Not really. if, for example, the correct exposure for a shot with a flash was f8, 1/125 @ iso100, shifting the iso up a couple of stops to iso 400 would make the correct exposure 2 stops slower, so it would be f16, 1/125. This means the exposure of the background will be the same, proportionally to the exposure on the flash. However, the DoF will be broader. If a faster iso setting had been used, and the exposure settings left the same, the ambient may be exposed better, but the subject in the light of the flash will be over-exposed.
I chose iso 100 for low noise, as I had sufficient DoF for this shot at this speed.
To increase the levels of ambient light, I should have used a lower shutter speed.
I see where you are coming from though.
Have some more recent shots that I'd like some criticism on, I'll stick them up in a second.
Not really. if, for example, the correct exposure for a shot with a flash was f8, 1/125 @ iso100, shifting the iso up a couple of stops to iso 400 would make the correct exposure 2 stops slower, so it would be f16, 1/125. This means the exposure of the background will be the same, proportionally to the exposure on the flash. However, the DoF will be broader. If a faster iso setting had been used, and the exposure settings left the same, the ambient may be exposed better, but the subject in the light of the flash will be over-exposed.
I chose iso 100 for low noise, as I had sufficient DoF for this shot at this speed.
To increase the levels of ambient light, I should have used a lower shutter speed.
I see where you are coming from though.
Have some more recent shots that I'd like some criticism on, I'll stick them up in a second.