What is the purpose of flash modifiers?

When I think of great lighting for portraits, I think of light wrapping around a subject's head with a gradual highlight to shadow transition. I think of a large softbox placed in close proximity to the subject.

So how does one replicate this effect with hotshoe flashes? One method is to bounce the light off of a large white surface, such as a wall or ceiling. But what if that is not an option?

Many people here seem to use modifiers such as the Flip-it!, the Flashbender and the ABBC. Now, I understand that softboxes have a zone close to the outer diffusion panel where the light will wrap. Further out and to the periphery, the light spreads out instead, and takes on a different character. So with a similarly modified speedlight, you'll need to be much closer to the subject to get the same effect. Sometimes that is not possible. That is where I am stuck right now.

So what's the answer? I have used two parabolic umbrellas, one key and one fill, to output collimated light in a pattern that emulates this. Is there such a parabolic mini modifier for speedlights? I think this would be the ultimate in portable 'soft light'. What do you think?

frugivore wrote in post #15378421
That is where I am stuck right now.

You're out of luck: Sometimes there is no option

frugivore wrote in post #15378421
Is there such a parabolic mini modifier for speedlights? I think this would be the ultimate in portable 'soft light'. What do you think?

"soft" light needs a (relatively) big light source. That's not portable.
"Parabolic" or not is irrelevant in this case.

One option: http://strobist.blogsp​ot.nl …usinsanity-line-goes.html

Sunbounce also have a bigger version.

Or you can just bounce off the white T-shirt of the guy next to you

There are modifiers like the Westcott Apollo, and its knock-offs, as well as collapsible soft boxes like the Cheetah Q box that will provide large sourced light but they are not intended to be on the camera.

As mentioned, if you want the soft transition from highlight to shadow you have to go big relative to the subject. With on camera flash that means bounce. Ideally off a reflector you can control.

René Damkot wrote in post #15378660
You're out of luck: Sometimes there is no option


"soft" light needs a (relatively) big light source. That's not portable.
"Parabolic" or not is irrelevant in this case.

One option: http://strobist.blogsp​ot.nl …usinsanity-line-goes.html

Sunbounce also have a bigger version.

Or you can just bounce off the white T-shirt of the guy next to you

The "white t-shirt guy" works, but he makes way too much noise when I put him in the trunk of my car with the rest of my gear. One of these days, I'm afraid he'll escape.

That option does not seem very portable. I'm looking more for a run-and-gun type of setup.

dmward wrote in post #15378969
There are modifiers like the Westcott Apollo, and its knock-offs, as well as collapsible soft boxes like the Cheetah Q box that will provide large sourced light but they are not intended to be on the camera.

As mentioned, if you want the soft transition from highlight to shadow you have to go big relative to the subject. With on camera flash that means bounce. Ideally off a reflector you can control.

Those are good options for flash modifiers, yes, but they would probably require an assistant to move around. And in a crowded event, would be too cumbersome.

With regard to soft/hard light, many people often say "big source=soft light, small source=hard light". But I think it is more accurate to say that a large diffused light source gives soft light, because it is the diffusion that causes the light wrapping. I could take my 86" PLM and leave off the diffuser cover, and the light/shadow transition will be abrupt. Instead of a large diffused source, I am trying to achieve this "light wrapping" by having multiple smaller sources (2). And I think that two "spotlight" beams, roughly the size of a person's head, can accomplish this.

For example, I took two photos of a ball, with key light directly from the side of the ball and fill light on camera - one with diffusers, and one with bare flashes:

With diffusers:

frugivore wrote in post #15378421
When I think of great lighting for portraits, I think of light wrapping around a subject's head with a gradual highlight to shadow transition. I think of a large softbox placed in close proximity to the subject.

Yes. A large softbox placed in close proximity is great lighting for portraits. This creates soft light.

frugivore wrote in post #15378421
So how does one replicate this effect with hotshoe flashes? One method is to bounce the light off of a large white surface, such as a wall or ceiling. But what if that is not an option?

If there is no where to bounce such as a ceiling or wall there is no real option to replicate light a large softbox will produce.

frugivore wrote in post #15378421
Many people here seem to use modifiers such as the Flip-it!, the Flashbender and the ABBC. Now, I understand that softboxes have a zone close to the outer diffusion panel where the light will wrap. Further out and to the periphery, the light spreads out instead, and takes on a different character. So with a similarly modified speedlight, you'll need to be much closer to the subject to get the same effect. Sometimes that is not possible. That is where I am stuck right now.

Light is photons, which is basically energy. Think of photons as specs of fine sand being flung in multiple directions. We cannot curve light. There is only one thing out there that can bend light - a black hole. This is simple physics and we are all bound to it no matter what we use. Light (photons) travels in straight lines.

Hard light. The first Illustration shows a 2' by 4' softbox placed 50' from the subject. I know you would not have enough power to light the subject from that distance but go with it for now. You can draw lines all day and you will not get light behind the head which will result in shadows. This goes for under the eyebrows, etc.

Soft Light. In the second illustration we have moved the softbox to within 5' of the subject. The light source is now close enough and big enough to get light behind the head. This is not due to any special baffles on the perimeter that causes this. Light is just scattered in all directions and at the outer edges some light (photons) winds up getting directed behind the head.

frugivore wrote in post #15378421
So what's the answer? I have used two parabolic umbrellas, one key and one fill, to output collimated light in a pattern that emulates this. Is there such a parabolic mini modifier for speedlights? I think this would be the ultimate in portable 'soft light'. What do you think?

Hard light vs Soft light is the size and distance of the light source to your subject. People use flip it's, flash benders, etc which are bigger than the flash head itself so it they help but are no substitute for large and close light sources. The flip is and others are also used when bouncing the flash off the ceiling. Some of that light reflects from the flip it towards the subject.

There is no magic bullet. If I have no other choice my flash goes on a bracket, ISO goes way up and the aperture is opened so the flash does not have to work so hard and I just shoot direct.

http://russellspixelpi​x.blogspot.ca …no-need-to-spend-big.html

Are you talking about on-camera or off-camera flashes? You mentioned that you have two umbrellas - are these not portable enough?

Have you looked at ringlights?

Me? Both. The properties apply to both on and off camera. I do have umbrellas that are very portable but you can't use them all the time.

Ring lights. It is all about size and distance to your subject. Same law applies to everything.

Portability and set-up are the prices you have to pay for speedlights or monolights both. Using a brollybox or softbox will get the light you need. You say at times you cant use these and can't bounce. Well in that case, you won't have soft light. If it were easy or there was a product that made soft light anywhere and everywhere with no troubles at all, then there would be no need for professional photographers. Every GWC would have it and be in business.

cbknight wrote in post #15385373
If it were easy or there was a product that made soft light anywhere and everywhere with no troubles at all, then there would be no need for professional photographers. Every GWC would have it and be in business.

Very well said. Many people making lot's of money, coming up with the latest and greatest gizmo that defies the laws of physics.

They made a lot of money off me. I think the word diffusion is alluring and mysterious and they bait you on that. Once you understand what diffusion is about you realize there nothing you can do but work with the device you have. Knowing what it actually can and cannot do makes things much more enjoyable.

I don't worry about it anymore. If I can use larger devices like umbrellas - sweet. Bounce is pretty close to sweet. If I have no other options I don't give a second thought about shooting direct. Like I said the secret to that is making your flash not work so hard.

Part of the reason for the on camera modifiers like the rogue flashbender, ABBC or demb flipit is to make the best of the circumstances. I use the rogue flashbender for event work. It allows me the benefit of bouncing most of the light, with a little bit of the light kicked forward as fill for eye sockets and under chins so that the directional light from bouncing doesnt leave shadows there.

The problem gets trickier when you dont have a decent bounce surface. For event work a large source like an umbrella or larger softbox may not be possible or practical so then you look for the next best option. Even though less effective than those modifiers the flashbender can be tilted to such an angle that all of the light is directed forward. It makes the apparent size of the light bigger than bare flash, but as you note its effect is only noticeable within a few feet of the subject.

gonzogolf wrote in post #15386423
The problem gets trickier when you dont have a decent bounce surface. For event work a large source like an umbrella or larger softbox may not be possible or practical so then you look for the next best option. Even though less effective than those modifiers the flashbender can be tilted to such an angle that all of the light is directed forward. It makes the apparent size of the light bigger than bare flash, but as you note its effect is only noticeable within a few feet of the subject.

Yes, and that is because the Flashbender surface diffuses the light. What I am trying to say is that there are two methods of "wrapping" the light around a subject. One is with a diffused surface that is larger than the subject. This method requires that the surface is in close proximity to the subject.

This obviously doesn't work when the source is far away, as digital paradise illustrated (great example, btw!!). So my solution is to have multiple light sources, two to for example, but all with collimated light. The key light at camera left/right, and the fill light on camera. The fill will have less intensity, and the key light will have more. This will create a pattern that emulates "wrapped" light, or soft light as some may call it.

Here is an example that I did last year, where I am using PLM umbrellas undiffussed, in such a manner. They are essentially spotlights, but when blended together, they give the illusion of soft light. Well not as soft as I'd like, but good enough:

frugivore wrote in post #15393695
Yes, and that is because the Flashbender surface diffuses the light. What I am trying to say is that there are two methods of "wrapping" the light around a subject. One is with a diffused surface that is larger than the subject. This method requires that the surface is in close proximity to the subject.

This obviously doesn't work when the source is far away, as digital paradise illustrated (great example, btw!!). So my solution is to have multiple light sources, two to for example, but all with collimated light. The key light at camera left/right, and the fill light on camera. The fill will have less intensity, and the key light will have more. This will create a pattern that emulates "wrapped" light, or soft light as some may call it.

Here is an example that I did last year, where I am using PLM umbrellas undiffussed, in such a manner. They are essentially spotlights, but when blended together, they give the illusion of soft light. Well not as soft as I'd like, but good enough:

Now in principle, the distance from light sources to subject would not matter, because the inverse square principle (or whatever it's called) doesn't apply. So during an event, where I cannot bounce sometimes, and where I cannot get close to the subject, I think this would work. As far as I know, none of the current flash modifiers do a "spotlight" type effect.

I think you have some flawed assumptions here. It all comes down to apparent size of the modifier which is a combination of actual size and proximity. Using two lights allows you to bring up the light to serve as fill, but it doesnt change the nature of either of the two lights. PLM's are not spot lights. They can be focused to have a fairly sudden falloff, but they are still very large light sources compared to the subject when used in most applications.

And the flashbender or bounce cards dont diffuse the light, they reflect it and make the surface appear larger.

gonzogolf wrote in post #15393730
I think you have some flawed assumptions here. It all comes down to apparent size of the modifier which is a combination of actual size and proximity. Using two lights allows you to bring up the light to serve as fill, but it doesnt change the nature of either of the two lights. PLM's are not spot lights. They can be focused to have a fairly sudden falloff, but they are still very large light sources compared to the subject when used in most applications.

And the flashbender or bounce cards dont diffuse the light, they reflect it and make the surface appear larger.

Granted, PLMs are not spotlights. But if they had a diameter that matched the height of a human head, I think you would have some good portable lights. Again, this just theoretical stuff that I'm just bounding around in my head, but here is what my concept would look like if put into practice:

I think what frugivore is trying to show is an example of using multiple "hard" lights, which are far from the subject and yet give results similar to that of a soft light, close to the subjects.

Here's an example. The light looks pretty soft on the subjects, yet I used small 7" reflectors that were placed pretty far from the subjects.

Seems that way to me as well.