system set up for the NBA. Big flash guns up in the ceiling, wireless transmitters on the cameras to trigger them.

Yeah, I've noticed that at hockey games before. Pretty cool.

 

[Demon-Xanth]

Originally posted by: Syringer

Originally posted by: Demon-Xanth
With a lot of the digital cameras I've used, if you turn off the flash, it ramps up the exposure time to something much larger that results in a blurry image unless the camera and what you're taking a picture of are perfectly still. Leave the flash on and everything works.

It's much better to risk a blurry image in hopes of getting a good clear image than to ALWAYS having a bad, dark image.

But I never have a problem with a dark image. Unless I don't use a flash. Only blurry ones. I understand the theory, but I think the cameras I've used are designed for stupid and don't work well when you try to think.

 

[Jeff7]

Originally posted by: sehlaw
I would guess that a large percentage are using their cameras on "auto" mode (or something similar). The dark surroundings cause the flash to go up.

Exactly. They probably don't know a thing about how to use their cameras.

 

[Lalakai]

Originally posted by: Citrix

Originally posted by: Lalakai
with the right camera and equipment, you can take flash shots from a long ways away; you just have to know to juggle the settings to compensate. I agree though with an earlier statement where the person pointed out that most of the people taking the pictures, use their cameras on auto, and the camera will use the flash, resulting in a picture that is basically worthless as the subject was too far away to benefit from the flash.

if you do it right, you can take some extremely interesting pictures using flashes, and different types of flash (strobe, slaved, ect.).

not true. most digital camera flashes have a range of 20-25 feet.

i have a detachable honeywell flash for my 35mm that has a range of 60-70 feet.

agreed on both points. by syncing an external flash you can easily get 60-70 feet. by juggling the shutter speed and using a flash focusing filter, you can push it further. What i said is true, as you just pointed out.