Trying to take a shot of my new cell-phone (after all it’s raining today so there’s nothing to photograph on the other side of my window), I lacked sufficient natural lighting and the few lamps in my room don’t amount to much when it comes to object photography. A flash is the only logical choice in this situation. Since I still have no external flash which can be oriented and covered/diffused easily I’m still relying on the builtin-flash of the 400D. Flashing something (shiny) head-on gives really ugly shadows and reflections, as we all know. It also makes for skin that looks like it was soaked in a jar of butter. So, I had the really simple idea of reflecting the flash towards the ceiling, where it can bounce back and scatter. I used a small mirror at an angle of about 45 degrees. This only works indoors and with a bright ceiling which isn’t too far away from the flash (1-3m is OK I suppose). Now for the juicy images ;)

Flash direct vs indirectBest viewed large, this shows a) no flash at all b) direct flash c) indirect flash. Notice the shadows (or lack thereof) around the phone in the shots.

Flash direct vs indirectAnother good example, a) direct flash b) indirect flash. People which look greasy on photos (which is everyone) will be happy to see that it doesn’t have to be like that. I also like how the second image has more depth than the first, which looks “flat” from the lack of natural shadows (where the light-source usually is above the object).

Please take note that both of these shots were more than insufficiently lit without a flash, so the natural-looking light distribution can almost completely be attributed to the flash.