Lighting: Strobe vs constant

c71clark wrote in post #5601451
color correction with modeling lights is a pain, and they are usually pretty weak. They barely do their job in giving me a general idea of where the strobe will hit.

Modelling lights are only weak on the low priced lights aimed at the hobbyist...100-150w lights. Truly professional caliber products have 250-300w modelling lights.

As for color correction, judicious selection of shutter speed and f/stop will render any contribution of the modelling lights to be insignficant (that is, if they are -3EV, compared to the flash exposure, the contribution is virtually nothing!)

JenniferLShort wrote in post #5604836
What is covered? If you mean the topic, I wanted othere photographer's opinions and why they felt that way. But thanks for letting me know that.

Generally if people have read the FAQ they ask followup questions. Your question didn't indicate any prior knowledge or reading, in that case I point people to the FAQ to avoid having to retype what i've already written out.

JenniferLShort wrote in post #5601613
Where can you find the newest lighting?

There are much less expensive options, though not as nicely packed as kino flow. For a true DIY setup try (among others) 1000bulbs.com for screw-in 5-200 watt CFL's. I use the 105 and 150 watt's and the light is awesome. I also prefer to use open aperture's, and am willing to live with slower shutter speeds to keep my depth of field really tight.

c71clark wrote in post #5614289
There are much less expensive options, though not as nicely packed as kino flow. For a true DIY setup try (among others) 1000bulbs.com for screw-in 5-200 watt CFL's. I use the 105 and 150 watt's and the light is awesome. I also prefer to use open aperture's, and am willing to live with slower shutter speeds to keep my depth of field really tight.

Thanks! I will do that!!

Constant light is easier to meter compared to strobes, but the effects of strobes just kick constant light's ass!

Although, there are light kits that have constant light bulbs in it so you can have constant lighting with the strobe. Now, I'm not exactly sure if you have the option to fire the shutter without the strobe with the constant light on...

CorzyPhoto wrote in post #5614409
Constant light is easier to meter compared to strobes, but the effects of strobes just kick constant light's ass!

Although, there are light kits that have constant light bulbs in it so you can have constant lighting with the strobe. Now, I'm not exactly sure if you have the option to fire the shutter without the strobe with the constant light on...

I love things that KICK ASS!! hehe

lol... I kick ass, too...

Hmmm.... it just dawned on me that I could use my 55 or so watt CFL bulbs in my strobes as the modeling light... so if I decided not to fire the strobe, I still have my creamy constant light! I will need to think about this for a bit....

CorzyPhoto wrote in post #5614409
Constant light is easier to meter compared to strobes, but the effects of strobes just kick constant light's ass!

What do you find is the kick ass difference? The only thing I can think of is flash duration, being able to freeze motion where continuous will blur. Otherwise, the characteristics are very similar with only slight differences.

CorzyPhoto wrote in post #5614409
Although, there are light kits that have constant light bulbs in it so you can have constant lighting with the strobe. Now, I'm not exactly sure if you have the option to fire the shutter without the strobe with the constant light on...

If it's a strobe with a modeling light, or strobe/continuous, all you need to do is disconnect the PC sync cord and the flash won't fire.

c71clark wrote in post #5621447
Hmmm.... it just dawned on me that I could use my 55 or so watt CFL bulbs in my strobes as the modeling light... so if I decided not to fire the strobe, I still have my creamy constant light! I will need to think about this for a bit....

55 watts isn't much at all, and if you put it behind a softbox it will be even less. Even when I shoot with 500 watts tungsten, behind a diffusion panel or softbox, I'm generally pushing the ISO in the 800 to 1600 range and still shooting in shaky cam territory. If you can use it on a tripod with subjects that don't move, you won't have any issues. But if the subject is moving, or you want to hand hold it, it may not be enough light. Only way to tell is try it.

Yes, 55 alone wouldn't be enough, but with 2, you are getting closer to a usable amount of light. CFL's *generally* put out as much light as a tungsten bulb with a wattage 5x that of the CFL. 55w CFL=250w tungsten.
I use a softbox with a silvered interior, with no diffusion (since the light is pretty soft right out of the bulb). With about 160 total CFL watt's (1 big, 2 small) I am shooting at ISO 200, 1/60 and f/2.5 or so. With my new 40d I should be able to push the ISO to 800 and bump up the other 2 a stop or so.

ISO 200, 1/60 at f2.8 is quite usable. I have to keep remembering that CFL's are pretty powerful in comparison. I really should buy or borrow some to play around with since it about the only light source I haven't used yet for photography. I migt just fall in love