A Photography forum. PhotoBanter.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » PhotoBanter.com forum » Photo Techniques » Photographing People
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

How many watt seconds do I need?



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #101  
Old December 16th 04, 12:50 AM
Bandicoot
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Alan Browne" wrote in message
. ..
Bandicoot wrote:

I agree, that would be a pain. But if you were to spend some money,
would you be better trading them both in to get two 200Ws heads
with infinite adjustment over three stops, or trade one in and spring

for
a 400Ws head with infinite adjustment over four stops? If you think
about the possible combinations, I think the latter is better.


I would get 5 stop infinite which is what AlienBees offer, AFAIK, on all
their monos.


This doesn't answer my point: if budget is tight, where is it best to direct
those limited resources? Just saying what you want _if_ you could afford
it isn't the issue.

I would avoid a pack set for a small studio.


Ditto - packs are good for high power, or inacessible heads, but you don't
need them for lower power applications. That said, I have a 3000Ws pack
with full asymmetry across three heads, and that is just as flexible as
monolights.


2 AB 800's and a 400 (really 320 W-s and 160 W-s resp) would be
ideal for a small portrait studio, supplemented with ac strobes as req'd.
If, in my small studio, I was doing anything requiring both lots of

difusion
and greater DOF, then higher power would be required. (I rarely use
anyhthing other than ISO 100 film in my little studio (Portra 160 being
100, of course)).

So, having said that, just adding the 800 (320 W-s) to my two 200 W-s
lights would be an improvment. But I'd rather replace those two as well
with more controllable lights as well.

One big problem I have with simple portraits is that my subject can't be
much further than about 3-4 feet from the BG (room) when I use the
100mm. My 200 W-s light, set at seat level to light the BG, and at 1/2
power puts too much light on the BG (unless I want a 2 stop blowout).
I've bought an AC-strobe (60 W-s) and put a sheet of white plastic over
it, and I can now get the BG to -1 to +1 stop as required by moving the
AC strobe in/out/up/down.


The closer that main light is to the sitter, of course, the more fall off
will reduce the relative brightness on the background - but then you need to
be able to turn down (or gel) that main light to give you the stop you want
for the subject. So this comes back to the general point I was making:
having one really good light in this instance, with lots of control, plus
the cheap and simple light on the background, helps you more than having two
lights with 'some' control does. It's all about where you put the money.


So you can see that more control of the individual lights, regardless of
power, would be a big help.

Of course lots of power and lots of adjustability is better - but if the
budget is limited I think it makes most sense to think carefully and
recognise that what matters is how much you can adjust the heads
_relative to_ each other, rather than how much you can adjust every
single one in isolation.


Certainly.


Ah, so we agree after all ;-)



Peter


  #102  
Old December 16th 04, 12:50 AM
Bandicoot
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Alan Browne" wrote in message
. ..
Bandicoot wrote:

I agree, that would be a pain. But if you were to spend some money,
would you be better trading them both in to get two 200Ws heads
with infinite adjustment over three stops, or trade one in and spring

for
a 400Ws head with infinite adjustment over four stops? If you think
about the possible combinations, I think the latter is better.


I would get 5 stop infinite which is what AlienBees offer, AFAIK, on all
their monos.


This doesn't answer my point: if budget is tight, where is it best to direct
those limited resources? Just saying what you want _if_ you could afford
it isn't the issue.

I would avoid a pack set for a small studio.


Ditto - packs are good for high power, or inacessible heads, but you don't
need them for lower power applications. That said, I have a 3000Ws pack
with full asymmetry across three heads, and that is just as flexible as
monolights.


2 AB 800's and a 400 (really 320 W-s and 160 W-s resp) would be
ideal for a small portrait studio, supplemented with ac strobes as req'd.
If, in my small studio, I was doing anything requiring both lots of

difusion
and greater DOF, then higher power would be required. (I rarely use
anyhthing other than ISO 100 film in my little studio (Portra 160 being
100, of course)).

So, having said that, just adding the 800 (320 W-s) to my two 200 W-s
lights would be an improvment. But I'd rather replace those two as well
with more controllable lights as well.

One big problem I have with simple portraits is that my subject can't be
much further than about 3-4 feet from the BG (room) when I use the
100mm. My 200 W-s light, set at seat level to light the BG, and at 1/2
power puts too much light on the BG (unless I want a 2 stop blowout).
I've bought an AC-strobe (60 W-s) and put a sheet of white plastic over
it, and I can now get the BG to -1 to +1 stop as required by moving the
AC strobe in/out/up/down.


The closer that main light is to the sitter, of course, the more fall off
will reduce the relative brightness on the background - but then you need to
be able to turn down (or gel) that main light to give you the stop you want
for the subject. So this comes back to the general point I was making:
having one really good light in this instance, with lots of control, plus
the cheap and simple light on the background, helps you more than having two
lights with 'some' control does. It's all about where you put the money.


So you can see that more control of the individual lights, regardless of
power, would be a big help.

Of course lots of power and lots of adjustability is better - but if the
budget is limited I think it makes most sense to think carefully and
recognise that what matters is how much you can adjust the heads
_relative to_ each other, rather than how much you can adjust every
single one in isolation.


Certainly.


Ah, so we agree after all ;-)



Peter


  #103  
Old December 16th 04, 08:05 AM
xrx
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

I'm curious to learn if you've decided on anything yet.

I am looking to work with a very similar (garage) set-up and am curious
to see what you decide after so many conflicting and, at points,
incongruent opinions from this group.

Do let us know.

Thanks,
xrx.


me wrote:
How many watt seconds do I need? I'm using a 35mm film camera. I'll be
shooting in my single car basement/garage and a smallish living room.
Ambient light from sun is dim, EV4 at 100 ISO for both.

I'd like 3 lights, main, fill and hair/bg/kicker. I assume the main and fill
should be the same w/s but how many w/s should the other light be? I'm
trying to come up with a ratio like 1/2 or 1/4 as many w/s as main.

I also want more than 3 power levels. I think this would be more versatile
and may be a necessity since I don't have room to move lights further from
the subject to reduce power. What do you think?

I apologize if this question is vague but I have never purchased studio
lights before.
Thank you for your help.
me


  #104  
Old December 16th 04, 08:05 AM
xrx
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

I'm curious to learn if you've decided on anything yet.

I am looking to work with a very similar (garage) set-up and am curious
to see what you decide after so many conflicting and, at points,
incongruent opinions from this group.

Do let us know.

Thanks,
xrx.


me wrote:
How many watt seconds do I need? I'm using a 35mm film camera. I'll be
shooting in my single car basement/garage and a smallish living room.
Ambient light from sun is dim, EV4 at 100 ISO for both.

I'd like 3 lights, main, fill and hair/bg/kicker. I assume the main and fill
should be the same w/s but how many w/s should the other light be? I'm
trying to come up with a ratio like 1/2 or 1/4 as many w/s as main.

I also want more than 3 power levels. I think this would be more versatile
and may be a necessity since I don't have room to move lights further from
the subject to reduce power. What do you think?

I apologize if this question is vague but I have never purchased studio
lights before.
Thank you for your help.
me


  #105  
Old December 16th 04, 08:05 AM
xrx
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

I'm curious to learn if you've decided on anything yet.

I am looking to work with a very similar (garage) set-up and am curious
to see what you decide after so many conflicting and, at points,
incongruent opinions from this group.

Do let us know.

Thanks,
xrx.


me wrote:
How many watt seconds do I need? I'm using a 35mm film camera. I'll be
shooting in my single car basement/garage and a smallish living room.
Ambient light from sun is dim, EV4 at 100 ISO for both.

I'd like 3 lights, main, fill and hair/bg/kicker. I assume the main and fill
should be the same w/s but how many w/s should the other light be? I'm
trying to come up with a ratio like 1/2 or 1/4 as many w/s as main.

I also want more than 3 power levels. I think this would be more versatile
and may be a necessity since I don't have room to move lights further from
the subject to reduce power. What do you think?

I apologize if this question is vague but I have never purchased studio
lights before.
Thank you for your help.
me


  #106  
Old December 16th 04, 11:46 AM
teflon
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On 16/12/04 7:05 am, in article Bsawd.240977$HA.73338@attbi_s01, "xrx"
wrote:

I'm curious to learn if you've decided on anything yet.

I am looking to work with a very similar (garage) set-up and am curious
to see what you decide after so many conflicting and, at points,
incongruent opinions from this group.

Do let us know.

Thanks,
xrx.



He probably wished he never asked. ;]


(I had to look "incongruent" up)

  #107  
Old December 16th 04, 11:46 AM
teflon
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On 16/12/04 7:05 am, in article Bsawd.240977$HA.73338@attbi_s01, "xrx"
wrote:

I'm curious to learn if you've decided on anything yet.

I am looking to work with a very similar (garage) set-up and am curious
to see what you decide after so many conflicting and, at points,
incongruent opinions from this group.

Do let us know.

Thanks,
xrx.



He probably wished he never asked. ;]


(I had to look "incongruent" up)

  #108  
Old December 20th 04, 05:36 PM
Alan Browne
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Bandicoot wrote:

"Alan Browne" wrote in message
I would get 5 stop infinite which is what AlienBees offer, AFAIK, on all
their monos.



This doesn't answer my point: if budget is tight, where is it best to direct
those limited resources? Just saying what you want _if_ you could afford
it isn't the issue.


The next time I discharge money into studio lights I will get what I want.
Prior to that there are other lenses I want, possibly a 500CM and a couple
lenses and backs. Maybe even a digital body.

If I currently had a choice of two lower powered monos or one larger mono, it
would be the larger mono, as this would give me more DOF control in the stuido
with slower films, that I do agree with you...


One big problem I have with simple portraits is that my subject can't be
much further than about 3-4 feet from the BG (room) when I use the
100mm. My 200 W-s light, set at seat level to light the BG, and at 1/2
power puts too much light on the BG (unless I want a 2 stop blowout).
I've bought an AC-strobe (60 W-s) and put a sheet of white plastic over
it, and I can now get the BG to -1 to +1 stop as required by moving the
AC strobe in/out/up/down.



The closer that main light is to the sitter, of course, the more fall off
will reduce the relative brightness on the background - but then you need to
be able to turn down (or gel) that main light to give you the stop you want
for the subject. So this comes back to the general point I was making:
having one really good light in this instance, with lots of control, plus
the cheap and simple light on the background, helps you more than having two
lights with 'some' control does. It's all about where you put the money.


I can't really agree that the BG lighting can be done easilly on the cheap.
In a larger area studio it's easier to work with less contol in the lights. In
a smaller studio there is less room to place things and adjust. Hence more
control is desired on all the lights. (The counter side of what I said above is
I have so little room for the BG light that lifting it 12 inches can change the
lighting behind the subjects head by over a stop.) I need to be able to tune
that back down. Current solution is a cheap AC strobe with layers of white
plastic... but that is messy, tedious and I get less control of the shape of the
BG light on the BG. (not having a modeleing light for it means a lot of
guesswork in getting a pleasing shape out of it too).

I currently make do with two 'real' studio lights (as 'junior' as they are), an
AC stobe, an old sunpak and one or two Maxxum flashes in manual wired flash
configuration, but it's very tedious on the setup.

--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: there's no such thing as a FreeLunch.
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
How many watt seconds do I need? me 35mm Photo Equipment 88 December 20th 04 05:36 PM
4921 seconds [email protected] Digital Photography 11 November 4th 04 05:57 AM
CF cards speed comparisons [email protected] Digital Photography 13 October 7th 04 06:16 AM
'Ultra' / 'High-Speed' SD cards VS. regular SD cards Steven Digital Photography 7 October 1st 04 03:04 PM
Density Streaks on Film Alparslan In The Darkroom 11 March 29th 04 02:03 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:49 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 PhotoBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.