Studio lighting for 8x10

[cyrus]

I'm surprised at the number of people who are using rather low-powered lighting for LF studio lighting. They can't all be shooting wide-open! What's going on? Even more surprised at the number of posts that use the WS as a measure of power without regard to the guide numbers.

ANyway, based on my calculations, any decent studio lighting for LF photography would come at a min cost of $5K for two heads (new.) Does this sound right?

[Mark Woods]

I spent about $4K for 4 Speedotron power packs: 3 - 2400 & 1 - 4800 ws and about a dozen heads. I'm going to trim the package to about 6 heads and 3 power packs. I already owned the stands and support, so your guesstimate is about right for cost, but not for quantity in my case. ;-) I like to shoot at F/64.

[erie patsellis]

New, probably about right. Then again, older Broncolor, Elinchrom and the like are going for next to nothing. Over a year, I accumulated 5 packs, 10 heads, modifiers, grids, etc., for well under $700. The only downside is that they are typically limited to a a 4 stop range, in 1/2 stop increments, so usage with digital is fairly limiting (unless you have some ND filters, which I use frequently).

[Capocheny]

Hi Cyrus,

It depends on what your photographing... for still life/product shooting, you can get away with lower-powered units by using multiple pops.

For portraiture, I suspect you'd need something with a bit more power than you can choose to use in the above situation. I don't do any portraiture photography so multiple pops have never been an issue for me.

I've been using Balcar packs (1 - 3200 & 1 - 2400 ws with 3 heads) for several years now and won't be expanding the kit.

As for cost, I bought my packs through a local store that was getting out of pro gear and they gave me a reasonably good deal on the kit.

Used gear on the auction site goes for next to nothing depending on what manufacturer they come from. But, buying used may mean you'll need to replace the capacitors sooner rather than later... especially if they come from a studio that heavily uses them.

Cheers

[jp]

You can get some very nice white lightning stuff for a lot less than $5k.

I have a pair of very old white lightning bucket shaped monolights, umbrellas, modifiers, stands, etc.. that I paid $400 for more than a decade ago and are still working fine. They are very weak in power output compared to the modern offerings, but they work for me as long as I don't have them too far from the subject. I would not be able to do a group shot at f32 for example on 8x10, but I can do a single person and have enough light as I can keep the umbrella(s) pretty close to the person and it won't be in the photo. This is with iso 100 film. If someone went to 400, they'd get a lot more flexibility from the underpowered cheap flash.

[sully75]

Don't want to thread highjack, but can someone list some models of older high quality lights to look out for on ebay? I'm less interested in the white lightning stuff than older elinchrom or broncolor.

Stuff that has a really strong modeling light would be awesome.

I look on ebay but I'm not really sure what I'm looking for.

[cyrus]

To get real depth of field in LF studio, you need a LOT more power (http://www.digitalphotopro.com/gear/lighting/hi-tech-studio-monolights.html?start=1):


If you're a large-format film shooter (4x5 view camera) and you tend to use ISO 100 film at a typical ƒ-stop of ƒ/32, you need about 32 times the amount of light as if you're shooting at ƒ/5.6. That ƒ/5.6 might give sufficient depth of field for a digital shooter using a Canon EOS-1Ds Mark II with a full-frame image sensor. In this example, the Canon shooter might choose 1,000 watt-seconds for the shot; the 4x5 shooter would need closer to 64,000.

Wow! This can't be right!

[erie patsellis]

Cyrus,
In your above example, I can't think of a single modifier or situation where 1,000 w/s would yield an aperture of f5.6, short of turning the head totally away from the subject and flagging any spill, relying on illuminating the space to light the subject. In my experience, for a typical softbox/scrim scenario in tabletop work, f5.6 would need somewhere around 100 to 200 w/s max. (depending on head/reflector/modifier efficiencies, etc...) Fresnels or direct illumination with heads/reflectors would cut that at least in half, likely 1/4. I can't think of a single situation in 20 years+ where I ever needed more than 8- 10,000 w/s in studio, and all of those were multi head shoots with very large objects.

With the Broncolor 304/404 era packs and heads, a 1600 w/s pack at full power will yield around f45-f64 or so with a good quality silver lined 2x3 softbox attached at 3' or so. Dual tube heads are an option, to gain an extra stop. Of course, film shooters also have the advantage of multi pop being an option.

The older packs do have their downsides, typically longer t.1 flash duration than the newer packs (a non issue for still lifes and such),and limited power selection, however since the Bron packs utilize cap switching to adjust power, color temperature and duration is very consistent across the entire range, something that has only recently been at the fore of "modern" packs lists of features.


Sully, the broncolor heads can use either a 250w quartz modeling light (candelabra base, I think ETX sounds close) or a 500w quartz modeling light, just be sure that a 6.3A fuse is installed in the head fuse holder (and keep some spares, when a quartz halogen light dies, it typically shorts). While high power modeling lights can be nice, with color critical work, it's a good idea to shut them off before exposure, as you can get some funky lighting induced crossover due to the difference in color temps of the two light sources. Two things to be very careful of with the older Bron equipment, make sure the heads and tubes work, a replacement tube for a universal head costs around $600 from Bron, and make sure you get a proper sync cable with the pack, unless you want to convert the pack to use the typical 1/4" jacks in use today. Bron used a wonderful, extremely reliable (mil spec/aerospace quality) Fischer Scientific connnector (similar to the Lemo connectors used on early Mark Levinson audio equipment) and just the connector is an outrageous amount of money.

[Ben Syverson]

Hahaha...

I recently did an 8x10 shoot on location with one Nikon SB-24 speedlight through an umbrella.

In the studio, I use a dinky Elinchrom 400 Ws monolight. I once went to an antique shop, and they had two of those strobes in the back to shoot stuff for eBay. They have me beat.

I shoot almost exclusively at f/9 and f/11. I don't want infinite depth of field. I don't like diffraction. f/64 can eat me.

There are plenty of rational reasons to buy expensive lights (mainly tabletop and fashion), but beware of gear lust and magic bullets...

[Armin Seeholzer]

the Canon shooter might choose 1,000 watt-seconds for the shot; the 4x5 shooter would need closer to 64,000.

Sounds a bit to much in my expierence only if you want burn them away you need 64'000 WS. I Work normaly at f 11-22 only for groups f32 and I get with a 1000 WS head f 45 with a umbrella at 2m distance, so my question is what Ws do have in USA the same as in EU;--)))) Outside with a no reflective seeling you need really much power but only in the night! Maybe there was one zero to much on your post because with 6400 Ws then you have e very good setting for 8x10 und 100 ASA Film. If you want use 25 ASA film then you really need about 20'000-30'000 Ws for work very fast!
But your customers will be blind after this session;--))))

Cheers Armin

[cyrus]

Sounds a bit to much in my expierence only if you want burn them away you need 64'000 WS. I Work normaly at f 11-22 only for groups f32 and I get with a 1000 WS head f 45 with a umbrella at 2m distance, so my question is what Ws do have in USA the same as in EU;--)))) Outside with a no reflective seeling you need really much power but only in the night! Maybe there was one zero to much on your post because with 6400 Ws then you have e very good setting for 8x10 und 100 ASA Film. If you want use 25 ASA film then you really need about 20'000-30'000 Ws for work very fast!
But your customers will be blind after this session;--))))

Cheers Armin

That's what I thought but the quote is from a magazine! My subjects will have a very nice tan after the photoshoot

[Ron Marshall]

I use ISO 400 for portraits, so that allows me to use 640 WS monolights; much less than $5000!

[Jason Greenberg Motamedi]

So much depends on what light modifiers you are using. Softboxes and umbrellas eat up/diffuse lots of light. I regularly use one head with a 22" beauty dish and a few reflectors at 2400ws at f45.

[Scott Davis]

I've got a 2400 w/s pack that is sufficient for anything I want to do smaller than 11x14. I generally shoot fairly wide open (f11-16ish) with a petzval portrait lens on 6.5 x 8.5, and have no problem getting that with my pack turned to minimum output, pumping output through two heads on separate channels, the main head in a 30x40 inch softbox. I'm using a Calumet Elite pack.

[Mark Woods]

The quality of light changes with the source's proximity to the subject. That's why I like my 2400 & 4800 Speedotrons. I have the choice to place the light where I want to get the desired effect.

[Walter Calahan]

"the Canon shooter might choose 1,000 watt-seconds for the shot; the 4x5 shooter would need closer to 64,000."

Nonsense.

[erie patsellis]

"the Canon shooter might choose 1,000 watt-seconds for the shot; the 4x5 shooter would need closer to 64,000."

Nonsense.

But Walter, it says so right there, on the internet. So it must be true!!! :)

[Jim Noel]

For years now I have been appalled by the insistence on extreme amounts of light in the studio. it is not the quantity of light which makes the difference, it is the quality.
Portraits often have burnt out highlights because of too much light. closing the aperture doesn't necessarily take care of this.
When I do figure studies in the studio using 5x7 or 8x10 cameras, I frequently set up the strobes and use only the modeling lights for exposure. In my classes I often demonstrate the making of a portrait with a five (5) watt bulb.

If you want to learn to light properly try getting away from all that power and learn to control the light. two or three clamp-on reflectors with incandescent bulbs from 25 - 200 watts will do an amazing job of lighting almost anything if located properly.

[Mark Woods]

Jim, what you describe is a WYSIWYG approach. Excellent lighting isn't dependent on only using small lights, but understanding what a given light does and how to manipulate it to get the desired effect. BTW, the burned out highlights you talk about have more to do with the inverse square law in relation to the distance the light is placed from the subject. In many of the commercials I've shot I used a 10K fresnel light to light a 12" plate of food. I shot all of the Sizzler commercials' food for two years back in the day.

[Ben Syverson]

Here's a way-rough scan of a recent studio shot. 400ws, pretty huge softbox, f/11

[cyrus]

Here's a way-rough scan of a recent studio shot. 400ws, pretty huge softbox, f/11

I'm guessing 4x5. What about a 8x10? or does it make a difference? Was there any ambient light like a window nearby?

[Frank Petronio]

You might need all that power for shooting large format film of cars in a large studio, but there aren't any professional car photographers working that way anymore. A lot of the car company photos are actually rendered.

Even with 8x10 I'd still be aiming for f/22-32 in most cases, and that's everyday stuff. One Speedo 2400-watt or a 1000-watt Dynalite pack and head will give you that for most torso portraits and tabletop studio subjects.

I wouldn't buy a new retail-priced AC strobe any more readily than I'd buy a retail large-format camera. You don't need to... it's a buyer's market. Just get a couple mid-sized 800 to 2400 watt packs and two heads per pack. In the USA I'd go with Dynalite for portability, Speedotron for robustness, ProFoto for their fancy light modifiers and trendiness, Paul C. Buff products for value... and relegate the other brands out of your consideration because they have a limited market penetration in the States -- service and parts will be expensive and slow.

You shouldn't pay more than a grand for a good Dyna or Speedo pack with two heads.

Don't forget cases for location work. They are not cheap. And you'll need a cart and plenty of grip gear. In fact I'd budget more money there than on the strobes themselves... but it is all relative, you can drop $20K on an Annie Liebowitz ProFoto light gizmo or $65 on a big umbrella... and get equally good pictures.

Most professional strobe heads top out at 250-watt Halogen modeling lights. People have modified some for more, but the added heat will probably limit your light modifying choices. Try to avoid the wimpy 100-watt household bulbs some of the less expensive strobes use.

Measuring strobes w guide numbers or watts or anything isn't very useful between brands. The shape of the heads and flashtube effect 2-3 stops of light. A 1000-watt Dyna equals a 2400-watt Speedo (old heads) in a softbox. Yet a bare Speedo head is really extra strong, it's the design of the tube that matters. The Dynalite flastube's ring shape with the reflector kicks more light forward - the Speedo is a straight tube so the light floods out in all directions.

The ProFotos are nice because you can slide the flashtube in and out of the reflector and change that aspect as well. They should be nice, they cost a lot.

[Ben Syverson]

I'm guessing 4x5. What about a 8x10? or does it make a difference? Was there any ambient light like a window nearby?
That was 8x10 -- not that it would make a difference if you're shooting at the same stop with the same film...

There was a window nearby, but it didn't contribute to the exposure.

[Ben Syverson]

but it is all relative, you can drop $20K on an Annie Liebowitz ProFoto light gizmo or $65 on a big umbrella... and get equally good pictures.
Frank, that is so true that even Annie agrees. She shoots quite a bit with a $50 Photek Softlighter (http://strobist.blogspot.com/2010/06/softlighter-too.html) on the main source.

[Frank Petronio]

Yeah I saw that too ;-)

Poor Photek, they left $19,950 on the table with that one.

[Ben Syverson]

Haha... Well, I'm sure they made it back the instant that video was posted to Strobist. :)

[Henry Ambrose]

f22 is f22, It doesn't matter what kind of camera.

For a large group of people you need more light than for one person because you have to light a larger area. Like lighting the car that Frank wrote about. And the farther away the lights are will require more light.

For a one person portrait you can light with 3-4 monolights like the X1600 White Lightning and have plenty of light to stop way down. You can also do it with only one light.

One thing to remember is that the closer the light source is to the subject the effect is as if the light is much larger in size. The way to see this is to sit in front of the light and notice that if its ten feet away it is smaller in your vision than if its one foot away. You have to think in terms of what the subject "sees". So for a head and shoulders portrait if you place a 3x4 foot softbox about 24 inches from the sitter it'll look like they are lit from a huge big window. then fill with a reflector. The only problem here is the sitter has to tolerate being so close to the lights. But it can look great. You might get to f22-32 doing this and only one light.

Your flash is lots more powerful up close because of that ol' inverse square law.

To make more room hang a big (8x8') silk and shoot the lights through that. Then you'll want 3 or 4 but you'll have nothing for the background. So maybe you want to start with 5 or 6 lights for a real studio. More would be better if you're doing real work as some will break and you need them when the job demands. You can never have too many lights. But you can start with a few and buy more later.

Five new X1600s at $439 is a long way from $5K. Or buy some cheaper models to mix in with those. If you buy used buy something you can have fixed locally. In NYC that should be easy enough. Buy one brand so the accessories interchange. The really great brands are better than most cheap ones if you need extreme consistency in output and color temperature. But I don't think anyone is doing super critical color work with transparency film these days. By super critical I mean objects that have to be perfect. I bet you can't get a clip test even in NYC these days. So don't pay too much attention to how "perfect" one brand is over another.

You'll need more than lights so save your pennies for some good grip stuff.

I'm selling what's left of my lighting gear. There is a forum member looking at it now but if that deal does not close you might want to talk to me about it.

[Mark Woods]

One thing to remember is that the closer the light source is to the subject the effect is as if the light is much larger in size. The way to see this is to sit in front of the light and notice that if its ten feet away it is smaller in your vision than if its one foot away.


So for a head and shoulders portrait if you place a 3x4 foot softbox about 24 inches from the sitter it'll look like they are lit from a huge big window. then fill with a reflector.

I'm amazed at these posts. It would seem from the posters that there is a magic bullet regarding lighting. What about the individual? Who is it? What context does this person need to be photographed in? The lighting? Moody? Full flash?

Although Avedon's portraits were shot in one manner, for the most part, think of Karsh who did more "interpretive" portraits.

Do you think about the ART of photography? I get the feeling that most of you don't.

[cyrus]

More than one photographer uses a single light and to good effect
http://www.williamcoupon.com/

[Mark Woods]

You sure?? I see multiple sources.

[Frank Petronio]

Nah he is well known for using just one hot light. He keeps the backgrounds really close to his subjects too, so you get a lot of shadow and reflections from that interaction. All Rollei TLR, he was super hot in the 1980s to early 90s and kind of faded since but is a helluva photographer and crazy person.

Mark I know you are a master but those were just rules of thumb for commercial portraiture, the "normal" pleasing kind of picture that people buy. Henry knows how to break the rules but the level of lighting experience for some of the people reading these threads is that they're trying to figure out how to bolt a shoemount flash onto a Deardorff... and doing portrait studio lighting is a big step-up. Henry's just trying to show Cyrus the... light (sorry).

[sully75]

With the Broncolor 304/404 era packs and heads, a 1600 w/s pack at full power will yield around f45-f64 or so with a good quality silver lined 2x3 softbox attached at 3' or so. Dual tube heads are an option, to gain an extra stop. Of course, film shooters also have the advantage of multi pop being an option.

Sully, the broncolor heads can use either a 250w quartz modeling light (candelabra base, I think ETX sounds close) or a 500w quartz modeling light, just be sure that a 6.3A fuse is installed in the head fuse holder (and keep some spares, when a quartz halogen light dies, it typically shorts). While high power modeling lights can be nice, with color critical work, it's a good idea to shut them off before exposure, as you can get some funky lighting induced crossover due to the difference in color temps of the two light sources. Two things to be very careful of with the older Bron equipment, make sure the heads and tubes work, a replacement tube for a universal head costs around $600 from Bron, and make sure you get a proper sync cable with the pack, unless you want to convert the pack to use the typical 1/4" jacks in use today. Bron used a wonderful, extremely reliable (mil spec/aerospace quality) Fischer Scientific connnector (similar to the Lemo connectors used on early Mark Levinson audio equipment) and just the connector is an outrageous amount of money.

Thanks for this...I was looking on ebay and can't find any Broncolo 304 or 404 series. Are they not there or just under a different name? There seems to be a fair amount of "Impact" series stuff at reasonable-ish prices.

http://cgi.ebay.com/Three-Broncolor-Impact-Flashes-case-stands-etc-/270623610043?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0

For doing portraiture on location, do you think that pack and heads works well vs. monolights? Any other specific models you would recomend?

[sully75]

I'm amazed at these posts. It would seem from the posters that there is a magic bullet regarding lighting. What about the individual? Who is it? What context does this person need to be photographed in? The lighting? Moody? Full flash?

Although Avedon's portraits were shot in one manner, for the most part, think of Karsh who did more "interpretive" portraits.

Do you think about the ART of photography? I get the feeling that most of you don't.

Um...aren't those fundamental laws of lighting?

[Henry Ambrose]

Mark Woods - did you get up on the wrong side of the bed?

Maybe you're thinking Portrature 403 and I'm thinking Intro to Lighting.
Cyrus is just trying to get started and has asked for directions.

Look at http://www.williamcoupon.com/ and see the example of how he shoots. (upper right hand side after you click enter site) Looks kinda like what I wrote about one light - huh? Formulaic? Yes. And it works pretty well I'd say, which is why its worth making it a formula and in this case his "shtick". Of course that's not the only way to do it, just one of thousands.

Please show some of your work that demonstrates high level artistic lighting of people so that we may be enlightened.

[Frank Petronio]

Yeah I have two cents to add. If you want to learn how to light with any personality and style, get yourself a 500-750 watt Halogen flood with barndoors, a Lowel if you are practical or an Arri if you feeling like spending more money. Get two heavy duty stands, clamps, and some foamcore. Shoot with that, using your digital camera to do tests. You actually can do 8x10 portraits with it - push the film, use HP5 or TXP, keep the light close and shots tight.

When you want to get fancy get a second identical set-up.

Then get an umbrella.

Your subjects won't melt. Flick the light off if they get hot. I know hot lights aren't "professional" but differs like Paola Roversi seems to make millions with his crappy lights.

After 1000 or 2000 shots then get yourself a strobe set-up. If you still feel the need.

Strobes are great, power to burn is great. But the puny modeling lights and fancy light modifiers can be deceptive and not at all representative of what your shot will look like. Until you figure out where to put your lights, you'll be at the mercy of following lighting diagrams and guessing and formulaic lighting.

That's why photo magazines have lighting diagrams, because people are so used to strobes they can't even judge light on their own, strobes make you stupid.

If you learn by seeing, by using constant light, you will actually know where to put the lights with control and you'll get what you want.

And if the puny couple hundred dollar hot lights are just too pedestrian, you can always blow $5K plus on a nice HMI set ;-)

[Mark Woods]

Frank, thank you for the perspective. And Paul I'm not sure I understand your comment about what I said are the "fundamentals of lighting." I was discussing the narrative of the individual being photographed as interrupted by the photographer. I'm not sure how that is a "law," but perhaps a good way to approach a subject. Henry, I did go to William Coupon's website. One can get a lot of good images with a Chimera, baby oil, and nude women. Is it art? Is it a style? What is it? Think about how you described it as "shtick." Your description of what you see. Frank, your comments, once again, are spot on regarding hot lights. I've been a Cinematographer for 30 years using hot lights (except for the occasional strobe for beer pours ;-). One can work the lighting in with instant film, or digital capture with strobes and get an excellent result. I've done stills with 24 2400WS packs with quad heads, etc. I've also done still with natural light with only a card. The great John Alcott, BSC used Polaroid PN film when he shot. He evaluated the print for the highlights and the neg for the shadow detail. Barry Lindon looked pretty good and it was lite with a lot of Tota Lights with umbrellas. The wedding scene in the church was shot with a ND grad on the sun side to bring down the brightness and exposed for the wedding couple. Finally, Henry, my website is in my signature. You can look at my work and make your own evaluation if I'm blowing smoke or not. BTW, none of the work is newer than 3 years. My current work is much better. I'd love to hear your comments.

Kind Regards,

[Mark Woods]

I forgot the real point of my above statement, the photographer needs to think about the individual s/he is photographing and set the light in the environment accordingly. Of course this may not fit in with the professional portrait photographers. My dad was one of those, and he sold the client on what he showed. He never varied from his approach. Many years later (and I mean this in the most positive way possible), he worked for me as my assistant in my studio. He was my best friend and miss him greatly since he's passed away.

[Jim Fitzgerald]

I'm not much when it comes to lighting but when I want to know about it I'll call Mark. My friend knows more than I can ever comprehend about lighting. A good trade for both of us. He teaches me lighting and I teach him carbon printing.

Jim

[Jason_1622]

I skipped page two and three of this thread, but it sounds like it turned into more than just lighting talk from the first page I read...

Let me say that I can easily shoot at f22 or even higher with one speedotron 2401 pack and a couple heads. With some creative light placement, I bet it wouldn't be too hard to hit f64 with the one pack. Of course, it depends on what you're shooting, so don't expect to take your 8x10 and a speedo pack to successfully shoot a team portrait of the Dallas Cowboys!

[sully75]

Mark it seems like someone asked for some basic lighting info, which someone else gave, and then you impugned them for giving it, and questioned their photographic skill. It sort of seems like you are melting down over there.

I think if you check out William Coupon's website and don't click on the link that says "nudes" you won't see any nudes. Most great photographers are pretty formulaic. Irving Penn's portraiture is all pretty similar, it's just what he does within that space that's amazing. Avedon, whoever, most people are not constantly reinventing the wheel. But it feels like for no reason you turned the discussion around towards something bizarre.

[cyrus]

I think people should realize that electronic communication does not necessarily convey the intended tone of voice and so there can be miscommunication and there's no point reducing a discussion to personal issues. So getting back to the point: yes I prefer and do use continuous lighting. Frank may remember my contribution to the LF book we made a few years ago -- that was made with two el cheapo floodlights. But I was going to go with strobes for my studio for a variety of unrelated reasons. But I think I will stick mainly to continuous because I want to have the option of making videos too amongst other things while at the same time getting some used strobes as recommended here. So I'm thinking if flourescents as my main lighting (and since i do only bw then I don't have to worry too much about color cast.) I also already have a few arri fresnels which are fine for what they do. I have zero windows in my space which is perfect for s darkroom but sucks for a studio so I guess I have to come to terms with the fact that this will primarily be a darkroom and only incidentally a studio, and that most of my photography will occur outside still

[Mark Woods]

Hello Cyrus,

You're right about the electronic communication. The stages I shoot on have no windows since I am expected to create the "look." With no windows, you don't have to cover them when they don't work, or the sun moves. ;-)

BTW, in a short response to some of the above posts, my only point is one might think about the subject before thinking about how to light the subject. That's all.

Have a great day, and I've enjoyed this conversation.

Oh, and Jim, thank you for your kind comments. We have to get together to swap techniques (and stories). One of the reasons I use strobes when I own a ton of hot lights is that I generally shoot outside and the wind plays havoc with my subjects moving. It's a real PITA. I would prefer the hot lights, or even the sun, but it doesn't work with the 11"x14" ASA 50 film.

Kind Regards,