On not overdiffusing flash in macro photography
By Alex Wild
This article was published in Scientific American’s former blog network and reflects the views of the author, not necessarily those of Scientific American
Earlier, I blogged about one of my flash diffusers, and about how most flash macro photography is improved by softening the flash's harsh artificial light. My observations were not novel, of course, and I love spying on the various contraptions macrophotographers invent as they aim for perfect diffusion. See, for example, recent posts by Seth Burgess and Ted MacRae.
The sparkle in this jumping spider's eye? That's uneven flash diffusion. A hotspot created by the right flash head sitting closer to the diffuser than the left provides some zing.
On supporting science journalism
If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.
I'm now going to play the contrarian. For many images, the quest for ever softer, ever more even light leads to images that are ever so slightly more... dull. While we want enough diffusion to avoid blown-out highlights and completely black shadows, flattening the light too much can have a similar flattening effect on the image's personality. Thus, even when striving for clean, even lighting I often prefer one side brighter than the other, or, as for the spider above, just enough glint on the eyes to suggest a little mischief.
Smooth, but not too smooth: A Prolasius worker ant from Victoria, Australia.
It’s Time to Stand Up for Science
If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.
I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.
If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.
In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.
There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.
