I was wondering about what kind of experience users of SB-28 have with the built-in bounce card. What is your experience when comparing photos made with and without the built-in bounce card ? Any samples?
If SB-28 is on the camera (F80 in my case), is there a chance of introducing a red-eye when taking pictures of animals indoors and using the build-in bounce card (while bouncing light of the ceiling for example)?
Assume that the animal will be 3-4 meters away from the camera and that the light from SB-28 will be bounced from the white ceiling.
The red eye has to do with the angle between that of the flash light and the lens. If you amplify this angle, either by setting your flash away from the camera (handheld or in a bracket via a SC-17 cable) you shuld not have a problem. Below a sad example of red eye in a once-in-a-lifetime photo opportunity (at least for me and my daughter in the picture). Fortunately there is Photoshop now.
JRP, thanks for your quick answer. Everything you said is valid and is something I am aware of.
If we go back to my question, you will se that I am concerned with the amount of light that will be directed towards the object (the animal in my case) from the built-in bounce card. The reason I am concerned is because:
- bounce card can redirect a lot of light - probability of the "red eye" (with animals it is something different then with the humans) is much higher then with humans.
So, is there a danger of the red eye when using built-in bounce card on SB-28, based on the original set-up (see first message) ? SB-28 is on the camera and is pointing to the ceiling.
if i may digress for a moment on the main subject of red-eye, this is the kind of picture of the past ,of which i have hundreds, that i am trying to scan for archiving and enlarging some of the wonderful ones. this one is quite sharp and i am unable to get most of my prints to this level. i am curious.... was this a print or a slide?... and what did you use to scan it with? i use a flatbed because most of my negatives are gone or difficult to match.
i apologize to vrzic for digressing on his thread.
I have an Epson 1200U PHOTO scanner, therefore with a slide/negatives adapter, but I only bought it to save in the meantime for a Nikon CoolScan IV ED. With it I scanned the image you saw above. Although I lost many boxes in moves and floods, I still have plenty of slides since I almost exclusively shot that from 1964 to about 1976, that's 12 years of 2 rolls per week on the average or no less than 1,248 boxes, or 44,928 individual slides, not counting shooting frenzies. Even imagining that I lost half of them, I am confronted with the task of scanning the best from 23,000 slides before game over. I must say that Nikon digital imaging hardware and software are making my task an easy one and the results are extremely satisfactory. Below another precious sample: