This has made me wonder, if two identical scenes were shot with different brand strobes, can the difference be identified by what brand, how many ws etc etc etc. If so then maybe I would begin to see the relevance in the whole debate.
lwrnclightner wrote:
This has made me wonder, if two identical scenes were shot with different brand strobes, can the difference be identified by what brand, how many ws etc etc etc. If so then maybe I would begin to see the relevance in the whole debate.
Think of it like comparing automobiles.
You can buy your basic disposable cookie cutter car or a Ferrari.
Both will get you to the same place.
lwrnclightner wrote:
This has made me wonder, if two identical scenes were shot with different brand strobes, can the difference be identified by what brand, how many ws etc etc etc. If so then maybe I would begin to see the relevance in the whole debate.
There are identifiable differences in specific situations.
If you set each flash up with its respective "standard" reflector, you will certainly see differences in the quality of the light they cast, but "quality" in this case is not quantifiably better or worse but different--like judging whether the color balance of a Fuji film is better or worse than a Kodak film.
You can run specific comparisons for, for instance, shot-to-shot power consistency and high-power to low-power color temperature consistency, and find that with few exceptions the primary consistency is consistent inconsistency between brands.
Shot-to-shot power consistency and high-power to low-power color temperature consistency are rare enough that if a flash unit has them, they are primary advertising points--and you pay for them. If consistency isn't touted in the advertising, it means the flash unit isn't all that consistent.
Most flash units, though, have a range in which they are consistent--usually from full to 1/3 power. Most units stop at 1/4 power. You sometimes see bad comparisons where two units are "compared at their lowest power settings," where Unit A is at 1/4 power (it's lowest setting) and Unit B is at 1/16 or 1/32 power (it's lowest setting). Yeah, Unit A at 1/4 power will be more consistent than Unit B at 1/16 power...but both at 1/4 power were equally consistent.
If I were doing product photography, I would be looking for a flash unit that specifically advertised and had been verified as consistent. I would also expect to pay for it.
RD, All flashtubes from all manufacturers are essentially the same. The shape, glass diameter and arc length are adjusted for the operating voltage, WS and for desired flash duration, life, efficiency and color temperature.
There is no "range of consistency" whatsoever. Xenon tubes typically produce a color temperature around 9000 to 12,000°k at the initial peak of of it waveform. As the capacitors discharge, the cap voltage declines as they discharge, and the tube current declines and the color temperature falls. The tubes typically stop conducting at about 50 volts, after following an RC exponential discharge curve. Near the shutoff point, the color temperature is probably around 2000°k.
The reason some units stop a 1/4 power is that they lack a "tickler" power supply that allows the tube to ionize at low capacitor voltages.
The parameters are typically adjusted such that the average color temperature over the discharge curve is on the order of 5000 to 6000°k, with 5600 being the most common.
One thing you can get from this thread: ignore "Effective Watt Seconds."
If these are your first studio lights, just pick up three AB 800s. They'll do any job that doesn't need just huge amounts of output, and are tough enough you may never need anything else..
After you've used them for a while, you will have a much better idea if you need the extra robustness and power of WL or even more premium brands. Until then, you're just going to be confused.
Me, I've got two AB 1600s and 2 WL 3200s, and 13 speedlights of various brands, plus some little micro-slaves. Usually, I use two or three to light a single scene. Sometimes more, even all of them on rare occasion, but I tell you truthfully I wouldn't have been able to understand except very vaguely why so many were needed until I got some experience. Get a small kit, start using it.
After you've used them for a while, you will have a much better idea if you need the extra robustness and power of WL or even more premium brands. Until then, you're just going to be confused.
I fully agree with this. If at this point you have no experience with studio flash and don't really know what you want, you can't really lose with that recommendation.
4honor wrote:
Whoa, all this is a bit too technical for me... I just wanted to know which one I should buy the Cybersyncs from... AB or WL...
+1
Being a computer science major who specializes in game programming and works as a contractor setting up networks and fixing servers and things and knows all kinds of crazy math.....
....Studio lighting is confusing as hell.
I think I'm gonna call Alienbees and ask them to "suprise me".
Chrono1081 wrote:
....Studio lighting is confusing as hell.
No, we are all just bored. We have to make it complicated to keep ourselves entertained.
Get 1 light. Turn it on, point it at something with the modelling light on. Look **carefully** at what you see with the modelling light.
Take a picture. Adjust the histogram on your camera so that the exposure is OK. Take more pictures. **Look at them** on the computer.
When you get what you like with one light, add a second light and repeat. Have fun, experiment, look and respond to what you see. Ask questions about specific problems you encounter.
You really can't learn lighting by reading. You have to do it. No big deal, really. It is like an artist playing with colors. Respond to what you like, and build on it. Ignore theory and rules for now, they will just dull your own vision. This is about experience, not theory.
All of this technical bs has nothing to do with lighting, or photography for that matter. It is just that most of us are more left brain - geeks - than right brained - artists. So we play with equipment and pretend that is what photography is about.
That is why photography attracts so many computer people (including me.) We can do the technical part and ignore the art part, but still think we are creative.
Paul Buff wrote:
RD, All flashtubes from all manufacturers are essentially the same. The shape, glass diameter and arc length are adjusted for the operating voltage, WS and for desired flash duration, life, efficiency and color temperature.
There is no "range of consistency" whatsoever. Xenon tubes typically produce a color temperature around 9000 to 12,000°k at the initial peak of of it waveform. As the capacitors discharge, the cap voltage declines as they discharge, and the tube current declines and the color temperature falls. The tubes typically stop conducting at about 50 volts, after following an RC exponential discharge curve. Near the shutoff point, the color temperature is probably around 2000°k.
The reason some units stop a 1/4 power is that they lack a "tickler" power supply that allows the tube to ionize at low capacitor voltages.
The parameters are typically adjusted such that the average color temperature over the discharge curve is on the order of 5000 to 6000°k, with 5600 being the most common....Show more →
The older WL Ultras and XLs (I have 5 of them) require either a test flash or "bleed time" to reduce the capacitor charge when dropping from a higher power to lower. So, with a less-than-full capacitor reducing the flash duration and total output, is it a good guess that the average cap voltage would be lower than for a full power flash, and therefore the average color temp would be reduced as well?
In practical studio portrait use, I find no problems of major color shifts when making the minor output adjustments that I do within any given lighting and posing setup. When I make a big adjustment, I'm likely going to get another white balance reading anyway, since the relative mix of lights going through different modifiers may change.
If I were shooting products that required the most accurate color possible, I would be doing a custom WB after determining the final lighting mix and power in all details.
Chrono1081 wrote:
Being a computer science major who specializes in game programming and works as a contractor.....
Same here, though game programming is just a hobby now, not enough money compared to low-level server/DB work. :-)
Lighting takes practice, but anyone who's gone through calculus 101 has more than enough brains to master it over time. Get a good brand and start taking photos, that's all there is to it. It's not like a new camera brand that you can hand a photographer who's never used it before and expect them to get good results. But lighting isn't the only aspect of photography that's foreign to many and can be frustrating for the first few months or years--check out the bird photogs who pay $5-10k for a big lens and $1k+ for a decent tripod and still get crappy results. But it's very rewarding.
mmurph wrote:
That is why photography attracts so many computer people (including me.) We can do the technical part and ignore the art part, but still think we are creative.
In practical studio portrait use, I find no problems of major color shifts when making the minor output adjustments that I do within any given lighting and posing setup.
No,you don't find problems in practical studio use, which is why these systems have been used successfully for years with film, which is significantly more of a problem to color balance if color balance is problematical.
The reason color balance and electronic flash consistency gets so much forum space these days is simply because digital photography quantifies all differences, and a difference between "5600" and "5400" looks like it's significant, even though with digital editing, it's easy-as-falling-off-the-log correctable....if correction is even needed.
Photon wrote:
The older WL Ultras and XLs (I have 5 of them) require either a test flash or "bleed time" to reduce the capacitor charge when dropping from a higher power to lower. So, with a less-than-full capacitor reducing the flash duration and total output, is it a good guess that the average cap voltage would be lower than for a full power flash, and therefore the average color temp would be reduced as well?
In practical studio portrait use, I find no problems of major color shifts when making the minor output adjustments that I do within any given lighting and posing setup. When I make a big adjustment, I'm likely going to get another white balance reading anyway, since the relative mix of lights going through different modifiers may change.
If I were shooting products that required the most accurate color possible, I would be doing a custom WB after determining the final lighting mix and power in all details. ...Show more →
Almost all monolights, including the most expensive, use variable capacitor voltage to reduce power. They all follow the same color temperature curve of approximately 75° per f stop of power reduction for the reason you stated.
bacilonur wrote:
Lighting takes practice, but anyone who's gone through calculus 101 has more than enough brains to master it over time.
There are two components to lighting, technical and artistic. The technical end ain't too hard to learn. The artistic well ... some (maybe most) never will learn.
But lighting isn't the only aspect of photography that's foreign to many and can be frustrating for the first few months or years--check out the bird photogs who pay $5-10k for a big lens and $1k+ for a decent tripod and still get crappy results. But it's very rewarding.
Not just the birders, check out the People forum. Lots of people with $5,000.00 worth of top-of-line glass and not an effin' clue about composition
Quote of the day. "If wishes were horses, then beggars would ride"
mmurph wrote:
Get 1 light. Turn it on, point it at something with the modelling light on. Look **carefully** at what you see with the modelling light ...
You really can't learn lighting by reading. You have to do it. No big deal, really. It is like an artist playing with colors. Respond to what you like, and build on it. Ignore theory and rules for now, they will just dull your own vision. This is about experience, not theory.
Got that right ! Can't learn an 'ell of a lot off of internet forums either !
Do like mmurph says. If after six months or a year you still suck, don't spend more money on lenses, lights, etc ... there is no magic bullet. Find another rat hole ,excuse me, hobby to dump your money into.
c.d.embrey wrote:
There are two components to lighting, technical and artistic. The technical end ain't too hard to learn. The artistic well ... some (maybe most) never will learn.
True. My consolation is that most artists I know are copy artists, very few can actually just think something up without having some form of reference, but they're still artists. Once you've got the technical side down, you can execute ideas gathered from movies, ads, paintings, billboards, CGI, or anything else. That's what's more important than trying to become more artsy, IMO--being able to take an idea that's in your head or that's only explained to you and be able to make it real.
bacilonur wrote:
True. My consolation is that most artists I know are copy artists, very few can actually just think something up without having some form of reference, but they're still artists.
Most things build on things that came before. This has been true since the beginning of time for both art and science.
Once you've got the technical side down, you can execute ideas gathered from movies, ads, paintings, billboards, CGI, or anything else ... IMO--being able to take an idea that's in your head or that's only explained to you and be able to make it real.
The whole problem is that damned few can. Look at all the questions that appear in this forum asking How did he do that ? Even after the answers that you, shatterkiss and others provide, most still can't copy the work.
If my talent for math was anywhere close to John von Neumann's I sure would not have worked in the movie biz ! But it wasn't ... so I changed my goals.
BTW ever see this cartoon? "Three weeks ago I couldn't spell engineer ... and now I are one"
I just wanted to know which one I should buy the Cybersyncs from... AB or WL... 
