Gary Fongs Lightsphere 2 videos - Really that good??

[sootyvrs]

I've been watching the videos here

http://store.garyfonginc.com/liiido.html

The results just look too good to be true! As good results with this diffuser as studio lighting!!

Good marketing or is this product as good as the videos suggest?

I've also seen replica lightsphere's from Hong Kong on ebay. Are these as good for 1/4 of the price?

[Curtis N]

Buyer beware. The last Fong advertisement I saw was so misleading it bordered on fraud.

Good lighting comes from knowledge, not tupperware. If you want to light better, go to Strobist (http://www.strobist.blogspot.com/) and start learning.

[sootyvrs]

Thanks for the link Curtis

Are you suggesting that the Lightsphere "tupperware" is not one of the better diffusers out there on the market?

[Curtis N]

Are you suggesting that the Lightsphere "tupperware" is not one of the better diffusers out there on the market?I think the Fong products are overpriced, considering what they actually do, and I think Fong's web ads make exaggerated claims.

Shooting your flash through translucent plastic is not altogether a bad idea, and in certain environments it can work well. But there's nothing magical about Fong plastic. Flash units are designed the way they are for good reason. If a plastic diffuser made them work better, then the manufacturers would ship them that way.

The bottom line is that choosing a flash modifier to make better pictures requires an understanding of the basics of light, and what kinds of lighting make for good portraiture. I see a lot of people using various plastic diffusers in situations where they'll do more harm than good. Buying a car won't help you reach your destination if you don't know how to drive.

I try to steer people away from Fong because I think his marketing tactics are aimed at the wannabe-pro who can be convinced that such a device will solve their problems. The world of wedding photography is being flooded with people who just bought a nice camera and think they can get rich with it. Fong is laughing all the way to the bank.

If you have a few spare bucks and want to experiment with one of the Hong Kong knock-offs, there's no harm in that.

[constrict]

If a plastic diffuser made them work better, then the manufacturers would ship them that way.


I disagree with that. Why would they ship a modifier along with a flash unit? They wouldn't, they would sell it separately (at least) like every other freakin' accessory they sell at ridiculously overpriced cost. I love canon...but paying $80 for the newest off shoe cord ruffled my undies...come on! :mad:

[Curtis N]

Let me clarify that statement.

We get questions here on a weekly basis about "Which diffuser should I get with my new flash?" There are people who somehow get the idea that putting a Sto-Fen or whatever on their flash will make better pictures, and they get one of those things, put it on the flash, and leave it there all the time. They seem to think that a diffuser is a compulsory accessory.

Flash manufacturers make motorized zoom heads with precisely engineered reflectors and fresnel lenses in front. It would be a lot cheaper to just put the bulb inside a translucent plastic dome. But they are made the way they are for a reason, and plastic diffusers waste all that engineering.

Constrict - I understand your disdain with overpriced accessories. It's one reason I don't own an iPod. :D

[FlashZebra]

Constrict - I understand your disdain with overpriced accessories. It's one reason I don't own an iPod. :D
But I use my ipod to control my chain saw.

Curtis how can you effectively control your chain saw without an ipod?

Now to get back on subject.

Has the iFong been released yet. My beta version was way cool. I had no idea that purple thing could spin so fast.

Informed iRumor has that the iFong is so popular with ifocus groups, that the iiFong is already on the idrawing board.

With this ifrenzied irate of idevelopment can the iiiFong be ivery far ibehind.

(Ooops! I think I just possibly breached my non idisclosure iagreement)

injoy! Lon

[Curtis N]

Curtis how can you effectively control your chain saw without an ipod?No chainsaw. Lumiquest Pocket Beaver.

[FlashZebra]

No chainsaw. Lumiquest Pocket Beaver.
Is that the Lumiquest Pocket iBeaver?

injoy! Lon

[LightUser]

No ipod here either. I admit I was Fonged and got one and it does soften the light and shadows are almost non existant if you want to use your flash on hotshoe and not a bracket. With that said, let me state that the lightsphere II will really make your images underexposed. Anything on my 580ex II I have to do a +1 FEC if I don't shoot straight on. If you look at Fong's images real close on the video his also is very underexposed but he doesn't mention about any other adjustment. You will need to be in a room with low ceilings and all white and all white walls for his products to work as advertised. If I want to bounce I use a demb flipit, otherwise it is straight on mounted on a stroboframe flip flash bracket. I'd rather flip the flash than the entire camera. If I want soft light while on a bracket I use the Lumiquest Soft Box on my flash and there again, that is a modifier so look for up to 1 stop of light loss, but hey - it sure looks professional..don't waste your money on Fong's stuff, get a bracket. If you choose to try a lightsphere don't shop for bargains because there will be none, he has price fixed his products to be the same worldwide, no discounts or sales allowed.

[marian]

I just have to say that that web page has some of the most misleading pictures I have ever seen. (A sucker is born every minute)

To actually think that a LS could take that huge group shot is misleading. How many rows back are the people, way in the back? (DOF?) The FLASH lit the room, not the LS. Just above that group shot is a young bride and groom. It seems that the exposure was compensated for, meaning that the shutter had to be dragged for the ambient light. (Look at candle, on the left side of the picture. It's definitely much brighter and the ambient light was picked up.

Even the video down below (he's in a hallway) taking pictures. The walls are bouncing the light back into the subject, not the LS.

[SkipD]

I just don't understand how so many people can be so gullible and apparently cannot think through the simple physics of light control. The basics of how light from a flash can be made "softer" is not all that difficult to understand.

However, I guess that wading through all the total BS (bovine excrement) put out by marketing folks like Gary Fong can be difficult enough in itself.

[linarms]

The LS is just a tool, and like any other tool, used correctly, in the right situation, it can work well.

That said, I bought one so I could more legitimately uphold my long-standing claim that the LS does no better than my flip-it can do, and having now used them both, I still believe that the LS is ridiculously overpriced for what it delivers (which is soft but not very controllable light) and that a much cheaper tool like the flip-it can deliver better shots if the photographer spends the time learning how to use it effectively.

But I've given up on bagging Fong and his Dong ... ultimately, responsibility for making him rich off a not-so-great product rests with a whole heap of gullible consumers.

I would encourage the OP to consider carefully what the true worth of the Fong Dong actually is. Mine is never used and will shortly be sold to someone gullible, or given away to someone who doesn't have a flip-it yet.

[Croasdail]

Same story from the same people, week in, week out.

The fact of the matter is it does work, it just doesn't work miracles. To get the most out of it really does take more knowledge then the video's would imply. But it does work. I second shoot for a pro who has been doing weddings for 20 years - hardly a newbie. He is actually a very well respected photographer that gets flown all over the place to shoot weddings, and is constantly asked to judge competitions. And he uses the devices to very good use in places like the brides and grooms prep rooms where softer light is desired. As far as the underexposing, that is no different then any other light modifying device that requires adjustments to metering. And really, you should do a flash read, not just trust your camera's metering.

It is goofy looking, probably over priced, but still one of the least expensive things a wedding photographer will have in their bag. If the difference between $25 and $50 is critical to your budget, there are other issues at hand. Like mentioned above, Canon isn't exactly being philanthropic with their pricing on accessories either. People just love to had the dude, for many many reasons.

I would look for a used one if $50 is a big deal to you. If you do lots of indoor closed quarters flash work, it is worth a try. It is after all, just $50. Less then a good photo book. Cheers.

[sootyvrs]

WOW, I'm surprised by the feedback on this product and Gary Fong!

There are so many diffuser products out there right now and it can be a little confusing on which one is suitable for my needs. I appreciate that there is a lot of skill required to get the best from using a flash and I'm still learning. Luckily, I'm no PRO so only need to please myself with the results ;)

I have both 430EX and 220EX (for light travel) flash units. I only use direct flash for outdoor fill and indoors, I usually bounce of ceiling but some shots.

My problems is that I feel there is not enough detail in the eyes sometimes with bounce and would like diffuser that can throw some light forward (catchlight) without giving a harsh direct flash look.

I usually shoot pretty close and I would always play with FEC and EC to get the results I want.

I'm not sure if I would pay £50 ($100) for this diffuser as this is the price in the UK for this item but would get a replica unit from HK for £10 ($20) to give it a try, which I assume will give similar results.

Alternatively, would something like the Lumiquest 80-20 give better results in throwing light forward without harsh direct flash look?

I guess maybe the proof is in the trying.

[Rudy M.]

I sure wish I had read this thread before I got "Fonged", especially Curtis' comments! I do have to say that indoors, is rooms with bright walls and bright low ceilings, my LS2PJ works pretty well--but it does look rather hokey. I like my Lumiquest Pocket Boucker and Mini Soft Box much better. The fold flat and pack easier, don't fall off and simply look better on the flash--more professional even though I am not. Also, I think Fong's recommended settings tend to underexpose on my 20D/580EX. Last year I showed my LS2PJ to a photojournalist who thought it did well for what it is for, but he would not use one--just the pull out white card on the flash and tilt the flash at 45° or 60° for most shots indoors or straight on outside. If you are really close, he told me to use the mini soft box. He was a Nikon shooter beause that is what his paper gave him, but he and is co-workers were trying to talk their boss into upgrading to Canon!

[Curtis N]

would something like the Lumiquest 80-20 give better results in throwing light forward without harsh direct flash look?It's important to understand what creates the harsh direct flash look to begin with.

A small light source, close to the lens, overpowering the ambient light. This creates no shadows on your subject (except maybe under the nose and chin) and therefore tends to make the subject look flat and shapeless. Light falloff makes the background dark. Shadows on the background, if visible, are very pronounced with hard edges. The result is an image that looks unnatural.

Ceiling bounce is not an inherently complex concept. Throw the light at a white surface above you that creates diffuse reflections. The ceiling becomes a very large apparent light source, throwing light in all directions and providing very generalized illumination for the entire area. Since we are accustomed to seeing people under overhead lighting, the shadow patterns seem very natural.

The problem with ceiling bounce is that eye sockets get a bit dark and it doesn't create catchlights in eyes.

This is where the various bounce cards and plastic diffusers come in. They improve the lighting by providing a small amount if subject illumination directly from the card or diffuser, while most of the light is thrown at the ceiling. The key to effective ceiling bounce is being able to control the ratio. How much direct light will your subjects receive compared to bounced light? As you move closer or further from your subject, or move to a room with a higher or lower ceiling, this ratio will change. So in my opinion, the best flash modifiers for ceiling bounce situations are those that allow you to alter this ratio.

Consider the simple index card & rubber band. You can slide the card higher or lower, to catch more or less light and direct it forward. It's not only versatile, it also happens to be pretty inexpensive and compact for storage. I have a nice little pile of flash modifiers, including various Lumiquest products, a softbox and a plastic diffuser. They all have their place, but the simple white card is what I use most.

http://performancephoto.smugmug.com/photos/193799451-M.jpg

[sootyvrs]

Thanks for the tip Curtis. i would never have thought of something so simple to be effective.

I will certainly give this a try and it's within budget too ;)

[Curtis N]

I have applied for US and international patents. When I release it commercially, it will be call "The Anti-Fong". ;)

Here's another low-budget, high versatility product that I like:
http://abetterbouncecard.com

[steveathome]

On the very first sample image on the op's link, the lightsphere also enhances the candlelight in the background.

The second sample is amazing, it overcomes light fall off laws. ;)

[breal101]

I have applied for US and international patents. When I release it commercially, it will be call "The Anti-Fong". ;)

Here's another low-budget, high versatility product that I like:
http://abetterbouncecard.com

When you sell it will you produce several long videos to explain how to use it. The guy seems like a sweet person but watching the video is a bit tedious.
I think he could make hour long video on how to tie your shoes. :):)

[steveathome]

I think he could make hour long video on how to tie your shoes. :):)

I'd be interested in that video if it comes out, please keep us informed. ;)

[Big Mike]

Great points from Curtis, as usual.

Going back to his point that if something really worked that well, the manufactures would include it with the flash. Well, this point is proved by the fact that Canon does include a white bounce card/panel with their top end unit. Too bad they don't have that on the 430 as well.

[breal101]

Big Mike, the index card or the better bounce card will work better than the panel on the 580.

[Big Mike]

That's true...but the point was that a simple bounce card is a great tool...and Canon thinks so as well.

[breal101]

Canon and Nikon have the panels on their speedlights, my point is that they are pretty much useless because of their small size, like Curtis said size matters.

[Wilt]

Canon and Nikon have the panels on their speedlights, my point is that they are pretty much useless because of their small size, like Curtis said size matters.


If the flash is pointed upward toward the ceiling, it is the ceiling which is providing the increase in size of the apparent light source!!! The integral reflector panel merely provides a small source of light that reflects back to the lens as catchlights in the eyes!

[Curtis N]

Canon and Nikon have the panels on their speedlights, my point is that they are pretty much useless because of their small size, like Curtis said size matters.True, but bigger is not always better, so I wouldn't call the catchlight panel worthless. It just has its limitations.

A larger card can sometimes be too much. Get on the floor with a crawling infant to take closeups and a big bounce card will look very much like direct flash.

In a pinch, I have used a white post-it note on my flash with good results. But I was close to my subject and far from the ceiling.

[Raymate]

Dont bother, I tried to order one from the website then they removed the UK destination and never replied to my emails (this was a few months back). So I just got an omnibounce instead.

[Raymate]

Maybe G

[PacAce]

Maybe G

Oops! Sorry I pulled the rug out from under you. I decided to move my post to its own thread so that I can put a poll in. Will let you know when it's done.

[PacAce]

OK, go cast your vote. :)

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=377373

[LightUser]

Canon and Nikon have the panels on their speedlights, my point is that they are pretty much useless because of their small size, like Curtis said size matters.

True and it is for horizontal shooting only..go veritcal and it is useless because it is on the wide side of the flash.

[marian]

Before the LS hit the market, photographers all over the world for the past (how many years?) have shot millions & millions of photos using bounce flash, index cards and other gadgets.

I have sat and watched judging of photos (local, state, regional & national organizations) where you can hear the judges speak of "beautiful quality of light" in the subjects face. No LS!

You guys who bought the LS, just helped to make GF rich!

If you "really" understand light and know how to work with it (flash, etc) then you can make some really great photographs.

For those of you who think that you can just stick one of them on your flash and produce "beautiful pictures" with out any knowledge, well you are wrong.

[sumozebra]

Sootyvrs,
I'm in hong kong, and i took a look athte gary fong boxes.. they're averaging 100$ - 120$ HKD a piece.. that's roughly 12 - 15$ usd. I've only see the translucent ones, not the transparent ones, and yes, the quality / effects u get from it is identical to the gary fong box (minus the exactness of fstops u loose.. since i'm pretty sure they're not as high quality in terms of their translucency)

I've been watching the videos here

http://store.garyfonginc.com/liiido.html

The results just look too good to be true! As good results with this diffuser as studio lighting!!

Good marketing or is this product as good as the videos suggest?

I've also seen replica lightsphere's from Hong Kong on ebay. Are these as good for 1/4 of the price?

[Lightstream]

I just don't understand how so many people can be so gullible and apparently cannot think through the simple physics of light control. The basics of how light from a flash can be made "softer" is not all that difficult to understand.

Flash is a difficult topic to understand. Most people find it so complex that they simply give up and hunt for quick fix after quick fix.

As Curtis said, Strobist is the best way to learn.

[linarms]

Incidentally, certain pro photo magazines are partly (hugely?) responsible for the Fong Dong's success, eg. UK's Professional Photographer magazine were glowing about it in a big review last year sometime. So ... don't just blame Gary and gullability! The so-called pro reviewers have a lot to answer for too!

[Wilt]

UK's Professional Photographer magazine were glowing about it in a big review last year sometime. So ... don't just blame Gary and gullability! The so-called pro reviewers have a lot to answer for too!

Lest readers forget, 'pro' simply means 'being paid to do something'!

[Steve Beck]

That bottom video is crap! Look close the flash gun doesnt fire, a flash of light comes form somehwere else.

[Headcase650]

I have a lightsphere II, It works as described, the key is knowing its limitations just like any other tool. No single modifier is the answer to every situation. Im also a huge fan of the "ABetterBounceCard" that Peter Greg came up with and its very cheap, less than 3 bucks. I think the reason Fong catches so much crap is the pricing and marketing. I wouldnt pay the current prices, I bought mine when they were $29. If you want one you can get exact clones off ebay for less than $20 shipped from china.

[Titus213]

I have a lightsphere II, It works as described, the key is knowing its limitations just like any other tool. No single modifier is the answer to every situation. Im also a huge fan of the "ABetterBounceCard" that Peter Greg came up with and its very cheap, less than 3 bucks. I think the reason Fong catches so much crap is the pricing and marketing. I wouldnt pay the current prices, I bought mine when they were $29. If you want one you can get exact clones off ebay for less than $20 shipped from china.

I agree completely - it's another tool. I got mine when they first came out at about $30 and it has produced some excellent results. It's not the silver bullet for flash photography. Neither is the Stofen, nor the better bounce card, nor the Lumiquest ProMax system. Understanding light is the key that will make all these add-ons perform better and in some cases be unnecessary.

BTW - now I put the LSII on the flash and let my wife shoot the bride and bridesmaids getting ready. It works and produces some excellent images.

[dalia]

when i made this one i stop using garyfong bowl.
http://www.youtube.com/user/PeterGregg

[Baadil]

Why is all EXIF information stipped from the images on Fong's website? ;-)

[fiveFPS]

Looks interesting but many people sayign its not good?

[LightUser]

I use the Demp Flipit..when you want direct flash just swing it back out of the way...you can hardly adjust the better bounce card, try the flipit, totally adjustable to get rid of any shadows.

[linarms]

Alright I'm officially switching to the pro-GF position ... he just got married ... time to give him a break, eh?

The LightSphere is a good tool for photographers who like it and/or truly know how it works. Is it overpriced? I think so. But then again, something is only ever worth what people will pay for it. According to the rules of our western economies, anyway.

The fact that many photographers use the LightSphere ignorantly is annoying sometimes, but heck, the same photographers have been using all sorts of gear ignorantly for a long time. Eventually those of us who work harder at knowing what we're doing have to square with that fact.

My LightSphere has gone unused since I bought it, because I don't like using it as much as my Flip-It. But that's my choice and although I'll happily explain my reasons for it (including, perhaps, my opinion of the LightSphere's price), I'm going to stop bagging the product, much like I stopped bagging GF himself a while ago. It does what it claims to do, after all.

As for the potentially misleading demos of the LightSphere, I've fought hard against them in the past (back when I was guilty of bagging GF) and honestly, I think the guy's just crazy busy and if someone sends him an example of a nice shot they say they got with the LS, would you expect him not to use it?

Of course, if we're going to be light practitioners, we need to know why the LS does what it does, why the Flip-It can do something very similar, why off-camera flash is cool and Strobist should be your home page, etc.

But right now, I'm really feeling sorry for getting caught up in the LS/GF bashing that goes on here, and if the man himself reads any of these threads, let me say "I'm sorry". My conduct has been at best unprofessional and at worst defamatory. Both of which are bad.

[LightUser]

Well, I just found a situation believe it or not that I would like to have my lightsphere back. If anyone has a lightsphere II for Canon 580EX then PM me and let me know what you want for it. It doesn't matter to me if it is clear or cloudy.

[LightUser]

I guess no one has one that size they want to get rid of...that's ok, I'll find a used one somewhere. I just don't want to pay Gary $49.95 for one when I can maybe get one for half that price. I think it is the P4 or C4 size.

[jrjphoto]

I've been a Strobist for a while now and one of the first things you learn about photography-in-general is that you can get away with DIYing more often than you'd probably think. I just learned that I can use my existing lighting gear to duplicate the effects of a ring light with zero hassle and that means one less +/- $1000 tool to buy (and carry around).

As for this Gary Fong thing; I've tried the Lightsphere 2, it works, but it's not a magical tool -- you can't be a technically inept photog and use it well. But I've reached similar results using layers of tissue paper scotch-taped to my flash, so again, it's one less bit of gear to shell out the Benjamins for.

Well, Jacksons. Or a Grant and some Lincolns. Or the Grant and a few Hamiltons when you add shipping costs. Or maybe a single Benjamin with a bunch of change...

[NewattheGame]

FlashZebra

Funniest rant I've ever read! Incidentally, the best diffuser I ever used was a white plastic christmas pudding holder from Marks & Spencer; my iomnibounce! I've got so much gear, honestly, one day I'll take a picture...