Need some powerful strobe help

[atlcruiser]

Hi All,
In the last set of portraits I did I used a set of Britek 300s on one stand shooting into an umbrella with a reflector on the other side of the subject. Once I got it all set correctly I liked it. The issue was that I can only get f16 @ about 7-8 feet. With the 810 this is not enough! I really want f22 and would love f32 if at all possible.

I have looked all over but I get a bit confused with the monolights. My thought is that I need 1200ws+ to get where I want to be; especially if I eventually use a softbox. It seems that as soon as you cross the 1000ws threshold prices go through the roof…….I can’t afford $1,000 for a light.

I have been looking at this http://www.paulcbuff.com/x3200.php and I think it will do the job. I ran the numbers on their drop down menu and it look like I will get f21.6 @ 10’ through a soft box @ EI 200. Shot into an umbrella I should have no problem with f22+. That will work but I really feel that if I am dumping $600 there has got to be a more powerful option.

Any other suggestions? I want to keep this a monolight, not too crazy expensive and easy to service. Flashbulbs still seem to be the best option 

Thanks

[Peter De Smidt]

How about something like: http://www.ebay.com/itm/Speedotron-B...item3f14625687
Along with: http://www.ebay.com/itm/Speedotron-1...item48444753c0

Or for more power:
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Speedotron-4...item5648d731ee
with a: http://www.ebay.com/itm/Speedotron-1...item20c0683396

[atlcruiser]

thanks Peter. The speedtrons are really sweet. I like the 4800ws option. If the subject gives me any lip I can blind him and give him a sunburn. Perfect world I can stay with a monolight but the price on the speedtron sounds great

[Frank Petronio]

Find someone willing and patient to test with and do a bunch of experiments with your lighting using a digital camera for feedback. Get it right on digital then shoot film, that is the way every pro will do it.

Why do you have the lights 7-8 feet away from your subjects if you are doing torso shots as I've seen you do? Also, seeing your lighting, you could do a couple of things that might make the photos "better" (subjective) and gain more efficiency from your current lights or allow you more control over choosing the aperture you want to work at.

First, move the damn things in closer. As a starting point, if you are photographing a three foot area (upper body) then have the light three feet away. Use an umbrella or soft box smaller than that since the light will spread. Picture I saw of your set-up on the Show Off your Camera thread showed a too large umbrellas too far away to jive with what you want. That wastes 2-3 stops right there.

Second, get better at focusing ;-p But I hear you, f/22 is a nice spot to be in for traditional portraits in 8x10. Maybe a 300 watt mono can't do it so upgrading makes sense. But why do you need to spend $1000 for a new strobe? It's not like you need fast recycling with 8x10. I'd also be cautious about putting a heavier moonlight up on a stand, once you go beyond those lighter, small ones then you will also need a serious stand and probably sandbags to "do it right". What I would seriously consider is getting one of the used 2000-watt Dynalite packs and a head (with a 2000 watt tube, not all of them are rated so high). For the money I think they are the best value in a quality, durable strobe. But there are a lot of good packs and head systems and I bet you could find a lot of power (and redundancy) for a lot less than a grand. And no, none of the pack I am selling are big enough for you ;-/

(Also the design of the head makes a big difference worth a couple of stops depending on your light modifier. Heads with built-in reflectors and recessed flash tubes work well with umbrellas. Head that stick their flash tubes out forward in a housing tend to work better in soft boxes and beauty dishes.)

(And yes, it is probably time to move up to big-boy strobes rather than plastic junk. But I am not a fan of Speedos unless they are dirt cheap - the heads are inefficient and waste a stop right out of the box - and they arc and are the heaviest things made. But they are durable!) (Avoid Normans, Balcars, old Calumets, old European stuff too, at least in the USA.)

Third, are using ISO 400 film? That would save a lot right there.

[Peter De Smidt]

And these things are studio work horses. They are robust and easily repaired. And since so many were sold, there's a wide range of fairly affordable accessories. The downside is that the power packs are heavy as sin. If you do get them, the main thing to remember is not to attach or unplug a head while the pack in powered on. I worked with these daily for two years.

I didn't do any investigating of the sellers, and so make sure you do a little of that if you do decide to bid on them.

[atlcruiser]

Find someone willing and patient to test with and do a bunch of experiments with your lighting using a digital camera for feedback. Get it right on digital then shoot film, that is the way every pro will do it.

Why do you have the lights 7-8 feet away from your subjects if you are doing torso shots as I've seen you do? Also, seeing your lighting, you could do a couple of things that might make the photos "better" (subjective) and gain more efficiency from your current lights or allow you more control over choosing the aperture you want to work at.

First, move the damn things in closer. As a starting point, if you are photographing a three foot area (upper body) then have the light three feet away. Use an umbrella or soft box smaller than that since the light will spread. Picture I saw of your set-up on the Show Off your Camera thread showed a too large umbrellas too far away to jive with what you want. That wastes 2-3 stops right there.

Second, get better at focusing ;-p But I hear you, f/22 is a nice spot to be in for traditional portraits in 8x10. Maybe a 300 watt mono can't do it so upgrading makes sense. But why do you need to spend $1000 for a new strobe? It's not like you need fast recycling with 8x10. I'd also be cautious about putting a heavier moonlight up on a stand, once you go beyond those lighter, small ones then you will also need a serious stand and probably sandbags to "do it right". What I would seriously consider is getting one of the used 2000-watt Dynalite packs and a head (with a 2000 watt tube, not all of them are rated so high). For the money I think they are the best value in a quality, durable strobe. But there are a lot of good packs and head systems and I bet you could find a lot of power (and redundancy) for a lot less than a grand. And no, none of the pack I am selling are big enough for you ;-/

(Also the design of the head makes a big difference worth a couple of stops depending on your light modifier. Heads with built-in reflectors and recessed flash tubes work well with umbrellas. Head that stick their flash tubes out forward in a housing tend to work better in soft boxes and beauty dishes.)

(And yes, it is probably time to move up to big-boy strobes rather than plastic junk. But I am not a fan of Speedos unless they are dirt cheap - the heads are inefficient and waste a stop right out of the box - and they arc and are the heaviest things made. But they are durable!) (Avoid Normans, Balcars, old Calumets, old European stuff too, at least in the USA.)

Third, are using ISO 400 film? That would save a lot right there.

Wow frank!

So..i have decided to use the digicrap to proof all of the set ups and i spent a day with my assistant figuring out how best to do this using the digital; and it made a big difference

Too big of an umbrella....had not thought of that. Will try it. I was actually about 5-6 feet away from the subject. Maybe 7 at most. Part of the issue is that these folks do not want to be right in the light or that close to it.

I think some people are attracted to a studio style set up and some are afraid of it. The majority of the subjects I have are afraid......

Focus....I agree but you gotta understand how fast this is happenning. I have forcklifts and a giant can crushing machine right on top of me. The subjects "might" dedicate 45' to this....usually less than that. I have to be set up and ready to go. They walk to the X, I tell them to stay still, grab a very quick look through the GG to set their head height then a holder and blam. Honestly, I doubt any of the folks have been on the X longer than 1 minute. F22 would be a BIG help and F32 would take a lot of stress away form this deal.

I have a Matthews baby mountain stand with bags..it was holding the umbrella in the photo. I also have the Matthews digital stands with bags for the reflector so I can hold the stuff in the air.

I am sold on HP5+ @ 200. I could jump to 400 but I am very happy with all of my results @ 200 and hate the idea of screwing with it all again.


thanks!

[Frank Petronio]

Focus....I agree but you gotta understand how fast this is happenning. I have forcklifts and a giant can crushing machine right on top of me. The subjects "might" dedicate 45' to this....usually less than that. I have to be set up and ready to go. They walk to the X, I tell them to stay still, grab a very quick look through the GG to set their head height then a holder and blam. Honestly, I doubt any of the folks have been on the X longer than 1 minute. F22 would be a BIG help and F32 would take a lot of stress away form this deal.

That's the battle isn't it? And you have to be critical and look at what your goals are - do you want to make a connection and make soulful portraits - or do you want to show you can do all that and in 8x10 too!?

No doubt if you can afford to persevere long enough to get really good at it, then you'll have something. But... at what cost?

Irving Penn did his tradesmen series with a Rollei for good reason, and he had the resources to shoot whatever he wanted. Avedon did the American West in 8x10 but note he had good natural light and assistants and probably more willing subjects (but he still had to deal with f/16, light is light).

[atlcruiser]

If it was easy everyone would do it

[DrTang]

get shoot thru umbrellas.. to keep the 'lectronics' part away from the subjects..they are as good as softboxes, but make round catchlights instead of rectangle ones

I like Larson Starfish

also..Matthews stands are the way to go..I love mine

[Peter De Smidt]

g
also..Matthews stands are the way to go..I love mine

As long as you don't have to carry them very far. If you're in a studio, you should sand bag every light stand. When you take the power cord from a monolight, or the connection cord from light to a power pack, thread the cord under one of the legs of the stand. That way if the cord is kicked, it will try to move the stand from the bottom instead of tipping it over. Of course, it's best to gaf tape down cords, or put throw mats over them, especially when working with models.