Need an explanation for the guide number and for the different kinds of metering (TTL, ...).
I think the section on technique needs to be improved a huge amount. Flash isn't the only technique available, and it does not increase the efficiency of the flash - if anything it REDUCES the efficiency as it needs to be spread over a wider area! Tiberius47 06:51, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
Needs a history section - was trying to find when it was invented but no info at all. I dont have any photo history references alas. Justinc 21:22, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
In "Dian Hanson's History Of Pin-Up Magazines Vol 2", Hanson says (chapter 4 p65), speaking of the particular fetishes that led Leonard Burtman to found "Exotique" magazine: "Thus Leonard Burtman, inventor of the photographic strobe, professional scientist and amateur photographer became a publisher." Obviously, this is just mentioned in passing, and the book exists mainly to reprint old pinups, but it seems reasonably well researched. Can anyone verify this information about Burtman? He doesn't have a WP page at current.
Classic flash photography
IMHO, the greatest flash photographer was Weegee; he handled a flash-powered 4X5 as if it was a 35mm. It would be great to find openly useable pictures of him with a Graflex with a flash gun next to an openly available flash picture by him. I will search.--22.214.171.124 (talk) 01:29, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
New article on photographic lighting
"Photographic lighting" is currently a redirect to this article, which is insufficient to cover the entire subject of photographic lighting. For example, professional photographers frequently use non-flash lighting sources in photography, such as in studio portraits. Photographic lighting even has a category, but no main, title, lead or "whatever you call it" article. The category can be found at Category:Photographic lighting. If you want to edit the page "photographic lighting" that is currently a redirect into an article, see this page. -- Kjkolb (talk) 22:09, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
Which is brighter?
In the flashbulbs section the srticle states, "Later bulbs substituted zirconium for the magnesium, which produced a brighter flash and tended to temporarily blind people."
- I too found that line, as it was written, confusingly ambiguous. As magnesium is used in fireworks and stun grenades, I think it safe to assume that the writer intended to ascribe the blinding flash to it rather than to zirconium. I have reworded the line accordingly for clarity. Hertz1888 (talk) 08:59, 9 December 2011 (UTC)
- It is still confusing as to which the sentence means is brighter, so I have reworded it again. It is the zirconium that was brighter, that is why the filling was changed. I can find no evidence that zirconium filled bulbs temporarily blinded people any more than magnesium or electronic flash units, so I have deleted that claim. If anyone can turn up a reliable reference that I have missed that this was so, then please restore the claim with the reference. DieSwartzPunkt (talk) 18:40, 16 April 2014 (UTC)