Strobes Vs. Hotlights

[Christie Photo]

Just for the record.... professional strobes do have modeling lights, so you do see where the light is falling.

 

[JerryPH]

Just for the record.... professional strobes do have modeling lights, so you do see where the light is falling.

That they do. These are also the more expensive studio strobes, also normally "wall plug powered" ones with usually under 100 watt bulbs used as model lights, and not meant to be used to contribute to the picture's exposure, hence normally turned off before the fun begins.

On my studio strobes, I do not even install the modeling lights anymore... I never used them.

 

[Helen B]

...

My last point... how many top end professionals that you are aware of, use continuous lighting?

I know a few, and know of a few others (eg Glen Luchford) but they (we) often use fairly expensive lights that only a brave and/or rich beginner would usually contemplate. On the other hand, Sanders McNew uses a home-made bank of fluorescent tubes for his large format portraits.

Best,
Helen

 

[JerryPH]

I know a few, and know of a few others (eg Glen Luchford) but they (we) often use fairly expensive lights that only a brave and/or rich beginner would usually contemplate. On the other hand, Sanders McNew uses a home-made bank of fluorescent tubes for his large format portraits.

So it would be fair to say a handfull out of all the photographers around. A very low percentage would be generous. There must be a possible reason in there somewhere.

I wonder what that reason could ever be.. lol.

 

[Happy Hour]

1 - I will guarantee you that with my limited experience, on the poses that I have practiced, I will get to 90% of what I want before the strobe gets pulled out of it's box. Thats just experience.

2 - Why would you assume that strobes require a tripod? I've yet to use a tripod in any of my sessions. And why would you think that continuous lights break the laws of physics and will give you higher shutter speeds than a strobe at equal light intensities (besides that, there is no convincing argument that you could use that would justify higher than any camera's maximum sync speed in a portraiture session)?

Fact is... a good strobe is a LOT brighter than any continuous light, just for a much shorter period of time... unless you are continuously blasting your model with one or two 400 watt bulbs. Even at that, you are not exceeding the power of a good SINGLE strobe, but likely just starting to come close.

On top of that, continuous or strobe, one is bound by the SAME laws of physics and the only way to control exposure is via your light source's intensity (which you have no control over, compared to a strobe's adjustability, BTW), ISO, aperture and shutter speed.

3 - See #1.

No offence, but none of what you said are really compelling arguments... and you STILL need a wall socket and have very limited portability.

You also cannot adjust the light intensity accurately to accomodate changing conditions... for example, expose a front lighting portrait of a couple in the setting sun... which within the last 15 minutes before the sunset will need to be adjusted at least 5 times to get a correct exposure. If anything, constant lighting limits your creativity AND your photographic possibilities on many levels.

It's only redeeming feature is "apparent" lower cost... but the learned know that a single strobe, lightstand and a peanut trigger will not only be more portable and flexible... but offer more creative possibilities for less than that continuous light setup. Toss in the cost of a reflector, and you will be hard pressed to compete with the results of this sub $200 kit.

I am not bashing anyone, but I do want to make sure that we don't mislead anyone into thinking something that is not 100% true.

My last point... how many top end professionals that you are aware of, use continuous lighting?

Well first of all I never once knocked strobes!! 2 everything I stated was my point of view! Not a general point of view! I did state "I Prefer" The room I use for portriats has very little light, so If I just used a strobe my shutter speed would be awfully slow and no way could I not use a tripod without motion blur! I have strobes and I use them! But again I said I prefer continuous light! And yes strobes do give off more light. But again I prefer a softer lighting! As for your 200 strobe setup? My continuous light setup cost under $20. Vs. a $500.00 Strobe setup (that I do use) But I prefer for the majority of my portrait shots continuous lights! So even though you were bashing me you are the one who needs to learn how to read a entire post! again "I prefer" <- My opinion!!! We can argue all day long but I never once said in my post strobes are worse off than continuous lighting!Both serve there own purpose (otherwise there would only be one) Strobes do not work for me the way continuous lighting does for the type of shooting I do. Yes as you said in the setting sun outside strobes are the only way to go! But you are pretty much stating that continuous lighting is useless! My grandmother has been a photographer for over 50 years my aunt 30+ and myself quite a few also and we all use continuous lighting for a great amount of photography! photography is a art form, so everyone has there own perspective on what is a good pic and what is not! So you ask only a handful of pro's use continuous over strobes well obviously they along with me and several others I know have a different look at the way shots should look it has nothing to do with what is better they both give off a different look there for a different form of art!

 

[JerryPH]

The room I use for portriats has very little light, so If I just used a strobe my shutter speed would be awfully slow and no way could I not use a tripod without motion blur!

False. With any kind of strobes, you set your camera to it's maximum synch speed and depending on the camera that is between 200 to 250th of a second. In what kind of studio portraiture situation do you need anything faster? Also, you seemed to have missed what I said before too (talk about not reading posts... lol), and that was that if the intensity of the continuous lighting and strobe lighting were equal, why would you need to change shutter speeds? You would not.

Don't take it personally... I am pointing out technical info, not saying you did something wrong. What you choose to use as lighting is your choice, but if you did your homework, you would see that there were better alternatives, and the reasons why are explained.

So even though you were bashing me you are the one who needs to learn how to read a entire post!

Did you miss this?

I am not bashing anyone, but I do want to make sure that we don't mislead anyone into thinking something that is not 100% true.

Cool your jets friend, you need to learn the difference between bashing and being presented with facts. If I wanted to, I could bash your post easily and hard... but I think facts do a lot better job of explaining things and make for a better quality post. You seem to be taking things rather hard, though. Why is that?

Facts and personal opinion may not always mesh, but opinion can change... facts do not.

But you are pretty much stating that continuous lighting is useless!

Your perception of what I said is skewed. I am saying that strobes are proven better and can give superior results for less money. If that means to YOU that continuous lighting is useless, well I did not say it, but you thought it, so don't blame me for whats in your head, ok? They were proven better a long time ago too... and not by me but by hundreds of thousands of photographers. Had you done your homework, you would have known that. But you chose not to it seems... you would rather get all insulted and get aggressive with me. Those are the actions of a child, not an adult, sorry.

My grandmother has been a photographer for over 50 years my aunt 30+ and myself quite a few also and we all use continuous lighting for a great amount of photography!

Good for them, what does that have to do with anything? Shall we play yours is bigger than mine now too? My father has been taking photographs for near 60 years... big deal. It doesn't change facts. He uses a Metz strobe and a 20 year old peanut trigger on his 35 year old Nikon F2A, BTW... lol

Look, you go right ahead and use what you want. I will use what I want, and we both can continue to be happy.

One thing I will tell you... you have a lot to learn. I am not saying that I don't, but half of what you are spouting off is wrong. It may be your opinion, but it is still simply technically wrong.

 

[Digital Matt]

Now..... here's something I picked up YEARS ago: If you're working with bright modeling lights (bright... like hot lights), the pupil will constrict showing more of the iris... desirable for showing eye color. I've done this only on rare occasions. I'll put the bright lights on until just before I'm ready to shoot. Then they lights go out and I'm right to work before the pupils dilate. It's quite a feat to pull off. I was never convinced it's worth it.

-Pete

Hey Pete,

A tip I picked up for doing this, which I have never actually done myself, is to put a small snooted hotlight (fresnel would be ideal) in the back of the room pointed at the model's face to keep the pupil constricted. This small amount of continuous light is enough to do the trick, yet does not contribute to the photo when using strobes.

 

[JerryPH]

A tip I picked up for doing this, which I have never actually done myself, is to put a small snooted hotlight (fresnel would be ideal) in the back of the room pointed at the model's face to keep the pupil constricted. This small amount of continuous light is enough to do the trick, yet does not contribute to the photo when using strobes.

Well now I have learned something neat! I can see how it would work very well too... becuase by simply overpowering the snooted hotlight with the strobes even slightly would mean that it has zero effect on the picture and still accomplish it's effect... awesome hint!

One thing though... the model had better not move very much... lol

Edit: Has me wondering if something like a maglight flashlight would be strong enough for that. The beam on those things is adjustable and they are pretty strong. But maybe the colour of the light could be off enough to cause issues?

 

[Happy Hour]

False. With any kind of strobes, you set your camera to it's maximum synch speed and depending on the camera that is between 200 to 250th of a second. In what kind of studio portraiture situation do you need anything faster? Also, you seemed to have missed what I said before too (talk about not reading posts... lol), and that was that if the intensity of the continuous lighting and strobe lighting were equal, why would you need to change shutter speeds? You would not.

Don't take it personally... I am pointing out technical info, not saying you did something wrong. What you choose to use as lighting is your choice, but if you did your homework, you would see that there were better alternatives, and the reasons why are explained.



Cool your jets friend, you need to learn the difference between bashing and being presented with facts. If I wanted to, I could bash real your post easily and hard... but I think facts do a lot better job of explaining things and make for a better quality post. You seem to be taking things rather hard, though. Why is that?

Facts and personal opinion may not always mesh, but opinion can change... facts do not.



Your perception of what I said is skewed. I am saying that strobes are proven better and can give superior results for less money. If that means to YOU that continuous lighting is useless, well I did not say it, but you thought it, so don't blame me for whats in your head, ok? They were proven better a long time ago too... and not by me but by hundreds of thousands of photographers. Had you done your homework, you would have known that. But you chose not to it seems... you would rather get all insulted and get aggressive with me. Those are the actions of a child, not an adult, sorry.



Good for them, what does that have to do with anything? Shall we play yours is bigger than mine now too? My father has been taking photographs for near 60 years... big deal. It doesn't change facts. He uses a Metz strobe and a 20 year old peanut trigger on his 35 year old Nikon F2A, BTW... lol

Look, you go right ahead and use what you want. I will use what I want, and we both can continue to be happy.

One thing I will tell you... you have a lot to learn. I am not saying that I don't, but half of what you are spouting off is wrong. It may be your opinion, but it is still simply technically wrong.

I regards to your better alternatives How ? Again you miss the point of a art form! How could getting the exact results I want "EXACT" What would a strobe do to make it better? they are exactly what I wanted! as for your 2 year old comment about who's is bigger. I was replying to you said " how many pro do you know that use continuous lighting?" I was stating how many I know! This is why so many people including myself have stopped coming on here. Because of 2 year olds like yourself constantly starting arguments for absolutely no reason. You obviously don't understand what art is! So you stick with your exact same old pics as everyone else and us people with more artistic views will keep raking in the cash from people who have a bit of intelligence for what looks good. Don't bother with your 2 year old rebuddle I will not reply again to this post (which you have taken over) with your optimistic views. Good bye a good luck!

 

[JerryPH]

I regards to your better alternatives How ?

I have no desire to requote this... the info is here in this thread already. Read it.

Again you miss the point of a art form! How could getting the exact results I want "EXACT"

Ok, let me baby talk you through this:

How about you tell me the difference... If using continuous lighting you needed the following settings to make a proper exposure:

ISO 100
SS 250
AP F/8
WB of 5500K

and now used a strobe of the SAME strength as the continuous lighting and to get the same proper exposure I set my camera to:

ISO 100
SS 250
AP F/8
WB if 5200

... technically WHAT would be different? Nothing.
... artisitcally WHAT would be different? Nothing.

Matter of fact, if I shuffled the pictures, no one could tell the difference, you included.

You obviously don't understand what art is!

Before you can call what you do "art", my friend, you need to learn what you are talking about at least.

So you stick with your exact same old pics as everyone else and us people with more artistic views will keep raking in the cash from people who have a bit of intelligence for what looks good.

Ah, so you are now saying that you are using 20 dollar continuous lighting becuase you are raking in the cash selling your work to "intelligent people for what looks good" ? Your grammer is as poor as your understanding of the basics of photography, my friend. Let me be bunt... you are basically burying yourself in BS everytime you open your mouth.

I will not reply again to this post (which you have taken over) with your optimistic views.

I think we shall both need to be gentlemen and not further respond to each other's posts in this thread.

Good bye a good luck!

Buh-bye!

 

[Christie Photo]

Hey Pete,

A tip I picked up for doing this, which I have never actually done myself, is to put a small snooted hotlight (fresnel would be ideal) in the back of the room pointed at the model's face to keep the pupil constricted. This small amount of continuous light is enough to do the trick, yet does not contribute to the photo when using strobes.

Yeah... "the boys" all kept an "inky" (very small spot) near the camera for this. Have you found it to be worth while?

Thanks, Matt!

-Pete

 

[Big Mike]

Everyone loves a good debate...let's keep it civil please.

 

[Digital Matt]

Yeah... "the boys" all kept an "inky" (very small spot) near the camera for this. Have you found it to be worth while?

Thanks, Matt!

-Pete

Pete,

I normally keep my modeling lights on full power. I know what I'm looking for in terms of light and how to get it with ratios, so I rarely depend on seeing the light. I've found that this keeps the pupils in check well enough. I also find that very contracted pupils, in my opinion, look a little wierd.

 

[Alex_B]

some people on here take some things way to personal

now, calm down and blame it on the problems of written/typed communication. people interpret way to many things as aggressive which really are not. and then we know what happens.

so, grow up, stay civil. it is just the internet and no one did anyone any proper harm