A Sheet, Two PhotoFlood Lights, Tripod, & A D50

[texassand]

Hi iPanzica,
Do you mind telling me where you purchased your set up?

 

[iPanzica]

I got mine from a local photography store, I live in Rochester, NY home of Kodak, so there are a few around here. It was called Hahns Photoraphics or something like that. It was $135.00 (or around there) before taxs. To tell you the truth I have a feeling on eBay it would have been much cheeper. But I also bought a Light Tent for photographing Jelwery, and didn't want to wait around for lights to be shipped to me.

Like I said before I might buy a 2nd set. But then there are the lights with unbrellas and other things, I dunno what I should purchess.

 

[Digital Matt]

There are lots of threads going on right now about lighting with continuous. It's just not easy to get the amount of light necessary. If you want to get a white background by lighting your background 2-3 stops brighter than your key, you probably need 4 of those lights, just for the background!

You could buy 2 stobe lights, 2 stands, 2 umbrellas, 1 reflector, and get much better results.

Photography is not cheap, and in an effort to keep costs down, you sometimes end up buying equipment that doesn't really work well for you. In the end, you might spend more trying to buy enough continuous lights to equal the power of 2 strobes. By the time you start adding umbrellas and other things to diffuse the light, you are cutting down the power of the lights so much, it's hardly even manageable. There is nothing like a big soft box on a strobe. Looks just like natural window light.

 

[iPanzica]

Ahh now im getting even more confsued ...

Matt: if i was to go with strobes ... what would a good starter kit be? Can you look around eBay and suggest something?

 

[texassand]

I think it was Matt who suggested a starter kit from alienbees.com to me. But the starter kit is 600 bucks before taxes!! I just can't afford that right now so now I don't know whta to do. I might just have to go with some cheap continuous lighting off of ebay until I can generate sales enough to buy it. Sigh.....................

 

[Digital Matt]

Sorry, like I said, it's not going to be cheap. If you want results, you need the proper equipment.

http://alienbees.com/digi.html

 

[iPanzica]

Yea I think your right, for now I think I should just stick to non-portirat work, or do things at my local Darkroom/Studio. I need to work on my knowladge, and save some money. $600+ dollars really isn't THAT Bad when you think about it. I already spent 150 on two ligths.

 

[Digital Matt]

If you were planning on buying 2 more lights, you'd be at $300, and still not be able to reach the output power of 1 strobe, let alone 2, and have no where near the flexibility. Don't forget about getting a flash meter as well, if and when you decide to buy strobes.

 

[Big Mike]

You can do plenty of things with window light or just outdoors. Maybe a $2 piece of foam board for a reflector. There are plenty of ways to take photos without expensive lights.

If setting up a studio with lights is your goal...then try to figure out what you will need down the road. Yes, strobes are expensive...but buying hot lights...only to find that you actually need strobes...is even more expensive in the long run.

Here is a site with some do-it-yourself type things that may allow you to get results with a low budget.

 

[benhasajeep]

I say slow down a little bit on buying things. Like Mike said you can get good pics with window light if that is the look you want. Best bet is to practice with what you have now. You can get good results with 2 lights. Something you might want to get is a reflector or make one (cardboard and foil). With a reflector you can use it like a lower powered 3rd light. And use your second light for the background. Start with some simple still lifes. Try something that is odd shaped. So it has areas that would creat shadows. Move the lights and reflector around some. And step back and just look at the results.

Don't just move the light up / down, left to right, angles. Move it closer and further away from the subject. The closer it is the more light will be on the subject. But more focused on small area as well (hard light). The further back the less light and more diffused on subject (soft light). 250w lights extremely close will be as bright as strobe (but not practical).

Also take time to get the know the camera. Its digital so dont worry about wasting film, there is none. It wont matter how you set the lights if you can't set the camera propperly!

 

[W.Smith]

Matt's right. Get flash!

Continuous lights are hot lights. Minimum for portraits would be 3x 500Watts = 1,500Watts. That is a lot of heat! Very inconvenient in confined spaces. And a fire hazard!
(And can your home's electrical system support that kind of drain?)

I have a 'portable studio'. It basically consists of 3 wireless 5600D flashguns on tripods, a 3' and a 4' silver/white reflector. Gives me plenty 'oomph' and endlessly variable possibilities, including faking 'softboxes' and balancing shadows. Easily fits a medium-sized suitcase.
When working with live subjects I mostly use the camera unsupported. Flash freezes motion anyway, and it keeps me much 'free-er' to move around, direct the scene, try different viewpoints and angles, and/or adjust the light.

I submit a 'portable studio' like this is much more flexible than a fixed continuous studio light set and is therefore used much more often. Like on location!
The downside is that you have no modelling light. But hey! this is the digital age so you just do a test shot and look whether you like the light setup as is.

 

[mysteryscribe]

Im going to be the one to disagree with strobe. First let me say I love strobe and worked with it for years. In my day it was the only way to go but now I think I would rather have bulbs.

For me its a matter of being able to see the lighting before I shoot. The intensity and the placement of exactly what you are going to be shooting as opposed to the hard reality of a strobe light after the fact.

But that is just my opinion. Flood light is softer and it is also more flattering. It is less reliable than strobe in a high volume sudio situation but in a low volume custom set up I like it much better.

Asking a model to hold still for a 25th of a second isn't exaclt unheard of you know. You can't tell much about sublety from a 2" screen.

remember whose opinion this is now before you put too much faith in it.

 

[W.Smith]

You can't tell much about sublety from a 2" screen.

Quite right, mysteryscribe. But we're in a studio setting here. So you can hook up a laptop, shoot your test shot, and judge it almost instantly on a glorious 17" screen (and zoom in as much as you want)....
That easily beats modelling lights as a way to 'pre-judge' light and shadow, imo, because you're looking at the real thing.

 

[mysteryscribe]

probably true ... probably true.. But then im a poor boy who still shoots film. lol

 

[iPanzica]

Just thought i'd say thanks for the help, did a bit of messing around with my little brother:

http://www.ipanzica.com/Photos.html