Lighting Question

kdgrapes

Looking at getting some lighting. What is your view on continuous versus flash? What makes one better than the other? Is one better suited for a particular situation?

Thanks!

Art Scott

kdgrapes wrote:

Looking at getting some lighting. What is your view on continuous versus flash? What makes one better than the other? Is one better suited for a particular situation?

Thanks!

Strobe versus continuous (hot) lights (think sun in the summer time).......
hot lights stay on all the time.....getting hotter and hotter and hotter and hotter......

They both will work for virtually any job aside from shooting ice and ice cream with hot lights for long.....
Strobes have a modeling lamp but it does not really heat up a studio area......they flash for momentarily blinding your subject......hot lights...blind constantly

Strobes do not put as much drain on your electric bill......
one would not think of going to lunch and leaving continuous (hot) lights on........one would not worry if one went to lunch and leftthe strobes turned on.......

Strobes are virtually cool as soon as shut off for packing if on a location shoot...........

Gonna stop now.......Iam sure I could go on and on and on for a while more:D

Shane422

Strobes allow you to shoot at lower ISO and smaller apertures because they have a larger light output. Because the flash duration is so short (<1/1000), it helps to make for sharper shots with subjects that are moving by freezing the action as well.

The advantage of hot lights is that "what you see is what you get".

NeilL

Continuous lighting typically used halogen lamps which were hot and yellow, ugh!

There are now continuous lighting which use white, and cool, fluorescent lamps, mmm!

I have two Excella Sprint 300W (continuous, fluorescent) lights in light boxes. I haven't tested them much to date so can't give an opinion about them yet. But they are certainly very cool and the shadows are beautiful. 300W in a light box is not all that bright, however, so I need larger aperture and/or longer exposure and/or higher ISO than would be ideal, for sharpness and low noise for example. On the other hand, there is sometimes something to be gained the slower way.

Continuous is an easier, more intuitive and more direct way to work for you and the model. Strobes take a lot of learning and experience, and they require extra equipment to control them, so there's also a reliability factor in the comparison.

At the moment, generally speakng, the quality of strobe lighting equipment is far better.

If a light is 300W strobe or 300W continuous I understand that they have the same light output.

Art Scott

NeilL wrote:

Strobes take a lot of learning and experience,

Lighting is all about the high lights and shadows.....I do not think the learning curve is any different as long as one is at least using a strobe with a modeling lamp so you know where the shadows goes.......

and they require extra equipment to control them,
Actually the only control for a strobe is the modifier and the power output slider, knob or switch, all of which is part of the strobe except for the modifier.......so again I do not see any extra control equipment, with either system you should be using an incident light meter (flash meter) for setting exposures......a decent flash meter will measure both flash and ambient light and also bothe incident and reflected light..........................

so there's also a reliability factor in the comparison.
strobes are considered more reliable by most

At the moment, generally speakng, the quality of strobe lighting equipment is far better.

If a light is 300W strobe or 300W continuous I understand that they have the same light output.

discussion above in bold also....................


Yes I forgot about the flouo continuous (cool lights).....but you do not see them around that much as it does take special dimmers to be able to dim a flouro lamp......and then there is color correction which in a strobe it is mostly built in as strobes are daylight balanced until towards then end of their life.....

NeilL

@ Art Scott
No argument with any of that, Scott.

When I mentioned shadows I was describing the quality of the shadows produced by the Excella lights I have.

Fluorescent lights are now produced in 5600K.

Re the extra equipment for strobes, I was thinking of what is needed to trigger them. Most people use cordless of some kind, and the reliability of the different options can vary.

You can see in the viewfinder how your lighting looks with continuous lights. With a lot of experience and a little science you can imagine how your shot will look with strobes.

With continuous you and the model can work with lighting in real time, at the same time you are making settings on your equipment, and working on composition and pose. You have realtime 'contact' with the lighting, get a sense of where it is in relation to face, body and props. It's a 3D experience, you can move within it.

Continuous is as hard on the eyes as the lighting in movies, ie bearable.

ziggy53

kdgrapes wrote:

Looking at getting some lighting. What is your view on continuous versus flash? What makes one better than the other? Is one better suited for a particular situation?

Thanks!

I think all of the following still applies:

http://www.dgrin.com/showpost.php?p=468801&postcount=11

jeffreaux2

No opinion on better or worse from me, but something else to consider....

-Continuous lighting will cause the pupil to contract....allowing you to capture more of the iris of your subject.

-Strobes will capture your subject with the pupils dialated.


Maybe a minor detail....but maybe not.

Now....back to the regularly scheduled thread.:D

Scott_Quier

jeffreaux2 wrote:

No opinion on better or worse from me, but something else to consider....

-Continuous lighting will cause the pupil to contract....allowing you to capture more of the iris of your subject.

-Strobes will capture your subject with the pupils dialated.


Maybe a minor detail....but maybe not.

Now....back to the regularly scheduled thread.:D

Ummmm .... only if you are shooting in a dark environment. It's really, really easy to have ambient light bright enough to partially contact the iris while still maintaining the 4 -5 stop difference between the ambient and strobe.

Chech this out - EXIF - click on image for larger version


Hot vs. strobes and being able to see what's going to happen. Lots of people claim that you need a modeling light on strobes to see where the shadows are going to fall. This maybe true if you are concerned about a mm difference in where the shadows fall on a model's face. But, I submit that it's all visualization. If one understands two things, it's really not very difficult:

1. The Inverse-Square Law of light propogation - how light intensity falls off with increasing distance from the light source
2. "If it can't see the the light, the light won't illuminate it" - This is a corollary of the fact (law?) that light, in our environment (and assuming it doesn't pass through density interfaces or gravity wells ) travels in a straight line.

I further submit that if you can visualize the shot you want you should, with just a little practice (not the claimed years and years of experience), be able to visualize where your shadows/highlights are going to be and their relative intensity. Finally, for me at least, the visualization process needed when working with strobes is an intimate component of the entire creative process. But, then again, I like to stress my two gray cells (and I only have two!) as much as possible.

NeilL

Scott_Quier wrote:

my two gray cells (and I only have two!)

Mind loanin' me one of 'em sometimes??!!

We all have a weakness for hyperbole... obviously!

Whether it's talking about lighting or brain cells... or both!

Scott_Quier

NeilL wrote:

Mind loanin' me one of 'em sometimes??!!

We all have a weakness for hyperbole... obviously!

Whether it's talking about lighting or brain cells... or both!

You think I'm kidding? I have had it documented. It's in writing, framed, and everything. Hangs on the wall in my office right next to my committment papers (the outcome of a mental competency hearing). I have these for those times when I really screw up and have to apologize to the DW. I can just point to the wall and say, just like Bill Engvall, "I'm just a guy!"

J/K - but hmmm .... I wonder how it would go over with the DW when I do make those all to common horrible mistakes?

OK - thread hi-jack over - back OT please

NeilL

Scott_Quier wrote:

OK - thread hi-jack over - back OT please

Hold it a sec!!... till I get this in...

hehehe!!!

Right, on we go!