studio strobes - recommendation ?

[jimwong]

I shot for the first time using studio strobes and I'm hooked. Can someone recommend a good brand and minimum ws power rating I should get for portrait work. Is a three head set, 600 ws per head be sufficent? too much, too little? I am looking at Novatron. Someone suggested Normans but I can't find a website for Normans.

thanks..

[DaveG]

I shot for the first time using studio strobes and I'm hooked. Can someone recommend a good brand and minimum ws power rating I should get for portrait work. Is a three head set, 600 ws per head be sufficent? too much, too little? I am looking at Novatron. Someone suggested Normans but I can't find a website for Normans.

thanks..

Have a look at the Alien Bees. Smallish, cheap; and with choices in different powers. For a portrait set up a bunch in the 400-600 watt second range should be fine. If you are thinking about using them for large inside group shots then all the power you can get is very nice.

You will need a flash meter as well. You could figure out the exposure with your digital camera by trial and error but you'll never be able to set up the lighting ratio that way.

[blacktape]

i don't know much about Norman and Novatrons for they're not sold here in my country. I do know that top photographers in NY and around the states, many of them uses ProFoto or Broncolor. I think Annie Leibovitz uses ProFoto. Anyway, I would recommend both brands. I own a Broncolor system and the quality of light is better than sun!

Anwyay,
3x600 WS is probably not needed. Sure you can have three, but 2x600WS would do the job just nice. What you have to think about is what attachment you gonna put on the lamps? Umbrellas are cheap but they're old. Currently people shoot with a big softboxes or dish reflectors, both can be very costly attachments. Consider the cost of these along with the lights.

I'd recommend getting a large softbox for starter. One aroudn the size of 150cm x 100cm or larger would be good. This would cost you around $300 by itself.

Also,
i think you should seroiusly save the cost of a light meter which can cost $150 to $300 or more. I assume you have a digital camera. These days nobody uses lightmeters anymore in the studio. They press the shutter, watch the contrast, then adjust the light output until they get it right. It's a much faster way to work. Who cares if the ratio is not perfectly 3:1 as long as the look is right? Anyway these days you can adjust contrast further from Photoshop, a luxury most photographers didn't have with slide. Yes, I've seen NY photographers and swiss photographers shoot, and serously, nobody uses lightmeters anymore. Too Slow!

[Vegas Poboy]

Earlier this summer I purchased two Alien Bees 800's & love them. Last week I purchased a white-lighting x1600 and it's now my main all add ons is fully interchangable. Good Buy & great for starter to midrange users.

[evilenglishman]

These days nobody uses lightmeters anymore in the studio. They press the shutter, watch the contrast, then adjust the light output until they get it right. It's a much faster way to work. Who cares if the ratio is not perfectly 3:1 as long as the look is right? Anyway these days you can adjust contrast further from Photoshop, a luxury most photographers didn't have with slide. Yes, I've seen NY photographers and swiss photographers shoot, and serously, nobody uses lightmeters anymore. Too Slow!

sorry to disagree, but that is utter crap. EVERY pro photographer I know uses a light meter with studio lights and NONE of them "hope" to correct wrong exposure with photoshop - they get it right before they start shooting.

[DaveG]

i don't know much about Norman and Novatrons for they're not sold here in my country. I do know that top photographers in NY and around the states, many of them uses ProFoto or Broncolor. I think Annie Leibovitz uses ProFoto. Anyway, I would recommend both brands. I own a Broncolor system and the quality of light is better than sun!

Anwyay,
3x600 WS is probably not needed. Sure you can have three, but 2x600WS would do the job just nice. What you have to think about is what attachment you gonna put on the lamps? Umbrellas are cheap but they're old. Currently people shoot with a big softboxes or dish reflectors, both can be very costly attachments. Consider the cost of these along with the lights.

I'd recommend getting a large softbox for starter. One aroudn the size of 150cm x 100cm or larger would be good. This would cost you around $300 by itself.

Also,
i think you should seroiusly save the cost of a light meter which can cost $150 to $300 or more. I assume you have a digital camera. These days nobody uses lightmeters anymore in the studio. They press the shutter, watch the contrast, then adjust the light output until they get it right. It's a much faster way to work. Who cares if the ratio is not perfectly 3:1 as long as the look is right? Anyway these days you can adjust contrast further from Photoshop, a luxury most photographers didn't have with slide. Yes, I've seen NY photographers and swiss photographers shoot, and serously, nobody uses lightmeters anymore. Too Slow!

"... 3x600 WS is probably not needed. Sure you can have three, but 2x600WS would do the job just nice."

You can do portrait work with two flashes, fill & main, but a third is needed for a background light and a fourth for a hair light.

" ... Umbrellas are cheap but they're old."

Umbrellas are fine, especially if you are taking your stuff to a location shoot. Are softboxes better? Possibly, but umbrellas are very good and about 20% of the price.

"Also, i think you should seroiusly save the cost of a light meter which can cost $150 to $300 or more. I assume you have a digital camera. These days nobody uses lightmeters anymore in the studio."

I assume that you haven't actually been in a studio lately, since EVERY pro that I know who uses digital cameras, use a flash meter to set up their lighting ratos.

"They press the shutter, watch the contrast, then adjust the light output until they get it right. It's a much faster way to work. Who cares if the ratio is not perfectly 3:1 as long as the look is right?"

This would be a lot slower work flow. You'd have to set up the first flash and get the right exposure based on the review screen. Then you'd have to set up the second light again with the review screen and hope to see the exposure difference between the first, which is almost impossible. I can see a whole bunch of back and forth as you go between the camera and the flash to move it or adjust the settings. Instead I set up the main light, meter it, then set up the fill light meter that one and adjust it so it's almost a stop less than the main. That's a 1:3 ratio and it'll be 1:3 every time I set up my lights, no matter where I put them.

More to the point under your system the results would be very inconsistent. I can see a day where you think that the fill is less than the main and it isn't and you shoot this way with the subject looking the wrong way. Now you can fix a lot of this stuff in Photoshop, but why would you want to? Even if your method was quicker (it isn't) you will easily add hours to your workflow if you mess up during the shoot.

There used to be an axion which went, "Make a Deluxe negative, and then buy an Economy print." That meant getting the right lighting ratio & basic exposure; making sure nothing in the background was distracting, and then adding vignetters to darken corners and so forth. I did all the work in the camera and the lab just pumped out a cheap print with - surprisingly - the correct density, lighting look, no retouching and with burned in corners.

I still try to incorporate a lot of that intent now so I save a lot of time later; yet I infer from your method that you only want to get close and then you can fix everything in Photoshop. Now this might be OK if you only need to work on one shot later, but what are your plans if you have to spend 15 minutes on each of 200 shots?

With your way you'd get 1:3 today, 1:4 tomorrow and something else the day after, but you'd never know for sure. Even if you are set up in a studio you'd be afraid to move anything after you got something that worked. I'm not sure that you'd even reverse the main light side. And of course there are times when I'd want to change my ratios for different purposes. I'd adjust the fill so that it is a little more than one stop and I'm at 1:4. Your procedure would be to adjust it and hope it's right.

"Yes, I've seen NY photographers and swiss photographers shoot, and serously, nobody uses lightmeters anymore. Too Slow!"

That's not true if they are shooting in the studio, and if their IQ is over 80. And once again your method is much slower, assuming you want your results to be at least reasonably close to the ratio required.

[blacktape]

so people have different methods of doing shoots. i don't see the need to bash and make a big fuss out of it. oh wait, you're the top contributor, you can't be wrong.

it would help to have an open mind sometimes.

[scottbergerphoto]

DaveG and the evil one are both correct, absolutely correct. A flash meter is indespensible for studio lights. The Sekonic L358 is a great relatively inexpensive meter that will accomadate a Pocket Wizard module to fire your flashes from your meter if they are hooked up to a Pocket Wizard receiver.
If you don't have alot of money to spend, consider the SP Excalibur line.
When I started doing studio work I bought This Kit (http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=productlist&A=details&Q=&sku=190515&is=REG) and added a third 3200, a softbox, and a beauty disc.
Regards,
Scott

[scottbergerphoto]

so people have different methods of doing shoots. i don't see the need to bash and make a big fuss out of it. oh wait, you're the top contributor, you can't be wrong.

it would help to have an open mind sometimes.
Perhaps if you had said, "In my opinion......." , instead of "Nobody uses......". You might have gotten a different response. :?
Scott

[Vegas Poboy]

I'm currently a student @ a local college & all of the pros that I've seen work uses a light meter, with both film & digital. Some commercial accounts still request transparency film & you must use a light meter for it. Quality in makes faster quality out. Everyone of course have a different way of doing things, I have the sekonic L-358 and use it with all my studio work.
The lastest issue of Popular Photography has an article on light kits & how to shoot food.

[DaveG]

so people have different methods of doing shoots. i don't see the need to bash and make a big fuss out of it. oh wait, you're the top contributor, you can't be wrong.

it would help to have an open mind sometimes.

Sorry if you feel bashed, but I think that I pointed out some serious errors in your argument. The bad part of forums like this is when opinions are not challenged, and are left standing as fact. Luckily very little on this site is accepted that way without a lot of discussion, and that is how it should be.

As far as having an open mind, I simply don't, if I think that it would require accepting an error in thinking. If someone says that the sky is green, then do I have to have an open mind and agree with them, when everything in my expeience tells me that it's blue?

[blacktape]

Sorry if you feel bashed, but I think that I pointed out some serious errors in your argument.

wow... you really think of them as "errors" ?

wow....

If someone says that the sky is green, then do I have to have an open mind and agree with them, when everything in my expeience tells me that it's blue?[/qoute]

that's good. at least you dispel post-modernism philosophy.

[DaveG]

Sorry if you feel bashed, but I think that I pointed out some serious errors in your argument.

wow... you really think of them as "errors" ?

.

[/quote]

Well, how about very bad advice?

[Cordell]

Sorry if you feel bashed, but I think that I pointed out some serious errors in your argument.

wow... you really think of them as "errors" ?

wow....

If someone says that the sky is green, then do I have to have an open mind and agree with them, when everything in my expeience tells me that it's blue?[/qoute]

that's good. at least you dispel post-modernism philosophy.



I don't think you should take what DaveG said in such a negative way. I think he simply pointed out things that you basically said are facts and are not. He did not bash you.

Umbrellas are not old at all. They have their place in a photographer's arsenal just like a softbox. I know several photographers who have been working for over 20 years that are now digital and use umbrellas, softboxes, and light meters. I can tell you to contact any photographer in any telephone directory and ask if they use umbrellas. The answer will be yes.

Photography is as simple as you make it. Digital in some ways actually makes things more difficult because of the low tonal range it covers. It is extremely important to get the ratio right BEFORE you snap the that little button. To me the LCD is only good for composition. The histogram is more useful for exposure. Now how can you judge ratios based on those a histogram? And I agree that who cares if it is exactly 3:1 as long as it is what you want to capture in the first place. But why make it difficult and time consuming by only working with a little bitty LCD?

[Bruce Foreman]

I gotta jump in here...

One of the first things I had to do when I took over Wallace Studios of San Angelo was FIRE the photographer I inherited.

He kept insisting that "what you see is what you get" with the modelling lights on StudioMasters and kept haphazardly moving the lights wherever he felt without regard to any consistency.

In those days (1980's) I used to set a 3:1 ratio with a flashmeter, test with a polaroid back, and then "string" the lights (a heavy grade of string with knots tied in to mark the exact working distance for each light at each aperture used.

Umbrellas "old"? C'mon, gimme a break. Yeah, I know there are "trends". And I know that while there are some diffrences in how each type of light modifier affects the "character" of light, a photographer who knows lighting can obtain very similar results with whatever he has to work with.

After a 4 year absence from professional photography (during which I rarely touched a camera but taught defensive handgun skills to little old ladies) I'm kind of coming out of retirement some and am looking to replace the location lighting kit I sold a few years ago.

While I love and prefer softboxes and large "dish" reflectors, I'll probably go with a couple of Alien Bees B800's and use them with umbrellas. Folks who watch me work are FAR MORE IMPRESSED with how I pose my people, pay attention to body position and clothing detail, and keep good expression going than by what kind of light modifiers I'm using.

Bruce Foreman

[blacktape]

this is getting boring.
you guys need to get a life.

here is a few photographers i know personally who never touches their lightmeter anymore.

--

Urs Recher joined Bron as head of the company's internal studio, responsible for all of Bron's internal advertising photography, product testing and development, as well as the company's worldwide workshop and seminar program.

and he's holding lighting seminars worldwide.

http://www.baltronics.com.au/creative_workshop_2004.html
http://www.traxler.com.hk/news/index.php?page=get_article&article_id=1Y1SYXM-RJFNQQS-JMFL1ZV-Q6WPFMK


--

and sarah silver

http://www.sarahsilver.com/

go email sarah and ask if she still uses a lightmeter.

:(

as i've said,
it would be good to have an open mind.

you still want to use your meters, that's fine.
it's not like i'm preaching heretic doctrines.
[/b]

[Sketcher]

I think you should seroiusly save the cost of a light meter which can cost $150 to $300 or more. I assume you have a digital camera. These days nobody uses lightmeters anymore in the studio. They press the shutter, watch the contrast, then adjust the light output until they get it right. It's a much faster way to work. Who cares if the ratio is not perfectly 3:1 as long as the look is right? Anyway these days you can adjust contrast further from Photoshop, a luxury most photographers didn't have with slide. Yes, I've seen NY photographers and swiss photographers shoot, and serously, nobody uses lightmeters anymore. Too Slow!
blacktape, ease up there. You speak in absolutes and then accuse others of not being open minded. You bring on the bashing yourself with the insistance that your limited circle of experience is the modus operandi for the whole digital photography genre. In saying "limited circle of experience" I mean to recognize that your examples are hand picked (albeit personal preferences if not acquaintances) for the style of lighting preference to which you ascribe. As Scott notes; if you'd have prefaced your statements as opinion rather than fact you'd have received a much different response. In fact, your input would more likely have been respected as another way to do things (even if unpopular here) rather than the pretentious poke that it was.

So, what kind of advice do you tell someone new to lighting who just bought themselves a bunch of equipment based on your opinion? You can't tell them to take a reading because they didn't buy a light meter. You threw 'ratios' out the window so how can you quickly impart the knowledge of these basic aspects of lighting to your forum acolyte? You can't see what they're seeing so how can they explain it and how can you respond in a meaningful manner that helps them 'get the look right'? More often than not, a hobby photographer getting into lighting isn't all that interested in learning photoshop if they haven't had a reason to delve into it already. Think it'd be difficult to explain how ratios work to someone green to lighting? Just a few lights we're talking about here. Try explaining Photoshop to a non computer/non photoshop experienced hobbyist and you'll likely spring for the cost of that light meter yourself. Besides, if you can't even get close on the front end, no amount of wizardly mad photoshop skill will a photographer make.

The only way a non-light metered studio workflow would be efficient is if you already have significant experience in your lighting knowledge (be it through unguided trial & error or traditional learning), know your equipment well enough to be within a perceived range of output and are more comfortable putting your time in fixing/enhancing your images in photoshop rather than getting it right in glass up front. I'm not saying that your non-light meter recommendation isn't a valid option. I'm saying that it's not a reasonable option for someone who doesn't have the experience under their belt to choose to shoot w/out a meter and that if efficiency is any sort of a goal; being creative with a shoot_&_assess_with_every_adjustment methodology might be good for artistic license but it heavily weighs against a reproducable workflow result.

I'm all for the digital age and anything that speeds up a workflow is worth considering in my book. But, you take the time to teach the basics and you'll have a person who can pose a question and value the input received more quickly in acheiving their goal than someone who knows what they want but cannot describe it in terms of photographic technique. Further, you'll have taught an individual who can then teach another tried and true methods that are much easier to post through than describing a Zen experience of getting it right.

Hey, it's an internet forum. It's a good one, but it's a forum nonetheless and you're going to get people speaking their mind just as you have spoken yours. Don't be surprised if you get back just as pointed a response as your own post. One benefit to this particular forum as well as another popular forum such as FM is that the regular members here OWN their opinions. That is, most people here qualify their input with their own experience; they don't usually just point at someone from their personal iconized list and say "I'm right because this particular person who is an awesome photographer does it this way".

You're solid in recommending that people here try having an open mind. Practice what you preach. If so inclined to put action to word, try posting your original post in this thread over in FM's Lighting Technique forum and see if you receive a warmer reception. http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/board/44

There's invaluable learning in thinking outside the box and trying things that aren't neatly packaged in a textbook or photography forum FAQ. To limit oneself to only the tenets of a craft would be I think to pursue an endeavor that is less about passion. But in order to think outside the box, you're already referring to the box. So let's start with a box that is easy enough to describe that we can more easily and more quickly help each other think outside of.

[blacktape]

"Obsessive!?, yes. Thank you

I think your signature can't be further from the truth. :)

when i say "these days nobody uses lightmeters anymore in the studio", it was more of a figure of speech? c'mon you guys all have used something like that before?

the internet forum is so scary these days. when you type anything, you better be careful about the words or YOU WILL BE PERSECUTED! they even persecute you for grammar mistakes!

hey, bob, joe, whoever you guys are, i didn't say "thou shalt not use lightmeters". but if you guys still insist i was stating what i said as absolute fact, i guess majority wins.

i'm guilty as charged.

damn what a hot courtroom in here.
these persecutors are so fierce i almost forgot they're trying to help me become a better photographer.

have you emailed Urs on how he shoot in a studio? this guy is responsible for all of Broncolor's internal advertising photography, product testing and development, as well as the company's WORLDWIDE workshop. surely he knows a thing or two about lighting.

[blacktape]

if this is how most photographers in the US do their shoot, then surely competition shouldn't be that bad. i should consider expanding my studio to the states. :lol:

although there are some real genius in new york.

[OviV]

O.K. Back on topic:

Would this kit be enough for a beginner that just wants to take studio like pictures of friends and family?

http://alienbees.com/digibee.htm

If so, what else would I need to hook them up to the Digital Rebel? A hotshoe to pc synch?

What is an inexpensive frame for backdrops for said person?

Ovi

[BDM]

DaveG and the evil one are both correct, absolutely correct. A flash meter is indespensible for studio lights. The Sekonic L358 is a great relatively inexpensive meter that will accomadate a Pocket Wizard module to fire your flashes from your meter if they are hooked up to a Pocket Wizard receiver.
If you don't have alot of money to spend, consider the SP Excalibur line.
When I started doing studio work I bought This Kit (http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=productlist&A=details&Q=&sku=190515&is=REG) and added a third 3200, a softbox, and a beauty disc.
Regards,
Scott

I totally agree that using a flash meter for studio work is extremely helpful if not essential. I have a Minolta Flashmeter IV which I would not be without. Of course, I used to do a lot of 16mm movie shooting on reversal film where you did not really have the option of post shooting density adjustments. Generally, using an incident meter we set the key light level for the lens aperature we wanted to use and adjusted the fill for the ratio we wanted. We also metered the back light to set it at a level compatible with the key light level. We were particularly careful to maintain flesh tones at a consistent level from shot to shot.

Of course, digital cameras do help in evaluating the setup - - I used to shoot polaroids to get a better visualization of how the setup will look on film, both lighting ratio, composition and even focus. Although I still do that with 4X5 cameras, the smaller format digital has eliminated polaroid testing for almost everything else and that saves a bundle of money and time.

As far as using Photoshop for fixing things, while I'm new to Photoshop I can't help looking at it a lot like convential darkroom work - - it's there to tweak things not save disasters. Long ago I learned that if it isn't on the negative it won't be on the print. From what I've seen so far, I don't think digital work is a lot different in that respect.

Bruce

[misko063]

Hi,

I use Bowens, and I'm very satisfied with their equipment.

You can check my gallery and my lighting setup at:

http://bowens.co.uk/gallery/miodrag

Their mono blocks are from full metal body, nicely build, and beautifully designed.
I use them a lot, almost every day, and they work trouble free.

I dislike only one thing. If you reduce power, you must press test button, to trigger light and discharge capacitors. There is no automatic discharge, like on some other brands.

[Bruce Foreman]

O.K. Back on topic:

Would this kit be enough for a beginner that just wants to take studio like pictures of friends and family?

http://alienbees.com/digibee.htm

Yes. And it would work for non beginners who didn't need a lot of power to cover large groups. The B400 should be used fairly close in with minimum 48" silver umbrellas. The low power would not be a disadvantage with the 6MP class of DSLR's (Most of these do not have significant noise at ISO 400) or with ISO 400 film.

The reason I say use close in with umbrellas is that typically 5"-7" reflectors used direct produce very specular, harsh light with sharply defined shadows. Umbrellas, (even silver ones) used fairly close to the subject soften the "character" of the light making it better for people.

The package offered looks to me to be very well thought out for the beginner

If so, what else would I need to hook them up to the Digital Rebel? A hotshoe to pc synch?

Yes. They (Alien Bees) have a very inexpensive hot shoe adapter. I forget the price but it is listed somewhere on their site.

What is an inexpensive frame for backdrops for said person?

Ovi

Most of the mail order houses have a set that is two stands and a crossbar for about $79. Also a 6' wide background can be suspended by a single sturdy light stand if it is attached to a wood bar with a 3/8 or 5/8 hole drilled at the center balance point.

Hope this helps.

Bruce Foreman

[Bruce Foreman]

Hi,

I use Bowens, and I'm very satisfied with their equipment.



I had a set of Bowens 9000's (3 of them) that I used for 15 years. When I sold them (thinking I'd never need them again) they were functioning as good as new.

They performed and stood up well.

I contacted the guy who bought them just yesterday and offered to buy them back. He declined.

Bruce Foreman

[OviV]

Thanks Bruce.

I bought a used backdrop stand yesterday from a local shop and ordered some bacdrop paper from B&H. I am going to start experimenting with this setup and 2 flashes for now.

Thanks again.

[Bruce Foreman]

Thanks Bruce.

I bought a used backdrop stand yesterday from a local shop and ordered some bacdrop paper from B&H. I am going to start experimenting with this setup and 2 flashes for now.

Thanks again.Good for you.

Best position for what is going to be the "fill" light will be as close to the camera axis as you can manage. Just behind the camera position and slightly above is a good starting position.

Then the main light, coming in at approximately 1 f-stop greater intensity than the fill, can be placed wherever you want the predominant lighting to be coming from.

If you don't have a flashmeter, you can measure the modeling light from each flash with a conventional light meter to set your lights for 1 stop diffrence, then test for actual exposure with both lights at 1/2 increments to find the actual working aperture.

(Of course if your camera is digital with LCD screen on the back this test will go faster.)

This will get you started and when you find the best aperture and working distance for the results you want, you can attach strings to your stands with a knot in the string so you can then get repeatable results as easy as measuring the distance to your subject with the knotted string on each light.

Bruce Foreman

[WestFalcon]

I have used White lightning for years and they are tough as nails. I tipped one over on a light stand at a wedding. It fell reflector first onto ceramic tile from a 10 foot height. The reflector was a mess but the light still works. The flash tube comes in two halves and one broke but the other was still working and I could have used it if I were not done already. Alien Bees are good too and made by the same people. They would be perfect for a new portrait photographer. I have never had problems with these units and have been using them almost 20 years. Customer service is great too.

[sp00g3]

Has anybody had any experiance iwth the following equipment? It sounds like a good deal, but as always, I'm leary of good deals. I need some feedback or response on this.

http://www.skaeser.com/4lit_strobes_softbx_3605.html

[jimwong]

O.K. Back on topic:

Would this kit be enough for a beginner that just wants to take studio like pictures of friends and family?

http://alienbees.com/digibee.htm

Yes. And it would work for non beginners who didn't need a lot of power to cover large groups. The B400 should be used fairly close in with minimum 48" silver umbrellas. The low power would not be a disadvantage with the 6MP class of DSLR's (Most of these do not have significant noise at ISO 400) or with ISO 400 film.

The reason I say use close in with umbrellas is that typically 5"-7" reflectors used direct produce very specular, harsh light with sharply defined shadows. Umbrellas, (even silver ones) used fairly close to the subject soften the "character" of the light making it better for people.

The package offered looks to me to be very well thought out for the beginner

If so, what else would I need to hook them up to the Digital Rebel? A hotshoe to pc synch?

Yes. They (Alien Bees) have a very inexpensive hot shoe adapter. I forget the price but it is listed somewhere on their site.

What is an inexpensive frame for backdrops for said person?

Ovi

Most of the mail order houses have a set that is two stands and a crossbar for about $79. Also a 6' wide background can be suspended by a single sturdy light stand if it is attached to a wood bar with a 3/8 or 5/8 hole drilled at the center balance point.

Hope this helps.

Bruce Foreman

what about the B800s, I have the money and would upgrade the digibee package to that.. I don't want to outgrow the lights too soon.

now Alien Bees uses true ws and effective ws.. how does that compare with other vendor strobes, they state that their strobe is 400ws, is that the same as the B400s,

[Vegas Poboy]

I have two Alien Bees 800's and they work great. I just recently purchased a X1600 to add to my set. Aliens is good products The only way I see to outgrow a light is by needing more power. For moble backdrop kits I purchased the heavy duty kit from http://www.calumetphoto.com/ctl?PAGE=Controller&ac.ui.pn=home.Home
Strong & sturdy set.

[JoeTampa]

I know I don't post here a whole lot, but I do READ a whole lot, and I'd like to beg your indulgence for a moment as I offer something I've learned.


Folks, photography is an ART. You are using and modifying light to illuminate and capture an image of a subject. How you get there is an individual thing. Just as two photographers can get two different shots of the same subject and both be "perfect" images, so to can the methods to make said image.


I have learned about photography in several different ways:

1. From my father, a dedicated film hobbiest when I was young

2. From photography books

3. From watching other photogs

4. From studying other's work

5. From shooting and experimenting.


I've developed my own workflow. It's not perfect, and I am continually learning from others, including from this very post. But please, people, remember that there's more than one way to skin a cat. My lighting style is not the same as the others that share my studio with me, but we all understand and learn from each other.

A case in point: My first studio lighting consisted of a single monolight with a shoot-through umbrella. That's it (I was somewhat cash-poor at the time). I would shoot in a room with white walls and a low white ceiling, putting the monolight to the front left of the subject and aiming at a 45 degree angle to the ceiling. The result? I emulated a main, fill, hair, and backlight with ONE light. When I posted about this technique (on another forum), I was quickly taken to task about how amateurish a technique this was; that nothing could substitute for a full studio light setup. You know what? When I posted a picture later, all the "experts" congratulated me for buying more lights. I grinned and kept to myself.

Of course, I wanted the flexibility that more physical lights provide, and, in time, bought them, along with softboxes, etc, etc. But you know what? I was able to pass along the technique to someone who didn't have the money for a full studio light setup and some lenses. He tried my "trick" and bought some good glass. His shots were great.

My point here is that those who tell you that there's only ONE way to do things are closed-minded. However -- they are still worth listening to. Why? They are probably trying to teach you the "proper" way to do something, which is, when you get down to it, a "tried-and-true" method that, while perhaps not truly the ONLY way, is a valid and respected way nonetheless.

Learn from each other, people. Help, teach, assist, yes. But learn too.


EOS (End of Sermon!)


- Joe

[Bruce Foreman]

what about the B800s, I have the money and would upgrade the digibee package to that.. I don't want to outgrow the lights too soon.


I sure would. The B800 should give you plenty of power and I doubt you would "outgrow" them anytime soon.


now Alien Bees uses true ws and effective ws.. how does that compare with other vendor strobes, they state that their strobe is 400ws, is that the same as the B400s,


ws ratings aren't that much help in comparing. Reflector design and efficiency has a lot to do with what you can do with a lighting unit. Look at their technical specs on their website for the working apertures for the various ways of using the units.

On location doing prom packs at formal military ball events I used to try to position my lighting units so I could use f8 to f11 with either 52" soft white umbrellas or what is now called "beauty dish" pan reflectors. It looks like the B800 falls neatly into that range with 48" umbrellas at 4' to 6' from the center of the radiating surface.

I'm pretty close to ording a pair of B800's myself to replace the lights I sold off a couple of years ago.

Bruce Foreman

[Bruce Foreman]

A case in point: My first studio lighting consisted of a single monolight with a shoot-through umbrella. That's it (I was somewhat cash-poor at the time). I would shoot in a room with white walls and a low white ceiling, putting the monolight to the front left of the subject and aiming at a 45 degree angle to the ceiling. The result? I emulated a main, fill, hair, and backlight with ONE light. When I posted about this technique (on another forum), I was quickly taken to task about how amateurish a technique this was; that nothing could substitute for a full studio light setup. You know what? When I posted a picture later, all the "experts" congratulated me for buying more lights. I grinned and kept to myself.

I remember a Dean Collins seminar in the '80s where he gave a demonstration using just one light and some reflector panels. What he could achieve with that one light was absolutely amazing.


My point here is that those who tell you that there's only ONE way to do things are closed-minded. However -- they are still worth listening to. Why? They are probably trying to teach you the "proper" way to do something, which is, when you get down to it, a "tried-and-true" method that, while perhaps not truly the ONLY way, is a valid and respected way nonetheless.

Absolutely. The "tried-and-true" can be a super starting point.

Bruce Foreman



EOS (End of Sermon!)


- Joe[/quote]

[CyberDyneSystems]

Don't MAKE ME come in here and lock another studio strobe thread in 15 minutes time!!!!!!!


:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:


Jeeze,... what is it about Studio Strobes that gets people so hot under the collar? :?

[sp00g3]

Don't MAKE ME come in here and lock another studio strobe thread in 15 minutes time!!!!!!!


:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:


Jeeze,... what is it about Studio Strobes that gets people so hot under the collar? :?

I think it has something to with the infinite possiblities you can get with studio setups.. Think about. 1 dedicated flash is the same no matter what equipment you have.. but a few inches with an umbrella can make you wet or dry.. (pun intended).. Everybody has their own thoughts on how the setup should be... what works for one person may not for another.. 3 dimentions suck eh?

[Bruce Foreman]

After 4 years of retirement I had just decided to get re-involved and start doing some location work (in home and environmental portraiture) and had just ordered a pair of Alien Bees B800's (Sold my other lights a few years ago), when a client called and just had to have something right NOW!

My "junk closet" yielded one Vivitar 285, 4 283's, a couple of Novatron 48" silver umbrellas, some reflectasol clamps, and assorted "stuff".

I used a slaved 283 into an umbrella as a main, the 285 on camera as fill(with a Wein Safe-Sync to protect the Digital Rebel circuits), the 283 (main) was set to manual and I took a flashmeter reading to see what it put out at the subject positon then set the 285 on auto for 1 stop less. That way I had a close to 3:1 ratio and could move around with the camera and the on camera fill.

With no modeling lights, I had to visualize in my mind the probable lighting effect and frequently check the LCD on the camera to see what i was actually getting. It worked OK, I'd rather be able to see the lighting in real time but it worked.

Here's what I got in their living room with the above setup:

http://img57.exs.cx/img57/1829/Wkl.jpg

The client is pleased and I'm glad I was able to pull something off with stuff I almost threw away 15 years ago.

Bruce Foreman

[TonyKInTexas]

Actually what would have riled me is the tone of your message indicating "pros" don't use light meters any more and "2" lights are more than enough when they are not always enough.

As has been pointed out, there is background and hair lights to consider.

so people have different methods of doing shoots. i don't see the need to bash and make a big fuss out of it. oh wait, you're the top contributor, you can't be wrong.

it would help to have an open mind sometimes.

[TonyKInTexas]

I agree with your original post. It highlighted why the tools are needed. I just shake my head when I see people giving opinions as information and they complain when they get called on it.



so people have different methods of doing shoots. i don't see the need to bash and make a big fuss out of it. oh wait, you're the top contributor, you can't be wrong.

it would help to have an open mind sometimes.
Perhaps if you had said, "In my opinion......." , instead of "Nobody uses......". You might have gotten a different response. :?
Scott

[TonyKInTexas]

I do in the way they were presented as concrete facts and not opinions.

Sorry if you feel bashed, but I think that I pointed out some serious errors in your argument.

wow... you really think of them as "errors" ?

[/quote]

[TonyKInTexas]

I like your photo very much. Here is one of my own.

2 years ago I was asked to do a protrait for some friends with new born twins. I had A Vivtar 285HV and a newly acquired (used) Canon D30.

The shot was done in their home in the area between the living room and dining room. We drapped dark fabric (it was all she had at the time) for the backdrop and I set up the camera.

I shot the 285 in to my umbrella and got a pretty good protrait. Good enough my friends and parents liked it very much. Its pretty neat what we can do with a little bit of equipment.

http://www.pbase.com/image/6324780.jpg

Thanks for sharing your experience.

After 4 years of retirement I had just decided to get re-involved and start doing some location work (in home and environmental portraiture) and had just ordered a pair of Alien Bees B800's (Sold my other lights a few years ago), when a client called and just had to have something right NOW!

My "junk closet" yielded one Vivitar 285, 4 283's, a couple of Novatron 48" silver umbrellas, some reflectasol clamps, and assorted "stuff".

I used a slaved 283 into an umbrella as a main, the 285 on camera as fill(with a Wein Safe-Sync to protect the Digital Rebel circuits), the 283 (main) was set to manual and I took a flashmeter reading to see what it put out at the subject positon then set the 285 on auto for 1 stop less. That way I had a close to 3:1 ratio and could move around with the camera and the on camera fill.

With no modeling lights, I had to visualize in my mind the probable lighting effect and frequently check the LCD on the camera to see what i was actually getting. It worked OK, I'd rather be able to see the lighting in real time but it worked.

Here's what I got in their living room with the above setup:

http://img57.exs.cx/img57/1829/Wkl.jpg

The client is pleased and I'm glad I was able to pull something off with stuff I almost threw away 15 years ago.

Bruce Foreman

[Bruce Foreman]

I shot the 285 in to my umbrella and got a pretty good protrait. Good enough my friends and parents liked it very much. Its pretty neat what we can do with a little bit of equipment.

http://www.pbase.com/image/6324780.jpg



Looks like you used the umbrella centered or close to centered above and just behind the camera position. Which, with only one light and a complex group like that, was just where it needed to be. And you got it high enough so eyeglass glares were not much of a problem.

A little bit of equipment is better than saying "No, I can't...."

Just the same, I'll be glad when my new lights get here. Scheduled for UPS delivery in 4 days...

Bruce Foreman

[TonyKInTexas]

I purchased my set of AB units last summer. I have a B400 and a B800, 2 umbrellas and 2 softboxes though I only have one speed ring (need to get another).

I used both of the AB units on this shot (7 Aug 2004). The B800 used the large softbox and the b400 used an umbrella. The wedding was held in the home of the bride's mother so there was not a lot of space to setup.

http://www.pbase.com/image/32363043.jpg


Looks like you used the umbrella centered or close to centered above and just behind the camera position. Which, with only one light and a complex group like that, was just where it needed to be. And you got it high enough so eyeglass glares were not much of a problem.

A little bit of equipment is better than saying "No, I can't...."

Just the same, I'll be glad when my new lights get here. Scheduled for UPS delivery in 4 days...

Bruce Foreman

[In Hoc Up2 Eyeballs]

So, what kind of advice do you tell someone new to lighting who just bought themselves a bunch of equipment based on your opinion? You can't tell them to take a reading because they didn't buy a light meter. You threw 'ratios' out the window so how can you quickly impart the knowledge of these basic aspects of lighting to your forum acolyte? You can't see what they're seeing so how can they explain it and how can you respond in a meaningful manner that helps them 'get the look right'?

There's invaluable learning in thinking outside the box and trying things that aren't neatly packaged in a textbook or photography forum FAQ. To limit oneself to only the tenets of a craft would be I think to pursue an endeavor that is less about passion. But in order to think outside the box, you're already referring to the box. So let's start with a box that is easy enough to describe that we can more easily and more quickly help each other think outside of.

First, I want to thank blacktape for stimulating such an interesting discussion. My main point is to underscore the influence these discussions have on beginning photographers like myself. After reading his post I began to question my own lighting plans (umbrella v softbox). The arguments which followed really illuminated the topic for me and confirmed my original thinking. It seems to me one of the main themes for the perceived hostility is to protect inexperienced photographers from making costly mistakes. I appreciate that.

[Bruce Foreman]

First, I want to thank blacktape for stimulating such an interesting discussion. My main point is to underscore the influence these discussions have on beginning photographers like myself. After reading his post I began to question my own lighting plans (umbrella v softbox). The arguments which followed really illuminated the topic for me and confirmed my original thinking. It seems to me one of the main themes for the perceived hostility is to protect inexperienced photographers from making costly mistakes. I appreciate that.

Of course! These forums are great, a lot can be learned from what is discussed. We didn't have access to this sort of thing when I got started in the early '70s.

What did work for some of us were the many programs and seminars put on by the pro labs, a lot could be learned there. And then the local pro organizations had guest speakers and ours even put on 2 day seminars 2 or 3 times a year.

One such program featured a guy who ran comparison tests on every type of light modifier he could attach to his StudioMaster lights...Umbrellas, softboxes, the Photogenic reflectors made for Studiomasters.

Parabolics made for the units were somewhat harsh, softboxes were more directional than umbrellas and with large barndoors allowed directional control of soft gentle light. The larger the box, the softer light.

Umbrellas are somewhat inexpensive but can be very useful and don't deserve the "old hat" putdown you sometimes see.

I have used studio units direct with the reflectors they came with, I've used umbrellas to very good effect, and I love softboxes but could never afford the good ones. I would up making one that fit over a standard 11" parabolic for the StudioMaster II.

But on location I often used umbrellas because of the smaller heads on Novatron stuff, umbrellas are the easiest and best way to "tame" small head systems like Novatron.

One of my favorites on location were Bowens Monolights with what is now called "beauty dish" pan reflectors.

I hope this info helps you and I hope the "fiery" discussion has not confused the issue for you.

Bruce Foreman

[Bruce Foreman]

I purchased my set of AB units last summer. I have a B400 and a B800, 2 umbrellas and 2 softboxes though I only have one speed ring (need to get another).



Mine came in early this evening. 2 B800's and the "hatbox" cases for them. I had a couple of Novatron 48" umbrellas on hand and figure a little later on I may order a B400 as a background light. Until then I can use one of the old Vivitar 283's for that.

I'm surprised at how compact they are for their power output. About 1/3 the size of the Bowens units I used to have. But I'll have to wait until I can set them up on location to do any pictures with them, just no room in my house to set up a good test.

I did set each one on a stand and ran some flashmeter checks on them, output with the 7" reflectors is just what is advertised, and the power settings calibration seems to be right on. The beam from a silver umbrella adjusted so none of the beam "spills" looks just soft enough to do decent portraits with.

I recommend them highly for anyone starting out on a budget, or for anyone needing a compact inexpensive location lighting kit.

Bruce Foreman

[TonyKInTexas]

My wife is in to fashion dolls (16" tall) and I use a single AB unit with bounce/reflector for those shots.

I really do enjoy mine and will probably order a second speed ring.

To haul my stuff around I went to the container store and bought a storage locker ($25) that has 2 small wheels on one end. The hat boxes fit in there as do my umbrellas and softboxes plus some other things. The light stands are in their own bag. It does help me keep my stuff organized.

Take care,

I purchased my set of AB units last summer. I have a B400 and a B800, 2 umbrellas and 2 softboxes though I only have one speed ring (need to get another).



Mine came in early this evening. 2 B800's and the "hatbox" cases for them. I had a couple of Novatron 48" umbrellas on hand and figure a little later on I may order a B400 as a background light. Until then I can use one of the old Vivitar 283's for that.

I'm surprised at how compact they are for their power output. About 1/3 the size of the Bowens units I used to have. But I'll have to wait until I can set them up on location to do any pictures with them, just no room in my house to set up a good test.

I did set each one on a stand and ran some flashmeter checks on them, output with the 7" reflectors is just what is advertised, and the power settings calibration seems to be right on. The beam from a silver umbrella adjusted so none of the beam "spills" looks just soft enough to do decent portraits with.

I recommend them highly for anyone starting out on a budget, or for anyone needing a compact inexpensive location lighting kit.

Bruce Foreman