Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 40

Thread: tungsten vs strobe lighting

Hybrid View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1

    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Durham, NC
    Posts
    117

    tungsten vs strobe lighting

    I am shooting with a cooke 229mm lens on a 4x5 camera. I am wanting to shoot at f/4.5 to get the softest lens effect as possible. With my Bowens Gemini 500 Pro monolight set at the lowest setting, 15 watts/sec and with a one-stop reducer in the softbox, I can use only one light and must keep it around 8 feet away, otherwise the shot is overexposed. I am shooting ASA 100 at 1/125 sec. at f/4.5. I would like to be able to use fill lights, hair lights, etc. without that overexposing the film. I thought of using tungsten lighting, so I bought a 650 W Tungsten Fresnel, but with that I have to get 3 feet away at the tightest spot to shoot at the same shutter speed and aperture. I don't really want to go below 1/60th sec., and I don't want my models melting under lights so close to them. Also, the tightest spot covers less than 1 foot at that distance. With a 650 W flood, forget about getting enough light. I have done some reading on the internet already. Some suggest going up to a 2000 W Tungsten fresnel or larger, but that would mean I would have to get farther away, which would lead to loss of light intensity. Why the fresnel? I love the look of fresnel spotlights of the old Hollywood portraits of the 20s and 30s. Oh, and I can't afford HMI.

    Thanks for reading my lengthy question,

    David

  2. #2
    Unwitting Thread Killer Ari's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Ottawa, Canada
    Posts
    6,286

    Re: tungsten vs strobe lighting

    What about a ND filter, either on the lens or ND gels over the lights?

  3. #3
    Greg Lockrey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Temperance, MI
    Posts
    1,980

    Re: tungsten vs strobe lighting

    Put some filtration on your lens.... you can get a couple of stops or more that way. Your polarizer will get you 2.5-3 stops alone.
    Greg Lockrey

    Wealth is a state of mind.
    Money is just a tool.
    Happiness is pedaling +25mph on a smooth road.



  4. #4

    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Durham, NC
    Posts
    117

    Re: tungsten vs strobe lighting

    Thank you for your repspones. I know there are many photographers that would strongly disagree with me, but I don't like to put filters of any kind on my lenses. I would be happy to put them over the softbox. I'll see what they have online. What about the quality of light from the fresnel spots? Can that be replicated by strobes with a snoot or other attachments?

    David

  5. #5

    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Santa Barbara
    Posts
    1,376

    Re: tungsten vs strobe lighting

    Quote Originally Posted by David Solow View Post
    Thank you for your repspones. I know there are many photographers that would strongly disagree with me, but I don't like to put filters of any kind on my lenses. I would be happy to put them over the softbox. I'll see what they have online. What about the quality of light from the fresnel spots? Can that be replicated by strobes with a snoot or other attachments?

    David
    some photographers will gut a fresnel fixture and stick a bare bulb strobe head in there to get similar effects. I think Norman even sells a fresnel head for their packs..or used to

  6. #6

    Join Date
    Sep 1998
    Location
    Loganville , GA
    Posts
    14,409

    Re: tungsten vs strobe lighting

    Quote Originally Posted by David Solow View Post
    Thank you for your repspones. I know there are many photographers that would strongly disagree with me, but I don't like to put filters of any kind on my lenses. I would be happy to put them over the softbox. I'll see what they have online. What about the quality of light from the fresnel spots? Can that be replicated by strobes with a snoot or other attachments?

    David
    Some companies made Fresnel spots for their strobes.

  7. #7
    Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Northern Virginia
    Posts
    5,614

    Re: tungsten vs strobe lighting

    You know that if you move your main light from 8 feet to 11 feet, you'll drop the light on your subject by a full stop. Do you have room?

    You may also try to use a scrim, unless you are looking for hard lighting. Even a white bedsheet hanging in front of your softbox will knock it down (but also diffuse it). If you are using a softbox, then that effect might not be incompatible with your objectives.

    If your softbox has a silvered reflector, try covering that with white cloth. Cheap white bedsheets will be a lot cheaper than neutral-density gels.

    If you need a spot, use a snoot rather than a Fresnel. It will block unwanted light instead of redirecting it to the spot.

    Rick "just some ideas" Denney

  8. #8

    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    St. Louis, Mo.
    Posts
    3,064

    Re: tungsten vs strobe lighting

    Quote Originally Posted by David Solow View Post
    Thank you for your repspones. I know there are many photographers that would strongly disagree with me, but I don't like to put filters of any kind on my lenses. I would be happy to put them over the softbox. I'll see what they have online. What about the quality of light from the fresnel spots? Can that be replicated by strobes with a snoot or other attachments?

    David
    I have a very good friend who feels as you do about using filters on his lenses. He feels that filters will make his images softer. I kind of understand his point of view since he is a landscape photographer and mostly uses a Hasselblad Xpan which is a 35mm camera.

    You are shooting portraits with a 4x5 camera. I don't know how large you are enlarging your images or if you are shooting men or women. How sharp are you wanting your images? I shot a group shot of my wife with her son, daughter-in-law and granddaughter with a Mamiya RZ67 with 110mm lens and Novetron Strobes and I caught hell from my wife because the images were razor sharp.

    Neutral density filters on your lens may very slightly soften the image. I wouldn't think enough to notice. Most Hasselblad owners use softar filters when shooting women because the Zeiss lenses are too sharp. Of course I'm talking about medium format and blowing up to 8x10 and 11x14 sizes.

    I think that neutral density filters on your lenses would be fine and quite a bit cheaper than ones on your strobes.

  9. #9

    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Minneapolis, MN
    Posts
    1,261

    Re: tungsten vs strobe lighting

    Quote Originally Posted by Alan Gales View Post
    How sharp are you wanting your images?
    If I can't count the hairs on the bacteria crawling across her face, then it's not sharp enough.

  10. #10

    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    St. Louis, Mo.
    Posts
    3,064

    Re: tungsten vs strobe lighting

    Quote Originally Posted by Robert Hughes View Post
    If I can't count the hairs on the bacteria crawling across her face, then it's not sharp enough.
    Well, you really answered my question!

Similar Threads

  1. Filtration for Portrait lighting
    By Bob Kerner in forum Style & Technique
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 31-Dec-2010, 20:28
  2. Suggestions for single strobe portraits
    By jasonjoo in forum Gear
    Replies: 36
    Last Post: 26-Aug-2008, 16:30
  3. Graflex Heiland Strobonar 4X5 Strobe
    By romie in forum Cameras & Camera Accessories
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 24-Mar-2008, 14:51
  4. Feinstein's lighting technique for flower photography
    By Paul Schilliger in forum Style & Technique
    Replies: 26
    Last Post: 11-Nov-2005, 13:59
  5. Recommendations for compact lighting kit?
    By Michael Mutmansky in forum Location & Travel
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 29-Apr-2002, 09:24

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •