48" octabox enough for family portrait of 10 people?

48 over camera center high should be good you are doing it for free ?
2 lights different could work don't try to balance them just make one main one fill
5 wide 2 deep ?

Not sure what winds are like ? Have someone to hold the stand maybe

terrygilliam wrote in post #16388629
Lovely harsh light and well-defined shadows.

But pretty darn even illumination of a pretty wide area with a very small softbox...proving the point I made about modifier area vs. area of illumination

Wilt wrote in post #16388936
But pretty darn even illumination of a pretty wide area with a very small softbox...proving the point I made about modifier area vs. area of illumination

not trying to contribute to a pile-on, i promise, but the ceiling and walls provide for a lot of bounced light in that shot, likely filling in a bit on the edges.

obviously one wouldn't get that outside.

Chad wrote in post #16388880
48 over camera center high should be good you are doing it for free ?
2 lights different could work don't try to balance them just make one main one fill
5 wide 2 deep ?

Not sure what winds are like ? Have someone to hold the stand maybe

Ya it's free so I doubt they're going to be disappointed because one person looks darker than the other...I'm sure it can be adjusted later. I'll have to grab some sandbags just in case. Already checking the tide and weather...going there later this week to scout the area.

hes gone wrote in post #16389629
=he's gone;16389629]not trying to contribute to a pile-on, i promise, but the ceiling and walls provide for a lot of bounced light in that shot, likely filling in a bit on the edges.

obviously one wouldn't get that outside.

Consider the fact that my example photo of area of coverage has no wall to the left which is adjacent...it is about another 15' to the left...no bounce contribution. And the wall to the right is largely a window with horizontal blinds that are partly open (which is why I deliberately underexposed ambient light coming thru the window by -9EV), so the open blinds also contribute little bounce back into the scene. And as for ceiling providing some bounce...that merely further proves the point about the size of the illuminated field is not directly related to the softbox size, if the light goes upward so much to offer any ceiling bounce effect, right?!

Wilt wrote in post #16390124
Consider the fact that my example photo of area of coverage has no wall to the left which is adjacent...it is about another 15' to the left...no bounce contribution. And the wall to the right is largely a window with horizontal blinds that are partly open (which is why I deliberately underexposed ambient light coming thru the window by -9EV), so the open blinds also contribute little bounce back into the scene. And as for ceiling providing some bounce...that merely further proves the point about the size of the illuminated field is not directly related to the softbox size, if the light goes upward so much to offer any ceiling bounce effect, right?!

but, but, but, aw heck I don't know.

If nothing else, if you could fill (big if, right?) a large box evenly with light, it seems you would at least have the advantage of a larger area with an even exposure. Even if the fall off outside the diameter of the box was the same as a small modifier.

Once you back up far enough falloff ceases to be an issue, but then the whole reason for using a big soft light source is gone as well.

I never thought of this but angle the group a bit like pworm14 did here with the sun about 45 to their left? I love the shot: https://photography-on-the.net …p?p=12665018&po​stcount=33

Hmm never thought of it but I think I'll be bringing my mini shovel to the location too just in case I need to dig to level/secure the light stand.

If you use a flash meter, you can tell of you are getting consistent exposure across a group.

Broke There isn't a cheap one (under $100) is there?

One more question: would using a 7' boom arm and aim the octabox down about center of the group help?

Aki78 wrote in post #16392284
One more question: would using a 7' boom arm and aim the octabox down about center of the group help?

I doubt the boom would be worth the extra work. If you are going with one light, you want it fairly close to the camera axis and a bit higher. You can do that on a stand. Booms are nice, but wind is already an issue for this type of shot and a boom adds that much extra care.

gonzogolf wrote in post #16392569
I doubt the boom would be worth the extra work. If you are going with one light, you want it fairly close to the camera axis and a bit higher. You can do that on a stand. Booms are nice, but wind is already an issue for this type of shot and a boom adds that much extra care.

Thanks Guess I'll pass on the boom idea for now. My mind is just ready to explode from so much reading this morning Oh the obsession...