sounds silly..but indoor light

[mangii]

These photos were taken indoors for the newborn session I did the other day. Now I really suffer with finding enough light indoors. I like to stick to natural light. Keep in my mind that I am just new to manual settings on my camera (proud to say I only use manual now...omg I kinda get it..lol). The light coming in was from tinted windows...I had the kids backs to the light source...should I have faced them towards the light? What about iso..if I want to keep my shutter speed up decent speed for kids movements etc...I need to bump up my iso..this makes me nervous for noise in my photos.

I really need to work on these indoor sessions..and having enough light and being able to work manual in my camera and feeling comfortable knowing that my images aren't going to be noisy etc.

Just looking at my settings. For one I had it on Manual 1/25 2.8 2500 the other two i had on Av 1/40 4.5 2000 obviously looking at this..my shutter speed is slow ..but I didn't get any blurring.

Anybody help me?

[Lost]

generally you have them facing the light with a reflector (or flash) bouncing light into the shadows.

it's usually best not to have direct sunlight coming through the window; so most windows on the south side of the house are best. we often here about artist with a north window studio; that saying comes from the northern hemisphere. In the morning look for a west window>>afternoon look for a east window. This will give you the softest light. LO L I have forgotten most of this stuff but I used to do lots of it Qld years ago. I used to use 400 film and 50 1.4 or 85 1.8 lenses mostly.

One of my favourite photos was taken from outside with a girl in the window and behind the fly screen. BTW: learn how to remove and replace fly screens.

[dawei]

Can I enquire what lenses are you using?

A good tip to alleviate noise and shutter speed concerns is to use a wider aperture. A lot of photographers are scared of DOF not being enough (e.g. one person being in focus, one being out) but there are some workarounds which I can suggest once a clear idea of the lenses being used is established

For instance, in the f/4.5 photo, if you had of used f/2.8, you could have got the same exposure using ISO 800.

Just be careful with the whole Manual vs AV debate. There is nothing wrong with AV mode, but there is everything wrong with using M for the sake of using M.

It's a big misconception that you need to use M to take good photos. It's like saying, you need to drive without a GPS to be a good driver. You can still be a good driver with a GPS, but you should practice driving without a GPS too to improve your skills - which is necessary because GPS units sometimes fail or break down or do not give the correct route. However, when the GPS does work, and you have no reason to use M, you are stuffing yourself up by deliberately avoiding the GPS when it can make life easier.

The specific purpose of M is when you either want:
1. shot to shot exposure consistency
2. you want to override the camera's metered setting

The danger of course is that our brains are not objective light meters - we cannot always predict the exposure parameters required for a scene, so using M will require chimping and trial and error. Sometimes this can cause missed shots as you try and get your exposure right.

It is not a good idea to use M just for the sake of using M as often AV gives a great exposure and saves you a lot of time, helping avoid lost shots due to your M exposure being inconsistent.

[Cookster670]

Hi Manda...it might be time to invest in a flash. No matter how much ISO or how fast your lens is, there will always be situations where you just don't have enough light. So learning flash opens up a whole new world for you.

I think you've done as good as you could have under the conditions, and i'm more comfortable WITH flash than without so I can't offer any more advice on top of what you've already done.

[Saintsgirl]

I am very much in the same boat as you Manda. Tried a few test shots out on a baby doll of my daughters. Used high ISO as the light was low-ish, and they all turned out horrible. So much noise I had to wear earplugs!! :P
I am like you and would prefer to use low ISO but a slower shutter speed, but yes, then you run the risk of motion blur.
I honestly don't really see much wrong with your pictures, and it seems you have enough light to take the shots. But if it's anything like mine, you really have to rely on a bright sunny day, and run the risk of cancelling a booking if it's raining! :(
I am looking into getting a soft box set up at the moment. I don't really want to because I love natural light, but mainly for backup.
Sorry, my response is totally useless to you, just jabbering on.
Good luck though. Your work is beautiful!

[Cookster670]

Take the plunge guys :). Flash can look like natural light if you want. Just think of it like a portable Sun !

[Mikey054]

Good advice from all. Soft light is the key for a natural portrait, but sometimes flash just has to play the part....depends on the situation, the subject matter, the surroundings etc. With indoor portraits, and when not using a flash I must admit I do take a hand held meter reading and shoot in manual mode for exposure....I am old school though. New cameras these days have very very good meters, but I tend to lean towards an ambient light reading as opposed to reflective light reading for portraits. Hope this helps. Your images are in the direction of "high key", but I kind of like that and so do many others. Number three (bottom left) is a great composition and well caught.
Mike

[Lost]

But if it's anything like mine, you really have to rely on a bright sunny day, and run the risk of cancelling a booking if it's raining! :(
I am looking into getting a soft box set up at the moment. I don't really want to because I love natural light, but mainly for backup.


There are plenty of pros who rely on natural light only and do the most beautiful photos; but it does take a while to learn how to read and use natural light. I heard of anther pro who used natural light for jewelery photography. Pros who use the clients home as a studio (it's free space ;)) like natural light because they don't have to lug lights around with them. I knew a Sydney bloke who had a Leica; a couple of lenses and couple a couple of reflectors; but it cost the cleint several hundred $$ just to get him in the door. BTW the Leica is good for low light photography because there is no mirror movement causing vibrations when the photo was taken

As I said above; this is the place for faster lenses; preferable fixed focal and on a crop camera 35mm would be go. My son has a tammy 17-50 2.8 that seems OK; now that may be an option. The standard "kit" lenses will generally not make the grade here. On a FF 50 and 85mm would be the go.

But as Mikey said; a little fill flash is handy. That will add a little sparkle to the photo