PDA

View Full Version : Danger of really bright flash lighting on people



brighamr
21-Apr-2014, 12:14
Hi

I'm currently working with 3 asa direct positive Paper negatives on 8x10
doing head shots at 1:1 I need as much light as I can get
I can get a good exposure with flash of F32 with a 10,000 Joule strobe "fish fryer" just above the lens about 2' from the sitter but I'm a bit worried that this may have some long term effect on people

Anybody know anything about this

thanks

robin

Jim Noel
21-Apr-2014, 12:28
Why don't you open the lens and use less light? That is a ridiculous amount at that distance.

brighamr
21-Apr-2014, 14:03
Hi Noel

F32 is not a ridiculous stop for a 1:1 headshot

it gives me about 2" of focus from my 480mm lens after I've allowed a stop for the bellows

robin

robin

Leigh
21-Apr-2014, 14:10
You have absolutely no right to assault your models/subjects.

Given that you're aware of the hazard, your actions could be considered criminal negligence.

- Leigh

Amedeus
21-Apr-2014, 14:12
I'm not aware of any long term effect on people but each person perceives this amount of light different ... from "I can do this again" to "I can't get out of here fast enough"

Not sure if you're using reflector, bare bulb or soft box as all of these have a significant effect on how much light reaches the subject.

I can tell you from experience that the pops of my two 3200J heads make pro models nervous and I'm not talking head shots here. (full length fashion shots) The retina is quite overexposed and the subjects see floating and sometimes very colorful "balls" for a very long time.

YMMV.

Michael Mutmansky
21-Apr-2014, 14:33
10,000WS fired a few feet from the subject? I'd be worried about a handful of things, including UV exposure, heat (burns), and permanent blindness concerns.

What Rudi mentions is called flash blindness:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flash_blindness

However, I expect that you will probably cross over into the realm of permanent damage because of the high exposure.

Suggestion:

Try it on yourself for a while first.

Don't sit 2' from it, but across the room. Fire away. See how it feels looking into the camera. Then, move in to 1/2 the distance and try it again (should be about 3-4x the power at your face). If you aren't seeing very long-term blobs of blinded areas, then move in again... and again... until you are at the shooting position.

If you are stupid enough to try this, please report back on the results (you know, for science).

After that, there is this theory about how long a person remains conscious after being run through a guillotine that I don't believe science has definitively answered. Maybe you can help us out with that.

Michael Mutmansky
21-Apr-2014, 14:43
Oh, and I'm just kidding... I don't think you want to come anywhere near to doing this. Have you ever been near 10,000WS going off, on the receiving end?

I had a 4800WS head that I used for architectural shooting, and that damn thing put out some serious heat. I wouldn't want to be anywhere near it when it went off without having a reflector in the way. Additionally, if the arctube failed on you... could get nasty.

Those things also make a lot of noise firing, so even if you did manage to make it work safely, could you keep the model from flinching?

This sounds like a good case of "probably shouldn't go there".


---Michael

Bruce Watson
21-Apr-2014, 14:55
I can get a good exposure with flash of F32 with a 10,000 Joule strobe "fish fryer" just above the lens about 2' from the sitter but I'm a bit worried that this may have some long term effect on people.

I can't imagine that anyone would sit for you under these conditions. I certainly wouldn't.

There was a reason for the way photographic portraits were done in the old days. They had flash powder, but they didn't use it for head-and-shoulders portraits for a reason. Instead they used a posing chair with a head brace (http://edisontinfoil.com/wetplate-process/wetproc.htm) to hold the head steady during the long exposure.

I advise you to investigate this path. You blind some sweet young thing with your strobe, don't be surprised to have the boyfriend after you with a cricket bat. Just sayin'.

Daniel Stone
21-Apr-2014, 15:18
I worked on a car job where we were using the Speedotron 9600 watt-second heads in-studio. Yes, we were using mutliple 9600w/s heads(each was connected to 4-2400ws packs).

Short story: I didn't feel very good that evening after being that close to that much strobe power going off around me(again, we were in studio).

And yes, those heads are really loud(boom!).

-Dan

114038

8x10 user
21-Apr-2014, 15:53
Yes... That is a lot of light!

I'd say 1600j is the most I would use on one of my hazylights from several feet away (~7). Hard lighting... I use on the lowest setting.

Some flash systems have an optional UV reduction filter... Use it, it possible.

I can feel the effects of a long day in the studio on the more sensitive areas of my skin (around my eyes, and lips). My eyes are use to the flash and will automatically close before the flash reaches its peak.

Sunscreen could be useful.

8x10 user
21-Apr-2014, 15:57
In addition to UV we should all watch infrared exposure. That stuff causes cataracts.

Michael Mutmansky
21-Apr-2014, 16:18
8x10,

Yes, but actually, lots of forms of radiation are known to be a cause:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cataract

Basically, keep exposure of all wavelengths to a minimum when reasonable to do so!

I rarely go outside without sunglasses, even on cloudy days. No harm to do so, might help in the long run.


---Michael

dsphotog
21-Apr-2014, 16:32
Have models wear really dark sunglasses, with eyes closed.... Or use (faster) film.
Don't forget to compensate for all that bellows extension.

Randy Moe
21-Apr-2014, 17:14
I'm doing the same thing, f32, but using HP5. I test on myself.

I have video LED lights that are painful at those distances. NG.

I use 2 Einsteins.

Actually I find a 19" lens way too short and use 25 or 30" lenses for 1/1.

When I find an affordable 35 or 40" lens I will go to that.

Jmarmck
21-Apr-2014, 17:24
If you are asking the question and are a "bit worried" I think you already know the answer.

Shootar401
21-Apr-2014, 21:13
You have absolutely no right to assault your models/subjects.

Given that you're aware of the hazard, your actions could be considered criminal negligence.

- Leigh

You can't be serious?

Leigh
21-Apr-2014, 21:24
You can't be serious?
I'm serious as a heart attack.

- Leigh

jbenedict
21-Apr-2014, 22:02
I'm missing some information here.

Why is it necessary to use so much light and/or why is it necessary to use such slow materials?

Jeff "wondering" Benedict

Brian C. Miller
21-Apr-2014, 22:12
I'm currently working with 3 asa direct positive Paper negatives on 8x10 doing head shots at 1:1 I need as much light as I can get I can get a good exposure with flash of F32 with a 10,000 Joule strobe "fish fryer" just above the lens about 2' from the sitter but I'm a bit worried that this may have some long term effect on people

I understand your problem, but I absolutely don't understand why you need to position your light at that point. That's a "mugshot" position. When you need that much power, place the lights at an angle from the eyes. There's lots of good lighting that doesn't use a dead-on beam in the face.

What can happen? Permanent eye damage. And that opens you up to criminal charges or a law suit.

Kodachrome25
21-Apr-2014, 22:41
What is that song by Smash Mouth?

"You might as well be walkin' on the Sun".

I'm just glad the OP at least asked for other opinions, surely he is getting an idea of how incredibly unproductive and flat out dangerous this is...10k right smack in the eyes of innocent victims....wow....

jbenedict
21-Apr-2014, 22:41
What can happen? Permanent eye damage. And that opens you up to criminal charges or a law suit.

And, besides that, someone is going to get their eyes roasted out the back of their head....

Patrick13
21-Apr-2014, 22:49
I know, try it on yourself first a few times and see :rolleyes:

brighamr
21-Apr-2014, 23:01
Firstly an apology

I seem to a riled a few people on this forum
but... I was asking for facts from people who might of done this sort of thing or knew about it (thanks for the link Michael)

secondly don't worry

I am a lighting professional for over 35 years now and know a few things
indeed I have shot lots of macro eyes at very high frame rates with flash and contiuous lighting
using neck braces and drops in the eye to relax the sitter administered by an optician

LF is my hobby not my trade

I have tried this lighting setup on myself to no avail


the reason i am using slow film and 8x10 at f22 and the light directly over camera is because that is the look i am after
I could and have used an Aero Ektar wide open on tri-x and leave the shutter open for 60seconds with ambient light
I could and do use an iPhone if i just what to take a picture which is much esker but I,m not doing this for easy

I do things to lesson the impact on the sitter such as I shooting outside in bright broad daylight and not in total darkness so there is not so much strain on the eyes
the light I am using is a soft box with a 3'x2' hard perspex front and the tubes are UV coated
the heat from the flash is not really noticeable and the pop is over after the picture has happened
I do demonstrate the lighting before so nobody has a heart attack from the shock

so anyway if anybody has any opinions on how to better achieve what I.m trying to do I'd be interested

thanks

robin

Brian C. Miller
22-Apr-2014, 00:29
Robin, I have a similar project to yours. Ilford Direct Positive, awful f-stop, etc. The soft box is a basic problem, as it's going to suck up lots of light all by itself. You could use Megaflash flashbulbs in the softbox. Or you'll just have to use a different lighting pattern. Have you thought about using a beauty light?

For my project, since I initially can't get film to size, I'm using Ilford Direct Positive. However, I'm looking at a starting f/stop of at least 75. With that paper, there really isn't enough flash power economically obtainable, so I'm going with the posing chair, and just wait for sunny days.

brighamr
22-Apr-2014, 07:42
hi brian

what are you shooting that you need a base of f75
I've had some luck flashing the paper to get another stop or two but at the cost of the blacks
I've already got he flash gear so meggaflash bulbs are an expensive option
I have also tried with a hard dish reflector but that really is scary

have you seen imago 1:1 studio
they use a softbox as key and use direct positive
also Richard learoyd shoots cibachrome in camera at 1:1
they both must be using massive lighting

robin

Brian C. Miller
22-Apr-2014, 09:49
I'm doing 4x macro with an f/15 lens, so wide open it's f/75 to start, down to f/320. And of course, ISO 3.

When Dennis Manarchy's Vanishing Cultures (https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/2060332949/vanishing-cultures-by-dennis-manarchy?ref=live) project failed on Kickstarter, I decided that it was something anybody could do. Process lenses aren't that rare, and if I couldn't find one, then I'd get one of Reinhold Schable's Wollaston meniscus lenses. So now I'm in the process of getting things up and running. At some point I'll be able to use film instead of paper.

Sheldon N
22-Apr-2014, 10:44
You should ask Jason Greenberg Motamedi (a member here) about this topic. He's does portraits with strobe and daguerreotypes and I think is using close to 10k watt seconds through a beauty dish up close to his subject to get sufficient exposure. He described the flash as sort of like getting slapped in the face, but not too bad.

The danger from the mercury is probably worse. :)

Amedeus
22-Apr-2014, 19:35
Off topic but couldn't resist ... who is still selling Ilford Direct Positive on rolls ?


Robin, I have a similar project to yours. Ilford Direct Positive, awful f-stop, etc. The soft box is a basic problem, as it's going to suck up lots of light all by itself. You could use Megaflash flashbulbs in the softbox. Or you'll just have to use a different lighting pattern. Have you thought about using a beauty light?

For my project, since I initially can't get film to size, I'm using Ilford Direct Positive. However, I'm looking at a starting f/stop of at least 75. With that paper, there really isn't enough flash power economically obtainable, so I'm going with the posing chair, and just wait for sunny days.

Brian C. Miller
22-Apr-2014, 20:21
Off topic but couldn't resist ... who is still selling Ilford Direct Positive on rolls ?

I bought the last 50" roll in the US from B&H.

Amedeus
23-Apr-2014, 00:14
Thanks Brian ...


I bought the last 50" roll in the US from B&H.

koh303
23-Apr-2014, 18:14
The short answer is to use film, positive if you must, and have a processor handy so you can process it right away same as you would with paper. The advantage of 6 stop in sensitivity might work to your advantage here;) ?