First portrait with continuous lighting

[samhaddixphotography]

I had been filming a promo video for a musician friend of mine and decided to snap a few photos using the video lights. This is my first time using a continuous video light as opposed to strobes or natural light, and would love some c&c. Thanks!
-Sam
www.samhaddixphotography.com

 

[cgipson1]

Care to say what lighting? I suspect it isn't the Cheap CFL type stuff, correct?

Lighting is nice... really needs to be viewed larger, the thumbnail just doesn't show the tonal range.

 

[Robin_Usagani]

Care to say what lighting? I suspect it isn't the Cheap CFL Cowboy studio type stuff, correct?

Dude.. light is light. Who cares who makes it. They got awesome stuff for little money. I don't understand why you always bash this company.

Fluorescent Lights

 

[TimothyJinx]

I like it!

 

[cgipson1]

Care to say what lighting? I suspect it isn't the Cheap CFL Cowboy studio type stuff, correct?

Dude.. light is light. Who cares who makes it. They got awesome stuff for little money. I don't understand why you always bash this company.

Fluorescent Lights

There... I edited my post... just for you, Robin!

 

[tirediron]

Care to say what lighting? I suspect it isn't the Cheap CFL Cowboy studio type stuff, correct?

Dude.. light is light. Who cares who makes it. They got awesome stuff for little money. I don't understand why you always bash this company.

Fluorescent Lights

Without meaning to derail the thread, I'm going to respectfully disagree with you Robin. Yes, photons are photons, BUT.. are they the same temperature? Having two light sources pumping out two different (even if only slightly) temperatured light is going to be a huge PIA. Cowboy studio makes a line of gear which is okay for home studio work, but there is much better out there for only a little more money. I would strongly disagree with the contention that they make anything which is "awesome" (other than their profits), especially after the tenth use! You gets what you pay for!

 

[Robin_Usagani]

Make sure they are all the same bulbs, what is the big deal? When LEDs are starting to become popular, people use FISH TANK LEDs for photography & video light because the name brand LEDs are so expensive.

Care to say what lighting? I suspect it isn't the Cheap CFL Cowboy studio type stuff, correct?

Dude.. light is light. Who cares who makes it. They got awesome stuff for little money. I don't understand why you always bash this company.

Fluorescent Lights

Without meaning to derail the thread, I'm going to respectfully disagree with you Robin. Yes, photons are photons, BUT.. are they the same temperature? Having two light sources pumping out two different (even if only slightly) temperatured light is going to be a huge PIA. Cowboy studio makes a line of gear which is okay for home studio work, but there is much better out there for only a little more money. I would strongly disagree with the contention that they make anything which is "awesome" (other than their profits), especially after the tenth use! You gets what you pay for!

 

[Robin_Usagani]

All I am saying is, it is hard to tell if a portrait is taken with a "cheap" light or "expensive" light. It is all about the finish product. Hell.. sun is a free continuous light and a lot of people do a good job with it in a studio. Charlie suspected the photo was not shot with a "cheap" light sounds ridiculous IMO.

 

[cgipson1]

All I am saying is, it is hard to tell if a portrait is taken with a "cheap" light or "expensive" light. It is all about the finish product. Hell.. sun is a free continuous light and a lot of people do a good job with it in a studio. Charlie suspected the photo was not shot with a "cheap" light sounds ridiculous IMO.

Robin, my point was that while CFL is fine for still lifes / product photography... with long exposures (and you still have to deal with the color issue), they lack sufficient power to shoot anything that may move (like people). So did you buy Cowboy Studio stock or something?

I have also seen some of Sam's work, and I doubt that he would bother using cheap, amateur lighting... too unreliable.

 

[Buckster]

Yes, photons are photons, BUT.. are they the same temperature?

Good question. Are they? Have you determined that they're not? Has it been scientifically determined that two of the same lights from CBS ARE different temperatures, and that it's a difference worth a nit? Or is this one of those, "well, SOME PEOPLE SAY that they're not good, and that's good enough for me..."?

Having two light sources pumping out two different (even if only slightly) temperatured light is going to be a huge PIA.

Good point. Same questions as above.

Cowboy studio makes a line of gear which is okay for home studio work

That's interesting. One might think it's all CRAP, given some of the comments about CBS.

...but there is much better out there for only a little more money.

Define "a little more money", preferably in "dollars".

I would strongly disagree with the contention that they make anything which is "awesome" (other than their profits),

"For little money" means it's a "relative" level of "awesome"

especially after the tenth use!

So, you've somehow determined that on the 11th use of anything from CBS, it fails. Please show your testing methods and data to support this contention.

You gets what you pay for!

Well, since we paid nothing for your assertions on this issue, I guess we can then determine their value accordingly.

 

[Granddad]

How about keeping reasonably on topic, Buckster, eh? OP asked for comments on his photo, why not give some positive input?

 

[imagemaker46]

All I am saying is, it is hard to tell if a portrait is taken with a "cheap" light or "expensive" light. It is all about the finish product. Hell.. sun is a free continuous light and a lot of people do a good job with it in a studio. Charlie suspected the photo was not shot with a "cheap" light sounds ridiculous IMO.

Have to say I agree with you 100% on this one. I shot a portrait for a book using a couple of lamps with the shades removed, they were 60 or 100 watt bulbs. As you said, light is light. It all comes down to the understanding of light, the base level for understanding photography.

 

[Buckster]

How about keeping reasonably on topic, Buckster, eh? OP asked for comments on his photo, why not give some positive input?

Thanks for skipping over the idea of admonishing those who decided to take it off track to take a leak on CBS in the first place, and kick me in the teeth for it instead. Seems legit.

Also good to know that we should never question statements made without support, especially if those statements bash a product, company or person. It's fine to do that, and wrong, wrong I tell you, to question it.

And in the immortal words of Bitter about threads going off-topic:

Tangents happen. Get over it.

You can go bash him for it in the thread where that occurred, if you're in the mood to police the forum for that sort of thing. It's here: http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/...ebate-i-m-gonna-get-flamed-8.html#post2870531

As for the image itself, I generally like it, even if it's not making me crazy with any particular emotion, neither up nor down.

ETA: By the way, where's YOUR positive (or otherwise) input about THE PHOTO?

 

[TonysTouch]

I have been using a cheap CFL setup, and I have say the inconsistent results are not worth saving a couple hundred bucks. (Not CBS but a very similar brand.)

 

[TonysTouch]

Also, love the photo. I like the way you composed the shadows.