Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

studio flash set up

Last response: in Digital Camera
Share
Anonymous
May 30, 2005 2:51:45 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

Here is an easy one for most of you!

Can you guys recommend an adequate studio flash setup- 2 flash heads for
small setup downstairs?

More about : studio flash set

Anonymous
May 30, 2005 6:30:16 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

Crownfield wrote:
> vpenoso wrote:
> >
> > Here is an easy one for most of you!
> >
> > Can you guys recommend an adequate studio flash setup- 2 flash heads for
> > small setup downstairs?
>
> check
>
> http://alienbees.com
> http://alienbees.com/packages.html
>
> http://www.white-lightning.com/

You're right. There's nothing better at the price. And
service/follow-up is good. I broke the resin based mount on my old tin
can WL 10,000 a year or so ago (the light is at least six years old). I
mentioned that to customer service and they sent me a stronger mount
out of the next manufacturing batch. Took a while, but it got here. Not
bad for a product they haven't manufactured in some time, added to the
fact it was almost certainly my fault the mount broke.
Related resources
Anonymous
May 30, 2005 1:50:40 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

vpenoso wrote:

> Here is an easy one for most of you!
>
> Can you guys recommend an adequate studio flash setup- 2 flash heads for
> small setup downstairs?

Depending on your budget:
Alienbees 400's. (160 W-s each). www.alienbees.com
(Or 1 400 and 1 800 to give yourself more "room")
(Or 1 800 and 1 1600 if you can afford it ... lot's more flexibilty and
aperture range).

Consider adding a couple AC strobes in home made snoots for hair/rim
lights and/or background lighting. (Or a third 400).

Shoot through umbrellas or (more $) medium sized softboxes to difuse the
light.

Cheers,
Alan

--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch.
Anonymous
May 31, 2005 12:54:39 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

On Sunday 29 May 2005 19:51, vpenoso wrote:

> Here is an easy one for most of you!
>
> Can you guys recommend an adequate studio flash setup- 2 flash heads
> for small setup downstairs?

Besides the recommendations already offered: www.novatron.com or look
on eBay for used Speedtron Brownlines.

--
Stefan Patric
NoLife Polymath Group
tootek2@yahoo.com
Anonymous
May 31, 2005 5:20:38 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

On Mon, 30 May 2005 09:50:40 -0400, Alan Browne
<alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:

>vpenoso wrote:
>
>> Here is an easy one for most of you!
>>
>> Can you guys recommend an adequate studio flash setup- 2 flash heads for
>> small setup downstairs?
>
>Depending on your budget:
>Alienbees 400's. (160 W-s each). www.alienbees.com
>(Or 1 400 and 1 800 to give yourself more "room")
>(Or 1 800 and 1 1600 if you can afford it ... lot's more flexibilty and
>aperture range).
>
>Consider adding a couple AC strobes in home made snoots for hair/rim
>lights and/or background lighting. (Or a third 400).
>
>Shoot through umbrellas or (more $) medium sized softboxes to difuse the
>light.

What are they referring to in the 'digibee' package that digital users
don't need as much power?

"For Digital Photographers who don't require a great deal of power"
http://alienbees.com/digi.html

At a given ISO, surely the film vs digital behave reasonably similar.

--
Owamanga!
http://www.pbase.com/owamanga
Anonymous
May 31, 2005 5:20:39 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

Owamanga wrote:

> What are they referring to in the 'digibee' package that digital users
> don't need as much power?
>
> "For Digital Photographers who don't require a great deal of power"
> http://alienbees.com/digi.html

I would take the meaning as applying to those shooters happy to work at
higher ISO rather than a suggestion that they should or must. If you're
making catalog shots for websites or small images in printed catalogs,
400 - 800 is more than reasonable.

In any case, the AB400's are 160 W-s strobes, which isn't that bad if
you're working in a small area. Couple them to medium sized soft boxes
(or umbrellas), and get them close to the subject, and you can work at
ISO 100|200 for small settings/subjects.

> At a given ISO, surely the film vs digital behave reasonably similar.

As ISO goes up, dynamic noise will increase, but pixel 'area' (size)
remains constant. Not as bad as film with dye clouds or grain
increasing in size with ISO as well as dynamic noise.

Cheers,
Alan

--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch.
Anonymous
May 31, 2005 11:31:12 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

In article <t9po915s7lr4eef7ndspdd9femq2eeg21k@4ax.com>,
Owamanga <owamanga(not-this-bit)@hotmail.com> wrote:
>On Mon, 30 May 2005 09:50:40 -0400, Alan Browne
><alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:

[ ... ]

>>Shoot through umbrellas or (more $) medium sized softboxes to difuse the
>>light.
>
>What are they referring to in the 'digibee' package that digital users
>don't need as much power?
>
>"For Digital Photographers who don't require a great deal of power"
>http://alienbees.com/digi.html
>
>At a given ISO, surely the film vs digital behave reasonably similar.

Well -- once the film is chosen, your ISO is locked in with
film. Digitals have the ability to boost the ISO, and at least the
Nikon D70 has the ability to boost it at need -- even calculating the
flash/ISO combination needed.

Granted -- when you get too high in ISO with digital, you get
noise -- but when you get too high in ISO with film, you get grain,
which is perhaps more obvious.

Enjoy,
DoN.

--
Email: <dnichols@d-and-d.com> | Voice (all times): (703) 938-4564
(too) near Washington D.C. | http://www.d-and-d.com/dnichols/DoN.html
--- Black Holes are where God is dividing by zero ---
June 1, 2005 1:50:19 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

"Owamanga" <owamanga(not-this-bit)@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:t9po915s7lr4eef7ndspdd9femq2eeg21k@4ax.com...
> On Mon, 30 May 2005 09:50:40 -0400, Alan Browne
> <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:
>
>>vpenoso wrote:
>>
>>> Here is an easy one for most of you!
>>>
>>> Can you guys recommend an adequate studio flash setup- 2 flash heads for
>>> small setup downstairs?
>>
>>Depending on your budget:
>>Alienbees 400's. (160 W-s each). www.alienbees.com
>>(Or 1 400 and 1 800 to give yourself more "room")
>>(Or 1 800 and 1 1600 if you can afford it ... lot's more flexibilty and
>>aperture range).
>>
>>Consider adding a couple AC strobes in home made snoots for hair/rim
>>lights and/or background lighting. (Or a third 400).
>>
>>Shoot through umbrellas or (more $) medium sized softboxes to difuse the
>>light.
>
> What are they referring to in the 'digibee' package that digital users
> don't need as much power?
>
> "For Digital Photographers who don't require a great deal of power"
> http://alienbees.com/digi.html
>
> At a given ISO, surely the film vs digital behave reasonably similar.
>
> --
> Owamanga!
> http://www.pbase.com/owamanga

Actually, that is a very annoying by-product of switching to digital. I
used to use ISO 50 or 25 film for my home studio shots and never really
paid too much attention that I had the flashes cranked DOWN quite a bit.
Well, now with my D70, ISO 200 is as low as I can go (2-3 stops more
sensitive) and I'm often finding that I can't attenuate the flashes enough
AND ambient light from other rooms is a problem. Another side problem
(at least with a home studio where the room might not be ideally
proportioned)
is that too small of an aperture winds up being used so now the background
isn't out of focus (remember, rooms are smaller at home so the subject is
typically closer to the backdrop AND the photographer is working with
a shorter focal length lens (FOV multiplication problem)). It is certainly
challenging and for all the WRONG reasons.

George
June 1, 2005 1:54:03 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

"Crownfield" <Crownfield@cox.net> wrote in message
news:429A9ED5.BAB@cox.net...
> vpenoso wrote:
>>
>> Here is an easy one for most of you!
>>
>> Can you guys recommend an adequate studio flash setup- 2 flash heads for
>> small setup downstairs?
>
> check
>
> http://alienbees.com
> http://alienbees.com/packages.html
>
> http://www.white-lightning.com/

One thing that I don't like about White Lightning / Alien Bees / Paul Buff
lighting is the choice of
modeling lamps...they are standard light bulbs and the problem is that they
partially block the flash
tubes. The good news is that they are just medium screw base bulbs so that
a comparable T-10
bulb could be used.

George
June 1, 2005 2:01:52 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

"vpenoso" <vpenoso@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:HJ-dnbIqesJsCAffRVn-1Q@comcast.com...
> Here is an easy one for most of you!
>
> Can you guys recommend an adequate studio flash setup- 2 flash heads for
> small setup downstairs?
>

Get something that has a wide variety of accessories (reflectors, etc.)
available, good support, UV
coated flashtubes (user replaceable) and a wide choice of f-stops.
Calumet/Bowens and Photogenic
would be my top choices. Others that fit the bill but I chose to exclude
due to price include Broncolor,
Balcar and Elinchrome. I've owned Bowens for 15 years and they've worked
flawlessly...and for 10
years prior to buying them, I'd occasionally use them at a camera club and
they worked perfectly there
as well (a different generation of flashes of course!).

George
Anonymous
June 1, 2005 6:13:01 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

On Wed, 1 Jun 2005 09:50:19 -0400, "george" <nowhere@newsonly.com>
wrote:

>Actually, that is a very annoying by-product of switching to digital. I
>used to use ISO 50 or 25 film for my home studio shots and never really
>paid too much attention that I had the flashes cranked DOWN quite a bit.
>Well, now with my D70, ISO 200 is as low as I can go (2-3 stops more
>sensitive) and I'm often finding that I can't attenuate the flashes enough
>AND ambient light from other rooms is a problem. Another side problem
>(at least with a home studio where the room might not be ideally
>proportioned) is that too small of an aperture winds up being used
>so now the background isn't out of focus (remember, rooms are
>smaller at home so the subject is typically closer to the backdrop
>AND the photographer is working with a shorter focal length lens
>(FOV multiplication problem)). It is certainly challenging and for all
>the WRONG reasons.

Have you considered using an ND-4 filter?

I wonder if there isn't ND film you could use somehow to further
attenuate the flash output. Ambient light would still be a problem,
you'll just have to work at night :-)

I don't know squat about studio photography, so these suggestions are
guesswork.

--
Owamanga!
http://www.pbase.com/owamanga
June 1, 2005 6:13:02 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

"Owamanga" <owamanga(not-this-bit)@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:4kgr91d2r42u9r4c099egam7rijnfo09hj@4ax.com...
> On Wed, 1 Jun 2005 09:50:19 -0400, "george" <nowhere@newsonly.com>
> wrote:
>
>>Actually, that is a very annoying by-product of switching to digital. I
>>used to use ISO 50 or 25 film for my home studio shots and never really
>>paid too much attention that I had the flashes cranked DOWN quite a bit.
>>Well, now with my D70, ISO 200 is as low as I can go (2-3 stops more
>>sensitive) and I'm often finding that I can't attenuate the flashes enough
>>AND ambient light from other rooms is a problem. Another side problem
>>(at least with a home studio where the room might not be ideally
>>proportioned) is that too small of an aperture winds up being used
>>so now the background isn't out of focus (remember, rooms are
>>smaller at home so the subject is typically closer to the backdrop
>>AND the photographer is working with a shorter focal length lens
>>(FOV multiplication problem)). It is certainly challenging and for all
>>the WRONG reasons.
>
> Have you considered using an ND-4 filter?
>
> I wonder if there isn't ND film you could use somehow to further
> attenuate the flash output. Ambient light would still be a problem,
> you'll just have to work at night :-)
>
> I don't know squat about studio photography, so these suggestions are
> guesswork.
>
> --
> Owamanga!
> http://www.pbase.com/owamanga

Yes, I need to get some ND filters...either Cokin and use 'em on the lenses
or
Lee or Rosco and tape 'em over the flash reflectors. I've just been in a
"cash
conservation" mode since I got layed-off so I haven't sprung for them yet.

George
!