PDA

View Full Version : Looking for a first artificial light for portraits



andre
3-Aug-2016, 08:55
Long time no see LFphotographyforum! :)

I have moved to a new place and no longer have that gorgeous grey Belgian sky as lighting.
The new place has no good windows to shoot with.

Because of that I haven't been doing any photography lately and really need to find some lighting for a small home studio.

It should be continuous lighting because I'm a die hard available light shooter.

LED is too expensive I think. And I am not sure how shape those lights.

Leaving daylight light bulbs and quarts lights, right?

I saw Greg Heisler's portraits with quarts lights and quite liked them. But maybe that's not because of the light source... :)

I think I want to have a beauty dish as key and strip lights as kickers.
I was considering THIS (https://www.foto-walser.de/en/Photo-Studio/Continuous-Light/Quarzlight/Studioset-Quartz-Light-VC-1000Q-Beauty-Dish-WT-806) light.

Does it still make sense to buy quarts lights these days?
Can I mix them with daylight light bulbs? I'm Shooting 90% black and white film.
I'm shooting with apertures of F4 and faster and I will have the lights quite close to the subject so power is not the main concern. (I think at least. Never done this before.)

I don't want to exceed 400 EUR per light.

Any tips?

Jim C.
3-Aug-2016, 09:18
Quartz lights ( hot lights ) give off quite a bit of heat, this is the projected light I'm referring to
something to consider if you're setting the lights close to your subject.

If you're shooting BW mixing 3200K incandescent and 5600K incandescent color temp light is fine
but you'll have to pay attention when shooting color, the lights can gelled with color correcting filters
when you do shoot color and testing should done.

Bob Salomon
3-Aug-2016, 09:42
In the long run LED will be cheaper, bulbs don't burn out as quickly as Quartz or tungsten, will be more neutral in color balance, will not change output of color during use and draw far less current to operate. Also, since they are much, much cooler burning they will be more comfortable to pose under and to work with. Finally many have dimmers that do not change color at different settings. Since the sharpness of a light source is dependent on its shape and distance it is much simpler to dim a LED light then a hot light. And when you dim it you do not effect the sharpness, or lack of sharpness of the light cast on the sitter.

jp
3-Aug-2016, 10:13
A simple beauty dish can do pretty good. Mortensen used it as his "basic light" to good effect which I tried in this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ntoUMoRP9o8
I used a simple hardware store reflector and 100w equiv cfl bulb which would work fine with B&W film. Use a second light to set the brightness of the background.

Peter De Smidt
3-Aug-2016, 10:16
I'm with Bob on this, especially if you want to work in black and white.

Jac@stafford.net
3-Aug-2016, 11:11
Bob is right. All I have are tungsten floods and they are discouragingly hot, and when I run out of my warehouse of bulbs it is off to LEDs, lots of them.

SergeiR
3-Aug-2016, 13:07
if you just planning to use continuous light and want to go cheap route - what Jason suggested would be best - simple reflector from hardware store will work fine.
You can control output by distance and can even add small barn doors . Can add second light like that. If you want to go fancier - everything short of LED and flash will be too hot in long run. LED will be most expensive.

Or you can build yourself battery of LED lights with household lamps and be happy and cheery ;)

andre
4-Aug-2016, 04:08
Thanks for the excellent advice everybody!
I will start with LED flood lights like this (http://www.obi.de/decom/product/LED_Strahler_Grau_EEK%3A_A/3390309?position=1&pageNum=1&pageSize=72).

How powerful should they be if I want to expose around EV8 and considering that I want to shape the light some how with an ambrella or softbox?

maxotics
4-Aug-2016, 05:16
Even in BW I'd think you'd want to be careful of the color output of your lights. If a light emits little of the red wavelength, for example, bricks would turn out dark. Also, LEDs do not deliver a lot of lumens. When I use them, I have to put them about 2 feet from the subject (especially when they're softened). So good thing they aren't hot! ;) The light you're showing above is meant for outdoors, not photography, and will have serious color spikes which may play havoc with you in time. Most color balance assumes a curve that moves to the blue or red, but is gentle. With LED, color spikes mean you would have to gel for individual colors, or wavelengths, to get a neutral curve, so to speak. Here's some comparisons of light spectrums (http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/gadgets/reviews/g164/incandescent-vs-compact-fluorescent-vs-led-ultimate-light-bulb-test/) I have Fiilex LEDs, which are among the best, and even they seem a bit odd, color wise. I'm not trying to dissuade you from your current decision, only trying to temper your expectations. You may run into that "crap" moment with those lights ;)

I'd personally look for some cheap Lowell or similar quartz lights on Ebay, or whatever you have over there. Many people are dumping them because of the heat. You will have to turn them off and on sparingly. Although they are half heat-lamps, their color is very good. Also, a monolight (strobe) is something you should also consider.

andre
4-Aug-2016, 08:04
With LED, color spikes mean you would have to gel for individual colors, or wavelengths, to get a neutral curve, so to speak.

Sorry, I did not understand that :)
Does it mean if I put a gel on that outdoor floodlight I am going to get a stable color temperature?

Randy Moe
4-Aug-2016, 08:36
Why color is not always correct under LED lighting. http://www.provideocoalition.com/why_color_meters_dont_work_with_leds/

Bob Salomon
4-Aug-2016, 08:58
Sorry, I did not understand that :)
Does it mean if I put a gel on that outdoor floodlight I am going to get a stable color temperature?

No, it will still have spikes but all of the light's output will be colored by the gel.

drew.saunders
4-Aug-2016, 09:21
If you're shooting 90% B&W, you don't need to worry about color. Modern LEDs are getting much better at accurate color. Anyway, for cheap, look at things like this (may be different brands in EU, and, of course different voltages and plugs):
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/271348-REG/Impact_401004_Floodlight_Reflector_with_Socket.html

I don't know if Impact makes one for EU, but someone likely does, probably in China, and probably pretty cheaply. The nice thing about that unit is that it fits normal lighting stands (unlike hardware store clamp lights or flood lights), and it's pretty well made. You can get that unit plain, or with a few sizes of reflectors in kits.

Then you put in it something like this: http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1182662-REG/savage_50wled_35w_led_studio_lamp.html

It's an LED bulb that draws 50W and produces light similar to a 350W tungsten, without putting out all that heat! It even has a fan to cool the electronics. LED bulbs don't bake your subjects, but the electronics in them can get warm.

Modern CFL and LED lights present all sorts of options for lots of light without cooking your poor subjects.

Bob Salomon
4-Aug-2016, 09:47
If you're shooting 90% B&W, you don't need to worry about color. Modern LEDs are getting much better at accurate color. Anyway, for cheap, look at things like this (may be different brands in EU, and, of course different voltages and plugs):
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/271348-REG/Impact_401004_Floodlight_Reflector_with_Socket.html

I don't know if Impact makes one for EU, but someone likely does, probably in China, and probably pretty cheaply. The nice thing about that unit is that it fits normal lighting stands (unlike hardware store clamp lights or flood lights), and it's pretty well made. You can get that unit plain, or with a few sizes of reflectors in kits.

Then you put in it something like this: http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1182662-REG/savage_50wled_35w_led_studio_lamp.html

It's an LED bulb that draws 50W and produces light similar to a 350W tungsten, without putting out all that heat! It even has a fan to cool the electronics. LED bulbs don't bake your subjects, but the electronics in them can get warm.

Modern CFL and LED lights present all sorts of options for lots of light without cooking your poor subjects.

Drew, this is simply a lamp. To use it in the EU just use a plug adapter or go to a hardware store in the EU and buy a plug and switch it for the one that is on the light.

And, this is probably a Chinese or Vietnam or Hong Kong made item. It is a house brand so you shouldn't have a problem finding it under other names.

Drew Wiley
4-Aug-2016, 11:06
I think the most bang for the buck is still a basic starter kit of Lowell Tota and Omni lights, good ole "hot" lights along with gel holders. What you see is what you get.

maxotics
4-Aug-2016, 11:38
Sorry, I did not understand that :)
Does it mean if I put a gel on that outdoor floodlight I am going to get a stable color temperature?

Nothing can really replace a good even color light source like strobes, which are cool, or quartz, which is warm. Gels don't really increase light, but DECREASE/subtract some of the alternating color. So a red gel on a strobe isn't really creating more red, it's soaking up/reducing the blues to balance. Same if you use blue on quartz. They are kludges. When you have spikes, your gel may reduce the spike, but then overcompensates on the wavelengths to either side.

I have Fiilex 360s and if I turn them all the way cool I can't get the same warmth out of faces that I can when they're warm; and I can't get good cold colors out of them when they're turned red. Theoretically, i should be able to balance the colors (to match) in Photoshop, say. I can't. If I want to use the lights alone, setting them warm for me is better on people. In general, changing colors on artificial lights is more to match existing daylight or indoors. Again, a kludge.

If you shoot with strobes, for example, and then shoot with some LED lights, you will start to see what I'm talking about.

Of course, it all depends on what kind of photography you're trying to do. It may make no difference. Indeed, the lights you get may be perfect! Again, my two cents is if photography is all you're doing get strobes or get quartz. LEDs are nice for video, and for convenience. I haven't heard of any photographer making them his/her first choice.

Drew Wiley
4-Aug-2016, 14:51
Hot lights are easy to correctly balance to color film because you have a full-spectrum bulb. You can use either gels over the lights themselves (properly spaced)
or conversion filters over the camera lens. The only potential problem is that they are hot. Nice way to quickly warm up a room on a winter day.

Bob Salomon
4-Aug-2016, 14:58
Hot lights are easy to correctly balance to color film because you have a full-spectrum bulb. You can use either gels over the lights themselves (properly spaced)
or conversion filters over the camera lens. The only potential problem is that they are hot. Nice way to quickly warm up a room on a winter day.

And heat up a room, which may require AC to get the room comfortable again, and, if you have 15 amp circuits, may blow fuses due to their current draw. Also, with any drop in line voltage, say from a refrigerator compressor or an AC or maybe someone just has too many lights on, both output and color temperature will also drop, unless you are on a stabilized outlet.
Those problems don't exist with flash or LED.

Drew Wiley
4-Aug-2016, 16:10
Well, these problems don't exist with flash unless they do exist. A bad blown capacitor in a flash box will mess up a lot more things than a simple bulb will, including any solid state gear or computers on the same circuits, or even on adjacent lines. And if the wiring in your studio is so bad to begin with that you can't plug in a few serious lamps without a voltage drop, how do you expect to expect to deserve fire insurance to begin with. Better call an electrician for a new service panel or move some place less medieval, or simply substitute lower wattage bulbs along with faster film. LED is not an accurate color source. Might be someday, but sure isn't yet. And how do you know what you're actually getting with flash? That's what modeling lamps are for, provided the ratio is truly the same. That's what people traditionally used Polaroid proofs along with color temp and flashmeters for - cause they weren't so sure! Some clients might not like hot lights, but some hate the blinding burst of flash even less. I can't stand flash going off, even pointed the opposite direction from my eyes. If the bulb pops on
a hot light, it pretty darn obvious. Put in another bulb. If something goes wrong inside a flash controller, you might not even know it until it's too late. Sure, you
can spend an arm and a leg for some fancy Broncolor setup. You might even need that kind of thing. But some of the greatest portrait and movie photographers
of all time preferred good ole low tech options.

Peter De Smidt
4-Aug-2016, 16:24
Arri and other feature film lighting purveyors produce a wide range of LED light sources. If they're good enough for feature films, then they're probably ok for still photography, especially BW. Will cheaper versions be as good? Probably not. Will they be good enough? Look for user reviews. Flash is not exactly the same as daylight, and neither is most daylight, as that varies tremendously according to time of day, altitude, weather conditions..... So often we get stuck splitting hairs, when the original posters wants to know what a good light to start out would be.

maxotics
4-Aug-2016, 17:32
Arri and other feature film lighting purveyors produce a wide range of LED light sources. If they're good enough for feature films, then they're probably ok for still photography, especially BW. Will cheaper versions be as good? Probably not. Will they be good enough? Look for user reviews. Flash is not exactly the same as daylight, and neither is most daylight, as that varies tremendously according to time of day, altitude, weather conditions..... So often we get stuck splitting hairs, when the original posters wants to know what a good light to start out would be.

He wants to buy an LED light manufactured for outdoor use where output in lumens is the goal, not color accuracy. I don't think I'm splitting hairs, just trying not to be argumentative ;) LEDs are a bad idea IMHO, having worked with them a fair bit and having tried many DIY solutions like he is proposing. The LEDs used in feature films are VERY expensive. Even a small one runs $2,000. Like I mentioned, I have expensive Fiilexes and even those I find wanting for photography.

Here's a shot of the Fiilexes. As you can see, they are a few feet from the subject so I can shoot at ISO 100, but have to shoot wide open. If you shoot LEDs, don't expect to shoot at f8! As soon as you try to soften your light you might as well light with a candle ;)

https://www.flickr.com/photos/maxotics/22662495826/in/album-72157658340149504/

I do feel the thread got sidetracked by worrying about the heat issues of quartz. Those lights have been used for decades and have a proven record. The great thing about quartz is the $40 worklight from HomeDepot is pretty much the same as the $400 light from Lowell. Yes, they're both hot and red, but they have an even color spectrum. Yes, if he can't deal with the heat or the amps they draw, then he must use LEDs. Certainly they're better than nothing.

Believing that a cheap LED will work for B&W photography because there's no color is a rookie mistake. An imbalance in colors will lead to an imbalance in grays. Yes, most people wouldn't notice, but the OP will notice if the LED has very little blue output and he tries to bring out the detail of a blue shirt.

That's my no splitting hairs rant :)

Peter De Smidt
4-Aug-2016, 18:08
Another photographer and I use an approximately $200 led light for light painting in Gulfstream jets. I'm doing one tomorrow morning, and I can check on the model. This is high end work, and we have to match color samples. We switched from using a tungsten bulb about a year ago. Since the switch, color correction has been easier. If it works well for that....

Peter De Smidt
4-Aug-2016, 18:43
Just a little searching brought up this: http://petapixel.com/2016/06/18/build-set-led-studio-strip-lights/

And this:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L3LWXznJx_0

maxotics
4-Aug-2016, 19:42
Another photographer and I use an approximately $200 led light for light painting in Gulfstream jets. I'm doing one tomorrow morning, and I can check on the model. This is high end work, and we have to match color samples. We switched from using a tungsten bulb about a year ago. Since the switch, color correction has been easier. If it works well for that....

Again, I HAVE LED Lights, both the Fiilex and an Aputure $200+ light, probably similar to what you're using. I read the OP and if he's spending $400 Euros for LEDs then I agree he can get some good LEDs. I was reacting to the LED which was posted which was not made for photography. Maybe my point is that you can't go cheap on LEDs and you have to keep in mind that they aren't as powerful as other lights.

I can make an argument for the other side. The reason I use LEDs, even though I wish they were brighter, is that I can model them perfectly without worrying about the temperature of the room. I favor light placement over color, so I use them. If that's what the OP wants, then definitely, LEDs are great in that way. I have good strobes too, but as much as I love the color and aperture flexibility, the modeling lights aren't strong enough for me to position them the way I want. You can't have everything; at least I can't ;)

Peter De Smidt
4-Aug-2016, 19:47
It's a very good point that LEDs differ widely in quality and in usability for photography. The link I posted earlier clearly shows this difference. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L3LWXznJx_0

My main point has been that I disagree with Drew's comment that "LED is not an accurate color source. Might be someday, but sure isn't yet." It can be accurate enough for high quality work, and you don't have to spend tons of money to achieve good results. Of course, you can also go horribly wrong, just as you can with fluorescents.

andre
5-Aug-2016, 01:01
When I shoot with daylight, so with the sky or windows, doesn't the color temperature change depending on the weather, density of clouds, time of day?
Not getting reproducible results from shot to shot is probably something I'm already used too, no?

Peter De Smidt
5-Aug-2016, 04:05
It's not color temperature that's predominantly the problem but the discontinuity of the spectrum. In the video I linked to the author compared a high cri led to a low one. Both were white-balanced. They don't look the same.

Pere Casals
5-Aug-2016, 04:33
It's not color temperature that's predominantly the problem but the discontinuity of the spectrum. In the video I linked to the author compared a high cri led to a low one. Both were white-balanced. They don't look the same.


I completely agree with what you say: the problem is the discontinuity of the spectrum.

Anyway this have less importance with BW. Also it is possible to make a combination of different LEDs that provide a better SPD.

maxotics
5-Aug-2016, 05:14
One of my bugbears about lighting in general is that it's one thing to light inanimate objects and quite ANOTHER to light the human face. You can get a cheap LED and shoot interior real estate photography until the cows come home and I doubt anyone would complain of the color. Shoot a portrait with that same light and you will end up spending hours in Photoshop trying to get their complexion right.

It makes a difference in BW too. When you don't have richly exposed yellows and reds faces become pale. Biologically, we are very sensitive to skin color.

Pere Casals
5-Aug-2016, 05:24
One of my bugbears about lighting in general is that it's one thing to light inanimate objects and quite ANOTHER to light the human face. You can get a cheap LED and shoot interior real estate photography until the cows come home and I doubt anyone would complain of the color. Shoot a portrait with that same light and you will end up spending hours in Photoshop trying to get their complexion right.

It makes a difference in BW too. When you don't have richly exposed yellows and reds faces become pale. Biologically, we are very sensitive to skin color.


Yes... for this reason there is nothing like Portra 160, or Fuji 160 combined with daylight equilbrated spectrum. Even BW conversions from Portra are impressive.

Portra specially has a relative spectral sensitivity of each color layer designed to perform a nice color separation in faces.

Digital sensors cannot reach that aesthetic performance by far, anyway Canon if better for faces than Nikon, and Nikon is better than Canon for other things.

maxotics
5-Aug-2016, 06:15
Digital sensors cannot reach that aesthetic performance by far, anyway Canon if better for faces than Nikon, and Nikon is better than Canon for other things.

My 2-cents about that never-ending argument ;) Canon skews colors a tad bit on the red side which favors people. So if you DO NOT want to become obsessive about processing than Canon delivers great images right out of the box. Most people want their images a bit warm. Nikon doesn't play the psychological color game. It seems to obsess over dynamic range, and has a 1 to 2 stop advantage over Canon. There is no competition in digital to the Nikon D810 IMHO (btw, I've never owned one, my Nikon experience is the D600). I have a Canon EOS-M and D50, so I love Canon's stuff too. Still, straight up, I believe Nikon remains the fussy photographer's tool of choice. They can match Canon color with no problem. Dynamic range can't be faked.

Pere Casals
5-Aug-2016, 07:55
My 2-cents about that never-ending argument ;) Canon skews colors a tad bit on the red side which favors people. So if you DO NOT want to become obsessive about processing than Canon delivers great images right out of the box. Most people want their images a bit warm. Nikon doesn't play the psychological color game. It seems to obsess over dynamic range, and has a 1 to 2 stop advantage over Canon. There is no competition in digital to the Nikon D810 IMHO (btw, I've never owned one, my Nikon experience is the D600). I have a Canon EOS-M and D50, so I love Canon's stuff too. Still, straight up, I believe Nikon remains the fussy photographer's tool of choice. They can match Canon color with no problem. Dynamic range can't be faked.


Of course, in my Nikon DSLR I set +2M in the wb to correct it... and of course by a ICC or a LUT we can make Nikon result look like Canon and the counter. Anyway the dyes on pixels (of the Bayer pattern) have different relative spectral sensitivity curves. If you look to the charts from Canon and Sony (Nikon has Sony sensor) you'll see different shapes for the curves.

I agree that same average face colors can be obtained, but the dyes on the Canon sensor allow better skin tones separation, as pink from skin capilaries is better separated in RGB values. A bit like Portra, but far from portra.

This is what I concluded about sensor dyes, I may be mistaken...

Anyway I'm a hard core nikonist... :)

But the good thing about film is that you can select the "sensor dyes" for each job... Portra and Velvia have very different spectral response. With a DSLR we are tied to the spectral response the sensor dyes provide, later with PS it is possible to do something but not all.

Tell Jose Villa that he has to use a DSLR, and you'll see... :)

andre
5-Aug-2016, 08:53
I expected a lot but not a canon/nikon debate. Seriously guys... :)

So the consensus seems to be:

- You would be better off with strobes
- If you can, invest some money in good LED lights with high CRI scores
- If you can't, decide between crappy light or melting your subjects face/burning down your house

Did I get this right?

Pere Casals
5-Aug-2016, 09:09
I expected a lot but not a canon/nikon debate. Seriously guys... :)

So the consensus seems to be:

- You would be better off with strobes
- If you can, invest some money in good LED lights with high CRI scores
- If you can't, decide between crappy light or melting your subjects face/burning down your house

Did I get this right?


- LED lights with high CRI scores is ok

you have another option:

Xenon is nice !!!

Continuous HID (high intensity discharge). High Light output, Xenon HID like cars !! but it should have a countinous electronic driver, a ballast deliver pulsed light.


Well, the "dyes on sensor" it was important as it is the other factor that combines with light spectrum to make and particular result...

Drew Wiley
5-Aug-2016, 09:32
Let's just say that a "black body" light source with a true continuous spectrum is adaptable to all kinds of film or sensors. LED or fluorescent sources are not by
definition continuous. Xenon puts out MOSTLY heat, though it is instantaneous. Once I've seen a xenon flashtube capacitor throw an EMI wave so strong that it blew out every surge protector behind it along with about twenty office computers for good, just like a dam breaking. If you want something like that in the studio, it might be a good public relations policy to hand out white canes to your sitters afterwards.

Randy Moe
5-Aug-2016, 09:36
This another never ending battle. New products, fads and Artistic vision.

Whatever the OP buys as FIRST lighting system even a solitary light IS a system, he may over time change his desires and expectations.

I solve this for my personality type, by acquiring over 20 years a variety of lighting systems and I keep them all.

How about flash bulbs which still offer the most light in the smallest package, including power supply?

I have posted flashbulb vs Studio Strobe results on this forum.

Drew Wiley
5-Aug-2016, 09:48
Beginner once meant a Smith Victor fifteen buck investment. Now you can find those things free. Some pros stuck with that their entire careers.

Randy Moe
5-Aug-2016, 10:13
Beginner once meant a Smith Victor fifteen buck investment. Now you can find those things free. Some pros stuck with that their entire careers.

I see you use 'past' tense.

Pere Casals
5-Aug-2016, 11:59
Xenon puts out MOSTLY heat,


This is not like this, xenon arc is one of the most efficient light sources, even more efficient than most LEDs

Bob Salomon
5-Aug-2016, 12:11
This is not like this, xenon arc is one of the most efficient light sources, even more efficient than most LEDs

I think he meant HMI lighting. But that is probably not practical or affordable for this application. I sure wouldn't want to pose under those in a small studio! Even high output 2, 4 and 50W 6 tube full output, high CRI fluorescents, while cool to run and with very low current draw can be blindingly bright at full power close up.

Drew Wiley
5-Aug-2016, 12:19
Well Randy, I do have a whole pile of Smith Victor myself, somewhere up on the loft in big boxes of inherited stuff I will probably never get around to sorting through, otherwise all in good shape and still perfectly usable. I did pull out some nice stainless darkroom trays for potential use. My favorite "studio" light is a
good ole adjustable-beam Arri fresnel unit; but these were never cheap.

Randy Moe
5-Aug-2016, 12:29
Well Randy, I do have a whole pile of Smith Victor myself, somewhere up on the loft in big boxes of inherited stuff I will probably never get around to sorting through, otherwise all in good shape and still perfectly usable. I did pull out some nice stainless darkroom trays for potential use. My favorite "studio" light is a
good ole adjustable-beam Arri fresnel unit; but these were never cheap.

We also have plenty of Smith Victor, ARRI, Mole, Totas and Omni's. Hot stuff!

I made my own FL tube lights 20 years ago.

The 3 other photo and movie studios here share everything.

I am most excited about a new dedicated 1200 sq ft Portrait studio in building this Fall. I will have off hour access and am making a 11x14 Location camera just for that space.

Pere Casals
5-Aug-2016, 12:30
I think he meant HMI lighting. But that is probably not practical or affordable for this application. I sure wouldn't want to pose under those in a small studio! Even high output 2, 4 and 50W 6 tube full output, high CRI fluorescents, while cool to run and with very low current draw can be blindingly bright at full power close up.


HMI is a type of HID lamp, any common Xenon HDI lamp will work perfect as a studio illumination, imagine a 12V HID lamp from a car headlight cheap conversion kit, small and powerful. Or one of those used in street illumination, it is continuos spectrum 5500K, just a continous electronic drive has to be provided, if using a ballast we'll find, with 60Hz altercurrent, 120 pulses per second, as negative wave also makes a pulse.

Drew Wiley
5-Aug-2016, 12:45
High-frequency ballasts can have tantrums of their own; that is something I know all too well. Also need mild ambient air temps to work properly.
Not something for an ice cold warehouse you only occasionally use as a studio. HMI was introduced for video use and early scanning cameras where constant
output was needed for the slow exposures. Damn expensive. But these cute little roll-up LED lighting panels being sold everywhere nowadays are pretty damn
weak.

Bob Salomon
5-Aug-2016, 12:48
HMI is a type of HID lamp, any common Xenon HDI lamp will work perfect as a studio illumination, imagine a 12V HID lamp from a car headlight cheap conversion kit, small and powerful. Or one of those used in street illumination, it is continuos spectrum 5500K, just a continous electronic drive has to be provided, if using a ballast we'll find, with 60Hz altercurrent, 120 pulses per second, as negative wave also makes a pulse.

When we introduced the Rollei Scan Pack for the 6008 around 1988 we travelled around and demoed it with a battery operated HMI system. Those were interesting times!

Drew Wiley
5-Aug-2016, 12:53
I remember the first Broncolor units rolled out along with the Sinar Epolux system, which itself cost a distinct fortune. Now you'd have to pay someone just to haul
the leftovers to the dump. But one of those automated Epolux turrets would be nice for some big tricolor camera project.

Bob Salomon
5-Aug-2016, 13:26
I remember the first Broncolor units rolled out along with the Sinar Epolux system, which itself cost a distinct fortune. Now you'd have to pay someone just to haul
the leftovers to the dump. But one of those automated Epolux turrets would be nice for some big tricolor camera project.

Fortunately the Rollei didn't use a filter wheel. That was one of the advantages over the original Leaf system, as well as the others that did.

Pere Casals
6-Aug-2016, 03:41
When we introduced the Rollei Scan Pack for the 6008 around 1988 we travelled around and demoed it with a battery operated HMI system. Those were interesting times!

Hello Bob,

I've searched it, $19000 in 1991, 20 seconds to scan 5 MPix Interesting times... in fact ! how it was to change all...

http://www.digicammuseum.com/en/cameras/item/rollei-digital-scan-back

John Kasaian
14-Aug-2016, 07:14
For portraits, I don't think you can go wrong with two hot soft boxes (large ones for LF) and a reflector.
Mine were Photoflex, purchased on introductory sale, but I later sold the array to finance a badly needed remodel job on our master bath.
Photoflex I understand is now out of business.