What does 'Alien Bees' gear mean to the photography world?

[inTempus]

but with rounded catchlights that do not obscure huge amounts of the eyeball with a massive,square or rectangular catchlight on close-in people photos.

I don't suppose you've seen any of the work by Martin Schoeller. I don't think too many people would dismiss his work yet he often does just that - obscures large amounts of the eye with square catch lights. That's where I got the idea and I purposely used it in several studio sessions.

I know this comment was a cheap shot at me (even after Mike asked us to play nicely together), but honestly it doesn't bother me. Just know that your pettiness made me chuckle, and that's all you accomplished.

 

[Derrel]

Since a certain member here referred to an Annie Liebovitz video in support of her shooting a Canon d-slr some moths ago, I thought it might be a nice counterpoint to show a link to a video of Annie shooting a Nikon D3 and using a modern Profoto pack-and-head system flash,along with the excellent enclosed umbrella she uses so often these days, the Photek Softlighter, which has both umbrella-like setup and break down speed, as well as softbox-like light, but with rounded catchlights that do not obscure huge amounts of the eyeball with a massive,square or rectangular catchlight on close-in people photos.

Holly freaking run-on sentence Batman!

Those with college-level reading skills can probably use the commas as breath spots. Sorry to have challenged you Timmy. Yes, Martin's work has a nice gimmick to it. The square-eyed look. He's made it his trademark gimmick. He has yet to achieve much success on a widespread basis; I notice Liebovitz got hired to shoot the Presidential family portraits at the White House not too long ago--where she shot them with a Canon camera, by the way. What, exactly, has Martin been doing these days besides the same old, formulaic, every-shot-just-like-the-next mugshots? I'm just sayin'...your link shows the same tired,shopwork gimmick, shot after shot after shot. A veritable one-trick pony is the example you're giving?

Sorry to spoil your homecoming Tim....but I see the religious fervor here in the Alien Bee defense attitude you've got. What I do not understand is why so many people will spend thousands and thousands of dollars on red-letter "L-glass" and then use a hobbyist brand of strobes and try and tell people who own higher-end systems how bad the higher-end systems are. It's like talking up the 18-55 and 55-200 kit zooms as being "durable" and "great",and then dismissing all those L-glass lenses that seem to creep into profile signature files. The original question was about how the Alien Bees line of lights are perceived and what they mean; they are about the same as the 18-55 and 55-200 lenses. I think c. cloudwalker's simple post summed it up pretty well and he included the phrase that "most people do not want to hear this but..." preface to help.

I do not understand the lauding of L-glass,over and overf and over, and then the denigration of the higher-end flash systems that have been on the market decades LONGER than Alien Bees. But, that is partly because you've been involved seriously in photography for a little over a year or so, and I have been involved with it for over 25 years; my point of view is from a lot longer perspective,and I've provided a little bit of long-term commentary as to how Buff got his start, and how he has done his marketing. In a word, the Paul C. Buff marketing has had a solid impact on the buyers--most of whom are convinced that their gear is unsurpassed,and that anybody who points out its areas of deficiencies is somehow a traitor or a brand-basher. Let's put it this way: Buff's marketing has to be good, because the equipment is sold directly--there are no stores across America or across the world that carry Buff equipment as dealers. The marketing materials therefore must be very convincing, so that buyers will purchase the stuff sight-unseen. That keeps the buyers OUT of places like Calumet or Samy's or B&H or Glazer's or ProPhoto Supply, where they might actually lay hands on other brands of lighting and grip equipment.

I think I've sufficiently made my points about how the photography industry views Alien Bees lighting gear; it has many satisfied customers. But the system is not competing with the older brands, or for the same dollars, and it is sold factory-direct; it does not share space on the sales floors in direct competition with other products in the lighting area. If a guy is happy with Alien Bees strobes, fine. I've shot with Sunpak 4000 monolights, Speedotron Brown Line, Speedotron Black Line, Norman, JTL, Dyna-Lite, and Photogenic, since 1987, so my experiences favor systems with very different heritage,and very different marketing and sales strategies besides direct-to-end-user sales. Alien Bees have their own "niche", and no matter how glib the arguments on web boards, the A-B lights cannot be elevated out of their niche. To do that, they would have to be sold in pro photography supply houses, head-to-head on the sales floor against much deeper,broader systems. The A-B is the economy system of Paul C. Buff--White Lightnings and now the Einstein are their higher-end systems. So Paul himself understands the value of different levels and different "quality" levels.

 

[burnws6]

This has been an awesome read. I have to side with Intempus.

 

[inTempus]

Those with college-level reading skills can probably use the commas as breath spots. Sorry to have challenged you Timmy.

Your taunts and childish jabs are tiresome. What, no comments about my signature line, website, or previous user name? Oh, you did use "Timmy". I'll give you credit there.

I yes, martin's work has a nice gimmick to it. The square-eyed look. He's made it a trademark gimmick. He has yet to achieve much success on a widespread basis; I notice Liebovitz got hired to shoot the Presidential family portraits at the WHite House not too long ago--where she shot them with a Canon EOS 5D, by the way. What, exactly, hs Martin been doing these days besides the same old, furmulaic, every-shot-just-like-the-next mugshots? I'm just sayin'...

You know of Martin? Really? Since you live with your nose firmly planted in Thom Hogans posterior I didn't think you had time to actually appreciate the art or the artists that actually use cameras.

What has Martin done lately, besides shooting every major star in Hollywood? Oh, not much I suppose. But that's not the point. I see no need to belittle Martin's work as it's not at issue here. I simply stated that my images were inspired by his work since you saw fit to insult my work.

As for Annie using Canon and Nikon, we already knew that. It was discussed in the thread from a few months ago you referenced in your initial attack post.

 

[Montana]

Wow...............................................

 

[inTempus]

Holly massive edit Batman!

Sorry to spoil your homecoming Tim....but I see the religious fervor here in the Alien Bee defense attitude you've got.

You see nothing but what you want to see, and that's conflict.

I do not understand the lauding of L-glass,over and overf and over, and then the denigration of the higher-end flash systems that have been on the market decades LONGER than Alien Bees.

I have never denigrated pro lighting gear, not once. Again, you're manufacturing strawman arguments to incite conflict.

But, that is partly because you've been involved seriously in photography for a little over a year or so, and I have been involved with it for over 25 years;

...and what exactly have you accomplished in 25 years? By your own admission in 25 years you have maybe 25 photos you're proud of and would use in a portfolio.

Since you've critiqued my work and that of Martin Schoeller, shall I critique yours? From what I see many of your shots are amateurish and boring, I would expect more from a 25 year veteran that takes such pride in deriding my work.

my point of view is from a lot longer perspective,and I've provided a little bit of long-term commentary as to how Buff got his start, and how he has done his marketing. In a word, the Paul C. Buff marketing has had a solid impact on the buyers--most of whom are convinced that their gear is unsurpassed,and that anybody who points out its areas of deficiencies is somehow a traitor or a brand-basher.

I don't think the lights are "unsurpassed", I certainly have never said or even implied this... not to mention I've said otherwise. What I have said is that for the hobbyist and for some pros they are a great option - and they are.

I think I've sufficiently made my points about how the photography industry views Alien Bees lighting gear; it has many satisfied customers.

Yes, it does. And not all of them are inexperienced noobs either.

But the system is not competing with the older brands, or for the same dollars, and it is sold factory-direct; it does not share space on the sales floors in direct competition with other products in the lighting area. If a guy is happy with Alien Bees strobes, fine. I've shot with Sunpak 4000 monolights, Speedotron Brown Line, Speedotron Black Line, Norman, JTL, Dyna-Lite, and Photogenic, since 1987, so my experiences favor systems with very different heritage,and very different marketing and sales strategies besides direct-to-end-user sales. Alien Bees have their own "niche", and no matter how glib the arguments on web boards, the A-B lights cannot be elevated out of their niche. To do that, they would have to be sold in pro photography supply houses, head-to-head on the sales floor against much deeper,broader systems. The A-B is the economy system of Paul C. Buff--White Lightnings and now the Einstein are their higher-end systems. So Paul himself understands the value of different levels and different "quality" levels.

And that we can agree upon.

 

[Derrel]

You know of Martin? Really? Since you live with your nose firmly planted in Thom Hogans posterior I didn't think you had time to actually appreciate the art or the artists that actually use cameras.

What has Martin done lately, besides shooting every major star in Hollywood? Oh, not much I suppose. But that's not the point. I see no need to belittle Martin's work as it's not at issue here. I simply stated that my images were inspired by his work since you saw fit to insult my work.

As for Annie using Canon and Nikon, we already knew that. It was discussed in the thread from a few months ago you referenced in your initial attack post.

Wow....you have some amazingly thin skin. And some amazingly insulting and vulgar homoerotic insulting rhetoric. What "attack post" are you talking about? "Nose up somebody's butt?" Really? Your use of homoerotic attacks are juvenile, but I am familiar with how heatedly and personally you can take equipment-related disagreements.

When did I "insult your work" Tim? I honestly do not think I have referenced ANY of your work. I have had you on my ignore list for a couple of months now, until today. And after your latest outburst in this thread, I'm afraid I have to promote you BACK onto my ignore list. Your inability to engage in adult debates with somebody vastly your senior in age and experience is telling. The fact that you are a two-year shooter and I started taking photos in 1973 makes my point of view a bit broader and longer-term than yours, Tim. But I do not believe I have denigrated your work in any way,shape or form.

I'll give you the last word, then re-set you for Ignore. Okay?

 

[inTempus]

I'll give you the last word, then re-set you for Ignore. Okay?

Post #42 was 100% directed at me, from top to bottom, and you know it.

You know this is true because before you did your typical back peddle you went on to degrade Martins work once I explained my inspiration. Oops.

But play your games Derrel. It's probably best I'm on your ignore list because you can't seem to resist making endless little jabs. If you know I have thin skin (and with good reason in dealing with you), why do you take me off your ignore list then take a cheap shot like post #42? Why can't you just play nice?

I've tried extending you an olive branch. I've apologized to you in PM and even offered to give you my phone number to talk voice and resolve our past differences. You ignored me and instead choose to continue the silly behavior.

So yes, put me back on your ignore list if you can't be a man about this.

 

[Joves]

Now, now children lets play nice.

 

[ThornleyGroves]

what do people think about bowmen gemini 400's in regards to the way alien bees are?

 

[SpeedTrap]

I have waited a while to chime in on this one, I have own AB Lights and now I don’t. They served the propose very well when I had them, they were light and portable and easy to use. But I found that as time went on I was outgrowing them and it was time to move on.

1) Customer Service – Yes it is great if you live in the USA, if you live anywhere else and have to get something repaired it is a PITA (I live in Canada) My current lights (LightRein/Rimelite) have a local distributor and repair so If I break one I can get a loaner same day and no cost to ship. As well I can walk in and try out new products without purchasing them first.

2) Colour Cast – I shoot fashion in studio and there was way too much color cast and the quality of modifiers just was not good enough. My local shop carries every modifier I could need and speed rings for my lights. I liked some of the modifiers AB had to offer, but in the end there was not enough.

3) Power, I need more than AB can offer, currently my lights are 700 and 1200 w/s. I needed more power in the modeling lamps as well, and my current lights have 650 Watt modeling lamps in them. The modeling lamps proved very useful when I had to shoot a child with epilepsy that could not handle strobes.

4) Range, I could not work within the 4-stop range of the AB’s, my current lights have 7.1 stops of light and are full digital moonlights. They have flash durations that are as fast or faster than the new Einstein’s in non-sports mode.

5) Build quality, this is one of the biggest reason I got rid of my AB lights. Everyone tells the story of how well they are made, but when it comes down to it my cast aluminum lights will take far more abuse than Lexan body lights. I broke 2 AB lights, I have never broken one of my new ones and I have put them through way more abuse.

If you want something to upgrade or dabble in, they are great, but in my opinion if you are looking for a long term solution I would research all the products available and determine the true cost of ownership for your choices. If they come out on top for you great, but do you research and make an informed decision about what will be best for you and give you the best future potential.

 

[c.cloudwalker]

Customer Service – Yes it is great if you live in the USA, if you live anywhere else and have to get something repaired it is a PITA (I live in Canada) My current lights (LightRein/Rimelite) have a local distributor and repair so If I break one I can get a loaner same day and no cost to ship. As well I can walk in and try out new products without purchasing them first.

+1

That is one thing I have said in a few strobe choice threads. If you are a professional, pick one with a local retailer. A pro shoot is not going to wait a few days until you get the part that broke or the accessory you suddenly realize you need.

AB keeps its prices low by selling direct. Great but it can, and eventually will be, a great problem to a pro. Period.

AB now has a distributor to cover the Australia/New Zealand area. Nice but how long to get a part? It doesn't ship anywhere else anymore because they can't deal with it as per their website.

Sorry AB lovers but the only way you are going to buy their strobes is because you are not a pro. Or you haven't yet figured out what is involved in being a pro.

 

[fiveoboy01]

You two need to stop this tit-for-tat BS. It gets old reading it. Both of you know a good bit about photography, more than I do... I'd rather learn something from the two of you instead of watching a back and forth bitchfest.

That said, those einstein lights certainly look cool. Wish I could afford some sort of a studio strobe setup.

 

[inTempus]

Sorry AB lovers but the only way you are going to buy their strobes is because you are not a pro. Or you haven't yet figured out what is involved in being a pro.

First, I've ran into plenty of pros that do use them quite successfully. I'm sure they're not nearly as pro as you are of course.

You might want to reserve judgment on them as a company until you have a chance to review the new Einsteins. It will require you to be a wee bit objective and actually review them with an unbiased eye and judge them on merit alone. They may rock, they may not. But they deserve a shot.

 

[inTempus]

You two need to stop this tit-for-tat BS. It gets old reading it. Both of you know a good bit about photography, more than I do... I'd rather learn something from the two of you instead of watching a back and forth bitchfest.

It ended a few days ago, but I guess it doesn't hurt to bring it up again. Thanks for chiming in, but I'm on Derrels ignore list now (thank God). So you can pluck your panties from your rear-end and take a deep breath. If tensions do flair again, know that you don't have to read it. You can simply 1) put us both on your ignore list or 2) scroll past.

That said, those einstein lights certainly look cool. Wish I could afford some sort of a studio strobe setup.

If you can scrape your pennies together for a camera, you should be able to scrape them together for some Bee's. Start off with a $250 B400 and get your feet wet. Save a little more and buy another one. Next thing ya know, you'll have a studio setup in no time.

The Einsteins do look to be VERY promising. I will be upgrading my Bee's to them as soon as they hit the street. I look forward to playing with them and seeing just how much of an improvement they are over the originals.

The color cast problem is gone supposedly, consistency is already good but its supposed to be even better and it's got some great new controls. They should be a lot of light for the money.