Upgrading to Godox/Flashpoint AD400 Strobes

[adamhiram]

So I finally managed to get a new gel from a lighting store in Ohio I came across, Knight Sound and Lighting - great service, competitive pricing, and free fast shipping. Most importantly, it arrived undamaged and in new condition, which was refreshing. This allowed me to redo a recent shoot using the same modifiers and same color gel so I could compare results between speedlights and monolights.

I used a basic 3-light setup for this portrait, with a 38" octobox for the key light, gelled reflector for background light, and a 10"x24" gridded stripbox for a hair light. I used a large white reflector for fill, and the background is a gray hand-painted canvas backdrop. See the pull-back shot at the end for more details.

• In #1, all 3 lights were Flashpoint/Godox AD400 monolights. I used the stock reflector on the background light, with a gel cut to fit the gel holder that came in the barn door kit
• In #2, I used an AD400 for the key light, but speedlights for the background and hair lights
• #3 is a shot from last year with a similar lighting setup, but all speedlights, and the hair light was likely a gridded snoot (Rogue Flash Grid), which has a similar effect to a gridded reflector

The biggest difference that I think will be a game changer is the refresh rate. Instead of shooting at ISO 400 to avoid firing my speedlights at full power and still having to wait 3-5s between shots, I can shoot at ISO 100 with the strobes all firing as fast as I can press the shutter. Even if I switch to continuous shooting at 3-4fps, there are no misfires. Working with an uncooperative young subject with zero patience, this is invaluable. This was also the reason I picked up 2 more AD400s - having one big light in a 2- or 3-light setup didn't really provide much advantage when I was still waiting for the other 2 lights to recycle.

I don't see much difference in quality of light between these shots. My softboxes are all double diffused, and there wasn't much visible difference in the spread of the background light. It is much easier to shoot at my camera's base ISO instead of needing to raise it to get enough power or faster recycle times, but quite frankly there isn't much noticeable difference between ISO 100 and 400.

Lastly, I'm still not getting much use out of the modeling lights yet. As mentioned previously, it certainly helped with initial setup and light placement, but working with such a young subject I prefer to use broad lighting zones, which had to be completely setup before he ever sat down. I don't see much difference in pupil size with and without the modeling light, since I tend to use a decent amount of indirect lighting in this space, which really isn't too dark. In fact, I actually observed a negative side effect of leaving the modeling lights on - my son has an eye condition that results in some asymmetry that is most noticeable when he squints in bright light, which is precisely what I was creating. This mostly went away once I turned the modeling lights off. Again, I am guessing this will change when working with adult subjects or lighting patterns that require more precise light placement, but this has been my experience so far.

Nikon D500 with 85mm f/1.8 lens
85mm, 1/250s, f/8, ISO 100 (ISO 400 in #3)

#1. Portrait using 3 AD400 monolights

20191214-DSC_6093a by adamhiram, on Flickr

#2. Portrait using AD400 for key light, TT600 speedlights for background and hair lights

20191124-DSC_5826a by adamhiram, on Flickr

#3. Similar portrait from last year using all TT600 speedlights

20190120-DSC_1387a by adamhiram, on Flickr

#4. Pull-back shot of lighting setup from #1

20191214-DSC_6117a by adamhiram, on Flickr

 

[smoke665]

@adamhiram Your son has one of those infectious smiles that makes me smile every time you post one of him.

On your lights do they offer "tracking" on the modeling lights, where they follow the power setting, or is it only full power? Mine are set to track, which cuts down the brightness tremendously, but even then, I turn off some of them when shooting. Especially those with snoots, or gridded/gelled reflectors to keep the heat down.

For the reason you mention I'm not sure that a hairlight is helping you. They require a certain level of precision focusing that is difficult to maintain on a little one, and with a light on the background I'm not sure it's even necessary. Rather then positioning to the side sometimes coming over the top of the background with a modified light (snoot, barndoors, or narrow strip box) can work, especially if you feather it. That way if you have spill it's directed down as opposed to out over the face. Metering the hair light a 1/2 stop under your key also helps.

I tend to experiment with Li'l Bit a lot because she more comfortable on set then most kids, but on others I follow the tried and true lighting setups used by school picture photographers for the last umpteen years. This year I did several friends and family using this type of setup. There's a good discussion on this with suggestions here setup for a standard "school portrait" Key problems with most kids is as mentioned movement, and getting light into the eyes.

 

[adamhiram]

@adamhiram Your son has one of those infectious smiles that makes me smile every time you post one of him.

On your lights do they offer "tracking" on the modeling lights, where they follow the power setting, or is it only full power? Mine are set to track, which cuts down the brightness tremendously, but even then, I turn off some of them when shooting. Especially those with snoots, or gridded/gelled reflectors to keep the heat down.

For the reason you mention I'm not sure that a hairlight is helping you. They require a certain level of precision focusing that is difficult to maintain on a little one, and with a light on the background I'm not sure it's even necessary. Rather then positioning to the side sometimes coming over the top of the background with a modified light (snoot, barndoors, or narrow strip box) can work, especially if you feather it. That way if you have spill it's directed down as opposed to out over the face. Metering the hair light a 1/2 stop under your key also helps.

I tend to experiment with Li'l Bit a lot because she more comfortable on set then most kids, but on others I follow the tried and true lighting setups used by school picture photographers for the last umpteen years. This year I did several friends and family using this type of setup. There's a good discussion on this with suggestions here setup for a standard "school portrait" Key problems with most kids is as mentioned movement, and getting light into the eyes.

Thanks Will, I always appreciate the kind words!

These modeling lights can be set to a percentage or proportional to the flash power. Proportional is great for visualizing lighting ratios, but is extremely bright when the light is set to 1/4 power. For comparison, I've been leaving the modeling lights at their default setting which is 20%, or roughly equivalent to proportional at 1/128 power.

My go-to setup is similar to the first response in that school photo thread, which is a variation on loop lighting with a white reflector for fill. I haven't had much luck with an overhead hair light, but that may have been due to using the wrong modifier at the time, which was either too specular or had too much spill. My son's preschool typically does flat cross-lighting with 2 equal powered lights which I'm not a fan of, both because of the lack of any shadows, as well as the alien-looking dual catchlights. They also shoot exclusively on a green screen, which has a plethora of issues, but very noticeable is the lack of background separation when they composite in a darker background.

So that raises a recurring question I've had, which is getting a little off-topic for this thread - am I doing something wrong with my separation light, am I just calling it the wrong thing (hair/rim/edge/separation), or do we just have a difference of opinion? I can see a little bit of spill on the face in #1 but nothing I can't live with, while I think I did a better job in #2 - really depends on how he turns his head. For #2 which used a speedlight for the hair light, I could definitely tell when it misfired, and think the highlights in the dark hair made a big difference against the darker background. In the past, this also resulted on too much spill on the shoulders when placed too high and not far enough away, which is why I've been opting for the side placement. Thoughts?

 

[smoke665]

So that raises a recurring question I've had, which is getting a little off-topic for this thread - am I doing something wrong with my separation light, am I just calling it the wrong thing (hair/rim/edge/separation), or do we just have a difference of opinion? I can see a little bit of spill on the face in #1 but nothing I can't live with, while I think I did a better job in #2 - really depends on how he turns his head. For #2 which used a speedlight for the hair light, I could definitely tell when it misfired, and think the highlights in the dark hair made a big difference against the darker background. In the past, this also resulted on too much spill on the shoulders when placed too high and not far enough away, which is why I've been opting for the side placement. Thoughts?

I wouldn't say wrong, just in the case of the subject maybe not the best application. A hair light requires fairly precise aim and control of the spill, which requires a subject who can hold the pose (at least fairly close). Since you have a lighter background and a background light, I'm not sure the headache of being that precise is worth it. By simplifying your setup it also gives you time to concentrate on the pose and coaxing out the right expression, but that's just one opinion.

If you really want a kicker you might consider an oblique short combination. Basically it's an overlapping key/neutral fill configuration that works well to get light in both eyes (a problem with kids) and define the front "mask" of the face with highlight that contrasts with everything else, then when you use a fill directly over the camera it will reach into all the low crevices on the front of the face and fall off naturally front to back helping the highlighted front of the face contrast more as you move further back on the face. Here's an example of what I'm talking about. In this one the key was a 24" beauty dish camera left, 45 degrees, above the eyes and angled down slightly. By having her turn into the key toward a 3/4 pose, it moved the nose and helped keep down a nose shadow on the cheek camera right (notice in your first shot the big shadow). It also helps with highlight hot spots on the skin. There's a 48" softbox high on camera axis that I'm actually shooting under, that's metered about a stop under for a nice even fill of the shadows. You'll notice that there's still a shadow under the mike, but you have to pick your battles sometimes. The kicker in this case was a gridded barn door cut to slit, on a boom camera right, high, metered under the key, angled down and feathered, to catch just the edge of the hair, to keep the spill directed down and off her. Most of the spill did go down, but you can see a little just under her arm and hand. There's really only two ways to control light spill, point it in the direction you want it to go, or flag it, Me I prefer the kicker light traveling away from, rather on to the subject. If you still get any, that's why it's important to be sure you meter it under the key so it doesn't stick out so bad.



Not an application for every use, but it works well for me on most kids. If you really prefer only the symmetrical full face shot, then butterfly lighting will probably give you the most predictable results.

Another thing to remember on the kicker is that the further from the light you get the larger the spread. I couldn't find it but I did a study comparing a snoot a various distances. Amazing how big a circle of light a snoot will put out as you get further away. If you're using a softbox, even with a grid you're throwing a large area of light, when you only need a little.

 

[JBPhotog]

I think what you have going on with the strip light is "rim" lighting. A hair light is generally above the subject and slightly behind as to not cast shadows under the nose. A strip box is ideal for this as it spreads the illumination evenly across the shoulders too, as long as that is the goal. If however, you are only looking to light the hair, a gridded head or small soft box with a grid also does the trick. Exposure for hair lights are subjective but again generally you want to create a highlight so often they are 1/2 to 3/4 a stop more than the key.

 

[smoke665]

@JBPhotog I may be confused, but I always thought of rim lighting as more from the rear, such that it creates a narrow band of highlight all around the subject almost like a halo as opposed to a hairlight which is broader and more confined to one side.

 

[JBPhotog]

No confusion, rim is generally an edge light. Side lighting is hitting both the face and side of the head and hair. A hair light is most often referred to just the hair and lighting the top of the head. If it hits the face it is not the correct application of a hair light however it can light the shoulders.

 

[adamhiram]

Thank you @JBPhotog for that explanation, and @smoke665 for the great example. I think I succeeded in my purpose of creating additional background separation on the shadow side, but please let me know if I can be doing something better or different to achieve this. I know there is some spill on the face in #1, not much I can do about that with a young subject, but hopefully that will improve over time, and not be the case with other subjects.

From my own notes on rim/hair/edge lighting, I found that most resources tend to use these terms somewhat interchangeably. I’m sure some of my confusion comes from relying too much on YouTube for learning, but some just seems to be that the differences can be pretty subtle.

• Chapter 8 of Light Science & Magic discusses portrait lighting, and has a section on hair lights, kickers, and rim lights. The differences are described in terms of positioning an purpose - it shows a rim light directly behind, a hair light slightly to the side, and a kicker provides more edge lighting that wraps around the front of the subject more.
• For a more contemporary example, here is Gerald Undone giving a walkthrough of his new studio setup. He describes it as a rim light for the purpose of background separation on the shadow side. This is the same setup I used, but with a small gridded stripbox.
  https://youtu.be/w6rpBj1OMxU?t=788 (13:08)
• Gavin Hoey had a nice lesson on low key rim lighting a few weeks ago that uses a similar setup. The first half focuses on lighting the subject using just metal reflectors, while the second half is more about the highlights in bubbles being blown using strip boxes.
  https://youtu.be/89ZHtI0dsnc
• This article from October shows a simple headshot setup that uses a stripbox as a hair/rim light to provide background separation, although they called it a backlight.
  Stretching as a Photographer with My First Mass Headshot Photo Shoot

Thanks again for all the feedback - while this thread was intended to be more about my experience switching from speedlights to monolights, I am definitely still learning, and these tips are immensely helpful in improving.

 

[adamhiram]

Some recent examples from the Godox facebook group - not sure if the posts are visible without joining the group, but the images are otherwise public.

• Godox User Group
  (image) (setup)
• Godox User Group
  (image)

 

[JBPhotog]

I dug out my 1980 copy of Kodak's "Professional Portrait Techniques" package. The reason I say "package" instead of book is it came with a Light Ratio Calculator, a sliding sleeve with numbers, four grey toned double sided cards with 1:2 to 1:5 light ratios and a 118 page book with diagrams with photo examples and plenty of supporting text. Back in 1980 I paid $12.95 for package however I am sure one can not find a complete kit now since Kodak failed.

FWIW, the sections I have attached include descriptions of the terms we have discussed in this thread and their application for your interest.

 

[JBPhotog]

Some recent examples from the Godox facebook group - not sure if the posts are visible without joining the group, but the images are otherwise public.

• Godox User Group
  (image) (setup)
• Godox User Group
  (image)

Yes the group is not visible but I am not on Facepage either however, the images are, thanks.

 

[adamhiram]

I dug out my 1980 copy of Kodak's "Professional Portrait Techniques" package.

Much appreciated, and definitely more helpful than the field guides I inherited with my Minolta X-700 from the same time period, which focused more on working in the darkroom.

This actually helped give me a better understanding of the lighting I used in a workshop I took last year. I used a gridded beauty dish from above and directly behind as a hair light, although my impression at the time was that it was also a rim light (kicker/backlight) on the shoulders to provide better separation. I'm not sure I have the space to do this in my own setup, but the scans above gave a very useful description of how and why to position them.

 

[JBPhotog]

A gridded BD can do the job as a hair light, placement is a bit critical depending on distance due to the typical 22 degree grid on most BD's. Play with exposure so you see the separation you are looking for.

What were you impressions of the eye lighter?

Lots of booms in that set.

 

[adamhiram]

What were you impressions of the eye lighter?

I spent a good amount of time obsessing over catchlights and was really excited to use it. I think the white fabric looks amazing, and really highlights the lower half of the iris nicely - check the eyes in the photo above for the result. The silver side looked to specular to me, and created a 2nd smile-shaped catchlight that I didn't care for. For my own use, it seems a bit expensive for what it is and takes up a lot of room to store unless you want to assemble it every time. I know Adorama had their version of it (Glow/Flashpoint) for about half the price. Personally, I've been happy using a large 2'x4' sheet of white styrofoam to serve the same purpose - not quite as perfect of a highlight in the eye as the curved one, but it was free with the purchase of a new shower door.

Lots of booms in that set.

Really nice to work with everything on heavy duty boom arms with remote adjustments, but also kind of unnecessary and a bit out of my price range!

A gridded BD can do the job as a hair light, placement is a bit critical depending on distance

So let me ask a more direct question, as this is something I have ben struggling with for some time. My first attempts at a hair or rim light were using a bare speedlight, which was far too specular. Even when put into a gridded snoot, coming from such a small light source it was better but still too specular. More recently, I started using a small gridded strip box and have been much happier with the results.

1. Do the results I am getting with this most recent shoot look correct/acceptable for providing some separation from the background?
2. Is there a better placement I can use with my existing gear to create that separation when needed? I have various size and shape soft boxes, strips, most with grids, but do not currently own a BD. Is there something specific you'r recommend here?

 

[JBPhotog]

I have seen the eyelighters used by some in the past and agree with you on the silver surface, it most often bounces too much light under the chin making the neck too bright in a butterfly lighting scenario. There are some pretty simple post production techniques to get the eyes to pop with out the need for such a reflector. Yes, styrofoam or foam core can easily provide enough illumination to the underside of the iris.

IMO the answers are:
1. I would bump up the power on the hair light, it needs a bit more highlight to really provide separation.
2. For people, I'd use a gridded strip box if the intention is to provide a highlight on the top of the hairline and shoulders to make them pop off the background, placed above and to the rear of the subjects head. Inverse square law can give you some ideas on how not to blow out the top of the head compared with the shoulders.