|
photobear Registered: Mar 05, 2004 Total Posts: 247 Country: N/A |
Does anyone have any experience with the Larson reflectasol reflectors? I love shooting through an umbrella but the convex shape tends to cause some flare problems. I can shoot through a diffusion disc but then I need to use two lightstands, one for the light and one to hold the diffusion disc. The Larson looks like the perfect solution since it's essentially a flat umbrella that minimizes flare and can be mounted to just one stand. |
|
cgardner Registered: Nov 18, 2002 Total Posts: 6291 Country: United States |
I have several. You can see a silver and white in this set-up shot... ![]() I've also used them with panel reversed as an umbrella with my hot shoe flash... ![]() They are well built (I've had mine for over 30 years) and convenient because they fold like umbrellas. On the ones I have the shaft has joint just below point where the ribs hit the shaft when the reflector. If you look at the reflector on the right, note the angle of the shaft relative to the angle of the flat surface. That design was due to the fact it takes quite a bit of force to stretch the panel flat and angling the shaft was a simple but effective way to lock it fullly open. There is also a small thumb screw for holding them partially closed as in the second shot. I've never used them for shoot through. A concern I'd have shooting through them is that the ribs are thicker than those of a regular umbrella and the fact there are only four of them might create an odd looking catchlight. Chuck |
|
photobear Registered: Mar 05, 2004 Total Posts: 247 Country: N/A |
Chuck, |
|
cgardner Registered: Nov 18, 2002 Total Posts: 6291 Country: United States |
I'm not sure about the shaft on current models - mine are 30 years old. But the bend isn't really a problem in terms of mounting it on a stand with a clamp. |
|
photobear Registered: Mar 05, 2004 Total Posts: 247 Country: N/A |
Thanks. I don't have the math background to argue whether or not your math is correct. But as a practical matter, I know that if I put a circle that has a 42" diameter (edge to opposite edge) on top of a square that has a 42" diameter (edge to opposite edge), there is a useable surface area (the corners) on the square that is not there on the circle. This is why I use a square gobo to block overhead light instead of a circular gobo, because the square blocks light at the corners that would not have been blocked by the circle. |
|
cgardner Registered: Nov 18, 2002 Total Posts: 6291 Country: United States |
You can put a circle in a square or a square in a circle. My comparison is based on the diagonal, representing the length of the ribs for both when folded, assuming that length is the same. ![]() So if you look at it from the standpoint of getting the most diffusion from the most compact reflector in terms of storage length and ease of transport circle beats a square. |
|
photobear Registered: Mar 05, 2004 Total Posts: 247 Country: N/A |
Point taken. Thanks. |
|
RDKirk Registered: Apr 11, 2004 Total Posts: 6940 Country: United States |
I'm also a fan of Reflectasol. I've got, umm...eight of them, a couple that I've had--nearly thirty years. |
|
photobear Registered: Mar 05, 2004 Total Posts: 247 Country: N/A |
Thanks, RD. I'm leaning heavily toward replacing my scrim jims with them, except I'll keep one SJ for suspending over my subjects. Which reflective surface would work best indoors (available light) and outdoors on dim overcast days? I'm thinking the metallic silver might be best since it would reflect the most light. Or is the super silver better? |
|
RDKirk Registered: Apr 11, 2004 Total Posts: 6940 Country: United States |
I find the plain silver most versatile, although my fill light is always bounced against a fully flattened white. |