«

I have seen Sto-Fen 'Omni-Bounce' Flash Diffusers used quite regularly, but
excuse my ignorance, I would be interested how they work.

Obviously, they create a softer light than normal flash, but I have seen
them used in two different ways:
Firstly, paparazzi when shooting close to politicians, and secondly when
shooting close to animals.

When paparazzi use them, they seem to point the flash directly at their
subjects.

When wildlife photographer Andy Rouse used it, such as shooting Giraffes at
close range at 17mm, he had it at a 45° angle, Seeing as the Giraffe was
almost licking the lens, it seemed like it would totally miss the Giraffes
head if you went by where the flash was pointing.

Also, I have heard that the Sto-Fen diffuser is best used at 45°.

Can anyone elaborate?

Matt wrote:

> I have seen Sto-Fen 'Omni-Bounce' Flash Diffusers used quite regularly, but
> excuse my ignorance, I would be interested how they work.
>
> Obviously, they create a softer light than normal flash, but I have seen
> them used in two different ways:
> Firstly, paparazzi when shooting close to politicians, and secondly when
> shooting close to animals.
>
> When paparazzi use them, they seem to point the flash directly at their
> subjects.

Minor improvement, or more likely forgot to raise it.

>
> When wildlife photographer Andy Rouse used it, such as shooting Giraffes at
> close range at 17mm, he had it at a 45° angle, Seeing as the Giraffe was
> almost licking the lens, it seemed like it would totally miss the Giraffes
> head if you went by where the flash was pointing.

No comment.

>
> Also, I have heard that the Sto-Fen diffuser is best used at 45°.
>
> Can anyone elaborate?

Yeah, McLeod and I were looking for a fight so this will do fine!

1. It is a slightly larger area than the basic flash. So slightly softer. At
45° the area is slightly larger still, and so slightly softer again. Slightly.

2. It is designed to take advantage of white walls (side) and ceiling to further
make the lighting area large and soft (while reducing harsh shaddows). This is
the mode where the contribution to soft lighting is the greatest.

3. At 45° the flash head is at a higher position relative to the lens axis, and
so there is less chance of redeye.

4. It reduces the maximum power of the flash by about 1.5 stops. On a TTL or
AUTO flash, this is no problem.

4a. On an AUTO flash, setting it to 45° or higher is a necessity, not an option
as the omni-bounce straight forward will radiate partly at the flash sensor
causing it to shut off early.

4b. On a non-Auto, non-TTL flash, divide the film ISO by 3 or 4 and use that as
the setting on the flash for distance/aperture determination.

Since I love McLeod so much, I'll argue with me on his behalf:

5. McLeod prefers the flash pointing straight up with the omnibounce for very
soft lighting using the ceiling as well as the wall behind the photographer (if
there is one). I disagree, on the other hand he earns his lving at this! I'll
stipulate that it does work if the wall behind the photog is relatively close (a
foor or two) v. a subject range on the order of 10-15 feet.

(Did I shoot myself hard enough there McLoed? Sorry if I wasn't harder).

The omnibounce is ALWAYS in my bag and I use it for almost all camera mounted
flash shots. I have another widget, the Lumiquest 80-20 which is very good, but
more cumbersome. I've recently seen an inflatable softbox that fits over flash
heads yielding a surface of about 4 x 6 inches. Seems like a bright idea, but I
haven't seen the results.

Cheers,
Alan.



--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI gallery]: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- [SI rulz]: http://www.aliasimages.com/si/rulz.html
-- e-meil: there's no such thing as a FreeLunch.

On Sun, 14 Nov 2004 14:52:37 -0500, Alan Browne
<> wrote:

>5. McLeod prefers the flash pointing straight up with the omnibounce for very
>soft lighting using the ceiling as well as the wall behind the photographer (if
>there is one). I disagree, on the other hand he earns his lving at this! I'll
>stipulate that it does work if the wall behind the photog is relatively close (a
>foor or two) v. a subject range on the order of 10-15 feet.
>
>(Did I shoot myself hard enough there McLoed? Sorry if I wasn't harder).
>
>The omnibounce is ALWAYS in my bag and I use it for almost all camera mounted
>flash shots.

I agree with everything you say. It does pretty much the same thing
which ever way you point it. The last sentence pretty much covers why
photojournalists have it on all the time...they're too busy shooting
to worry about whether it's on or off and usually they are just adding
a little fill or catchlight to the eyes with it anyway. That is also
the reason nature photographers use flash, unless you're shooting for
National Geographic with one of those huge tele extenders. In my
experience you can get away with much less flash power with digital
than film and removing the sto-fen is not neccessary. I know this
goes against the laws of physics so maybe it's just a poor hypothesis.

On Sun, 14 Nov 2004 14:52:37 -0500, Alan Browne
<> wrote:

>4b. On a non-Auto, non-TTL flash, divide the film ISO by 3 or 4 and use that as
>the setting on the flash for distance/aperture determination.
>
>Since I love McLeod so much, I'll argue with me on his behalf:

One other good idea is to actually calculate your guide number with
the Stofen on. Since flashmeters are no longer the rarity they used
to be it's very easy to do without even shooting any film but you have
to be aware of what sort of room you are shooting in. A large open
room will give very different results from a room with an 8 ft white
ceiling.
One of the best photogs I know ignores auto, ttl, d-ttl for 95% of
his shots and knows his flash well enough to do a quick mental
calculation for main light, fill, or just a kicker in the eyes..

On Sun, 14 Nov 2004 17:51:11 -0600, McLeod <>
wrote:

>On Sun, 14 Nov 2004 14:52:37 -0500, Alan Browne
><> wrote:
>
>>4b. On a non-Auto, non-TTL flash, divide the film ISO by 3 or 4 and use that as
>>the setting on the flash for distance/aperture determination.
>>
>>Since I love McLeod so much, I'll argue with me on his behalf:
>
>One other good idea is to actually calculate your guide number with
>the Stofen on. Since flashmeters are no longer the rarity they used
>to be it's very easy to do without even shooting any film but you have
>to be aware of what sort of room you are shooting in. A large open
>room will give very different results from a room with an 8 ft white
>ceiling.
>One of the best photogs I know ignores auto, ttl, d-ttl for 95% of
>his shots and knows his flash well enough to do a quick mental
>calculation for main light, fill, or just a kicker in the eyes..

Agree with this. I normally use a Quantum-X flash with a Norman
battery pack, and this 400 W-S arrangement is non-TTL, and cannot be
made TTL. It's not a big job to take a flashmeter and make a few test
shots (or use the camera's histogram) at the apertures & distances
planned. True, it's one more thing to worry (or not worry) about, but
it certainly beats flashbulbs. And if I can't live without auto
flash, the unit does have a built-in SCR device that works in most
circumstances. If the image isn't dead-on exposure-wise (often
slightly over if anything), the 14n almost always has enough elbow
room to recover it. One advantage to shooting flash by "guide number"
is that you are doing the equivalent of using an incident light
reading, most often a solution to highly contrasting subjects, and
generally the method used by pros under studio conditions.

Most of this automatic stuff is just a bunch of marketing, anyway,
including overpriced lenses, rant, rave etc. We'd do well to get back
to basics and leave that stuff alone. The image is what we're after
here, not a closetfull of equipment, right?

"Matt" <> wrote in message news:<cn84b1$c7c$>...
> I have seen Sto-Fen 'Omni-Bounce' Flash Diffusers used quite regularly, but
> excuse my ignorance, I would be interested how they work.
>
> Obviously, they create a softer light than normal flash, but I have seen
> them used in two different ways:
> Firstly, paparazzi when shooting close to politicians, and secondly when
> shooting close to animals.
>
> When paparazzi use them, they seem to point the flash directly at their
> subjects.
>
> When wildlife photographer Andy Rouse used it, such as shooting Giraffes at
> close range at 17mm, he had it at a 45° angle, Seeing as the Giraffe was
> almost licking the lens, it seemed like it would totally miss the Giraffes
> head if you went by where the flash was pointing.
>
> Also, I have heard that the Sto-Fen diffuser is best used at 45°.
>
> Can anyone elaborate?


I use mine in the straight-on position with the flash mounted on a
Stroboframe and get results very much to my liking. Moving the
primary light source further from the lens will do more to improve
your flash photography than will any diffuser alone. The diffuser is
useful for on-camera fill-flash; I'd still recommend shooting with the
flash head in the straight-on position.

Michael

Hi

I have been a fan of the Sto-fen Omni-bounce flash diffusers for many
years now, They have many uses, the most important of which for me is
that they give a slightly softer light than an on camera flash will
without one.

The Omni-bounce caps are always in my bag. They represent a very
simple and durable way of balancing flash and available light colour
temperatures to within the range where Photoshop can do the rest with
ease.

Regards
Gary
www.basic-digital-photography.com

"Matt" <> wrote in message news:<cn84b1$c7c$>...
> I have seen Sto-Fen 'Omni-Bounce' Flash Diffusers used quite regularly, but
> excuse my ignorance, I would be interested how they work.
>
> Obviously, they create a softer light than normal flash, but I have seen
> them used in two different ways:
> Firstly, paparazzi when shooting close to politicians, and secondly when
> shooting close to animals.
>
> When paparazzi use them, they seem to point the flash directly at their
> subjects.
>
> When wildlife photographer Andy Rouse used it, such as shooting Giraffes at
> close range at 17mm, he had it at a 45° angle, Seeing as the Giraffe was
> almost licking the lens, it seemed like it would totally miss the Giraffes
> head if you went by where the flash was pointing.
>
> Also, I have heard that the Sto-Fen diffuser is best used at 45°.
>
> Can anyone elaborate?

McLeod wrote:

> On Sun, 14 Nov 2004 14:52:37 -0500, Alan Browne
> <> wrote:
>
>
>>4b. On a non-Auto, non-TTL flash, divide the film ISO by 3 or 4 and use that as
>>the setting on the flash for distance/aperture determination.
>>
>>Since I love McLeod so much, I'll argue with me on his behalf:
>
>
> One other good idea is to actually calculate your guide number with
> the Stofen on. Since flashmeters are no longer the rarity they used
> to be it's very easy to do without even shooting any film but you have
> to be aware of what sort of room you are shooting in. A large open
> room will give very different results from a room with an 8 ft white
> ceiling.

I'll grant you that one though I doubt the range variance is very wide when the
sto-fen is at a medium angle ... as most of the light will be direct path
subject and back to the auto sensor.

> One of the best photogs I know ignores auto, ttl, d-ttl for 95% of
> his shots and knows his flash well enough to do a quick mental
> calculation for main light, fill, or just a kicker in the eyes..

Kicker in the eyes is no sweat, if I'm that close and all I want is a punch
there, then I set 1/16 or 1/32 and it's doen. But without my meter or one of
the 4,327 varieties of TTL flash on my machine, I'm lost for what power setting
to use even with limited aperture choices.

A few weeks ago I was at an oyster party and happily snapping away party pics.
I'd forgotten the camera was in "M" mode... thankfully the TTL is the default
mode of the system and still obeys the flash comp in "M"... great shots of course...

One negative about the stofen and a high angle ... when close up and the stofen
is set high (45° or higher) then you're less likely to get a catchlight in the eyes.

Cheers,
Alan

--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI gallery]: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- [SI rulz]: http://www.aliasimages.com/si/rulz.html
-- e-meil: there's no such thing as a FreeLunch.

>From: Alan Browne

> I've recently seen an inflatable softbox that fits over flash
>heads yielding a surface of about 4 x 6 inches. Seems like a bright idea,
>but I
>haven't seen the results.

Yes you have.
http://www.pbase.com/bret/image/13184171
http://www.pbase.com/bret/image/25524502

Was this with a Photoflex XTC II?


"Annika1980" <> wrote in message
news:...
> >From: Alan Browne
>
> > I've recently seen an inflatable softbox that fits over flash
> >heads yielding a surface of about 4 x 6 inches. Seems like a bright
idea,
> >but I
> >haven't seen the results.
>
> Yes you have.
> http://www.pbase.com/bret/image/13184171
> http://www.pbase.com/bret/image/25524502
>
>
>