Why bother with studio strobes...speedlight not enough?

Folks seem to want to try to learn lighting with speedlight-based kits. But why does that impede the learning how to master the setup? Simply, because you cannot SEE the effects of placement, you have to guess the effect. Or have a less appealing photo which is merely 'illuminated' , and not 'lighted to show off' someone or something at its best. I talk about this principle on POTN a lot. I decided to use this opportunity to illustrate my points in action.

My youngest stepdaughter is getting married soon. Little details still being worked out, like how the florist would like to augment table decorations. Jackie told her mother, "Send me a picture" after her mother explained that the suggested addition would increase the apparent height of the centerpieces and the glittery characteristic would dress up the arrangement. So now I had a request to 'take a quick picture and send it in an email'. Enter studio lighting...

Here is a series of shots. First of all I set the light on the right with a snoot, and I wanted to set the light on the left with a grid. I wanted to feature the light falling upon the 'set' so that it would illuminate as little of the back wall as possible, and also illuminate the table as little as possible, both accomplished with 'feathering' the light falling upon the set. No complex and time consuming 'set design' here, as I was not being paid and the request was for an emailed picture 'as soon as possible'. The work was done in my family room with distracting things around, not in a pro studio without bothersome cr*p laying all around the set. That's why I needed to control how my lighting fell (didn't fall) on adjacent things.

Speedlights would make it all total guesswork, and probably not even possible without a ton of shoot and chimp shots. By using studio flash with modeling lights, I could immediately SEE how the lighting fell on the 'set' and adjust it to suit my goal, with no guess work or shooting and chimping. I wanted to exhibit the 'sparkle' via critical angling of the subject piece along with critical placement of the light. Again, that would be a total guess with speedlights, but the modelling lights allowed me to immediately SEE how the lighting could create sparkle the best at certain key locations (like at the end of the tallest piece).

now for the series...

Thanks for sharing! Just a couple questions...

It looks to be 2 lights, no mods except snoot/grid, and roughly same power?

What drove the decision for 1 snoot and 1 grid?

Hard to see the difference in how the 2 lights play on the object, but I do see the softer shadow on the left (from the snooted-right, if I read correctly) -- could you tell a difference in the "quality" of reflections from each light?

And finally, if the hired gun doesn't do these objects justice, did you volunteer to PS your version in? (yeah, right!)

Anyway, nice work!

Wilt: This is what I call the "Three-tone Dad" scenario - the one which goes
"Daa
a-a-a
a-d"
on a rising tone - with cajoling overlay! It also usually accompanies the most dangerous four letter word in the English language - J U S T.

So you end up with "Daa a-a-a a-d, can you just....." which is usally the precursor to something which either takes 3 days to "just" accomplish or costs you mega-bucks. I think you got off very lightly here! In England, we'd call that 'experience and using the right tools' - I'll bet it's much the same in SoCal. (Yes, substitute step-dad as appropriate)

Yes, studio lighting definitely helps in a lot of places. But then you and I started off in film days when every single exposure cost us money whether it was right or a total foul-up - that definitely focusses the mind quite markédly. Shoot - chimp - reshoot - rechimp - reshoot again - end up looking and feeling like a chimp(anzee) may be some people's preferred method of working but I'm definitely with you on this. Studio lights, using the modelling lights, makes life so much easier. Not always the answer of course but proof positive in this case that quick and dirty isn't always the answer.

Enjoy the wedding. Delight in the free booze. REVEL in the fact that the bill goes elsewhere!!

nice job on illustrating your point. I'm just laughing since I can hear you wife saying something to the effect. "
Just take a picture, can't you do that without making a production out of it"

BTNorris wrote in post #16171809
It looks to be 2 lights, no mods except snoot/grid, and roughly same power?

Light with grid was 1EV brighter than the light with snoot, according to the power dialed into the power pack. Both were equidistant from the object being photographed. In the modeling light photos, they appear equally bright because I adjusted exposure to take a shot depicting area of light coverage, irregardless of intensity differences.

BTNorris wrote in post #16171809
What drove the decision for 1 snoot and 1 grid?

I simply did not own two narrow grids! Actually, I did not own two grid holders, or I else could have used two grids of different angular cutoffs.

As both sources were equal in size as viewed from the subject position, one would not expect any difference in 'quality'. So the specular highlights ought not be drastically different. The characteristic of a grid can be seen in the shadow edge cast by the subject (below). Not casting shadows on a backdrop in my shot, I did not care about shadow edges cast by the subject.

The difference between snoot and grid -- that mattered to me -- really was the transition zone between illuminated area and the un-illuminated area at the edge of the cone of light. This comparison from the Visatec/Bron web site allows you to see the difference.

Snowball in Hell come to mind?!

My stepdaughter's aunt is the florist (owner). I was thinking last night that I ought to give her the shot to use in suggesting that type of decorative add-on to other clients of hers. [done]

Whortleberry wrote in post #16171833
Yes, studio lighting definitely helps in a lot of places. But then you and I started off in film days when every single exposure cost us money whether it was right or a total foul-up - that definitely focusses the mind quite markédly. Shoot - chimp - reshoot - rechimp - reshoot again - end up looking and feeling like a chimp(anzee) may be some people's preferred method of working but I'm definitely with you on this. Studio lights, using the modelling lights, makes life so much easier. Not always the answer of course but proof positive in this case that quick and dirty isn't always the answer.

Ignoring the question of expense, since 'digital shots are free!', there is a really tangible difference between 'illuminating' and 'lighting'.

• trying to find the edge of the illumination field so that I could control the light field falling on the background,
  
• trying to rotate the subject to the correct angle, in combination with
  
• determining the angular placement of the light on the floor and
  
• altering the light's elevation
  
• and adjusting the camera elevation to best capture the glint

Thank you, Wilt, I really appreciate the time and thought you put into your posts - they are really ...errr... illuminating!

Wilt,
That's an excellent example of the value modeling lights add to light placement etc.
It also illustrates that the more focused the light source the greater the benefit a modeling light adds.

Wilt, thanks for sharing your knowledge. I'm pretty new to lighting and was wondering if I could get some clarificaiton.

I have a small little studio in my garage and have three speedlights with umbrellas. I am using it to shoot my 3 yr old daughter and 1 yr old son.

What I have basically done, is the night before shooting. I change the setttings on the speedlights and right them down. Then go look on the computer once I have shot a bunch of shots with different settings.

Keep the favorites, and use those settings for the next day.

I like the thought of being able to see the results instantly.

My questions are, first are these the lights that are always on? Or are these the alien bee/ white lightinging type lights? (Mabye Alien bee's and such can always be on - I'm just not familiar enough).

If they are always on, do they have an option where you can have them on, then set them to flash after you have the setup and the power output?

I ask this because I would imagine if the lights were on the entire time, they would be distracting and/or bothersome to my kids - which it's a tough enough task getting them to be still with just the flashes of light.

Maybe that's a non issue. I don't know. The whole world of lighting is new, and I'm eager to continue learning.

Sorry, these questions probably seem very rudimentary - but I'm unfamiliar.

The lights that I use are similar to Alien Bees in usage:

1. There is a constant source modeling light (typically incandencent, usually halogen on pro level units), depending upon manufacturer and model btw. 150-250w
   
2. There is a momentary source flash tube
   

Wilt wrote in post #16173463
The lights that I use are similar to Alien Bees in usage:

1. There is a constant source modeling light (typically incandencent, usually halogen on pro level units), depending upon manufacturer and model btw. 150-250w
   
2. There is a momentary source flash tube
   

You can turn on/off the modeling lights independent of flash tube.

'Hot lights' are very bright incandescent, typically 500-1000w bulbs.

OK, so if I understand. You are illustrating the advantages of strobes over speedlights?

In this instance that you can model the lights to see what you're getting. Compared to the shoot and test that needs be done with speedlights.

If this is the case, I think I may need to upgrade to strobes once the budget allows. When I started up, I simply got in the most economical way possible as my budget was tight.

pinolero newbie wrote in post #16173502
OK, so if I understand. You are illustrating the advantages of strobes over speedlights?

Sorta...I was demonstrating why you want a constant source of light to help in optimally positioning your lights, and even to help position your subject (like in the opening post). How you actually make the exposure is a totally different issue, not meant to be the discussion point of the thread. The studio strobe vs. speedlight topic was simply to get folks to think about why they ought not build a 'complete light kit' using only speedlights.

One might derive this constant source benefit from even a high wattage halogen desk light, or photoflood lamps, and not necessarily a studio strobe with integrated modeling light...all three have constant sources in them!

Now the fact that speedlights do not have any 'constant' source immediately handicaps their use for certain types of photographs -- like the purpose illustrated in the OP.

Wilt wrote in post #16173553
Sorta...I was demonstrating why you want a constant source of light to help in optimally positioning your lights, and even to help position your subject (like in the opening post). How you actually make the exposure is a totally different issue, not meant to be the discussion point of the thread. The studio stobe vs. speedlight topic was simply to get folks to think about why they ought not build a 'complete light kit' using only speedlights.

One might derive this constant source benefit from even a high wattage halogen desk light, or photoflood lamps, and not necessarily a studio strobe with integrated modeling light...all three have constant sources in them!

Now the fact that speedlights do not have any 'constant' source immediately handicaps their use for certain types of photographs -- like the purpose illustrated in the OP.

OK, so I understand what you were saying now. Thanks for the sharing. I know this was very helpful to me.

I know this definetly puts me on the path to saving up for some constant lighting (I'll probably end up getting some strobes). I can definetly see the advantages in the setup stage. That way I don't have to spend a ton of time in prep.

Thanks again.

pinolero newbie wrote in post #16173650
OK, so I understand what you were saying now. Thanks for the sharing. I know this was very helpful to me.

I know this definetly puts me on the path to saving up for some constant lighting (I'll probably end up getting some strobes). I can definetly see the advantages in the setup stage. That way I don't have to spend a ton of time in prep.

Thanks again.

Goal accomplished, this thread helped one person to 'see the light'!

Wilt wrote in post #16173726
Goal accomplished, this thread helped one person to 'see the light'!

You know, some of the Canon speed lights have modeling lights when you hold down the DOF preview button on the camera. Of course, it lasts only a few seconds and flickers incessantly. I never use them. My Einsteins, on the other hand, track the modeling light to match the power setting and use 150w bulbs so quite bright.

For anyone that wants to learn how to light, this one feature makes studio lights the only real choice.