My Ring Flash Experience



Image from ExpoImaging web site

 A funny thing happened at the Jimbo Fisher War Party last week...funny if you have a weird sense of humor. The day before the gig, my new ExpoImaging Ray Flash arrived from B&H Photo in NYC, one of my go-to sources for any gear (the other is KEH). The Ray Flash is basically a poor man's ring flash, costing a fraction of what a studio ring flash costs. My initial impression after pouring through reviews, etc. was that it appeared to be much more versatile than a conventional studio ring flash. I wanted a ring flash primarily for occasional use in the studio (to create that "Cosmo" high fashion look in images); but what really sold me on the Ray Flash was ExpoImaging's touting of the product as great for studio use plus the cat's meow for wedding photographers. I read that as suitable for grip & grin events, which are not unlike wedding receptions - people in small and large groups dominating most of the photos.



Images from ExpoImaging web site

When I make reference to "Cosmo" type images, I'm referring to that noticeable but subtle halo shadow surrounding the subject (above, left) by positioning the subject close to the backdrop and using a ring flash.  The halo shadow is a style that is either loved or hated - there's no middle ground - but I'm always looking for any way to generate images that are different so I wanted to add this type of image to my arsenal. If you don't want the halo shadow, you pull the subject away from the backdrop and you still get soft, even lighting on the subject. If there is no backdrop (as in a group shot of folks at a reception), there is no shadow - again, just nice, even lighting. The other unique aspect of a ring flash is the telltale catch light in the eyes - a circle of light (above, right) that many people love.

Image from AlienBees web site

There are two issues with studio ring flashes from my perspective. First, cost - most start at $1,000 and go up from there. The AlienBees ABR800 (above) is the exception and goes for $400, but everything I've read about it gives me pause for concern as to the mounting hardware for the camera/flash, reportedly somewhat flimsy and may not withstand repeated tear down/set up. The second issue with a studio ring flash is it forces you to be relatively stationary - if you move forward or backwards, the exposure that you meter will obviously change. The key light (ring flash) is on the camera so the light reaching the subject will change as you move. To ensure good exposure, camera to subject distance has to remain constant after metering - mark a spot on the floor if you're handholding the camera or set up a tripod to position the camera in one place.



Images from ExpoImaging web site



The Ray Flash (above & below) seemed to overcome the issues as an occasional studio ring flash and then some: 1) Cost - $200; 2) Versatility - I could use it in the studio or take it with me for shoots like the War Party; 3) TTL camera functions still work, so you can move forward or backward without affecting exposure (to some extent); and 4) it's a snap to use - you pop it on your portable strobe, mount the strobe to the hot shoe and you're good to go .

I knew from researching the Ray Flash that you lose at least one stop of light, so I tested the unit in my office before taking it to the War Party. Sure enough, there was some light loss, ranging from 1 to as many as 3 stops depending on the distance I tried to illuminate. No big...that's what the exposure compensation button is for on a camera body - to increase or decrease the exposure without changing shutter speed or f stop. But I made a mistake, one that I know better than to make - I did not test the Ray Flash on a person or persons before taking a new piece of equipment on a magazine shoot. I should not have assumed anything but I did -I assumed that since the product was marketed for use in wedding photography and since there were no other issues identified in any of the materials I had reviewed (including the ExpoImaging web site, their marketing videos, their demo videos and the manual that accompanied the product), I was going to take some beautifully lit images that would rock for Unconquered Magazine.

Well, I got evenly lit images. What I never expected was "Exorcist" eyes in almost every shot - the dreaded red eye that usually comes from using an on-camera strobe in a dimly lit room. Pupils become huge to compensate for the low light levels and an on camera flash lights them up - in vivid red. Thank God for Photoshop. I managed to eliminate the red eye from all the photos I processed and turned in to the magazine, but it was a lot of unnecessary additional time and effort.

The next day, I called B&H to return the Ray Flash for a refund. No way I was going to have $200 tied up in a product that performed like this while used in a manner that I thought was intended. The B&H customer service rep was more than accommodating in terms of the return. He even e-mailed me a UPS shipping label so I could ship the product back on their dime (which is why I do business with B&H - impeccable customer service, no questions asked). Another rep followed up by contacting me to provide his thoughts on what had happened. Among other things, he questioned the assumption I had made as to wedding photography use - yes, the Ray Flash was a great tool for wedding photographers, but for wedding photographers wanting to create "Cosmo" type portraits of the bride. The product was never intended for generic, wedding reception images. I had made an incorrect leap of faith in assuming that "wedding" photography meant all types of wedding images.

All this was conveyed in a very professional and respectful manner, as opposed to a "Jane, you ignorant slut" condescending tone. For a B&H rep to take the time to follow up on my return of the product and delve into specific issues as to what caused my dissatisfaction was not expected. Have any of you ever been contacted by a company rep upon return of a product? I haven't. Until now. Kudos to B&H.

I then called ExpoImaging to relate my experience and convey my disappointment with their product performance/marketing information. Two representatives apologized profusely and diplomatically reminded me that whenever you shoot in low light with an on-lens-axis flash, red eye is common, known phenomenon. In a studio setting, they mentioned that you typically have other strobes firing which typically eliminates any red eye. I told them they had marketed this thing as a product suitable for "weddings" (and thus implicitly, receptions, which typically have the same lighting conditions as the War Party). I also asked why in the world they would go to such lengths to caution users about the 1 or more light-stop-loss but not something else of which they were well aware - the red eye issue . They acknowledged that they should have mentioned it and will now include something in their marketing information to address it.

Then they took it an unexpected step further - they want me to really put their product through its paces and review it for them. Cool. They're shipping me a unit to use so I can form a better educated opinion as to the Ray Flash. It should be here in a few days (coming from California) and I'll play with it under various conditions.

It would have been easy for ExpoImaging to blow me off as a disgruntled user but they went way out of their way to generate customer goodwill. So, kudos to ExpoImaging for their approach to the situation.   I'll let you know what the final verdict is on the product. At the very least, ExpoImaging gets top marks for customer satisfaction. Stay tuned.