happy2010 wrote in post #18417606
You are an exemplary photography veteran, so my comments may not be useful to you, but I thought in the interests of POTN input, I would chime in anyway.
I always appreciate your posts, which are consistently well thought out, clear, detailed and based in significant real-world experience.
I am especially glad you overcame any hesitation to post, because it is often from such posts that I glean significant tidbits, techniques and information about gear I may have overlooked or ways to use gear I may have seen but not thought of using in such a way. And I'm sure many others benefit in a similar way.
And, in point of fact, I learned a number of things from your post today and the video links you added.
Reading your post and others above, I also realized an error in my use of the word "scrim." The word can, in a lighting context, be used in more than one way (or perhaps I am still in error).
When I was saying scrim, what I meant was a net, which effectively cuts the intensity of the light without changing the quality (softness) of the light.
Apparently, scrim is also used for what I would call a diffuser or silk, which is a material similar to the diffuser on a softbox, which spreads or softens the light as well as reducing the intensity.
The reason I want a net is that I want to be able to use the light source as it is, but to reduce the intensity which falls on part of the subject. As an example, if I want less brightness from a subject's shirt (or hat or bald head or...). Basically, I want the quality of light falling on the subject to remain the same, but I want to "dodge and burn" in camera rather than in Photoshop .
One key factor in this net being fully versatile is that the frame should have an open side so that there is no darker shadow cast by the frame, depending on where it is placed relative to the light and subject.
One way to get this is with three-sided flag frames which can hold a net, something like this: