Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > Digital Photography > Inappropriate - make that stupid - use of flash at events

Reply
Thread Tools

Inappropriate - make that stupid - use of flash at events

 
 
void@no.spam.com
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-27-2004
On Tue, 27 Jul 2004 20:37:33 GMT, "Doug Kanter" <(E-Mail Removed)>
wrote:

>> Just as strange are those who try to take pictures of something on
>> television, using a flash.

>
>Even stranger: People who keep trying it and failing, year after year after
>year.....


And the people who try to take a picture of something behind glass with flash.

What about the people who use flash for facial shots. When they get their
prints developed, many times the faces are REALLY white due to overexposure
from the flash. And they still say things like "These pictures are really
good! We have an excellent camera!"

 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
MP@newhouse.com
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-27-2004
I was standing next to someone who had just taken a picture of a castle. The
castle was lit up, but it was really far away. It was at night, and the guy
had used flash. I said to him "You know the flash isn't going to do anything
for something that far away." He replied "But I zoomed in on it."

 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Michael
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-27-2004
On Tue, 27 Jul 2004 16:31:44 -0400, http://www.velocityreviews.com/forums/(E-Mail Removed), wrote the following
in rec.photo.digital:

> OK, good to know that I'm not the only person who has noticed how stupid
> people are when they try to take a picture of an object that is possibly 100
> yards away at night with flash. I always think to myself "Wow that person is
> going to be disappointed when he/she gets his/her film developed."


Actually, sometimes they will get a passable picture. You know, 800 speed
film, brightly illuminated subject, etc. (The flash didn't help any, of
course.)

It probably won't be a particularly good picture, but most people aren't
too critical about picture quality. So long as it vaguely resembles what
they remember seeing, they're not disappointed.
--
Michael
 
Reply With Quote
 
MP@newhouse.com
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-27-2004
On Tue, 27 Jul 2004 18:59:54 -0400, (E-Mail Removed) wrote:

>I was standing next to someone who had just taken a picture of a castle. The
>castle was lit up, but it was really far away. It was at night, and the guy
>had used flash. I said to him "You know the flash isn't going to do anything
>for something that far away." He replied "But I zoomed in on it."
>


Oh yeah, you know how some cameras have a red-eye reduction mode that fires
two flashes? I heard a story about how someone was trying to take a picture
of something far away, so used the red-eye reduction mode. Apparently their
logic was that if two flashes went off, then the object would be lit up more
than if only one flash went off.

 
Reply With Quote
 
Michael Meissner
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-27-2004
Anthony Buckland <(E-Mail Removed)> writes:

> Watching the Democratic Convention yesterday, I watched the usual
> scattering of flashes from people hoping to catch a candlelit scene
> with flash photography. But I have to admit this was nothing to the
> _thousands_ of flashes at nightime Olympic celebrations.
>
> What is it with people? Does collective insanity take over the minds
> of people whose camera flash has a range of maybe five metres and
> who would in any case totally wash out the play of light and color
> that makes the event what it is? I can understand a few people at
> an event having new cameras and no clue about how to switch off
> the flash or even a clue that flash exists. But people who lay out
> hundreds of dollars to attend an event and more hundreds on
> expensive cameras presumably have a few functioning
> neurons; yet a big fraction of them, not some tiny dumb portion,
> cannonade away on pictures that will be totally useless.


Just because your wimpy onboard flash can't cover 50' doesn't mean my external
flash can't I've taken flash pictures in a darkened auditorium from 45'
away with my old flash, and had it come out, though I did have red-eye and
noise from using a high ISO. My current flash is more powerful, so I could
probably put the ISO back to 100.

> This goes way back in my life, to over half a century ago before
> even the flash cube had been invented, and taking a flash picture
> required deliberate setting up and using accessories that only the
> relatively well-off owned -- yet I watched people trying to take
> flash pictures, from the Canadian side of course, of the illumination
> in color of Niagara Falls.


There is a technique where you use the camera with a long shutter speed (to
catch the falls in background light) and use a flash to capture the foreground
objects (such as people standing in front of the falls).

Now granted a lot of people just shoot in auto-pilot mode, and many don't take
time to learn the ins and outs of the camera. But that doesn't mean everybody
only shoots on auto.

--
Michael Meissner
email: (E-Mail Removed)
http://www.the-meissners.org
 
Reply With Quote
 
Chris Brown
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-28-2004
In article <h2zNc.1357$(E-Mail Removed)>,
Doug Kanter <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>Even stranger: People who keep trying it and failing, year after year after
>year.....


I see the tourists in London doing it a lot. Standing on one of the bridges,
with their friend by the railing, looking out over the Thames at night. One
can only imagine how they must enthrall their families when they drag them
round for the ceremonial showing of the holiday snaps:

"And this is Benny, standing in front of TOTAL AND COMPLETE DARKNESS"
 
Reply With Quote
 
Ron Hunter
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-28-2004
Anthony Buckland wrote:

> Watching the Democratic Convention yesterday, I watched the usual
> scattering of flashes from people hoping to catch a candlelit scene
> with flash photography. But I have to admit this was nothing to the
> _thousands_ of flashes at nightime Olympic celebrations.
>
> What is it with people? Does collective insanity take over the minds
> of people whose camera flash has a range of maybe five metres and
> who would in any case totally wash out the play of light and color
> that makes the event what it is? I can understand a few people at
> an event having new cameras and no clue about how to switch off
> the flash or even a clue that flash exists. But people who lay out
> hundreds of dollars to attend an event and more hundreds on
> expensive cameras presumably have a few functioning
> neurons; yet a big fraction of them, not some tiny dumb portion,
> cannonade away on pictures that will be totally useless.
>
> This goes way back in my life, to over half a century ago before
> even the flash cube had been invented, and taking a flash picture
> required deliberate setting up and using accessories that only the
> relatively well-off owned -- yet I watched people trying to take
> flash pictures, from the Canadian side of course, of the illumination
> in color of Niagara Falls.
>

Yes, and I watched people at a presentation of "Annie" trying to take
flash pictures from the balcony.... In spite of a sign plainly stating
that cameras weren't allowed in the theater. Sigh. The ushers DID
track down the offenders and warn them. I would have relieved them of
their tickets, and had them escorted outside. The idiots don't even
have the sense to know that the pictures will be crap.
 
Reply With Quote
 
Ron Hunter
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-28-2004
NoNameAtAll wrote:

> Many cameras do not have an option to turn off the flash. And even for cameras
> that do have such an option, many owners don't know it exists or don't know how
> to operate it.


Like he said, stupid!
 
Reply With Quote
 
Ron Hunter
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-28-2004
Roland Karlsson wrote:

> (E-Mail Removed)ntiSpam (NoNameAtAll) wrote in
> news:(E-Mail Removed):
>
>
>>Many cameras do not have an option to turn off the flash.

>
>
> That I have a hard time to beleive.


It is true. Sad, and stupid, but true.

>
>
>>And even for
>>cameras that do have such an option, many owners don't know it exists
>>or don't know how to operate it.

>
>
> So - why do their neorons not start working the first
> time they see the flash? Maybe this thing uses up my
> battery - maybe it is possible to turn off?
>
>
> /Roland

 
Reply With Quote
 
BillyJoeJimBob
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-28-2004
How many folks who purchase consumer compact cameras, digital or
otherwise, do you think actually follow the principles of RTFM?
Keep in mind that an even greater number of the folks attending
the Olympic celebrations probably have VCRs at home with the time
blinking 12:00... pretty scary when you think about it.

BJJB
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
problem in running a basic code in python 3.3.0 that includes HTML file Satabdi Mukherjee Python 1 04-04-2013 07:48 PM
make RE more cleaver to avoid inappropriate : sre_constants.error: redefinition of group name aspineux Python 5 03-30-2007 04:19 PM
Stupid question. Please, only stupid responders. If you're not sureif you're stupid, you probably aren't. =?ISO-8859-1?Q?R=F4g=EAr?= Computer Support 6 07-18-2005 05:11 AM
stupid stupid stupid kpg MCSE 17 11-26-2004 02:59 PM
ENERGIS ABUSE TICKET : 1636944 Inappropriate Usenet Posting - ????? English Patient Computer Support 13 10-07-2004 11:46 PM



Advertisments