Luminous Landscape Forum
Equipment & Techniques => Digital Cameras & Shooting Techniques => Topic started by: Yoram from Berlin on April 27, 2012, 03:20:10 am
-
Hi all.
I am increasingly frustrated with Flash, and would like to move to Continuous Light. I have been shooting ProFoto for years, at my studio I use the Pro8 System with ProHeads and some D1s, all nicely controlable via the (rather lame) Air Remote system... I see that ProFoto has a continuous light system... but what other systems are there, and what are people's comments and experiences in general. Any discussion would be helpful.
Apologies if this is the wrong sub-forum.
Best,
Yoram
-
There are many continuous light systems that might fit your needs. Since we don't know what your source of frustration is and as I haven't looked at your portfolio, that makes it rather hard to suggest what kind of system might best fit your needs.
Clearly you have spent a lot of money on your lighting gear and probably wish to be able to continue using your collection of Profoto based light modifiers. If that is the case look at the products from http://www.k5600.com/ as they make an adapter to use their HMI lighting tools with Profoto mount light modifiers.
-
Will do, thanks for the link.
My frustration is simply not being able to see what I'm shooting. I like the idea of being able to shoot "available light" that I control... shooting what I see. So my frustration is general, not manufacturer-specific. And although being able to use my existing modifiers is really nice, it pales in comparison to the overall cost of a system... but Yes, having a system that fits warrants being part of the evaluation process.
-
Okay Yoram, I've looked at your portfolio now. It is beautiful work. I'd describe it as strongly narrative based surreal erotic fashion with top flight production values, styling and set construction.
If you haven't worked with continuous or "hot" lights before here is a rough rule of them for gauging how much power you need: Electronic flash at a shutter speed of 1/60th second is pretty close to 20 times more efficient if you are comparing watt-seconds (AKA joules) to quartz-Halogen and HMI* sources. meaning that if you shoot at 1/60th second and you have a Profoto head putting out 1,000 w-s to get the same intensity of light you'll need a 20K watt source. If you can shoot at longer shutter speeds the ratio goes down ( if at 1/60th the ratio is 20:1 at 1/30th the ratio is 10:1, etc.) and if you shoot at shorter speeds the ratio goes up. One way to think about this is that you'll be getting into Gregory Crewdson size productions ( crew, bulk and expenses) which is also essentially what is required for a movie set.
(*HMI maybe a bit more efficient than quartz-halogen but is not terribly more efficient.)
You might consider using stronger or supplemental modeling lights in your Profoto heads if they will let you do that. I never dim my modeling lights but that is just me.
You should go check out some of the film/ television production company rental houses near where you are based.
Continuous type lights also create a very different look than electronic flash does.
-
Correctly set up modeling lights in a totally darkened studio shows quite exactly what the exposure is going to look like. I do like to shoot with continuous light, but there are serious limitations: just not enough power for short exposures and enough DOF at the same time. Just another day I was able to shoot action shots at 1/1000 sec, but that was at f:2 and ISO 800 with three 2.4kW and two 800 W HMI fresnels provided by the video crew (circuit breakers were popping all the time). Getting nowhere near the same illumination power what even a mediocre studio flash system provides would mean a huge investment in cinema style lights, ten times bigger electric cabling and power bill, and sizable investment in air conditioning to get rid of all the heat produced, not to speak about the weight and positioning limitations of the light fixtures. For portraits lighter LED panels and KinoFlo type fluorescents would work, but the color temperatures are not nearly as exact as with matched studio flashes.
-
I agree with the above responses. I learned lighting in film and TV. When I was shooting comercialy I mainly used strobes, but started mixing in Kinos, then a bunch of Arri 1 and 3ks, then an Arri Sun and other HMI's. The cabeling, crew (you need grips for this stuff, its usually not in the average assistants' experience), multiple distro boxes, heavier grip equipment (ever use a Cinevator?) and massive power on location presents a challenge. When I was doing comined film and stills, we used Red cameras and 5D2's, bumping the ISO so that we could use the least amount of power possible.
You will also need to up your grip skills, or really "cross train". I always made my own mdifiers for continious, because alot of the stills modifiers just don't exist for a 1k fresnel. I was obsessed with building a hot light modifier like the big Briese Focus. I did it in the end, with difussion and grided fresnels, but it took a long time to set up. In the end I jut rented a Focus and use dthe Briese HMI.
That being said, I like continious, I like how digital reads 3200k as a white point, makes things look nice, puts a heen on skin rather than penetrating it like 5600k sources.
Kee in mind that it is not really What You See is What You Get. More so than strobes, but at the same time, the DR of the scene you just lit will be compressed to what is viewable on a monitor and eventually print. So those shadows will go dark, the highlights may be lost, etc. In short, I'd hang oin to my Pro 8 and get some HMI and Kinos, maybe a Arri fresnel, and experiement. See if the extra pain is worth it.
-
Nice work Yoram. Great sense of mise en scène. (scenery in english ?)
TMARK (wich isn't Mark T but T first) is right IMO.
You'd need to up your grip skills. (grip is a very north american term when it comes to lightning crew) Also this wysisn'twyg drove me crazy. I sort of found a d.i.y that supose to emulates the compression's results on a monitor that I always have mounted on cam 1; but it eventually decalibrates after awhile. The power is a prob.
But as a visual render point of view I prefer the CLs.
-
Yes, interesting stuff you've got here!
Two things: from whence cometh this idea of the fear of female sexuality, to which you have referred; I think that the black/white in Sketches is, for me, the very best work.
Rob C
-
Fred,
Nothing looks better to me than tungston lit portraits on large format film. The light leaves this sheen on the skin whih strobes and daylight can't.
-
There is a book you should get, called the Lighting Technicians Feld Guide, or something along those lines. Really very useful.
-
Subscribing to American Cinematographer, the magazine published by the American Society of Cinematographers, is a great place to start: http://www.theasc.com/ac_magazine/April2012/current.php
-
Fred,
Nothing looks better to me than tungston lit portraits on large format film. The light leaves this sheen on the skin whih strobes and daylight can't.
I agree ! One of the reason I like the Alexa is that it's, IMO, working brillantly with this config and very close to film look. It's organic, erotic. (curious those ends in "ic")
-
but what other systems are there, and what are people's comments and experiences in general. Any discussion would be helpful.
http://visualsciencelab.blogspot.com
-
Beautiful work Mr. Flatline!
You are doing quite well with the strobes.
In movies, we're shooting ISO 500-1000 at 1/50th sec at f2.0-f4.0 for the most part.
If you need to freeze motion or shoot hand held, or have deep depth of focus, you'll proabably stick with strobes.
For an experiment, you might want to hire a movie gaffer and small crew. Come up with a concept and see if you can shoot it on a budget that you can afford. It might even be enough to have the concept and consult with the gaffer on a lighting budget.
For the most part I would suggest using daylight balanced lamps as they are more efficient and will give also a more efficient result with digital capture. With this, you might be able to avoid renting a generator. Just determine the highest ISO you can use, along with the longest shutter speed and widest aperture you can use. Scout the location with the gaffer and see if it all makes financial sense.
That's my suggestion :). Keep up the good work!
-
Thank you all so much for the comment, and thank you for the compliments :-) Ok, I will go play... I shoot in studio... the forest is in one of my studios in Berlin, not a location... so access to power and space are not a problem.
Is there a central way to control light systems? Like a fader board, or something more sophisticated?
-
Kirk Tuck, a photographer from Austin, Texas, has just written a book on the new LED continuous lighting, and has discussed the uses of LEDs several times in his blog. That might be what you are looking for. His blog is here: http://visualsciencelab.blogspot.com/
-
I have a couple of these LED things, but they seem like the Speedlights of Continuous Light. They are finicky, require AA batteries, and are quite small... No, I want something beefy. I made that mistake about five years ago when I began focusing on Flash, and the websites said "all you need are speedlights, they're just as good now as big strobes." I bought one, then two, then two more, and then realized they didn't work for me. I need power, group control, and I do NOT want to worry about charging AA batts.
-
You might contact James Russell and his team. They're shooting images like this with HMI.
http://www.russellrutherford.com/julia7/
-
Help me understand this a little better, please... Tungsten are what we formerly know as light bulbs, right? Except these would be more bright and consistent in their light color. What is HMI? Is it Halogen?
-
Interesting, thanks. Yes, Delight is a great rental house. No idea what they put in the coffee there, but they are ALWAYS in a good mood, and super helpful.
-
In addition to others' suggestions, I would also try Kino Flo products (http://kinoflo.com/). While their main use is in cine photography, they are another great lighting tool for the still shooter.
They are light, draw very little power, quick to set up and offer both 5000K and 3200K color temp bulbs.
-
Also, there is an aditional chalenge at the moment you work in multicam config.
If you work on location (by oposition to the studio), you'd need to light the external window(s) in the day (not always possible), specially in unstable weather (clouds like cumulus are a mess because their effect is brutal, sudden shade, sudden bright) so the artificial lightning always commands.
But when multicams are involved you'll have different frame angles of the same scene. It's one of the most difficult situation for a DP. I'm learning this at the moment and it's complicated. The help of the old foxes from the cine crew is priceless if you can access it.
Technical equipment and gear is easy to learn, but the use of CL requires a lot of practise and learning from mistakes. You need to burn watts.(and warm this planet a little bit more. We're freezing in Madrid)
Something that works fine in an axis, doesn't in another. It's not rare to make mistakes on set and end with 1 or 2 stops differences and the consequences can be that it looks from another scene-moment. I'm actually correcting frames of a multicam sequence that has this issue on some footage and it's time consuming. My patience being close to the absolute zero with those kind of problems.
On the tungsten side (3200), you can control the intensity and therefore the temp. Tunsten has the same color rendition indice than the sun: 99 and those lamps stay stable during all their lifetime (not the HMIs).
The HMIs (5600) have more power BUT...the color rendition is worse than the tungten and lifetime of lamps is shorter. When the lamps are getting old, they loose their color temp and the spectral is not continuous like tungsten but like a wave. (no mess with shutter speed and keep an eye on the lifetime's lamp)
To light the subject(s), you need to keep in mind the Lambert law (try to find some infos in your lenguage because I can't explain it with my limited english). So you know that the distance and the power require is not the same. As you'd imagine, it's a square law.
I've noticed that the 8bits are crap with tunsten. The impact is more pronunced than with other sources. So if you plan to shoot in CL motion with those dslrs, you'll have more possibilities to get banding (very nice indeed!...). The way you expose is critical, very specially with those still cameras. You need to be (in digital!) on the very limit of blowing highlights, just below and the flatter you shoot the best (IMO, not everybody needs it) and watch particularly the histogram because there is no reliable monitoring.
Our isos settings are generally from 4-500 isos to 800-1250 and quite open. 800 is a sort of standart for me. As the need for elec power is critical with the increment of distance, you need to have flexibility if budgets are tights.
Best regards from freezing winter 2 in Madrid.
-
I did some short tests with flash and tungsten because I was curious. I used 3 different fresnel spots...
By testing with Fresnels at 15 degrees you're testing at close to the maximum efficiency for these lights. Put a scrim, silk or softbox in front of them, or change them to a wider beam spread and their efficiency drops dramatically.
You are quite right, this is why most photographers use flash. Continuous light from any source is far less efficient all while drawing immense amounts of electrical current and producing overwhelming heat in a closed space like a studio.
Cinematographers sweet spot to shoot at is typically F/4 ~ F/5.6 for a very practical reason well beyond the trademark shallow depth of field look.
Try hot lights. You'll understand how much control and efficiency your Profoto heads and modifiers are giving you.
I've used both for a couple of decades. I'm speaking from experience.
-
In addition to others' suggestions, I would also try Kino Flo products (http://kinoflo.com/). While their main use is in cine photography, they are another great lighting tool for the still shooter.
They are light, draw very little power, quick to set up and offer both 5000K and 3200K color temp bulbs.
For broad fill light, yes, they're nice. But have you looked at the OPs images ? Much of the lighting he's doing can't be done with a Kino.
-
Thank you everyone, as usual I can rely on this community to be generous in sharing mind-bending amounts of experience.
Lot's to chew on... ISO needs to be seen, every camera has a different native ISO... Canon seems to be calibrated to 100, whereas the PhaseOne backs are at 25... I don't mind going a little shallower, though shooting at f11 has been a nice safety buffer that I will need to leave behind.
-
In reply to: "Thank you everyone, as usual I can rely on this community to be generous in sharing mind-bending amounts of experience.
Lot's to chew on... ISO needs to be seen, every camera has a different native ISO... Canon seems to be calibrated to 100, whereas the PhaseOne backs are at 25... I don't mind going a little shallower, though shooting at f11 has been a nice safety buffer that I will need to leave behind."
This is one reason I stopped using MFDB. When I was shooting stills and commercials on the same set, I needed strobes to use the backs. ISO 400 was pushing it for that generation of Phase One back (P30+), so strobes were the answer, but then the stills didn't match the motion, at all. The look was just too different, so I used DSLRs, which worked well at 800 iso, and produced useable images. Then the D3x, which was really in a different league, but I digress. I don't know what the current generation of backs can do, I haven't used anything newer than a P30+.
And Fred, about the multi-cam/multi angles and lighting: its tough, especially now that crews and budgets are smaller.
-
That being said, I like continious, I like how digital reads 3200k as a white point, makes things look nice, puts a heen on skin rather than penetrating it like 5600k sources.
Off topic but could you explain this comment a bit more? How you literally set your color balance ( white eyedrop tool on a white card in the scene? ).
-
Off topic but could you explain this comment a bit more? How you literally set your color balance ( white eyedrop tool on a white card in the scene? ).
Sure. I use a Macbeth chart, balance off the medium gray chip, shooting tethered. That is the starting point. The rest is done in post. Arri fresnels have a a very good color rendering. I use a Minolta color meter as well, because I'm often working with film and need to gel lights/windows, see if I need to kill the practicals in the room because the insane variation in household and indutrial lighting requires much work. I usually end up replacing all flourescents with Kino floursescents, because the standard tubes produce the oddest colors which are very difficult to get rid of, even in post. My mantra is "In Camera, In Camera, In Camera". Too much post time kills the joy of photography.
-
My mantra is "In Camera, In Camera, In Camera". Too much post time kills the joy of photography.
This is so true !
The less time in post, the healphiest happiest and longuest life.
-
I think you've barely tapped the surface of LEDs if you think they are all small, battery powered units. There are a number of companies making very powerful LED light panels and harder fixtures for the movie industry. You can start with LitePanels, go to Nila and Altman and scores of other sources. The big, A/C powered panels and the spots from Altman and Arri are very good. They are also being widely integrated into theater lighting. LED technology is definitely NOT stuck where is was when most people looked at the LitePanel minis five or six years ago....
Also direct your attention to some of the tri-color panels made by a number of manufacturer that allow you to change color balance and color temperature.
You'll never be able to match the sheer power of instantaneous flash. You have to think cinematically. But it's very, very do-able.
My book is a decent/recent source of general info about what's out there. But a trip to a local cinema supplier should quickly educate you about how much more stout the selection of LED light units is now...
You might also look into a new light source: Plasma.
-
There are now powerful units from Arri, Dedolight-Felloni, Mole Richardson (big, fat, powerful LED fixtures staring around $4,000 USD), and Zylight. Check them out on B&H's website or on their individual websites. LED grew up while you weren't looking. :-X
-
LED grew up while you weren't looking. :-X
How does their CRI compare with, say HMI? Or tungsten halogen?
-
The new panels from Lowel, called "Primes" are rated at 91 CRI. That's damn good. A little, tiny bit of specific filtration and you have a beautiful light source. I didn't mention the Lowels when I responded above but I spoke with their product manager this week and the Primes are very well done. Not too expensive and very workable. Evaluating their 200 and 400 panels with an eye to including them in the studio inventory. 91 CRI in a raw file = really, really good.
-
Sure. I use a Macbeth chart, balance off the medium gray chip, shooting tethered. That is the starting point. The rest is done in post. Arri fresnels have a a very good color rendering. I use a Minolta color meter as well, because I'm often working with film and need to gel lights/windows, see if I need to kill the practicals in the room because the insane variation in household and indutrial lighting requires much work. I usually end up replacing all flourescents with Kino floursescents, because the standard tubes produce the oddest colors which are very difficult to get rid of, even in post. My mantra is "In Camera, In Camera, In Camera". Too much post time kills the joy of photography.
If you want cheap reliable 5000k at 92 CRI go with 4ft Chroma 50 tubes. 3 $20 shop light fixtures with 6 $10 bulbs in a doubled layer soft box will give you massive lumens for low ISO studio work. I use those constantly. They don't get hot. They don't waste a lot of energy. They run forever.
The only thing better I've used was a small 96 CRI arc-lamp. I originally got this for a HD LCD projector project. It became redundant when 1080p TVs provided more resolution than my small SXGA LCD. The one advantage of that for lighting was the highly directional arc-spot gave huge control of the look of shadows. You can make the same directional light you use at sunrise naturally but in 4200k. Just lifting a white projector screen to bounce off you could make it as hard or soft as you like.