This will be my first studio lighting equipment, and I have based my decisions on the recommendations of fellow FM'ers. I just want to make sure I'm not making any newbie mistakes.
Impact Multiboom Light Stand and Reflector Holder 13' (as Reflector holder) -- $ 80
Impact Collapsible Reflector 5-in-1 - 42x72" Oval (for full body shots/ other) -- $ 94
Bogen / Manfrotto Air Cush. Background Support System, 3.6 - 9.75' -- $ 213
Savage Seamless Paper Background - 107"x 12 yds. -- $ 40
Total of $860
I might've went overboard with the Manfrotto bacground support? I mean, there are cheaper solutions, like a Savage support for $60, but they seem ridiculously fragile. I wouldn't want to be accused of unvoluntary murder because the background fell over my model.
Perhaps I should also tell you guys what I'm interested in shooting... I want to do mostly full body portraits, as well as 3/4 and head/shoulders portraits, both indoors and outdoors. I will also be doing commercial.
Anyone have an opinion? Maybe it's not really possible for you to judge?
I'd invest in a second light. Filling a face effectively (i.e. from the front of it) for a headshot is rather difficult with a reflector. Even more difficult for a full body shot. Reflectors work better outdoors where sunlight typically used as a back rim light and its easy to put reflectors near the camera to bounce light back into the front of the face. Indoors with only a single strobe its always a compromise between putting it somewhere it can catch the light, keeping it out in front of the face, and keeping it out of the photo.
It might seem logical to just put it on the shadow side of the subject, but that results in the side of the head being too light and the fill getting shaded by the cheekbone. The nose shadow winds up the darkest on the the face and where key and fill shadows cross there is no light and very dark distracting voids in low places.
To avoid crossed shadow "holes" in the lighting pattern the fill shouldn't create shadows. The simple and effective expedient of a fill light over the camera provides even fill for everything the camera sees. The lighting ratio and shadow detail, which is what is most responsible for the illusion of "softness" perceptually, can be dialed in precisely. Of course a reflector can also be added if needed to "sculpt" the shadow side or if over the subject create a subtle "hair" light.
It may seem counter-intuitive but using two lights as key and "neutral" fill eliminates fill as a variable when trying to learn lighting. You can adjust the ratio visually using the modeling lights by keeping the fill constant and raising the key light. So the only variables are the intensity and position of the key light.
You're also going to want a much larger diffuser if you're planning on shooting full-body and 3/4 portraits. A medium softbox, positioned to optimally light the face, will be falling off significantly by the midriff and several stops too low by the knees. If you don't have the cash for a 5' octabox, thinking about a 60" white umbrella. The Photoflex one can be had very inexpensively.
I'm not a fan of the 5-in-1 reflectors...they wrinkle and stretch, wear out faster, aren't as versatile as just owning multiple reflectors. I'd rather own a white/silver and white/black for about the same money.
Thanks for the feedback guys , so I should buy a second light then..well considering my budget is pretty maxed out.. would my 420EX with a DIY diffuser "à la Chuck Gardner" be enough ?
-Chuck, on your website, in your "clueless to competent" tutorial, I see you do portraits with 1 key light and 1 fill coming from your camera flash.
Is that what you meant by second light, or do I really need a second strobe with a stand ?
-ShatterKiss, you're absolutely right about the 5' octabox. I`m a newbie so most people recommended I get a medium softbox to start with, so I could learn. But it won't allow me to do full body.. so I didn't know what to choose.. I think I`ll go with the 5' octabox, I guess I can learn as much as with the smaller ones
Nope nope nope...bigger isn't always better. The med. softbox is going to be nearly a necessity for head-and-shoulders work, something larger will be nearly a necessity for full-length. Plus those big octaboxes are unwieldy - hassle to setup and break down, need some serious ceiling height to work with. You need to supplement, not swap - there's no single right tool for every situation.
This is trying to light a wider area with a medium softbox - it's going to be too dark and shadowed for most people:
And this is lighting a tighter shot with a 5' octabox - it's lacking in shadow definition and leaves too flat an image for most people, not to mention being a headache to work around in close quarters:
Patrick F. wrote:
Thanks for the feedback guys , so I should buy a second light then..well considering my budget is pretty maxed out.. would my 420EX with a DIY diffuser "à la Chuck Gardner" be enough ?
No. The 420ex is ETTL only and will not be a good mix with the AB
-Chuck, on your website, in your "clueless to competent" tutorial, I see you do portraits with 1 key light and 1 fill coming from your camera flash.
Is that what you meant by second light, or do I really need a second strobe with a stand ?
Actually that tutorial is geared towards using two studio lights. However I also have tutorials on hot shoe flash in general and Canon wireless specifically.
My location lighting solution is a pair of 580ex flashes, on on a camera-flip bracket w, DIY diffuser for both solo use and as fill for a two-flash key/fill configuration. I put my off-camera light on a modified IV stand. See http://super.nova.org/DPR/Canon/MultiCanon/
I don't really recommend mixing hot shoe flash and studio lights. It can be done but the mix, one way or the other, is seldom as convenient as using two if the same type.
-ShatterKiss, you're absolutely right about the 5' octabox. I`m a newbie so most people recommended I get a medium softbox to start with, so I could learn. But it won't allow me to do full body.. so I didn't know what to choose.. I think I`ll go with the 5' octabox, I guess I can learn as much as with the smaller ones
Not addressed to me, but I recommend a 24 x 32 med. for learning to control light before trying to use larger modifers. Low ceilings also limit how high above the subject a large SB or umbrella can be placed so unless you have 10-12' ceilings keep that in mind also.
Thanks a lot I really appreciate the time taken to help me. Alright, here's my understanding of the situation.
To do full body shots, I need at least a 5' umbrella/SB. On Strobist they recommend using a Studio light on anything bigger than 45'', because hot-shoe flashes aren't powerfull enough for this.
If I listen to what Chuck recommends, it would be best to buy 2 identical lights.. so either 2 B800's or 2 580ex. How I would get to use one B800 as a fill facing the subject, I don't know...
So the best apparent option would be to use a B800 as key and 580ex as fill, I guess.
What about the reflectors ? I want to use them, but is 42x72" too much ?
A medium softbox necessarily makes you place the light source closer to the subject (due to its small size). Light falloff occurs rapidly.
When you place a light source 4 times as large by area twice the distance away, you get a very different effect, with much less light falloff.
The difference is very evident in Simon's second picture above. The way he used his softbox it is intended to mimic a small light source in a bedroom.
A large softbox is intended to mimic light coming from the sun through a window. You can still angle your light and/or subject to cast interesting shadows, but you will place that light a lot further away and it will look like it is placed a lot further away - after all it is!
As explained by Chuck, with a low ceiling a large softbox may not be viable.
You can light a full body shot with a 7" reflector if the light is placed far enough away to provide even coverage. If you were to put another 7" reflector above the camera and increase its intensity to the point it matches the intensity of the light off axis the light will appear to be, perceptually, "softer" because the brain keys more on shadow detail and pattern than the transitions to create that impression - which is an illusion. Light is not soft or hard, its the perceived shape / texture of the objects the light hits. Now raise the light to the point the fill is brighter than the key light and it becomes flat. Near total control over the character of the lighting with one simple tool - a second fill light.
Simon's example of a med. SB for a full body shot is flawed because the contrast and illusion of "hard" lighting is really due to the lack of fill. Take the same key light, add lots of fill and it would look plenty soft. In some situations, such as shooting on white backgrounds, flat saturated lighting on a face is actually the most effective strategy because strong highlights blend the face into the background making it disappear perceptually. On white its is the color contrast of the face, not the tonal contrast which attracts the eye. That's why wide crop B&W shots of blondes are difficult to shoot effectively on white and tightly cropped ones where the dark eyes dominate are so effective. Lighting is really all about controlling the perception of contrast in the mind of the viewer. After eye contact its contrast that leads the eye around a photo.
Certainly size of the modifier is a variable, but control over the lighting ratio is a much bigger one. Most beginners and many experienced shooters don't realize this. Its really just the same physics, applied different ways. What diffuses a shadow is the number of DIFFERENT directions and intensities the light come from. If you use a single 8' Octobox or two direct light sources spaced 8' apparent you get the same directional spread for the overall lighting. In other words the 8' space between the key and fill are like a big "virtual" softbox in the way the shadows create by a face are rendered. The light has the same directional vectors from the edges of the source(s).
I learned this stuff an interesting way 35 years ago working for Monte, who at the time did all his portraits by window light with a reflector and all the reception shots with two direct strobes - no diffusion at all. I learned from him how to use a well placed key light and and fill with direct flash to create a similar look as what was possible with the window light. Perceptually you need to use a lower ratio with the direct flash than with a more diffuse source. Two smaller sources can be more effective than one large one because the directional vectors can be separated wider apart. So where you might use a 3:1 or 4:1 ratio with a large SB you might need to use 2:1 to achieve the same perceptual result with two smaller ones but the net effect, perceptually, will be similar with respect to "softness" of the lighting. Over the years I came to realize the contrast of the face with the background has a huge effect on how the facial lighting is perceived. A 3:1 which looks well balanced on a med. dark background will look overly harsh on a white one. That's how my clothing-centric, contrast-control approach to portrait lighting evolved: Pick the background based on the clothing so the clothing doesn't distract from the face and then pick the lighting strategy which will make the front of the face contrast effectively against the background. Thinking in those terms greatly simplifies the process of finding the most effective lighting strategies for any situation.
In a studio all the variables except the clothing can usually be controlled. Outdoors the background can be selected to compliment the clothing. Outdoors there's less flexibility in controlling the contrast of the background with the face, which is why outdoors the different tactics of using focus contrast (shallow DOF) and separate control of flash foreground and background are used to create the desired contrast between face and background. Same goals and strategies indoors and out, but different tactics required to implement the strategies.
Many thanks for your explanations on perception and light ratios. It's helped me understand a lot. I studied mech. engineering, so I have a good theorical understanding of how light behaves, I just never "used" it. This is a fun challenge
Here's an update: I am going to buy 1 Elinchrom D-lite4 (400w/s) with a wide reflector, a 60'' umbrella, and 24x32'' softbox. (Will interchange modifiers, to test&learn with 1 light first). I will add a second light and 5' octabox when the time is right.
- About the reflectors, I understand I can achieve similar results with any reflector size, and that the choice varies with the setup configuration. But is there a recommended size for shooting full body outdoors as well as in a 15'x30'x8' room ? I guess I`ll start with a 42'' 5in1 and eventually buy a larger one.
Thanks again, after this last question gets answered, I'll be on my way to purchase and (finally!) practice.
The important question is how you are planning to measure the light / light ratios...
I would suggest to throw something away from your list and get Sekonic L-358 with PW unit. You may not need the PW unit right away, but you will appreciate it later. You can throw aways the stand and the 5-in-1 reflector and get a white bookend for subtle fill, putting money towards the flash meter.
Hmm, I would suggest getting something more powerful than D-Lite 400Ws. You cannot have too much power, only too low.
What is very important to consider is the line of products available. You should be able to buy a more powerful unit and it should be compatible with your accessories. So, I would recommend to choose a brand/product line that has at least 1000Ws moonlights in the upper-range. Otherwise you soon would have to sell your equipment to get the whole new products.
You may want to look at Bowens as a viable alternative.
Last, but not least, consider the prices and compatibility for battery packs for on-location jobs. Is D-Lite compatible with battery pack units? There is also tremendous variation in prices for battery packs between manufacturers.
So in essence, choose the SYSTEM for years to come.
, so I should buy a second light then..well considering my budget is pretty maxed out.. would my 420EX with a DIY diffuser "à la Chuck Gardner" be enough ? 
