Moreover, I don't honestly think I've assisted on a real commercial shoot in the last 3-5 years where we used lights that the photographer owned. It's all been rental lighting, probably 50% of the time it's been rental cameras as well. Mostly Profoto lights, some Speedo, some hotlights like Kinos and Arri fresnels. A number of shoots used lighting sub-rented from a rental studio (in NYC it's places like Milk, Bathhouse, Splashlight, Industria, ShootDigital, Pier 59, etc.), otherwise it was rented from the major houses like Splashlight, TREC, Adorama, 5th and Sunset, Milk Locations. The only shoots I've been on, outside of my own, where we used the photographer's lighting gear were model tests, small lookbook shoots, spec editorials.
If that many commercial photographers are using ABs/WLs I just don't understand why I haven't walked into a single shoot where I've seen them.
The idea that, by and large, commercial photographers own their studios and don't rent lighting is absolutely ludicrous. I'd love to see what the major studios and rental houses and shoot producers of the world think of that statement. It may be more common in an area like Nashville where there aren't any alternatives because there's no significant rental studio or gear market...but given that more commercial work in the US is done in NYC, LA and Chicago than anywhere else, I think that those markets are a little more telling in how commercial work is done.
The power range goes from 1.5 to 7.5 at 0.1 increments, which is 60.
That would be great. In fact, then I'd buy them. However, it says "The power range selection is 7 f-stops." right in the product description. The more expensive package has 8.5 Are they referring to something else?
but unlike a lens, the Ranger can go up in 0.1 of a f-stop. To get the full 8.5 f-stops you need the Ranger Speed AS and switch from the A to B plug for the lowest end of the range.
If an engineering issue can't be resolved in house, you shall/can out source it to over come the roadblock. There is a such web site that lets companies post any challenge engineering problems and people from a talent pool may come out a solution. You shall be able find this site by Googling. I hope you can come out something to complete with Elinchrom Ranger Quadra soon.
I was thinking having three AB Max lights with a square wave inverter for each. Am I right in thinking that the square wave inverters that will work with the lights are fairly small and portable? I believe it will eliminate a lot of the long cables that you can often need on location which run back to a battery pack or generator. Does anyone have an opinion on this as a location setup?
I think you are talking about advertising and fashion photography but commercial photography, in my opinion also consists of a much larger range, from architectural to industrial where photographers generally own their gear. I could see the new AB lights very useful because of their versatility.
Rick
shatterkiss wrote:
Moreover, I don't honestly think I've assisted on a real commercial shoot in the last 3-5 years where we used lights that the photographer owned. It's all been rental lighting, probably 50% of the time it's been rental cameras as well. Mostly Profoto lights, some Speedo, some hotlights like Kinos and Arri fresnels. A number of shoots used lighting sub-rented from a rental studio (in NYC it's places like Milk, Bathhouse, Splashlight, Industria, ShootDigital, Pier 59, etc.), otherwise it was rented from the major houses like Splashlight, TREC, Adorama, 5th and Sunset, Milk Locations. The only shoots I've been on, outside of my own, where we used the photographer's lighting gear were model tests, small lookbook shoots, spec editorials.
If that many commercial photographers are using ABs/WLs I just don't understand why I haven't walked into a single shoot where I've seen them.
The idea that, by and large, commercial photographers own their studios and don't rent lighting is absolutely ludicrous. I'd love to see what the major studios and rental houses and shoot producers of the world think of that statement. It may be more common in an area like Nashville where there aren't any alternatives because there's no significant rental studio or gear market...but given that more commercial work in the US is done in NYC, LA and Chicago than anywhere else, I think that those markets are a little more telling in how commercial work is done....Show more →
shatterkiss wrote:
Moreover, I don't honestly think I've assisted on a real commercial shoot in the last 3-5 years where we used lights that the photographer owned. It's all been rental lighting, probably 50% of the time it's been rental cameras as well. Mostly Profoto lights, some Speedo, some hotlights like Kinos and Arri fresnels. A number of shoots used lighting sub-rented from a rental studio (in NYC it's places like Milk, Bathhouse, Splashlight, Industria, ShootDigital, Pier 59, etc.), otherwise it was rented from the major houses like Splashlight, TREC, Adorama, 5th and Sunset, Milk Locations. The only shoots I've been on, outside of my own, where we used the photographer's lighting gear were model tests, small lookbook shoots, spec editorials.
If that many commercial photographers are using ABs/WLs I just don't understand why I haven't walked into a single shoot where I've seen them.
The idea that, by and large, commercial photographers own their studios and don't rent lighting is absolutely ludicrous. I'd love to see what the major studios and rental houses and shoot producers of the world think of that statement. It may be more common in an area like Nashville where there aren't any alternatives because there's no significant rental studio or gear market...but given that more commercial work in the US is done in NYC, LA and Chicago than anywhere else, I think that those markets are a little more telling in how commercial work is done....Show more →
I would suggest, across America, there are a hundred commercial/professional photo studios that own their equipment for each rental studio.
Paul Buff wrote:
I would suggest, across America, there are a hundred commercial/professional photo studios that own their equipment for each rental studio.
By that definition, you might be right. But I agree with the previous posters' semantic division between commercial and professional photographers, which is why I only spoke to commercial photographers. I think they're a very different breed with very different needs and their businesses operate in a very different way than someone who might be running a storefront portrait studio. Clearly, if one photographer is selling prints for $20/each and another is licensing image usages for thousands (or tens-of-thousands or hundreds-of-thousands) of dollars, their needs are going to be different.
but unlike a lens, the Ranger can go up in 0.1 of a f-stop. To get the full 8.5 f-stops you need the Ranger Speed AS and switch from the A to B plug for the lowest end of the range.
Thanks.
I'm pretty excited, then, about the RX.
I only wish I could have an RX system with a cyber-sync controller.
shatterkiss wrote:
By that definition, you might be right. But I agree with the previous posters' semantic division between commercial and professional photographers, which is why I only spoke to commercial photographers. I think they're a very different breed with very different needs and their businesses operate in a very different way than someone who might be running a storefront portrait studio. Clearly, if one photographer is selling prints for $20/each and another is licensing image usages for thousands (or tens-of-thousands or hundreds-of-thousands) of dollars, their needs are going to be different.
This may be true, but it doesn't change the ratio of one to the other. We serve what we refer to as "the 80%" whatever that actual percentage is. Fact is, Honda sells way more cars than Rolls, so should Honda try to compete with Rolls for another couple of percent in sales?
Perhaps since the Rolls equivalents in the lighting industry have begun to try to compete with the Honda equivalents speaks volumes.
Paul isn't in the business of making controlers for other people's lights. If you want the beauty of a wireless controler with a built in flash meter, then buy ABMax or wait for the Einstien series. Otherwise, by a Ranger and be happy.
Paul Buff wrote:
This may be true, but it doesn't change the ratio of one to the other. We serve what we refer to as "the 80%" whatever that actual percentage is. Fact is, Honda sells way more cars than Rolls, so should Honda try to compete with Rolls for another couple of percent in sales?
Perhaps since the Rolls equivalents in the lighting industry have begun to try to compete with the Honda equivalents speaks volumes.
Much easier for the top to drop down and compete with the bottom, than the bottom raising up to compete with the top.
Brent Ward wrote:
Much easier for the top to drop down and compete with the bottom, than the bottom raising up to compete with the top.
Not as easy as you might think. Designing building and marketing a successful mass appeal product is every bit as hard as doing limited-market expensive products. Often, a high end company will throw a low end product together without thinking out the marketplace or the required techniques and come up with a real loser. Cost effective engineering is every bit as difficult as high tech engineering - often harder.
It's sort of like when seasoned studio musicians would come into my studio and try to do rock and roll songs.
