sungphoto wrote:
That’s totally what they are made for. I agree on the versatility but that trademark hard/soft mix doesn’t work for everyone’s skin unfortunately - it can be unforgiving on less than perfect or oily skin.
I don’t necessarily want a light modifier to have that specific para look, and it can get a little stale when overused (which is easy to do with them). They also don’t feather very well. In a funny way they end up being less useful in practice than you would think, which is why I got rid of mine
I couldnt disagree more. I find flexibility is one its biggest strenghts. You can make it work like a more common softbox as well if for any reason you need it at some point. In the end for me, it saves me space with all the looks I can get form the one.
Appreciate Sung's comments about not wanting to be boxed in by a look. Some people lean *heavily* on a style, going so far as to attach much or all of their creative identity to a specific modifier. It all reeks of an amateur mindset.
I have tried to get that one but they declined twice to send a loaner for review.
As far as it being the best alternative I wont even dare making that assumption after the disappointment that was the Godox one. Time will tell.
sungphoto wrote:
Jim contributes a ton of knowledge on this forum, is published in every magazine that anyone on this forum would die to be on, has an incredibly well developed eye and is probably one of the best lighting techs I've ever worked with. He is a legit full time photographer in one of the most competitive photo markets in the country, and I've personally hired him on huge multi-country projects. I would trust Jim's word over almost anyone else on this forum, so I would perhaps be a little more respectful. If you want people to treat you with respect, do the same to others.
No offense to the hobbyists on this forum, but there is a HUGE difference doing this for a living and testing all of the modifiers out in the real world with experienced clients with trained eyes. ...Show more →
I am the "hobbyst" that he mentioned. Do you think I test modifiders for a tiny youtube channel for a living? I shared that as I was testing gear for my own needs with real world clients not just for fun.
If you check my forum history I have been very silent lately because I have little time to do videos or hang around the forum due to amount of work I am doing.
So yeah, I think that counts as some "real world" experience. So perhaps apply the "treat others with respect" phrase you were predicating to yourself as well
GabrielPhoto wrote:
I am the "hobbyst" that he mentioned. Do you think I test modifiders for a tiny youtube channel for a living? I shared that as I was testing gear for my own needs with real world clients not just for fun.
If you check my forum history I have been very silent lately because I have little time to do videos or hang around the forum due to amount of work I am doing.
So yeah, I think that counts as some "real world" experience. So perhaps apply the "treat others with respect" phrase you were predicating to yourself as well
I think the hobbyist he is talking about is a guy on DP review forum, not someone who posts on FM.
GabrielPhoto wrote:
I am the "hobbyst" that he mentioned. Do you think I test modifiders for a tiny youtube channel for a living? I shared that as I was testing gear for my own needs with real world clients not just for fun.
If you check my forum history I have been very silent lately because I have little time to do videos or hang around the forum due to amount of work I am doing.
So yeah, I think that counts as some "real world" experience. So perhaps apply the "treat others with respect" phrase you were predicating to yourself as well
I was the one shared that video on dpreview. Just stating things as is without any intention to upsell it. From my experiences, Godox one is a true parabolic reflector. It’s just that the silver material is less reflective than the Broncolor’s and, I assume, the soft silver Parabolix. I have not shot with a Briese but I heard their silver is also less reflective than Broncolor. Just to say there are different flavors of parabolic. As Jim said, I recognized the para pattern of highlights, shadow, and contrast with the Selens. At $400 for the entire 90 kit, i certainly plan on getting one.
GabrielPhoto wrote:
How is the old version? I take mine very often really but depends on the location and look of course.
Painful, literally and figuratively, to set-up and break down those 16 rods. They have high tension to keep the fabric taut. I had the chance to get a new version Parabolix 35D at 50% off but I am thinking of trying the Selens due to the ease of set-up.
jlafferty wrote:
My personal experience with all sorts of lighting is ~15 years working in the commercial & editorial photo world in NYC. I’ve handled a bunch of parabolic mods, including Broncolor & Briese (and even the legendary B2Pro - #iykyk .
Commercial or not, and putting aside whatever shade you’re trying to create repeatedly using Chinese as a pejorative… the results speak for themselves. Anyone who knows what they’re looking at can see the quality of light shared in the video. If it’s not for you, I’m not offended… but if we’re chatting about “the parabolic look”, Selens seems to deliver.
On this whole idea that a parabolic “doesn’t have a look” - sure, you can make it emulate a very overpriced octa, or a very overpriced ringflash-ish… but if you’re looking to have it behave in a way that no other single modifier can, that’s “the parabolic look.”...Show more →
You certainly have experience with parabolic reflectors. Remarkable how one photographer's’ opinion/ experiences and maybe taste can be that much different from another. “Chinese” in my post isn’t meant as a pejorative; I could and would say the same if I was watching a Dutch test for a Dutch product. My studiolights are Chinese (Godox); no problem with Chinese products in general.In my opinion, the Godox parabolic reflector performs very poor in this test from “GabrielPhoto”. What’s your impression of this? “GabrielPhoto” couldn’t get his hands on a Selens para (I think, they didn’t want to lend him one for testing). That’s too bad, because then maybe we really could see differences. So yes, I trust the results of his comparative test more than that Selens video. In my opinion a parabolic reflector doesn’t have ONE specific look….it can have multiple “looks” and then some more. If you know of another one modifier that can do that, then I really would like to know.
If you feel that I was too harsh in my language, then I’m sorry; no offense intended.
sungphoto wrote:
Jim contributes a ton of knowledge on this forum, is published in every magazine that anyone on this forum would die to be on, has an incredibly well developed eye and is probably one of the best lighting techs I've ever worked with. He is a legit full time photographer in one of the most competitive photo markets in the country, and I've personally hired him on huge multi-country projects. I would trust Jim's word over almost anyone else on this forum, so I would perhaps be a little more respectful. If you want people to treat you with respect, do the same to others.
No offense to the hobbyists on this forum, but there is a HUGE difference doing this for a living and testing all of the modifiers out in the real world with experienced clients with trained eyes. ...Show more →
I didn’t and don’t mean to be disrespectful at all. If that’s the impression, them I’m sorry.
Mujabad123 wrote:
You certainly have experience with parabolic reflectors. Remarkable how one photographer's’ opinion/ experiences and maybe taste can be that much different from another.
Without getting too lost in the weeds, my original post was simple - the output from the Selens looks good, and further it might be the best Broncolor alternative at its price point (under $1k). I'm not challenging anything Gabriel said, and Gabriel hasn't said anything about the Selens anyway. So this whole idea - Gabriel's word versus "a Chinese ad" - is irrelevant to my post. So is, frankly, my personal experience, whatever it may be. I made an observation as to the aesthetics of the Selens output - it's an opinion. You may find it misses the mark for your needs. Whatever claims anyone is making about its efficiency vs. the Broncolor is a whole other story, and one you can feel free to debate or chase down test results for or whatever.
Mujabad123 wrote:
the Godox parabolic reflector performs very poor in this test from “GabrielPhoto”...I trust the results of his comparative test more than that Selens video.
Again, I have no idea how any of this is relevant to what I wrote re: Selens, or how you propose someone judges the character of a light's output when they don't have it. I checked the video and it didn't seem like they were doing anything misleading or underhanded - that's enough for me to make a judgement call. I did write “might” meaning, I’m not fully committed to it, but it was just a cursory - and seemingly favorable - observation. Like Gabriel says, time will tell. I spent a bit of time yesterday trying to find additional videos to see more but came up with near zero. There is one on the Selens product page but it’s a dancer and the light is used more as a rim/wrap, so it adds nothing to my understanding for how I’d use it.
Are you bringing up the Godox in Gabriel’s test thinking/claiming the Selens and Godox are identical? I thought they weren’t but haven’t looked at the gear too closely. I thought Selens and Godox were separate companies.
Mujabad123 wrote:
In my opinion a parabolic reflector doesn’t have ONE specific look….it can have multiple “looks” and then some more. If you know of another one modifier that can do that, then I really would like to know.
I mean, honestly, a lot of modifiers can do "multiple looks", but none can do the specific look a parabolic can - that's the whole linchpin of getting one, and why people who love them, love them. But to entertain your question, just two dead obvious examples: photek softlighter - you've got it as a direct soft source, a feathered soft source, semi-hard silver without the sock, and reversed as an impossibly subtle "natural light" look; 7" reflector you've got it direct as a point source, gridded it behaves closer to a fresnel, shot through a roll or frame of diffusion as a soft source, and bounced.
I don’t think Godox and Selens are the same companies, but I’m not sure. I wonder what your opinion is on the Parabolix/Para comparison of Luiz Gabriel (in my opinion they come very close). I know he did not review the Selens.
One difference between you and me, is that you can see the Selens qualities based on that video.I can not and I would at least like to see a comparison like Luiz Gabriel did with other parabolic reflectors. I cannot base any judgment on the Chinese video, and you can (I know…”might”).
At the same time I’m a bit suspicious, if a Dutchman reviews a Dutch product as this without proper and downloadable examples.
I hear you that it would be nice to have more samples to pull from for sure.
Re: Parabolix vs. Broncolor - it’s close enough I’d prob go for the Parabolix, meaning… I can’t see the difference in cost/value in the distance between their qualities.
To put it another way, and just speaking for my own preferences: I can’t justify the cost of a Broncolor because I don’t want to feel the need to use it to offset the investment. I’d be in the position of having my work feel too similar, or having it collect dust. So for my particular style I’d rather rent as needed and pass the rental fee to the client. But at the same time I haven’t yet encountered a situation where a client comes to me and says “It’s a parabolic or nothing.” Most people, most clients among them couldn’t tell the difference between a parabolic and a well executed octa or 7” reflector. They just pay for good work and let you sort out the details.
Thnxs. As to Parabolix vs. Broncolor: I bought the Parabolix (45"). Close enough to the Para indeed. I don't feel any need to use it because of offsetting an investment; I' m a hobbyist and do not rely on any income generated by my images. Still, the price difference between the Parabolix and the Broncolor is too big to me. Especially since the results of the Para and the Parabolix are so close (in my opinion).
Because I have no clients, I can pretty well do like I want in photography. I sometimes sell A2 prints, but I'm the only one to decide how these look. Simply a matter of "take it, or leave it". Same with portraits and prints of portraits. I don't do any commissioned work and I like to keep it that way.
I cherish this freedom.
Maybe you' re also a poster on the DPReview forums? They're on the "Studio and Lighting Technique" forum, there' s a (very) frequent poster called Don89, who (by his own statement), has seen his business grow since he uses the Broncolor Paras. He ofcourse really, really likes them. Always posting images/studio shots as well.
Mujabad123 wrote:
Maybe you' re also a poster on the DPReview forums? They're on the "Studio and Lighting Technique" forum, there' s a (very) frequent poster called Don89, who (by his own statement), has seen his business grow since he uses the Broncolor Paras. He ofcourse really, really likes them. Always posting images/studio shots as well.
Take a look at Jim Lafferty's work by clicking the website link in his post/profile. Compare it to Don89's photo posts/instagram.
I did and those images are wonderful. Images of Don89 look more static and "safe" whereas those of Jim show more movement and "guts". I like both....images of Don89 and images of Jim.
Apart from art in general, my inspiration comes from many different photographers.
For me, Erwin Olaf probably is first.
I love his meticulously orchestrated images.
Those are kind words, thank you. Olaf's work is interesting, some of it pretty provocative. Much of it feels like it would be at home in Lurzer's Archive, circa 2010. I mean this as a compliment
Mujabad123 wrote:
I did and those images are wonderful. Images of Don89 look more static and "safe" whereas those of Jim show more movement and "guts". I like both....images of Don89 and images of Jim.
Apart from art in general, my inspiration comes from many different photographers.
For me, Erwin Olaf probably is first.
I love his meticulously orchestrated images.
I can usually tell the difference between a pro and an enthusiast by looking at their body of work, not just a few photos. It is not what I like on a personal level or what success they claim. Pro's deliver consistent high level quality that paying clients demand, every time. They get hired based on their body of work, experience and reputation. Commercial work even more so. I see the difference.
I might take photo advice from an enthusiast whose photos I like, but when they start making business claims, that makes me pause. There is a difference between getting paid a handful of times a year generating side income vs. a fulltime professional earning a living.
. He is certainly all about the Bron Paras.