Self-made Lighting Equipment

[workflow]

Hey folks,

I'm a bit ............ because of the very expensive studio equipment especially for lighting effects. As a friend of mine decided to build his own lighting stuff with strong LEDs I also tried to plan a background and direct lighting for my photos. See what came in my mind...

This is the direct lighting:



Such spots will be used for my background lighting:



I created the spots / lamps on my own just by buying cheap eBay cases that easily can resist high temperatures.

These are the LEDs bulbs I used:



Total costs: a third of the professional equipment's costs...

What kind of stuff do you use flood a room with light?

[William W]

What kind of stuff do you use flood a room with light?

Professional Flash Units.
For two main reasons;

1. To arrest Subject Movement.
2. To NOT place any strain on the Subjects' eyes, especially the elderly; the very young; or those with various eye conditions.

For inanimate Subjects, continuous lighting can be suitable in some circumstances: provided there is measurement and control over the Colour Temperature of each source light

WW

[Colin Southern]

Professional Flash Units.
For two main reasons;

1. To arrests Subject Movement.
2. To NOT place any strain on the Subjects' eyes, especially the elderly; the very young; or those with various eye conditions.

Same.

For what it's worth, my studio has no less than 8 flourescent tubes lighting the 10 x 8m area (general lighting) ... and these 8 lights contribute approx ZERO percent of the lighting that goes into a photo (when compared to the strobes). Basically you just can't get enough power from continuous lighting for ideal results in my opinion; you'll end up either having DoF issues due to wide-open apertures or having to treat the subject for an eye injury.

Many years ago I used several thousand watts of halogen worklights on a subject (I even had to feed them from 2 circuits to stop the fuse blowing) - and even that wasn't satisfactory.

[William W]

Thanks Kathy,

I read it twice and seems to be a reasonably balanced objective article.

There are four sample shots, one a product shot (B&W) and I mentioned that.

I have not very much argument with use for B&W portraiture . . . but that appears a “professional” model, who can hold a pose: 1/250s is a bit too slow for Kids’ Portraiture, for example.

Maybe it’s my monitor – but the Colour of the Fill for the Open Shade shot of the Blonde Woman in the white dress is not as good as the text suggests – that would be my main argument and objection with the objectivity of the author and the facts of the article -

And also maybe just not enough power and or flexibility for fill in open backlit / sidelit sunlight.


WW

These comments are in response to the link Kathy has made in her post #5, below:

[inkista]

Sorry, William. Slippage. I deleted my post, since I wasn't sure l knew what I was talking about . Anyhoo, here's the link for anybody interested.

http://theonlinephotographer.typepad...kirk-tuck.html

It's a TOP post about Kirk Tuck's new book on LED panel lighting. For folks who shoot both still and video, it could be a serious gamechanger. For those who primarily shoot stills, an interesting addition to the arsenal.

[rpcrowe]

One of my main criticisms of continuous light is that in order to achieve a decent f/stop and a shutter speed which will stop subject motion, the lights have to be very bright. Far brighter than at which the average person is comfortable. Besides the discomfort, a light source of this intensity causes the subjects pupils to contract making them look like they have been using mind altering drugs...