deleted

[matt_m]

deleted

 

[Derrel]

I think that studio flash units offer the beginning student the ability to SEE what the lights do as they are moved across the floor, to literally SEE the effects of different light placement, different light angles, different light distances, different modifiers, different reflectors. I think learning to light things in a studio sense would be better with monolights, not speedlights.

For studio flash, I think it makes more sense to buy studio flash units than to modify and adapt speedlights into roles they really are not ideally suited for.

 

[Derrel]

There are some inexpensive options, yes. I've been recommending Adorama Flashpoint 320M as the best bang-for-dollar beginner's studio flash setups for about five years now. A 150 Watt-second monolight for $99. It puts out MORE light by one f/stop than a $279 Alien Bee 400 does when measured at five feet, each unit firing bare-tube, so no reflector "cheating", no influence of a narrow-angle reflector or an ultra highly polished reflector artificially inflating the flash meter readings...just straight up flash power versus flash power.

For $49.95 per light unit, the Adorama Flashpoint Budget monolight, 120 Watt-second lights BF-120W

Consider that a typical "full power" speedlight like a $580 Nikon SB 910 or Canon equivalent high-dollar flash unit is roughly, more or less, 50 Watt-seconds of effective Guide Number over about a 50 degree beam angle, and a discount, made in China flash is less than that by 1 to 1/2 EV worth of output...and these are 120 Watt-second and 150 Watt-second flash units at full discharge...

Take a look at this video,showing how to use just ONE, single studio flash unit, a corner, and a large 48x96 foam core reflector, or in one case, a pair of 48x96 inch foam core reflector panels.

 

[Designer]

Should I still look at a trigger system or would the optical slave get me started, using the on camera flash to trigger them?

One factor to consider is whether the BI flash will add light to the composition in a way that is not wanted.

 

[WayneF]

The builtin optical slaves work extremely well, and all studio flash have them. Not using them is the hard way to do it.

The camera internal flash typically can be set to its most minimum manual power to do this, with no effect to the picture lighting. It only has to trigger the nearest flash, typically the fill flash located right at the camera (however I instead use a PC sync cord, camera to the fill, which is a short distance, and not in the way, and comes with the light, and is in fact the same PC sync cord already used to meter each light anyway).

What makes optical slaves work so well indoors is that the others are all triggered by the full working power of the fill flash, which cannot be ignored. There's ample room reflection of this strong flash (or one of the other lights) so that any light anywhere in room will trigger too. I use four lights, and it's always been 100% for me.

See Light Kits for Home Portrait Setups

about selecting an inexpensive light kit for portraits.

 

[WayneF]

A large softbox is a considerable off-center load, which tends to tip over light-weight stands (so the stand needs to be substantial, with a larger foot print). It's not about the direct downward weight, its about the off-center load and foot print. A stand taller than you need is one way to get a larger foot print. I like the Impact 9.5 foot heavy duty stand for a large 40" softbox, or for a hair light on a short boom.

Whereas umbrellas are light weight, and unless a huge umbrella, much lighter smaller stands are acceptable, about any reasonable stand can work OK.

Regardless, either way, keep one leg directly under any off center load.

 

[tirediron]

I like a nice BIG >48x60" softbox for soft, gentle light. As for triggers, PC sync cords and optical triggers do work well, BUT.. when you can get a perfectly decent set of Yongnuo radio triggers for <$75, and not have to worry about wires, pop-up flashes, etc, why not?

Radio triggers really are the cat's sitmedownupon of triggers, and they make life a LOT easier. One other tool you may want to consider is the flash meter. These are a great buy used, on local Craig's List type boards, and while by no means essential, they do make life easier and the process quicker and more constant.

 

[WayneF]

I like a nice BIG >48x60" softbox for soft, gentle light. As for triggers, PC sync cords and optical triggers do work well, BUT.. when you can get a perfectly decent set of Yongnuo radio triggers for <$75, and not have to worry about wires, pop-up flashes, etc, why not?

Great distances, or outdoor sunlight, are another concern, but for indoor portraits...

One opinion is that radio triggers of course require several extra connections, and settings, and of course some batteries, all to be concerned with. At bare minimum, we have to remember to turn them on and off, each one, every time. And sometimes, maximum sync speed can be a problem for them (esp batteries).

The optical slaves already provided require nothing and no cost, they simply just work. Due to the connections and settings and batteries, I'd say with greater reliability (indoors). If the cost of getting started is an issue, radio triggers are certainly the optional expense.

 

[Derrel]

I shot for almost 20 years with studio flash and never owned any kind of radio or electronic triggering device. I used a Paramount brand synchronization cord most of the time, and occasionally used a low-powered electronic flash on-camera and a high-quality Wein brand photo slave to trigger my flash packs. Radio triggers are absolutely NOT required whatsoever. It seems today people consider them automatic necessities like so many other modern era niceties, like 550-channel monthly cable TV packages at $159.95, or twice daily $4.95 breves from Starbucks. You.Don't.Need.Remote.Triggers.

 

[tirediron]

... Radio triggers are absolutely NOT required whatsoever. It seems today people consider them automatic necessities like so many other modern era niceties, like 550-channel monthly cable TV packages at $159.95, or twice daily $4.95 breves from Starbucks. You.Don't.Need.Remote.Triggers.

Nope, they're not, but damn, they are convenient! My grand-daddy owned a Model T Ford; he started the engine with a hand-crank. Me... I get in my Ford truck and turn the key. Both work, but I know which option I prefer!

 

[Derrel]

Sounds like I can get started with the built in stuff then upgrade to radio as the budget permits. Really looking for the minimum to get started (without being an exercise in frustration.) Can always add/upgrade down the road.

Steve Kaeser Lighting on-line sells some pretty good umbrella boxes. These use a drawstring closure, and are pretty useful. The lighting quality of these is decent. They are priced very affordably. Convertible-style umbrellas from Photflex and Westcott are also pretty nice to have.

In smaller spaces, I like the enclosed umbrella boxes because they keep stray spill light to a minimum. Other brands of this type of light include the Lastolite Umbrella Box, which I also have a pair of; they have great light quality; the interior is a very dull,dull, thick matte white, almost rubberized feeling type of fabric, and the diffusion screen is tighter and less-translucent than the Kaeser ones, and the light's output is softer and more diffused, but the actual quality of the sewing on both these is, pretty shoddy for the price. Photek makes the Softlighter II, which is probably the top dog in this product category.

For indoor use, I would look at 40 to 43 inch umbrellas for use with those flash units. If you want a BIG, soft light source, I would build a Tinker Tubes type PVC frame and fit it with a 42 x 78 inch white rip-stop nylon fabric diffuser, or make a 60 x 60 square panel.

 

[MiahStan]

Sounds like I can get started with the built in stuff then upgrade to radio as the budget permits. Really looking for the minimum to get started (without being an exercise in frustration.) Can always add/upgrade down the road.

Steve Kaeser Lighting on-line sells some pretty good umbrella boxes. These use a drawstring closure, and are pretty useful. The lighting quality of these is decent. They are priced very affordably. Convertible-style umbrellas from Photflex and Westcott are also pretty nice to have.

In smaller spaces, I like the enclosed umbrella boxes because they keep stray spill light to a minimum. Other brands of this type of light include the Lastolite Umbrella Box, which I also have a pair of; they have great light quality; the interior is a very dull,dull, thick matte white, almost rubberized feeling type of fabric, and the diffusion screen is tighter and less-translucent than the Kaeser ones, and the light's output is softer and more diffused, but the actual quality of the sewing on both these is, pretty shoddy for the price. Photek makes the Softlighter II, which is probably the top dog in this product category.

For indoor use, I would look at 40 to 43 inch umbrellas for use with those flash units. If you want a BIG, soft light source, I would build a Tinker Tubes type PVC frame and fit it with a 42 x 78 inch white rip-stop nylon fabric diffuser, or make a 60 x 60 square panel.

I'd also add to be careful using square light sources (like a square softbox) in the front of a person you're photographing. It drives me nuts when I'm driving down the road, look up at a billboard and see a person on it that is lit nicely but with huge squares of light in the middle of their very round eyes. I think using a round light source (octabox, shoot-through umbrella or beauty dish etc.) for the front of a person really helps with the catchlight matching the composition of the eyes. Everything is nice and round.

When you're photographing products, I don't think it matters as much, but portraits is a different story.

 

[tirediron]

I'd also add to be careful using square light sources (like a square softbox) in the front of a person you're photographing. It drives me nuts when I'm driving down the road, look up at a billboard and see a person on it that is lit nicely but with huge squares of light in the middle of their very round eyes. I think using a round light source (octabox, shoot-through umbrella or beauty dish etc.) for the front of a person really helps with the catchlight matching the composition of the eyes. Everything is nice and round.

When you're photographing products, I don't think it matters as much, but portraits is a different story.

Interesting observation! I agree... to a point. If the setting is out-doors, then yes, round catchlights would be appropriate and realistic, BUT... if the person is being photographed inside, then I think that square/rectangular catchlights are perfectly realistic, and attractive since they are very similar to that produced by a window.

 

[Derrel]

Yeah...square or rectangular catchlights in the eyes of portraiture subjects look like those awful windows that let light into buildings and stuff. So other-worldly.

Speaking of starter flash items, since looking at a couple items in this thread, my e-mail is now getting spammed with an Amazon product that includes a screw-in lightbulb type flash unit, a "slave flash" unit, of the type that the Morris Company has made for decades. Currently on Amazon, marked down (allegedly) to $28. Comes with an electric cord and an umbrella shaft receptacle with locking thumbscrew to hold the umbrella in place, and a simple swivel to tilt the umbrella, and a 5/8 inch standard light stand female receptacle...

Looks "okay" as a source of moderate-power electronic flash, with the umbrella swivel mount and the lightbulb base. For those who have not seen these, look around. These can be screwed into ANY regular "household base" type light socket, in a desk lamp, ceiling fixture, bathroom mirror fixtures, whatever. These are shaped a lot like a lightbulb. These have been made for literally, decades now.

 

[epatsellis]

Westcott Apollo's have been my goto location box for decades, a three light setup, with a couple of lumedynes and 3 heads fit well in a bag and are easy to carry and setup.

For my infrequent studio portraits, I prefer a huge (8') octabox for a "wrap around" light, incredibly soft, and really easy to shoot with. I've used striplights at times (the Elinchrom that is currently mounted on my rolling stand is OK, just...) as well as large silks flown over a set with a half dozen heads firing into them. In the past, my favorite light modifiers were a Broncolor Hazylight and a Cumulite, both incredibly huge light sources. (fortunately, I no longer have a formal studio space, so no room for monster modifiers)

Square catch lights, so Flemish....(as in Vermeer, et al...)

... You.Don't.Need.Remote.Triggers.

What he said. they're nice, but so's my Mercedes ML320. Point being if cost is an issue, then by all means leave the remotes for last. I have a whole drawer full, from Cowboy Studios cheapies to Quantum Radio and Pocket Wizards. 99.9% of the time they stay in the drawer. It's only when I'm shooting on location, and there's a lot of activity around the set (not by me...) then I use a remote, as well as lots of gaffer tape to reduce any possibility of tripping.