Do it again! Give us a compact, approx 600w/s outdoor pack, with a tiny head.
You've equipped the in-studio market, now give us a product for the outdoor strobe revolution. It's shaping up to be as big as the indoor one was. The Profoto Acute 600B is almost right, barring the price. You could do better... Elinchrom's Quadra is smaller with a truely tiny head (I saw it at a trade show yesterday, on special for A$2500), and will vastly outsell the Acute, despite only being 400w/s.
Almost all of the on-subject posts in this thread are expressing a need for the same thing. And it's not just this thread. Who is going to make millions re-equipping our entire industry?
Brent Ward wrote:
It was at the top of the first page on my search, I don't care enough to search 69 pages just to mess with you. I have no idea if it's true or not, but your childish behavior that everyone has witnessed time and time again doesn't really make it that much of a "leap of faith" to believe.
I usually just ignore you, but combine your ego with me being in an ornery mood and I couldn't resist.
Believe what and who you want. Looks to me like you're not stating the facts and just have a hate agenda. I just did a Google search for paul c buff and http://www.paulcbuff.net/ appeared on page six of the search. Here is the content of this link:
"This site is currently off-line."
Can you say "Conspiracy theory?" Who's being childish here?
Just curious, but why do you folks think there is such a great demand for such a product now? Photography hasn't changed that much and units like the Norman 200Bs and Lumedynes have been around for a long time. My own photography consists of being near an AC source most of the time and only once in awhile needing portable flash power greater than my shoe mounted strobes. I had a 400w's Lumedyne that never got used. To me keeping the batteries fresh would be a pain. For my uses, something like the new AB units that are AC but could run off an easily sourced battery like a car would be ideal and I an interested in hearing how well they work.
Cableaddict wrote:
He's not listening. Too busy defending his current position.
-but another +1 for what shoebox wrote in the OP & what I outlined in that other thread. Some company IS going to make a fortune with this.
I'm not defending any position. I only have some many engineering resources and have to devote them to what sells best.
Cableaddict wrote:
He's not listening. Too busy defending his current position.
-but another +1 for what shoebox wrote in the OP & what I outlined in that other thread. Some company IS going to make a fortune with this.
rickboden raises a good question here and actually one which has gotten lost since page one or this thread when the question was raised as to what makes these smaller units being described here all that different than products such as lumedyne?
norman has offered a 200 and 400 portable battery and compact head for more than 15 years; comet has offered a 400 and 1200w/s kit since at least the early 90's and i believe at one point a 800w/s portable battery and small head kit as well, and even bowens offered and still may offer, the pioneer: if these small packs and batteries are what photographers want, why has the growth of these products been pretty static when compared to studio flash, battery powered studio flash, and speedlights?
it seems to me that rather than present these proposals for small packs and heads to a company which is not in this market, these "proposals" and ideas might be better served up to the companies that are in the market and perhaps are unaware of how their current lineup fall short of what photographers may be looking for or want. these companies may be a little more aware than they are given credit as built in pw's are showing up in some of their product lines as well as led modeling lamps. dj le_dez of lumedyne is very accessible and always willing to talk about the company products.
if a company does not want to be in a particular market, i think we need to repsect that and refrain from assuming they are not listening or being defensive. perhaps they know something none of us do about this segment of the market, or
they have already looked at it and determined that there is not enough upside.
if you feel your idea has merit and one company is not receptive, take it elsewhere., but i do have to say that i am a bit confounded as to why people would want to take ideas to companies for product development without having a financial stake.
what makes these smaller units being described here all that different than products such as lumedyne?
The modifiers available, and no master controller like a cyber-commander or skyport.
bka20d wrote:
it seems to me that rather than present these proposals for small packs and heads to a company which is not in this market, these "proposals" and ideas might be better served up to the companies that are in the market and perhaps are unaware of how their current lineup fall short of what photographers may be looking for or want.
Paul Buff IS in this market, he just thinks he isn't.
bka20d wrote:
i am a bit confounded as to why people would want to take ideas to companies for product development without having a financial stake.
Maybe because we'd like to have these products available for our own use?
Brent Ward wrote:
It was at the top of the first page on my search, I don't care enough to search 69 pages just to mess with you. I have no idea if it's true or not, but your childish behavior that everyone has witnessed time and time again doesn't really make it that much of a "leap of faith" to believe.
I usually just ignore you, but combine your ego with me being in an ornery mood and I couldn't resist.
OK, I Googled paulcbuff this time and www.paulcbuff.net came up on page 13 with a message that the site is offline - none of the junk Brent Ward claims is there. Brent, maybe Chad Pryson has hacked your Google search?
I suggest anyone else interested in this smear campaign do the same and find out the truth.
You're right, I got the message, it was nice to try. The reason I wanted to try is that I like Paul.
Regarding if the demand is/will be real. Let's look back in 3 years and discuss it then. The Pro wedding/portrait world is beginning to re-equip themselves with outdoor lighting- due to an educational shift. They/we are like a giant beast slowly waking up to what commercial photographers have been doing for decades.
Once your competitor down the road is showing outdoor images that can't be got any other way, you effectively have no choice but to get serious too, and take your outdoor work to the next level, or close up shop.
Paul Buff wrote:
OK, I Googled paulcbuff this time and www.paulcbuff.net came up on page 13 with a message that the site is offline - none of the junk Brent Ward claims is there. Brent, maybe Chad Pryson has hacked your Google search?
I suggest anyone else interested in this smear campaign do the same and find out the truth.
I've worked for product companies before, so some of the things he states on his page hit close to home for a lot of product companies, just not paul c buff.
A LOT of companies rely on their customer service departments to save them from poorly made products.
Like I said before, it's your repeated behavior that even leads people to think things at this link could even be true. Maybe you should try harder to work on how YOUR perceived than trying to squash others opinions.
Oh, here's the link that came up and I have no affiliation or have I ever met the guy, but for some reason I feel like buying him a drink just for driving you crazy.
Brent Ward wrote:
I've worked for product companies before, so some of the things he states on his page hit close to home for a lot of product companies, just not paul c buff.
A LOT of companies rely on their customer service departments to save them from poorly made products.
Like I said before, it's your repeated behavior that even leads people to think things at this link could even be true. Maybe you should try harder to work on how YOUR perceived than trying to squash others opinions.
Oh, here's the link that came up and I have no affiliation or have I ever met the guy, but for some reason I feel like buying him a drink just for driving you crazy.
...Show more →
Whatever. You have posted an archive link that's been dead for a year or so. Old old news thats been hashed through and forgotten here a long time ago.. Guess your Google works different than mine.
As to how I am perceived, I'd say I have about a 99.5% approval rating from customers, including the 3/10% or so that have taken us up on our absolute satisfaction guarantee. Our customer service hides nothing. We typically get a couple dozen thank you notes and glowing comments on our products and business practices per week, and maybe one negative note every couple of months. I'm satisfied with this track record for a 28 year old business with 500,000 customers.
Again, believe what and who you choose. I sleep well at night and my customers and employees like me except the one's I've had to fire. As for driving me crazy, I don't even bother to do anything with Mr. Pryson - he's like a gnat to me as are a few people here like yourself. Real people know what's what.
Paul Buff wrote:
Whatever. You have posted an archive link that's been dead for a year or so. Old old news thats been hashed through and forgotten here a long time ago.. Guess your Google works different than mine.
As to how I am perceived, I'd say I have about a 99.5% approval rating from customers, including the 3/10% or so that have taken us up on our absolute satisfaction guarantee. Our customer service hides nothing. We typically get a couple dozen thank you notes and glowing comments on our products and business practices per week, and maybe one negative note every couple of months. I'm satisfied with this track record for a 28 year old business with 500,000 customers.
Again, believe what and who you choose. I sleep well at night and my customers and employees like me except the one's I've had to fire. As for driving me crazy, I don't even bother to do anything with Mr. Pryson - he's like a gnat to me as are a few people here like yourself. Real people know what's what....Show more →
I never said how your COMPANY is perceived, I said how YOUR perceived.
We're all gnats in your mind paul...that's the point.
Peter,
You do nice work and are a good example of a "commercial photographer" who likely owns his own lighting. I assume you are monitoring this thread because of an interest or need in portable flash. I'd be curious about kind of flash gear would get you excited. Apologies if you have already posted on this.
shatterkiss wrote:
A high-end makeup artist, with assistant, for a shoot on that scale could cost $1,500+/day. The retouching could have easily billed at $500/hour. Compared to labor fees like that, which aren't considered unreasonable, no one bats an eyelash at $500/day for production RVs or $2,500 for crafts services...or a $3,500 rental gear package.
Thanks for the behind the scenes report on costs of a true commercial shoot.
I'm amazed they're willing to pay so much for retouching and makeup
Even a full set of profoto blacklines would be a drop in the bucket for them...
rickboden wrote:
Peter,
... I assume you are monitoring this thread because of an interest or need in portable flash. I'd be curious about kind of flash gear would get you excited.
Same here. I was shocked to get such little positive response to that similar thread which I started last month. Again:
