Building up lighting studio at home

I got to the point of pulling some of my hair out - choices, choices, choices!!!

I'm building a home studio for photographing people - head, torso and up to full body shots. Mostly fashion, but not glamour.
After spending a week, reading forums here, reading reviews, Scott Kelby's recommendations, Amazon suggestions, blatant ads, speculations and what not, I'm starting to understand what I need. I don't want to go a "cheapo" route, slapping something up together quickly, so I can throw it away in a few months, when I understand what I need and learn how to manipulate light, but at the same time I'm on a fairly tight budget, since I just got new 7D and 580EX II flash.
I'd like to build up and down the road being able to reuse the lights, stands, etc.

At the moment I'm looking at 1 main light, probably 1 reflector and one hair light.
I have two flashes - 430EX II and 580EX II, but for home studio lighting I decided to go with monolights.
So, as a main light I'm considering AlienBee B400 as my main light;

Either Foldable Large Softbox (32"x40") or Octabox (35") from AlienBee. Another alternative is 2 40" Steve Kaeser Umbrella Softbox, which has some pretty good reviews here on forums.

For remote triggers I've considered RF-602 with 3 receivers from Ebay (1 for the main light, one for hair light and one for the future expansion)

I'm yet to figure out what to use for hair light. I want to put it on a lightstand with a boom. Another AlienBee?

Which light stands? LumoPro LP604seems to be a good stand, but it's only 6' tall, so I might be limited in the future, plus I don't think i need this compactness. Would I be better off with one of the AlienBee stands?
Westcott 750 7' seems good, but only holds 5.5lb. With monolight and a softbox, would it be enough?

I want to use a reflector, but this is pretty easy (I think) - Westcott 40" 5-in-1 reflector should be good. Would I need yet another light stand?

I also didn't quite understand how I attach a monolight to a stand. Does the monolight have an opening that sits on top of 5/8" light stand adapter.
And the last question I have - for full body shots would 6'x9' background be enough or I need to go for 9'x12'?

I know, it's a lot of questions and I do appreciate all the help and support.

Hope you have a wonderful time of the day,
Aleness

I went with the larger 47" Octabox and since it does not cost much more. I also have the Alienbees stands and I am happy with them.

Aleness wrote in post #10369450
Which light stands? LumoPro LP604seems to be a good stand, but it's only 6' tall, so I might be limited in the future, plus I don't think i need this compactness.

go with the LP610 for monolights. That's an heavy duty air cushioned stand.

You can use simple sheets of white foamcore for reflectors in your studio.

And the following can be used to mount your speedlites to your lightstands:

http://www.bhphotovide​o.com …G/Photoflex_AC_​BSWCP.html

photopat wrote in post #10371678
go with the LP610 for monolights. That's an heavy duty air cushioned stand.

I get why the air cushion can be a good thing, but I've never had a setup that I couldn't hold with one hand first to prevent it from slamming down when making a height adjustment. I think air cushioned stands are a bit overrated.

aleness: the lights do exactly as you guessed- they fit right over the 5/8 adapter and tighten down with a knob. you don't need what George has linked unless you are using the speedlight. You could put a snoot on the 580, and use it for a hairlight too, if you are stuck on using it in the setup. Keep in mind, it might not recycle as fast as the other lights, depending on power levels and battery level.

....well, duh ! ( smacking myself on the forehead ! ) ....reading comprehension is everything.....I did not read that right before I replied earlier. I was mistakenly thinking he was asking about mounting a speedlight. Thanks Hawk for catching my error !

The distance at the b/g causes the lens to see a wider area at the b/g distance than at the subject distance. For example, using 50mm lens on FF at distance of 10' to subject, at subject it sees 7' x 4.7', plenty for full length. But at 16' (background) it sees 11'4' x 7.6', so 6'x9' b/g would be too small!

I shoot on 9' seamless, and anyone larger than 5' 5" laying down the Bg is too freakin small. And darn if the 12' roll isn't $250 with shipping. grrrrrr. I love tall models, but I hate them too when my BG is too small. You don't have a ton to clone, but it's still enough to be irritating.

Wilt, thx for the geometry lesson.

Wilt wrote in post #10373617
The distance at the b/g causes the lens to see a wider area at the b/g distance than at the subject distance. For example, using 50mm lens on FF at distance of 10' to subject, at subject it sees 7' x 4.7', plenty for full length. But at 16' (background) it sees 11'4' x 7.6', so 6'x9' b/g would be too small!

If, in this situation, you had 30' of shooting space, the subject could be at 20' with 100mm lens and be captured to full length, and the b/g could be at 26', and at 26' the lens sees 9.2' x 6.2'...quite different than the 11'4' x 7.6' shot from closer distance with shorter FL. The problem is that 30' is a generous space!

Wilt- are you talking about the subject standing or laying?

hawk911 wrote in post #10374261
Wilt- are you talking about the subject standing or laying?

I am assuming camera is oriented so its long axis lies on the same axis as the body of the subject...standing subject 6' in front of backdrop captures 11.4'vert x 7.6'horiz of the backgdrop; reclining subject 6' in front of backdrop captures 7.6'vert x 11.4'horiz of the backdrop

Thank you, guys, for the input. I think I'm getting there finally.