Do you see the two photographs above? They are both of a pinkish rose, one a light pink and the other a deep pink. There’s also some profound differences in the photos stemming from the fact that one was taken with a flash and one was not.
The one on the left was with a flash. The foreground of the light pink rose is well lit… it accentuates the glistening water droplets loitering on its petals. The background is very dark, and the setting appears to be sometime at night, well after sunset. The greenery is very dark and muted behind the bright flower, making for an uneasy contrast in depth and brightness.
The one on the right was taken without a flash (requiring a steady hand). This rose is a full, rich rouge-salmon of a pink… very deep in color compared to the unsaturated color on the other rose. The greenery here is a confidant hue and stands out quite clearly in the muted sunlight of what appears to be a cloudy morning with lingering due… say around 10:00 AM.
If you haven’t already guessed, this is the same rose. The pictures were taken from the same perspective. What you might not have guessed was the profound effect the flash would have on this photo… because, you see, they were not taken hours from each other.
Indeed, these two photographs were only taken 20 seconds apart! 
Web designer and developer. Loud discerner. Software engineer and 
Good luck though!!
I’m waiting for the tie-in where you tell me that Liberals are idiots… Hmmm.
@ Rachael :: There’s always that potential.
This is almost philosophical. It must have a deeper meaning.
@ Mike :: Perhaps you could work it into one of your study groups and tell me what they come up with.
As somewhat of a photographer I always choose to photograph with natural light. No flash, I think it ruins pictures. Take it natural and if need be photohop it.