Can you post a link?

bump

Rob Galbraith and the PLM

http://www.robgalbraith.com/bins/multi_page.asp?cid=7-10046-10396

Only nit on the Galbraith review was that he's not using the softbox at softbox distances (max of 2x diagonal)...at 25' away, it'll behave mostly like a slightly softer point light source Seems like a review of "how it looks if I used it to light up large sports teams".
Good review overall as long as you kept that in mind while reading it...

My experience with the PLM was similar to RG's review. While I don't do group shots, the product in use is very capable and easy to set up.

Deezie wrote:
My experience with the PLM was similar to RG's review. While I don't do group shots, the product in use is very capable and easy to set up.

Plus one! I've had the same experience. I have all three, but mainly use the large one. BTW the large PLM is very easy for this old man (65 plus) to set-up by myself.

Planning to get the {b]New Improved PLMs when they are available!

Planning to get the {b]New Improved PLMs when they are available!

What improvements are they making?

Deezie wrote:
Planning to get the {b]New Improved PLMs when they are available!

What improvements are they making?

Read the RG review.

John

kenyee wrote:
Only nit on the Galbraith review was that he's not using the softbox at softbox distances (max of 2x diagonal)...at 25' away, it'll behave mostly like a slightly softer point light source Seems like a review of "how it looks if I used it to light up large sports teams".
Good review overall as long as you kept that in mind while reading it...

This is a silly arbitrary rule created by some "expert". So you are saying using a 3' x 4' softbox at any distance greater than 7 feet violates some rule and you might as well use a 7" reflector? Or using an 86" PLM beyond 12' is somehow useless because it breaks some law?

Fact is the degree of shadow softening and specular behavior is a variable function of source size VS distance. There are no absolutes in photography, and when a would be pro shooter starts looking up lighting in his rule book he is headed for mediocrity.

Certainly shadow wrap around effect diminishes with distance and with source size, but there is no yes/no point. I can clearly see the difference in shadow structure (softening) in my tests at 100' between an 86" PLM, or anything else this size, and a 11" or 16" reflector.

Deezie wrote:
Planning to get the {b]New Improved PLMs when they are available!

What improvements are they making?

I'm not taking about improvements being made until they go into production. I would like to, because I like to share what I'm doing, but anytime I do that here I get jumped on. I had nothing to do with Rob's report - even discouraged him from going beyond what is presently available (though back ordered). He called me and was enthused with his findings - end of story. If one knows anything about Rob, one knows he is extremely thorough about what he publishes, and is the preeminent expert on high quality sports shooting.

Paul Buff wrote:

This is a silly arbitrary rule created by some "expert" ... useless because it breaks some law?

Fact is the degree of shadow softening and specular behavior is a variable function of source size VS distance. There are no absolutes in photography, and when a would be pro shooter starts looking up lighting in his rule book he is headed for mediocrity.

Certainly shadow wrap around effect diminishes with distance and with source size, but there is no yes/no point ...

Plus one to Paul Buff. There is an old adage in the Motion Picture Biz: You have to be smarter than your equipment

I've used the 86" PLM at about 18' and it still had good wrap. Was able to shoot at f/16 at that distance using a Profoto AcuteB 600R.

BTW If they made an 8 foot PCB PLM I'd pay in the $150/200.00 for it. Anyone else feel the same way??

Sorry about the double post!

Paul Buff wrote:
This is a silly arbitrary rule created by some "expert". So you are saying using a 3' x 4' softbox at any distance greater than 7 feet violates some rule and you might as well use a 7" reflector? Or using an 86" PLM beyond 12' is somehow useless because it breaks some law?
Fact is the degree of shadow softening and specular behavior is a variable function of source size VS distance.

Rule is probably too harsh...guideline?
AFAIK, the guideline is due to size vs. distance and also how the modifier works. E.g., beauty dishes have the recognizable nice contrasty/soft BD effect only up to a max of 2x diameter...beyond that, they light sort of looks like an umbrella's. I'd assume a parabolic umbrella has similar guidelines because I've seen some folks mention they use it up to a certain distance (though that may also be because of the size :-)

p.s., I do appreciate heads up on what's going on in your pipeline and FWIW, I don't think people jump on you for this.
It seems to be mostly the time estimates that the griping is over. And don't think it's only you...look up Radiopopper in the flickr strobist forum and you'll see what I mean (their JrX was a year late...their RPCube is already several weeks late and people including me have hacked up their own...their european version of the JrX is a year late, etc.).

A white BD with the usual blocker is basically a non-focused round light source that that projects a wide, even beam essentially identical to what a round white bounce umbrella would project. Nothing contrasty about it.

What is perceived as contrast is the fact that when it, or any similar size modifier . . . . umbrella, softbox etc. is placed close to the subject, inverse square law causes the parts of the subject closest to the subject to be brighter than the more distant parts. Thus the subject has gradients of brightness across it . . . a light side with gradients to a dark side. This is not a shadow - it's a light gradient. The further the light is from the subject, the less the inverse square law falloff but the more defined the shadow because the wrap around effect is diminished. The same effect occurs with a softbox or umbrella except the catchlights are not round.

Also, there is the subject of face-evenness of the light source. Irregularities across the face effect specularity - the brightness of reflective portions of the subject (shiny parts) VS non reflective portions. This also causes variations in the shadow structure and of light gradients when used close to the subject.

Still further, there is how the rays of light emanate from the source. Almost all white light sources produce non-coherent light rays that scatter in every direction from each point on of the radiating surface. But metalized modifiers produce rays that coherently radiate in a different direction from each point of the surface. Depending on the modifier design, the rays may cross . . . in front of the subject, at the subject or behind the subject, or a combination. This adds a further element to the specularity, apparent contras, gradients and shadow structure.

A beauty dish without a blocker, or a conventional metal reflector produces a whole new effect . . . a bright, point source in the center and a ring of large-source "soft" light around the perimeter. Thus it is two sources in one and combines the soft look of a large source with the extreme specularity of the bright point source. Where and this is useful or detrimental depends on subject and the lighting goals.

Finally, there are silver umbrellas. The light that actually strikes the subject is a series of eight spokes of relatively specular light (high spot intensity) that graduate into a field of much lower spot intensity, together with lots of cross angles of emission. This yields the shadow wrapping effect of a large source with a fairly strong accentuation of of shiny portions of the subject (specularity), and yields up to a snappier looking shot than an all-white, even spot- intensity source such as a softbox of white umbrella or white beauty dish.

Finally, the PLM produces 16 spokes of lower spot intensity light than the standard eight spokes. This produces a more controlled, yet still very present, specularity, high shadow wrapping and, in most cases, catchlights that appear round rather than octagonal catch lights.

Diffusing the output of a silver BD or umbrella effectively removes most of the characteristics discussed above and yields a look very similar to a white umbrella or a softbox . . . relatively even spot-intensity and non-coherent, wide angle soft illumination. The over use of large, strongly diffused light sources often leads to mushy, boring results in the view of many pros.

So it is very difficult to make generalizations about the behavior of a particular light modifier. Embry is pretty much on target, but I would add you also have to understand the myriad characteristic differences in modifier types and use them to your advantage. But another method, successfully used by many artists, is "screw the rules and just experiment."

Broken rules often produce the most unique and interesting results. Nine poor shots and one sensational one beats ten mediocre shots in my book. Live light to the fullest

Paul Buff said:
A beauty dish without a blocker, or a conventional metal reflector produces a whole new effect . . . a bright, point source in the center and a ring of large-source "soft" light around the perimeter. Thus it is two sources in one and combines the soft look of a large source with the extreme specularity of the bright point source.

For those of you who have never used a hard open face source, (i.e an Alien Bees new 8.5-Inch High Output Reflector 45°, Dynalite RR-50 10” 50° Parabolic Reflector, Elinchrom Maxi Lite Reflector 43° (40cm =15.7 inches), Profoto Magnum 50° (34.5 cm =13.58 in) or Speedotron 20 inch 50° Grid Reflector) these light modifiers all make a double shadow, a soft one from the reflector and a hard one from the point source of the flash tube. The double shadow is a soft broad shadow with a skinny hard black shadow in the middle. I saw a fashion ad (maybe Interview Magazine) with the model sitting at 90° to the camera several feet from the wall, her legs cast this double shadow. The photographer was thinking outside-the-box to get this interesting effect (no PhotoShop needed ). I have a 20" 50° Speedotron (that has a Profoto mount) that I sometime use with an Elinchrom Beauty Dish Deflector (14cm = 5.5") to kill the double shadow (this plugs into the umbrella socket).

Paul Buff said :
The over use of large, strongly diffused light sources often leads to mushy, boring results in the view of many pros.
and also:
Broken rules often produce the most unique and interesting results.

Got that right!! Start living outside-the-box -- we don't need no stinking boxes!!

c.d.embrey sez: There is a difference between lighting and illumination!!

c.d.embrey wrote:

BTW If they made an 8 foot PCB PLM I'd pay in the $150/200.00 for it. Anyone else feel the same way??


Make it 10 feet please...

Thanks Paul and embrey. Those were two most illuminating posts I've seen in a while

kenyee wrote:
Thanks Paul and embrey. Those were two most illuminating posts I've seen in a while

You are very welcome.

Paul, I need a 40' PLM and a 25' light stand to go with it, please!

Mark

Thanks all. If anyone wants more of this sort of analysis of the behavior of light, I wrote a little booklet when I first stared in the biz in 1981. It's completely non promotional and doesn't even mention my products. A bit dated but very understandable. It's free. If anyone wants one just contact our customer service and ask for the booklet Lighting For Still Photography. If a day goes by and I haven't learned something new about this that means I slept all day